Commons Chamber

Tuesday 8th July 2025

(began 4 hours, 42 minutes ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
11:43
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:45
11:45
11:46
11:47
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
None Portrait Q5. What progress she has made on reviewing terms and conditions of service for prison officers. (905071)
-

Number five.
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:53
11:54
11:55
11:55
None Portrait Q8. What steps she is taking to support victims of violence against women through the criminal justice system. (905074)
-

11:55
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:57
11:58
11:58
11:58
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:01
12:01
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:04
12:04
12:05
12:06
12:06
12:07
12:07
12:07
12:08
12:08
12:09
12:09
12:10
12:11
12:11
12:12
12:12
12:13
12:13
12:14
12:14
12:15
None Portrait Q18. What steps she is taking to ensure she can refer Parole Board decisions in cases of serious offenders to the High Court. (905085)
-

Number 18.
12:15
12:15
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:17
12:18
12:18
12:18
12:19
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:22
12:23
12:24
12:24
12:24
12:25
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:27
12:27
12:27
12:28
12:28
12:29
12:29
12:29
12:30
12:30
12:31
12:31
12:32
12:32
12:32
12:33
12:34
12:35
12:35
12:35
12:36
12:36
12:36
12:37
12:37
12:38
12:38
12:38
12:39
12:39
12:40
12:40
12:40
12:41
12:42
Pat McFadden Portrait Rt Hon Pat McFadden MP, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Wolverhampton South East, Labour)
-
-
Thank you. With your permission, I would like to update the house on the government's resilience action plan. We are living through a period of profound change, upheaval in the international order, conflicts raging in the Middle East, war being waged on the continent of Europe, old norms being overturned on a daily basis, and against this backdrop, the government's first duty of keeping the public safe becomes all the more important. Resilience is a measure of great strength, and by that, I mean fundamentals like a good NHS, a secure energy system, good flood defences, all of these things which increase national resilience.

We saw the vulnerabilities exposed by the COVID pandemic in the NHS and in a different impact that it had on different workers, ethnic minorities mems of the community. Resilience has to be for all, not just for some. And by insurance, I mean the emergency systems, the scientific capability, the scale up capability and other measures that we need in a crisis. Everyone knows they need insurance. We also know that no one spends the whole income on it.

That is true for a country too. By definition, preparation for the worst has to sit alongside the week to week provision of the essential services that government runs. And there is no perfectly correct answer to the balance between these two things. What is certain is that the government has to think through the scenarios and try to ensure that the country is as well prepared as possible. Today, we set out how we will do that with the publication of our resilience action plan, a chronic risk analysis and an up date from the UK biological security strategy.

No government can stop every risk from materialising. Every member of this House understands that we are living in a world where we are susceptible to a much wider range of risks than we were even a decade ago. Cyber attacks on household names, trade measures that can trigger fluctuations in the price of food or household goods, power outages, the possibility of another pandemic, these risks are real and they are all different. The answer to these shared challenges lies in making sure that all parts of society are better prepared.

Our economy, our defences, our health systems, our infrastructure, our borders, our industrial base, our energy security. Much of it comes down to the unglamorous work of delivering improved public services. This is what we might call deep resilience and NHS drum enough to cope, and energy system that does not leave us as exposed to the spikes in the price of oil that we saw in the aftermath of Russia's invasion of the Ukraine, a science space that could be called Every member of this House, all of us sharing thoughts in the same direction.

The Action Plan sets us up to do this in three ways. First assessment a continuous basis how resilient the UK is so we can effectively target interventions and resources when and where they are needed. Secondly, enabling the whole of society to take action to increase its resilience. This relies on is changing the culture by making it part of our everyday lives in practical and simple ways. Whether that is the owner of a business introducing new cyber defences or a more informed public knows what to do in order to prefer -- prepare for emergencies.

And third improving Court resilience. We have thousands of frontline public sector workers who are integral to our resilience at a local and national level. From the employees who keep the energy grid running to local responders. I pay tribute to all of them. The Action Plan brings together a range of policies. We have already set out our proposals to increase defence spending, we are earmarking £4.2 billion of funding for new flood defences. £370 million to secure the U.K.'s telecom networks.

Opening a new resilience academy in North Yorkshire that will train 4,000 people every year from both private and public sectors. And later this year we will have the largest ever national pandemic exercise that will test the U.K.'s readiness for future pandemics. We are also developing a risk of an ability map for public servants risk vulnerability map the public servants because all too often it is the most vulnerable in our society who are hardest hit in the case of an emergency.

On top of each of these steps the Action Plan and update on the strategy set out new additional measures. These include a new nationwide test of the U.K.'s emergency alert. This will take place around 3 PM on Sunday, 7 September. It will involve a notification going out to 87 million mobile phones at once. This is the second time we have used this test on a nationwide basis. It will last for around 10 seconds and the mobile phone alert system will play a critical role in making sure we are ready for all kinds of future emergencies.

In the run-up to the test we will work with stakeholders including domestic violence charities to ensure the public has as much warning as possible. As well as the alert we will be pushing ahead to promote the government prepared website to allow individuals, households and communities understand how they can be ready for a range of different emergencies. We continue to support local resilience forums in England because they are essential in planning for and responding to incidents whenever they are occurring.

A biological security strategy includes £15 million from the Integrated Security Fund to help address capability gaps across government and beyond. That is in addition to the £1 billion of investment were announced a fortnight ago for a new network of biosecurity centres to strengthen our defences against biological incidents, accidents and attacks. The defendant's X to also includes £1 million worth of projects for universities like Queen's University Belfast and Cardiff University. My colleague, the Health Secretary will publish a framework explain how the government is bringing together vital scientific research needed to vital scientific research needed to prepare for any future pandemic.

I am also able to announce the national situation centre of governance will sign an MOU to ensure every part of the UK has the best data to prepare and respond to crises. These are practical steps that will help the UK the moment when an emergency comes. Resilience comes from the realisation we need deep strength and the ability to scale up quickly when the situation requires it. That is why the government investment plans announced in the recent spending review are so important.

And by the actions outlined in this plan are important. We will not be resilient unless we invest for the future. A stronger NHS, more and better housing, better energy security, utilising our deep research and development pace and on top of that having the capabilities to really get going fast in an emergency. That is what the plan sets out and I commend it to the House.
12:51
Alex Burghart Portrait Alex Burghart MP (Brentwood and Ongar, Conservative)
-
-
Thank you. I would like to thank the Chancellor and the Duchy for advanced sight of his statement. And I would also like to thank him for the date on which he has chosen to test the UK emergency alert. Which can only have been chosen to notify the country it is my birthday. I shall be looking forward to the alarm at 3 PM very much. I can understand as well why the government would want to plan for resilience.

It is understandable faced with the collapsing economy and collapsing government, with capital flight spiralling borrowing costs and the OBR this morning warning of the Chancellor's latest U-turns which have left Britain vulnerable and less able to respond to future crises the government would want to come forward with a plan. But this plan is published today. It sets out as the Minister has set out and builds on the work of the previous government. Both in the rollout with a national emergency alert system, the expansion biosecurity preparedness, investment in learning -- flooding protection and securing to cross departmental collaboration on resilience and emergency preparedness.

To pick up on a few things, the Chancellor said in his statement he was looking for an assessment on a continuous basis. The report sets out the intention for data collection. It would be useful to hear from him by when the new data framework is going to be available for Oliver Skipp scrutinise. -- For all of us to scrutinise. He said he wished to enable the whole of society to take action. I rather wonder how he intended the whole of society to find out about this? Part of the report itself calls on MHCLG to provide guidance on developing cohesion strategies and monitor tensions.

This does not set easily with the fact the government is not currently tackling Islamist extremism properly. The drugs its veto national inquiry into grooming gangs and it is bringing forward or seems to be bringing forward a highly controversial definition of Islamophobia. The Chancellor referred to improving core public service resilience and that is certainly to be welcomed, particularly on a day it has been announced resident doctors have voted in favour of strikes. Which will result in industrial action in January.

It is notable the plan does not mention an ability to deal with widespread industrial action. Is the government planning for the eventuality of a general strike? On the biological... He also mentions the increase in defence spending which we know is a form of spoken mirrors -- smoke and mirrors. The 1.5% that came in addition to hypothetical 3.5% we understand touches on things such as tunnels and roads. We have also been provided with no baseline is to what is currently spent in those areas.

How will know when the government has got to 1.5 or indeed whether it is at 1.5 already? On the biological security strategy, the last government as the Chancellor of the of -- Duchy of Lancaster did set out, we did take steps in this area and extended our capabilities and publish the first UK biological security strategy. I was interested in this strategy there is a reference to exploring the utility of wastewater analysis. Which had great success doing the pandemic.

Will the Minister set out whether he intends to bring that back on a wide scale and that would be welcomed if that was the case. In terms of the bio threat radar, very pleased the government is pressing ahead with what was a conservative idea. Two years after our announcement there is still no go light data on this -- date on this. It could be an asset to national resilience but we need to know when it will come online. The FCDO also The Auld House of fully operational radar will give us near real-time warning of emerging pathogens.

The WHO has still reminding China to handover its basic biological data on COVID-19. Can he guarantee the radar will allow the UK to independently verify when a state actor chooses to withhold or delay information? I was very interested to read about exercise in Pegasys, the preparations the pandemic exercise. As the Minister will know, different types of pandemic behave in different ways. Which pandemics were tested in Pegasys? Which pandemics were tested in Alcarez? It is very important we understand what the government is looking at in this regard.
12:56
Pat McFadden Portrait Rt Hon Pat McFadden MP, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Wolverhampton South East, Labour)
-
-
Thank you. I am very grateful to the opposition spokesman for his questions. Several things have contrary to to the need for this. The experience of COVID itself, the changing geopolitical situations and changing threat and picture. It is important to be both flexible and dynamic when considering resilience. Let me turn to some of the specifics and in advance of his birthday on September 7 I wish him a very happy birthday and many happy returns. He asked about data collection, this is not something that has a date, it is a constant effort and it is an additional weapon in our armoury, the capacity to use data in a better way today then perhaps we could have done in the past.

In terms of the whole of society, we have a good sensible advice on the go.prepare -- Gove.prepare website. I hope that these preparations measures would become normal for people in the future. The strength of community is very important in community resilience. He refers to strikes in the NHS. We have supported the NHS with significant financial means of support. We have made a very fair pay offer. We very much value the work doctors do but hope everyone in the NHS realises we are a government who supports the NHS, want to work with the staff and industrial action will not do anything to contribute towards that goal.

He referred to biological security and important investments into this, including the opening of the new lab announced by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for DEFRA couple of weeks ago. On exercise Pegasys, it has not happened yet. It will happen in the autumn. He is right on one thing. It is very important not to fight the last war and assume the next pandemic will be carried in the same way or behave the same as the last one. We have to be flexible in our response and make sure we try to plan for different kinds of scenarios.
12:58
12:59
13:00
Sarah Olney Portrait Sarah Olney MP (Richmond Park, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Thank you very much. Can I thank the Chancellor and the Duchy of Lancaster for advanced sight of the statement. The world is less stable and more insecure than at any time since the Cold War. A consequence the government must ensure the British people and United Kingdom are prepared in the event of our country or an overseas territory is threatened. The Liberal Democrats welcome any boost to strengthen our resilience. Especially in relation to cyber security which is a new and evolving threat and against which we must be armed.

While the liberal Democrats welcome the alert test, we would also call for a more wider public information campaign to ensure the public are properly ready for any potential future conflict or disaster that would support resilience building across the UK. Perhaps take some lessons from for example a Scandinavian neighbours. They are working always towards potential future threats, providing information to their citizens. This kind of information should be provided through a number of different means including leaflets, traditional broadcast. While we welcome the alert test as I said, websites and text alerts will miss millions of British people.

People without phones, without battery. We need to be ready on all fronts not just reliant on single tech alerts. I ask the Minister whether they will accept the call to launch national I welcome the talk about being more resilient climate emergencies. We also the horrifying pictures and very upsetting stories from Texas in recent days in the floods there, but in this country, we have had one of the straightest starts to a summer in UK history and it is vital that the government is not caught unawares during the temperature rise.

I had a meeting with Thames Water and they told me that they are preparing drought mitigation measures. The regular supply of water is to people's property and agricultural lands is vital to livelihood and everyday lives, so can I take this opportunity to ask what steps the government is taking to put into place the new action plan to ensure any drought mitigation measures will not significantly impact this country in the coming months.
13:02
13:03
13:04
13:04
13:05
13:05
13:05
13:05
13:06
13:07
13:08
13:08
13:09
13:09
13:09
13:10
13:11
13:11
13:12
13:12
13:13
13:13
13:13
13:14
13:15
13:15
13:16
13:16
13:17
13:17
13:18
13:18
13:19
13:19
13:20
13:21
13:21
13:22
13:22
13:22
13:23
13:23
13:24
13:24
13:25
13:26
None Portrait Ministerial statement: Road and Rail Projects
-

Madam Deputy Speaker, with permission I would like to make a
13:27
Heidi Alexander Portrait Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)
-
-
statement on how we are reconnecting Britain. Today I am announcing one of the most transformative of the most transformative investments in our transport network for regeneration. We are green for regeneration. We are green lighting over 50 rail and road projects, touching every corner of projects, touching every corner of the country. From more rail capacity in Oxford and better roads in Newcastle, to new stations in Devon. This is what delivering on our Plan for Change looks like. We said we would raise living standards so today's announcement is about taking today's announcement is about taking breaks of growth, supporting 42,000 new jobs and slashing journey times.

new jobs and slashing journey times. We said we would build 1.5 million new homes. So we are directly supporting the construction of 39,000 new properties showing how transport can lift up communities transport can lift up communities and improve lives. We said we would accelerate net zero. Not only will accelerate net zero. Not only will we make our roads less congested and we make our roads less congested and safer, not only will we continue the EV transition in a sensible way but we will get more people on public transport.

Backing our railways with transport. Backing our railways with new links and more electrified track. More jobs, new housing, better journeys, these are the people priorities and they are mine too. None of this was inevitable. We are here because this government is restoring stability to our finances and honesty to our politics. Thanks to the 10 year infrastructure strategy we are committing at least £725 billion for infrastructure over the next decade. Restoring confidence, driving growth and transforming how projects are delivered.

Through phase 2 of the spending review, £92 billion will be spent on getting Britain moving. We have already confirmed where some of this money is going. Aliens of pounds for upgrades on the TransPennine route, the backbone of our northern cities. -- Billions of pounds for upgrades on the TransPennine route. The biggest ever investment in local transport across the Midlands and the North. And over £2 billion to enable Transport for London to continue with the purchase of new Piccadilly, Bigelow and DLR trains.

-- Bakerloo and DLR trains. Last month the Chancellor said we will be confirming plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail soon. However today I can provide more detail and how we will use our wider spending review settlement. Let me start with our main highways. It should be no surprise when I say the strategic road network is one of our most important national asset. Carrying one third of all traffic, two thirds of our freight generating £400 million for our economy. -- £400 billion for our economy.

They are sustainable for our businesses, our trade and our way of life. Much of the network being built in the '70s and 80s not only are many routes in need of renewal but there are pinch points where nothing short of new infrastructure will do. So after careful consideration I can announce we will fund 5 More Strategic Rd enhancement projects. That starts with linking up the M 54 and M6. And expanding capacity on the a 38. That means better links to thousands of workers in the Midlands as well as supporting over 15,000 new homes across Derby.

We will also start work on the continuous dual carriageway on a 66 across the Pennines. Strengthening road safety, cutting journey times by 12 minutes and getting more people to the regions stunning National Parks. We have set aside funding for the A 46 Newark bypass scheme and the island interchange greater Manchester for both schemes now awaiting the outcome of the live planning process. 97% of trips directly depend on our road network, from cycling to buses and walking to cars.

You name it, our roads carry it. That is why we are investing record funding, enough to fill an extra 7 million potholes this year. It is why we extended the temporary cut in fuel to at the last Budget. It is also why this government will always be on the side of the British people who depend on our roads day in day out. Today we are going even further. I have approved for business cases on the middle which eastern bypass and the A380 to from drum bridges to Newton Abbot meaning these can now enter construction.

I can also announce with secured funding to continue to take forward 28 schemes, from Somerset to Skipton and Newcastle to North I can. I have spoken about the dozens of schemes that will transform journeys across the country full decisions we have made to prioritise essential trips for work, to the shops, to see loved ones and to keep our vital freight sector moving. Now let me turn to the railway. And the projects delivering reliable journeys for delivering reliable journeys for We know real investment outside of London is well overdue.

The Spending Review wrapped up funding for the TransPennine route update, and the new Midlands Real Hub will see the region's most ambitious improvement scheme in the region up to date. Thanks to government funding, huge numbers of additional trains and 20 million extra seats could be added to services in and out of Birmingham each year. But this is not just about delivering big-ticket projects. I can today announce new railway stations at Wellington and clumped in -- other locations in the south-west.

Have also decided to fund the reopening of Haxby station on the York to Scarborough in. It will -- we will replace the aged signalling system, securing the benefits of the new system for the next generation. I have listened carefully to the mayor and my Honourable friend, and we will connect 50,000 people to the rail network. Make no mistake, these and other projects will not just improve the passenger experience. They are down payments in future economic growth, better connectivity and new jobs and homes this government has promised.

Now, I know some Honourable members will have specific schemes in their constituencies, which are at the early stages which have not been funded in the spending review period, which were cancelled but not announced as such by the previous government. Let me reassure colleagues that many of these are worthy projects and we will keep them under review. The soon to be published infrastructure pipeline will set out our longer term outlook and give colleagues transparency which for years they have surly that.

It's important to set the context. We know critical infrastructure projects were promised. We know expectations were raised. Sadly, we know there was no plan to pay for them. Indeed, schemes that formed part of the previous government's major no -- major road network program all of which were meant to be in construction now have not progressed as expected. Almost half are yet to reach the outline business case stage despite being in the programme for six years. Years of dither and delay wasted everyone's time and left communities in limbo.

This I must say is the tragic legacy of the farcical Network North announcement made by the previous Prime Minister. It falls to this government to make the difficult but necessary choices about future transport projects to level with the British public, to provide much-needed certainty and to govern with integrity. Only those projects that are fully costed, affordable and deliver a return on taxpayer's money will be given the green light under my watch. That means no more black holes and no more busted budgets.

No more promising the moon on a stick. Those days are over. I have therefore taken the difficult decision on the strategic node network not to progress the -- strategic road network not to progress the A12 road widening scheme. It was impossible to continue with this. We have also decided not to progress the A47 scheme. We are already investing over £500 million on improvements to the A47 corridor. Sections in Norfolk are already underway.

It is not feasible to support further investment at this time. I understand some communities will feel frustrated but by taking this decision, were rebalancing funds towards those areas that for too long have not had the infrastructure investment they have deserved. The North and Midlands will now get a high proportion of strategic road spend that we have seen in the last five years. I believe that is the right and fair thing to do. Finally, the previous government spent many years and a lot of money developing plans for large local schemes and major road network projects that were never going to be affordable and therefore never got off the ground.

We cannot go on like this. Whilst I have today written to colleagues and councils about 28 schemes which we will fund, many others now need to be reviewed. My officials will work with councils and which schemes to prioritise and I will update the house on steps once those discussions have taken place. We are making a once in a generation commitment to get Britain moving. Better roads and new rail links will raise living standards, increase opportunity and deliver on a Plan for Change.

Throughout we will always put British people first. That means being honest about inevitable trade-offs. It means understanding that financial stability remains the bedrock of economic growth and it means ensuring we always deliver the best value for taxpayers money. I truly believe that talent exist across this country, yet poor connectivity is a drag on opportunity and places a ceiling on people's aspiration. That changes now. We will reconnect written and we will deliver a world class transport infrastructure this country needs.

That's my ambition and I commend this statement to the house.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Before I call the Shadow
13:38
13:39
Gareth Bacon Portrait Gareth Bacon MP (Orpington, Conservative)
-
-
development consent order was signed in March last year under the last Conservative government. The Secretary of State knows it was in the last spending period. The forthcoming spending review was always going to be after the general election. I could go on and on. Every single one of the schemes announced by the government today are the result of the work of the previous Conservative government. So I cannot muster the same enthusiasm as the right honourable lady when it comes to today's announcement.

The truth is whether they know it or not, the Secretary of State and her ministers have been sent to the size today to stage a destruction. In recent weeks, we have seen the economic credibility and the political unity of this government employed. We have seen the Chancellor who promised to maintain an Irish group and the public finances -- iron grip, complete U- turn after you turn. I know what this means. It means more taxes for families, businesses. The Chancellor has admitted it herself.

We know the impact this will have on the economy. In the last few months, the OBR, the Bank of England and the OECD have downgraded UK's of interest -- forecast by as much as half. The government are kidding themselves if they believe renouncing infrastructure projects already in the pipeline will revive an economy faltering after a disastrous first year in office. With the tax burden reaching a historic high, inflation almost double the Bank of England does not target an inflation rising because their party are seemingly incapable of implementing any welfare reform.

Far from fixing the foundations, the government are destroying them. Now the line has been set -- no deadline has been set. I must question whether the funding for this project is as secure as the noble Lady claims. With the OBR expected to downgrade forecasts, we know that Labour have sunk billions into Labour have sunk billions into public finances. -- Public projects. Does she recognise these projects alone will not revive an economy that is faltering under the government's economic mismanagement? Will she set a timeframe for this project not just to be started but completed? In summary, what we have seen in recent weeks as the following.

A Prime Minister who is -- whose unpopularity with the public has exceeded his popularity in his own backbenchers, a Chancellor who is wilting under strain, government out of steam after only one year in office and forced to rely on ideas thought up by other people. It's no surprise they would like to speak about anything other than their record in office but Britain deserves better.
13:42
Heidi Alexander Portrait Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP, The Secretary of State for Transport (Swindon South, Labour)
-
-
Sometimes, I do wonder what alternative reality the Honourable gentleman is living in. Network North might have promised everything to everyone, but not a penny of it was funded. Are missing local areas schemes that they knew would never go into materialise -- onto materialise is no way to run a government and no way to run a country. This government is providing certainty to those areas, giving the green light to important road and rail schemes and being honest about what we can afford.

I don't know if he caught the former Rail Minister at the transport select committee last week. He had this to say about the record of the previous government : a lot of promises were made to MPs and others as to the ambition but it did not match the amount that was actually being sat down -- set down. By the time I came into pose, I end up with a list that was much longer than could be funded." I rest my case.

He talks about nothing being new but let me give him some examples of new projects we are announcing today. The upgrade of the Tyne & Wear Metro, replacing the signal system dating back to the 70s and enabling the extension of the Metro to Washington. New rail stations from Wellington and Devon, Portis head and peel into Preston -- Peele, connecting thousands of people. Which Transport Secretary under the Conservatives committed to these projects? He cannot answer because none of them did.

To take the -- one of the new roads as an example. The previous government rejected the business case for this scheme. This government is funding it. The infrastructure, new rail stations, new roads connecting every part of our country. That is the difference a Labour government makes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Chair of the select committee.
13:44
13:45
13:46
Gideon Amos Portrait Gideon Amos MP (Taunton and Wellington, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Liberal Democrat spokesperson. neglected by the last Conservative government. From potholes to cancelled bus services, skyhigh train tickets, and entirely fictional rail and transport budget, safe reliable transport system is vital for economic growth, of course it is. This capital investment is of course welcome news. We are pleased to see the government answer the calls of the Liberal Democrats and other campaigners for vital upgrades such as new rail investment on the northern routes. Given the hardfought campaign by local people in my constituency, I would also like to particularly welcome confirmation of new stations in Wellington and first proposed in this House by the predecessor, Jaromy Browne MP.

I can't go as far as agreeing to relocate Wellington into Devon, it does remain in Somerset. But they are both long overdue rail projects. I thank the Secretary of State for engaging not just with myself, my honourable friend and members across the house including the honourable before Exeter who I see regularly on the importance of these stations for the whole regional economy. Long overdue funding for the West Midlands Rail Hub is also welcome. Turning to road infrastructure, many of the schemes announced today have been sought for many years.

We are pleased to see investment in the A66, something my honourable friend has consistently campaigned for. As well as investment in infrastructure in Manchester, Derby, Nottingham. But clarity is still needed on how exactly funding for these projects will be spent. After years of delays, broken promises, and mismanagement, not least with HS2, public confidence in government ability to deliver major infrastructure is understandably low. May I ask the Secretary of State, given the effects of inflation over the course of the 12 month review of the Wellington projects and others, can the Minister confirm today that the project will be fully funded and completed in the two is it takes to construct them? When will the government finally published detailed plans for Northern Powerhouse Rail? Can the government give the country a firm assurance all these projects will be delivered on time and on budget in a cost- effective manner?
13:48
13:50
13:50
13:51
13:51
13:52
13:52
13:53
13:53
13:54
13:54
13:54
13:55
13:55
13:56
13:56
13:57
13:57
13:58
13:59
13:59
14:00
14:00
14:01
14:01
14:02
14:02
14:03
14:03
14:03
14:04
14:05
14:05
14:06
14:07
14:07
14:08
14:08
14:09
14:10
14:10
14:10
14:11
14:12
14:13
14:13
14:13
14:14
14:15
14:15
14:16
14:16
14:17
14:17
14:18
14:18
14:19
14:20
14:20
14:21
14:21
14:22
14:22
14:23
14:23
14:24
14:25
14:25
14:26
14:26
14:27
14:27
14:28
14:28
14:29
14:30
14:30
14:31
14:31
14:32
14:33
14:33
14:34
14:35
14:35
14:36
14:36
14:37
14:37
14:38
14:38
14:39
14:40
14:40
14:41
14:42
14:42
14:43
14:44
14:44
14:44
14:45
Gareth Thomas Portrait Gareth Thomas MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Harrow West, Labour )
-
-
Sir Wyn Williams has today released the first volume of his report into the Horizon scandal which caused so much time to so many innocent people. The fearless and diligent work of his enquiry has won the trust and admiration of postmasters. The enquiry has asked penetrating questions on a large number of witnesses and has scrutinised more than 2 million pages of evidence. The whole house I know recognises the bravery of the postmasters who fought against enormous odds to see their cause recognised.

The report reminds us that blameless people were impoverished, bankrupted, stressed beyond belief, lost their jobs, their managers, the reputations, the mental health and in some cases, I'm sure the whole House will show my gratitude to Sir Wyn Williams and his team to the report. This spells out the human impact on looking at that redress schemes that have been put in place in response. The second volume will in due course deal with the causes of the scandal and how repetition can be avoided.

To be clear, I'm sympathetic to his 19 recommendations today. Clearly a number of them require careful consideration. We will respond them properly with some concern about the ongoing delivery of the Horizon schemes. We will set a deadline of 10th of October and we will beat it was House will see that he has accepted that the post office, department, and ministers continue to adhere to the aims of providing financial redress which is full, fair, and prompt. He concludes that the majority of people who have accepted offers under the GLO scheme would have done so because for them the offer was full and fair.

That said, he makes some understandable criticisms especially of the Horizon Shortfall Scheme which we will need to study closely and address. We inherited a compensation process which was widely seen as too slow, adversarial and legalistic. Over four years after the first High Court case exposed the scandal, only 2500 postmasters and had final settlements. There were key significant gaps in the compensation process, and many victims and not come forward. Indeed there was no compensation scheme in place for those postmasters whose convictions had been overturned by Parliament.

One year ago, government had paid £236 million of redress. We have now for Drupal is that to nearly £1.1 billion. We have launched a compensation scheme for postmasters who have had their convictions overturned, the Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme. And arrangements to overturned convictions. And we have delivered a £75,000 fixed some offer and over 200,000 sub-postmasters opted for it. We have opted in the event process to allow people to appeal their HSS settlement or offers. This should provide, as the report says, an opportunity to put right any failures to deliver redress which is full and fair for HSS claims.

And look at Fujitsu and the cost of contributions to the scandal. As the House notes and the report underlines, there is still a lot more to do. I know that those postmasters who are yet to agree final compensation are frustrated with the delay. So my. We have been consulting regularly with the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board and others on what more we can do to approve redress. The recommendations are very helpful in that regard. Two of the recommendations address issues which we have already been working on a cross government and with the advisory report.

I can confirm we accept the recommendation that claimants should be able to bank the best offer they get the GLO process and should not sit at risk if they choose to go to the independent panel. Secondly we will provide redress for family members of postmasters who suffered because of the scandal. I have met the group "Lost chances for postmasters children" who have campaigned with considerable courage. The report recognises that designing a suitable compensation scheme for family members raises some very difficult issues.

Nonetheless we want to look after those family member who suffered most, and meeting the recommendation that we should give " Redress to close family members of the most adversely affected by Horizon. " Given these challenges we will now discuss the details on how the scheme should be run with claimants lawyers, the independent Advisory Board, and the Lost chances group. And close family members of existing Horizon claimants who themselves suffered personal injury including psychological distress because of their relative suffering. Other than in exceptional circumstances, we will need contemporaneous written evidence of that personal injury.

There are some fundamental lessons to be learnt which the report .2. About how compensation following wrongdoing on the scale should be delivered in future. In particular, the post office should never have been allowed. Decisions on funding should be made more quickly and it should not have needed the ITV drama distillate action to overturn hundreds of unjust convictions. We cannot now turn back the clock to fix those fundamental mistakes. We must instead address two challenges, the first is to make sure that if there is ever another terrible scandal like this one, and all of us will sincerely hope that there isn't, but the victims do not need to bring in a dramatic court case to expose it.

The second challenge of such another scandal happens, government must be set up to offer trusted redress from the very start. The report argues that should be eight standing public body to deliver redress in any further scandal. I have a considerable amount of sympathy with that view. Clearly we should need to analyse the options fully before we commit to it. We will reflect on how to address those twin challenges and will bring our conclusions back to the House. Madame Deputy Speaker, we can never recompense a person properly for their freedom are wrongly being denied them.

The humiliation of being wrongly accused, of seeing your loved ones in profound distress or worse. Or recompense someone for their good reputation been taken from them. I cannot assuage the anger of the victims, nor the anger I feel on their behalf ever be assuaged. But we are determined to do more on redress and to do it quickly. To give more of the victims of this appalling scandal at least a measure of the peace they rightly deserve. I commend the report to the House.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Shadow Minister.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. Can I thank the Minister as well for advanced sight of his statement? We advanced sight of his statement? We welcome the release of volume 1 of the Post Office Horizon inquiry the Post Office Horizon inquiry final report. I would like to put on record my thanks to Sir Wyn Williams and inquiry team all the work they and inquiry team all the work they have done alongside all those who gave evidence. This inquiry lays bare one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in modern British history.

Volume 1 focuses on British history. Volume 1 focuses on redress and the human impact of the Horizon scandal which has been Horizon scandal which has been evolving since the year 2000. The human impact revealed is human impact revealed is particularly devastating. The report reveals that at least 13 people may reveals that at least 13 people may have taken their own lives as a result of the Post Office Horizon IT
14:53
14:54
Harriett Baldwin Portrait Dame Harriett Baldwin MP (West Worcestershire, Conservative)
-
-
never recompense a person properly for this miscarriage, I'm sure the whole House will want to ensure that whole House will want to ensure that the victims are fully compensated by the schemes. I would like to put on the schemes. I would like to put on record my tribute to the work of the member for Thirsk and Malton who set up the process of redress. The report has recommended that the report has recommended that the government and /or the department and, where appropriate the post and, where appropriate the post office and Fujitsu, should provide a written response to the recommendations of 10 October.

Can the Minister confirm that the the Minister confirm that the government will be able to say by 10 government will be able to say by 10 October whether they are going to accept all 19 of the recommendations accept all 19 of the recommendations in the report? The report details that there is still much to be done to ensure justice for the victims. to ensure justice for the victims. Can I ask the Minister who and how of those responsible be held of those responsible be held answerable for the years of denial and suffering? This was not simply a and suffering? This was not simply a technical failure.

It was a failure of oversight governance and of oversight governance and accountability. The report finds that the post office and Fujitsu new, or at the very least, they should have known, that the Horizon IT system had faults. The sub- postmasters are also described as victims of wholly unacceptable behaviour by the two companies. Sir Wyn Williams has stated there are still more than 3000 claims to resolve. They have been egregious delays in compensation. Can the minister update the House on the most recent status of the compensation schemes? What steps is the Minister taking to address these concerns, and how is the government ensuring that full fare and fast compensation is delivered without further Roxy or delay? Can the minister update us on what action is being taken in relation to Fujitsu? They are still being awarded government contracts full stop Fujitsu said they would wait until the inquiry reports to offer compensation.

So Can the minister confirm there is now nothing stopping Fujitsu from paying interim compensation now? And Can the minister confirm that it will be made clear how much he believes Fujitsu should contribute to the redress scheme? In the spending review, the government allocated £86 million from its transfer fund for the post office. Specifically earmarked to support investment planned including replacing the existing Horizon computer system. Can the minister update the House on the progress of securing a new computer system for the post office? And if this system will be replacing the Horizon system in its entirety? What assessment has he made of the earlier Capture accounting software and its legs your problems? Finally to move on from this protracted miscarriage, Can the minister say when we will receive the much anticipated Green paper on the future of the post office? How will the public be able to have their say on this consultation? Time for half measures is over.

Justice delayed is justice denied, and those affected by the scandal deserve nothing less than the full force of the government's commitment to truth, reform, and redress, and taxpayers also deserve to know how much ministers think Fujitsu should pay

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to resolve these terrible wrongs. To I thank lazy for her comments and
14:57
Gareth Thomas Portrait Gareth Thomas MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Harrow West, Labour )
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank lazy for her comments and questions. She zaps to be right in questions. She zaps to be right in opening remarks about this being the greatest miscarriage of justice in our country's history, and response ability on all of us to do what we can to make sure victims receive full and fair compensation. And we do everything we can do to ensure that there is never a repeat. She challenges me on this. I can confirm we are determined to meet the deadline.

And some of the recommendations concern the ongoing delivery of the heart Horizon compensation schemes. We do not want inadvertently to delay and hold back any of those claims from going forward. She rightly gives me the opportunity to pay tribute to the right honourable gentleman for Thirsk and Malton for the work that he did when he was Post Office Minister. Without question, we would be even further behind without the considerable amount of work and effort being put in place.

There are many others in the House who campaigned on behalf of the sub- postmasters. I see the right honourable gentleman in his place, and my right honourable friend who chairs the Select Committee is one other too. Who and how will those responsible be held to account is one of the other questions that the honourable Lady opposite ask. She will know that Sir Wyn Williams is due to publish the second part of his report which focuses on those very questions.

We will consider carefully what he has to say where we receive the report. She will also already know that the Metropolitan Police are leading an investigation into whether there is criminal responsibility at play here. Over 100 police officers are working on that investigation. They have identified a number of individuals of interest, and we will see what they do with regard to those particular individuals in due course. She and the House will understand that ministers are not in any way involved in those decisions.

What further steps have we taken to deliver and speed up compensation? She will be aware in particular on the Horizon Shortfall Scheme that we the Horizon Shortfall Scheme that we had issued the early opportunity for sub-postmasters applying for that scheme who wants to accept a fixed sum payment of £75,000 to do so. We will put in place an appeals process to try and give those who feel they have not received to date a fair offer, a chance to get a full and fair redress.

But there are particular challenges in the Horizon Shortfall Scheme. It is a scheme if I'm honest that I worry about the most, not least because there are 1700 cases where it does not appear to be any evidence of shortfalls. That does not mean that there were not shortfalls, it means at this stage that we do not have evidence of what those shortfalls were. As the House would expect, I've gone back to the post office and made clear we want to reinvestigate to see whether evidence can be found around as many of those cases as is possible.

We are looking very carefully at what we can do about the rest. On Fujitsu, again, we will need to see the final report to understand fully the degree of Fujitsu's culpability. I have made clear to Fujitsu that we think they should bring forward an interim compensation payment. I hope we will see them see the report today. She asked me about the Green Paper. We hope to publish it shortly. The issues which she quite rightly will recognise, Green Paper will consider, is the future of the post office IT systems.

We certainly need to move on from the past and move on to Arise in and we will set out in more detail what work we are doing in that regard.
15:01
15:03
Gareth Thomas Portrait Gareth Thomas MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Harrow West, Labour )
-
-
I take the opportunity to pay again a tribute to the work of the Business and Trade Select committee under my right honourable friend's As he has said, there have been a serious recommendations from his Committee. I realise we have not always agreed with all of those recommendations. For me, the question about whether to offer legal advice in terms of Horizon CAME claims has always been a finely balanced judgement. -- Horizon Shortfall Scheme claims. So many Shortfall Scheme claims.

So many have accepted the payment I think is an indication of that appetite. Nevertheless, I recognise that Sir William Williams -- Sir Wyn Williams have give us a very particular answer on that question. We will consider this carefully. On the question of whether the post office should be stripped completely of the responsibility for the Horizon SCHEME, there is no doubt that if we were starting afresh, the Post- Office would have no responsibility Office would have no responsibility Office would have no responsibility When I look at the question of who should be responsible for the delivery of compensation, this would cause further delay to victims receiving compensation.

The post office should not be involved in the horizon shortfall scheme delivery. I hope given the numbers of people who have come forward with appeals in the Horizon Shortfall Scheme, we will be able to offer confidence to those people that they will have the chance to get their full compensation.
15:05
15:07
15:09
15:09
15:11
15:11
15:13
15:14
15:15
15:16
15:18
15:18
15:19
15:20
15:21
15:23
15:24
15:25
15:26
15:27
15:28
15:29
15:30
15:31
15:32
15:34
15:34
Edward Leigh Portrait Rt Hon Sir Edward Leigh MP (Gainsborough, Conservative)
-
-
make the point of order, following the sad death of Lord Tebbit last night. Obviously, I feel particularly touched by this because I served with him in Parliament between 1983 and 1992. I suppose I'm one of the last Thatcherite left standing here. To us he was an icon of everything we believed in in terms of small government and deregulation, he was the original Brexiteer, the original campaigner against Woking. He had an extraordinary ability with words. He came from humble backgrounds and he summed up everything we believed in, really pulling himself up and achieving greatness.

But I don't want to end on a political note, what I really want to end on is a personal note. I know that he has a reputation as a hard-hitting politician, but above all he was a supremely kind man. And very kind to us younger Members of Parliament, I remember sitting in the tearoom when Mrs Thatcher resigned asking if he would stand as leader of the Conservative Party. To my regret he said he couldn't, and the reason was in the events of the bombing of the Grand Hotel in 1984, I think he showed tremendous courage and stoicism.

Above all and although he lead our party to victory as chairman in the 1987 election, refuse office because he devoted his whole life in terms of love and devotion to his wife Margaret. Who was in a wheelchair for the rest of her life after those terrible events. So it's a great honour and delight in this short point of order to pay tribute to my friend, Lord

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Norman Tebbit. I thank the honourable gentleman for his touching tribute, which is
15:36
15:36
15:37
15:37
15:39
15:39
None Portrait Ten Minute Rule Motion: Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (Training in Schools)
-

Thank you very much. May I just
15:40
Nesil Caliskan Portrait Nesil Caliskan MP (Barking, Labour)
-
-
remark on what touching tributes we just heard in the chamber. I beg to move that leave be given to bring in move that leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about the evaluation of training about special educational needs and disabilities educational needs and disabilities initial teacher education requiring training about special educational needs for certain persons working in schools as part of their continuing professional development and for professional development and for connected purposes. Every child deserves an inclusive education.

In an environment that enables them to thrive. Every child should have teachers and support staff that teachers and support staff that understand their needs and who also have the professional capacity and have the professional capacity and skills to care for and teach each child. Proposing this bill in this child. Proposing this bill in this house, because sadly that is not the experience for many children with special educational needs living in special educational needs living in my constituency. Children in Barking and Dagenham have been left out and Dagenham have been left out because of a national system is broken.

Across the country parents are feeling hopeless and teachers are feeling hopeless and teachers are overwhelmed. Last night my honourable friend from my neighbouring constituency of Dagenham and Rainham secured an important debate in this House on ascent. She highlighted that in 2022 the request for Education, Health and Care Plans in Barking and Dagenham doubled, and increase of four times the national average. I know central to the Labour government's mission is to improve the life chances of children, regardless of their background or needs.

However, without fixing special educational needs support we cannot achieve that. And so, as the bill sets out, requiring compulsory SEND training for teachers and staff would provide them with the skills they need to educate our children. Currently initial teacher education and continued professional development programs have no dedicated SEND training. SEND seminars and sessions are woven into extra-curriculum, they failed to give teachers the expertise they need to support children. Often the debts and practical application of existing training is too variable, and many teachers feel underprepared.

Teachers require professional expertise to effectively provide wraparound support for all children. But instead, currently children with SEND are forced into an overstretched EHCP process, managed by overburdened local authorities because mainstream school support has been stripped away after 14 years of Conservative cuts. When I visit schools and meet parents in my constituency, I've also recently held a coffee morning at over 100 people attended, I hear the same thing over and over again. That early help makes a big difference.

Early help can only happen with appropriately trained teachers, with the skills to identify children in need. Making sure a child receives speech and language support for example would, as the evidence overwhelmingly shows, reduce behavioural issues in children with SEND. Making a mainstream setting more successful for many children, than might otherwise be excluded from school. SEND children are five times more likely to be excluded and they have some of the widest attainment grades of any demographic.

Impacting earning potential and overall life chances. It doesn't have to be that way. With more than 50% of students with an EHCP plan in mainstream schools, the current system is letting children down who have special educational needs and disabilities. Schools of course are trying their best, but the truth is teachers feel ill- equipped to provide support for children with SEND. One teacher in Barking and Dagenham told me about the four hour training centre Mark -- seminar on SEND they attended. But that was their only training, followed by a sort of get on with it attitude from the education sector.

The lack of training means well- meaning teachers inevitably create an exclusive education environment. Resulting in 9/10 children with SEND being left behind. This is a two- tiered education system working against our children that have the greatest need. Early intervention must be at the core of the government's SEND strategy, but it won't be successful if it's left only to SENCOs and teaching assistants. This bill seeks to address that. For most schools, a dedicated SENCO in the schools senior leadership team is a nice to have rather than a must have.

Parents, certainly those I've met in my constituency, are often left wondering who they can turn to as they fight to get the support their child deserves. One parent in my constituency told me about the exhausting decade they've had fighting for an EHCP plan for their son, who has autism. After five years a school becoming too difficult challenge for her son once he started secondary school, in 2020 her little boy was referred by the NHS to neurology. But it took until 2024 for a doctor to confirm that he also had epilepsy, which was causing brain seizures resulting in short absences.

The point here is that the little boys mother made to me is that her child was clearly struggling at school for years, finding it difficult to focus. That was apparent before a 10 year fight to secure an EHCP for her son, which she only managed to do towards the end of his secondary school. This little boy was in mainstream school for 10 years, being taught by teachers with inadequate SEND training. His mother feels that equipped with better skills and training on SEND, teachers would have identified the need for her child sooner and they could have helped him earlier.

SEND support for children is a complete picture that requires input from different agencies. Parents must always be at the heart of any discussion and decision about SEND support for their child. This is especially true for the many children who will and do fall short of the statutory duty to secure an EHCP. With a lack of specialist support or training for staff in mainstream schools those children are too often left children are too often left For some children, access to SEND schools is an appropriate fit, but the majority of SEND children are in mainstream schools and therefore we must recognise that our school should fundamentally shift to being better equipped with teachers better trained to support children with SEND.

Because SEND children deserve to succeed in our mainstream schools. Being a good teacher and all professionals that look after and teach our children is a special kind of person. The responsibility they hold is greater than to any individual child. They are helping raise and educate the next generation in our communities and shaping our society. A society in which I want to see everyone, including those with SEND, thrive in and contribute to. This will support teachers to do their job properly.

They deserve adequate training to deliver the early help the children with SEND. I ask members from across the house for their support for this bill so that we can begin to fix the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

broken SEND system in this country. The question is that the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the honourable member have leave to bring in the bill. I think the aye have it. Who will prepare and bring

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in the bill? Anna Dixon, Chris Ward, Chris

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Anna Dixon, Chris Ward, Chris Kane, Clive Betts, Danny Beales, Dawn Butler, Lloyd Hatton, Sarah

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Special Special educational Special educational needs Special educational needs and disabilities training in schools.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Second reading, what day?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friday, 12 September. The clerk

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friday, 12 September. The clerk will now proceed to read the orders of the day.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Football governance bill, Lords, as amended in public bill committee to be considered.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to be considered. We will begin with new clause 1 with which it will be convenient to
15:49
None Portrait Legislation: The Football Governance Bill [Lords]: Remaining Stages
-

consider the new clauses and amendments as listed on the selection paper.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I also put on record
15:49
Louie French Portrait Mr Louie French MP (Old Bexley and Sidcup, Conservative)
-
-
my thanks to Lord Tebbit for his life of service to both our country and our party. Be dearly missed by us all. In starting today's proceedings, I also draw members to my registry of interest. It is a privilege to stand at report stage to speak for the countless fans who filled the stands week in, week out and keep our clubs alive come rain or shine. And I would like to begin by putting on record my thanks for right honourable members for their contributions during the bill committee, and everyone who is engaged with the process outside of Westminster.

For all the high-torque regulators, quangos and corporate structures, let us never forget that football in this country is not an industry dream debt by officials with neat PowerPoint slides or Excel spreadsheets. It is a living tradition, part of who we are and the fabric of our nation, and that is precisely why we must be so careful now because this bill, well-intentioned though it may be, risks replacing one danger, a minority of reckless owners with another. Reckless political interference that risks the independence of sport.

It is a bill that wants to tackle cowboy owners by an incoherent government under investigation for appointing a Labour crony to be the new Sheriff of football and a department which has seen their whip resign since the bill committee. We really are in the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

thick of it. Would he like to join with me in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would he like to join with me in thanking his honourable friend the shadow Secretary of State for first shadow Secretary of State for first introducing legislation in this house which promoted an independent football regulator?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

football regulator? Is my noble friend says, you have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is my noble friend says, you have messed it all up, and I'm sure that doesn't apply just football. Before I move on to talk about amendments, it is worth reminding ourselves how we got here. English was not we got here. English was not invented by corporate lawyers or politicians. Its origins in the politicians. Its origins in the history and soles across the country. This is the same spirit that sees parents across the country drive through window and rain on a Sunday morning so the child can run Sunday morning so the child can run out in their club colours.

It is a out in their club colours. It is a spirit that is not a pair on balance sheets but without sustainable finances, there is no football at finances, there is no football at all. Sadly, as we have seen those cases where financial mismanagement and reckless spending has seen clubs and fans lose out. We focus on the and fans lose out. We focus on the long-term sustainability of the game. We support better fanny engagement, respecting the heritage of our clubs and strengthening ownership to help prevent the issues we have seen.

The final lead review stated that this area of regulation should in time be returned to the Football Association and Leeds. Having spoken to many football fans across the country and in my constituency, I can say with confidence that they would agree with this even more now that Labour is trying to directly interfere in English for my appointing a Labour crony. During the passage of this bill, we have heard from the likes of the FA and the Premier League they are concerned about regulatory groups, and we have sought today to push back on the tentacles of the socialist state seeking to strangle with redtape our beautiful game and this great British success story which attracts millions of fans around the world and contributes £8 billion to our economy each season.

This includes our amendments that would prevent the Secretary of State from expanding Leeds inscape under clause 2 without the approval of Parliament. We must give pub certainty and provide empire building. We must have transparency about how much these burdens are costing clubs and ticket prices, both today and in the future. This is why we have tabled amendments one, two and 28. It is the pound not spend on grassroots players, sentence maintenance or ticket prices. Every new bureaucrat is a tenner on match day cost and in the end, the fans pick up the tab just like always.

The government's own impact assessment suggests these costs will be more than £125 million with smaller clubs expecting a bill of 240 £7 million. We know that many smaller clubs will have no choice but to pass this onto fans, and the government and the regulator must be honest about it. As a house, we can also help limit these additional costs by supporting our amendments 22 and 23 which would limit the size of the regulator and The pay of the Chief Executive at the same levels of the Prime Minister.

The government states that once a regulator to be light-touch but vote against limits placed upon it. Which leads to the question of why. Why is the government saying one thing whilst doing the opposite in Westminster? Is it because it is an experience or is it the truth that this is yet another example of jobs for the boys at the cost of fans. That is why we have tabled amendments that would seek to limit interference into the independence of sport.

Firstly, we believe that should be consulted on any political statements made by clubs. Football clubs must not be mouthpieces for whichever fashionable cause of the time, and we believe that politics should be kept out of sport wherever possible. When a club speaks, is peeks for its fine and the local community. If it wants to do that matters beyond football, it should ask those fans first. Turning to my amendment which would remove the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

requirement. Would he mind us talking about

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would he mind us talking about what these causes that we shouldn't talk about? I would happy to. We talk about? I would happy to. We have been quite clear that we do not believe that includes the likes of believe that includes the likes of remembrance. We believe that is different to political causes. But as I have said, we do not believe that clubs should be getting involved with politics, and that is a hell that we are willing to die a hell that we are willing to die on, but it does not include requirements.

Turning to schedule requirements. Turning to schedule five which would remove the requirement for additional EDI reporting, we all know that football must be welcoming to everyone. must be welcoming to everyone. Racism and bigotry have no place in terrorism or wider society. Football terrorism or wider society. Football has made huge progress by itself with a range of initiatives already with a range of initiatives already in the game on the quality code of in the game on the quality code of practice, antiracism education and mentoring schemes.

Game has done this not because a government this not because a government regulator told them to because it is right, it works and fans supported. Fans do not pay their hard and money Fans do not pay their hard and money to defund diversity paperwork. Our amendment leaves inclusion where it belongs, on the pitch, on the stands, and in the community. Turning to clause 7 a new clause 11, these amendments tabled in my name seek to ensure the exercise functions to avoid conflicts with the regulations and rules of international bodies.

FIFA and UEFA rules are clear, national associations must be free from undue vertical interference. Countries that break the rules have been banned before, just ask the Greek football committee. The government is sleepwalking towards a giant own goal and this time there is no VER to save us. We already know that Uefa has written to the Secretary of State to set out their concerns with the bill. This came after the government bought out an expanded area of the bell. One stems from the fundamental requirements which is that there should be no government interference in the running of football.

The Minister could not give us enough reassurance about government interfering with English for which is why I have re-tabled my amendment today. We know that Uefa is concerned and that the government regulator may expand its mandate beyond its loosely defined current competencies. This expansion into broader aspects of football governance could undermine the established structures and processes of the sport that amount to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

government interference. I give way. When he was in government, did he

**** Possible New Speaker ****

When he was in government, did he have any correspondence from UEFA and FIFA, and given the openness with which the shadow minister is with which the shadow minister is coming for, would he now published the previous government got in that correspondence?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

correspondence? This is quite a rehearsed line seeking to payout, but as we heard in the Bill committee, and the Ministry has sought to reassure the Ministry has sought to reassure the house that Uefa has no problems with the bill. That is the insurance he sought to give us, so if that is the sought to give us, so if that is the case, why is this not being laid on the floor of the house so that all the floor of the house so that all members can take this vote in pure confidence of what has been said, because what has been brought to the because what has been brought to the press differs from what the Minister is telling members today, and so for is telling members today, and so for his allowed to allow Parliament to see this letter so that we may see this letter so that we may properly scrutinise this bill in the fullest possible way and in the proper context.

So I ask again now, proper context. So I ask again now, what is she so afraid of? Is she scared that, given the Secretary of State is already under investigation for appointing one of her donors to for appointing one of her donors to the chair of the regulator, the publication of the letter will prove to be yet another now in the coffin of the regulator, won't it? Turning to schedule two, any regulator must be credible. That means independent beyond any doubt, but what have we seen? The preferred chair with a hidden political donation, a Secretary of State.

Accuse herself

**** Possible New Speaker ****

only once exposed, revolving door. And I ask him why the previous

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I ask him why the previous government and his colleague sitting next to him on the Frontbench who is the Minister responsible at the time the Minister responsible at the time actively headhunted the individual in question and added him to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in question and added him to the shortlist because that is true. The Secretary of State has either

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The Secretary of State has either deliberately or not deliberately dismissed that because the gentleman dismissed that because the gentleman in question has already said.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

in question has already said. I understand that the shadow minister may not have meant to say that the Secretary of State deliberately misled the House. He

**** Possible New Speaker ****

may want to clarify that for the house. I reflect on that comment and I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I reflect on that comment and I withdraw it. I don't know what the withdraw it. I don't know what the problem is. But the reality, they can scream and shout they want, is can scream and shout they want, is that the floor of the DCMS the chairman question said very clearly chairman question said very clearly that he was approached by civil servants not the minister in question, and the minister in question has already said on the floor of this house that he did not approach the said gentlemen, so maybe the secretary of state would also like to reflect on her comments.

This is a revolving door of vested interest ready to leap in. We would let the chairman of a rival club. You are already under investigation. I'm not sure you want to make this worse. We would let the chairman of a club referee a cup

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm sure the shadow Minister did

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm sure the shadow Minister did not mean to In-Fa I was under investigation. Apologise, you are not under

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Apologise, you are not under investigation, but the Secretary of State and the government is. That's State and the government is. That's a matter of public record. We wouldn't let the chairman of a rival club referee a cup final, why would club referee a cup final, why would we let people with political or commercial conflicts sit at the top of this football referee? Basic due of this football referee? Basic due diligence, no party has the chair and full declarations of conflicts and full declarations of conflicts to avoid the mess this government has got itself into.

Amendment 18 would put a stop to this cronyism would put a stop to this cronyism one central and give the public property. It is not radical, it is property. It is not radical, it is responsible. If we don't do it the regulator will fail before the first whistleblowers. We also re-tabled new clauses we still believe would new clauses we still believe would strengthen the bill. Let me begin with player welfare, players past with player welfare, players past and present who run onto that pitch every weekend and give us great every weekend and give us great entertainment.

But we can't ignore entertainment. But we can't ignore the fact that the two long player welfare has been left behind. We need to conduct a serious review within one year of this act passing on how we can better protect players, past present and future. The clause does not dictate solutions, it demands a serious evidence led review. It asks the secretary of state to bring governing bodies, medical experts, clerks and players together to ensure the beautiful game does not come at the cost of the minds and bodies of those who play it.

We hope the government listens. Last but not least, our new clause 1 would consult on calling full-time to the two-tiered approach to football fans. The alcohol ban that has been in place since 1985 was introduced to help curb hooliganism on the terraces during the problematic era of British football. 40 years on and with the modern game enjoying a more family friendly atmosphere across the country, clubs, fans and the Conservatives are urging the government to consult on lifting the ban on alcohol.

As football fans know, we have this legacy ban which sees fans rushing to drink beer before kick-off and at half-time. This leaves them delayed to enter the stadiums and overcrowding on concourses. Thus why we have listened to fans, especially those down the football pyramid, to end the two-tiered approach to football fans as part of the bill. This new clause has support across the House and we hope it will be supported today. In conclusion, we are all here today because we care about English rubble -- football, but the government's heavy-handed regulator.

I stand here today because I want to see football succeed, not nationalised by stealth. We want clubs safeguarded from dodgy owners, not strangled in red tape. You want fans to have a real say, not ticked off on a form buried in a filing cabinet. We want inclusion that works, not paperwork that gathers dust. Above all we want football to remain what it has always been, something built by the people, for the people, not for the political classes. Good regulation can help the referee, blowing the whistle when rules are broken, but not dictating every pass or free kick.

These amendments today seek to limit the damage of this bill, they park the bus against political overreach and let football play on. If like me members really love football, the pitches, the terraces, the songs that never change, then blow the whistle on the bad owners. We must also call time on Ministers who think they can better run leagues from Westminster. Football does not belong to the government, it belongs to the people who stand in the stands, shoulder to shoulder win or lose, let us do right by them today.
16:04
Stephanie Peacock Portrait Stephanie Peacock MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport) (Barnsley South, Labour)
-
-
Alcohol and football grounds, the question is that new clause 1 be read a second time. I call Minister Stephanie Peacock.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. I'm pleased to be responding to the report stage of the Football Governance Bill as it enters its final stages in the House of Commons. I begin by sending condolences to the family of Liverpool player Diogo Jota who tragically lost his life last week at 28 years of age alongside his brother. I'm sure the whole House will send their thoughts to their will send their thoughts to their loved ones. English football is one of our proudest traditions, it's of our proudest traditions, it's more than just a game, football brings us together providing a source of local pride, uniting us in victory and loss.

The Premier victory and loss. The Premier League, the EFL, the National League, attracting some of the best players in the world. In return you players in the world. In return you can find fans of English football clubs in almost every country. Despite the global success story of English football there were English football there were English football there were underlying fragility is of the game that this Labour government is committed to tackling, as we are departing on the side of football fans. We have seen too many fans.

We have seen too many instances of irresponsible owners and financial models and financial and financial models and financial regulation casting shadows over too regulation casting shadows over too many clubs. Fans have issues that need resolving now and demonstrate the urgent need for this bill to become law. The change has been a long time coming, dating back in this place to 2011 with the cross- party Select Committee report. The ill-fated Super League attempt of course led to the Fan-Led Review, and I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the work of Ding Tracey Crouch who pioneered this work.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you for giving way. My right honourable friend mentions the right honourable friend mentions the Conservative Minister, basically the Tory party wrote the vast majority Tory party wrote the vast majority of this bill and then decided to vote against it. I'm confused, perhaps my honourable friend with perhaps my honourable friend with explain to me why this is a explain to me why this is a socialist bill and football is being nationalised. I think it's absolutely ridiculous.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

absolutely ridiculous. My honourable friend makes a good point. I hope that whoever wins the point. I hope that whoever wins the election on 4 July will see this as a good bill to crack on with because it's important for the future of football and crucially for the future of football fans. Not my words, but the words of the right words, but the words of the right honourable gentleman the member for Daventry, who I have a huge amount of respect and affection for.

Which of respect and affection for. Which brings me on to the points made by the shadow Minister, and the amendments that stand in his name. Amendment 14, the issue of listing competitions and scope of regulation competitions and scope of regulation on the face of primary legislation. The approach in this bill is consistent with other similar sports consistent with other similar sports legislations. The opposition's amendment would likely make this a hybrid bill, which would mean years of delay effectively killing the bill they introduced.

A bill that was in their manifesto. We have been absolutely clear that the regulator will be operationally independent of government. It will not exert any influence on the FA's autonomy to govern the game. The opposition spokesperson is obsessed with the publication of private communications with UEFA and FIFA, despite his obsession and his strong remarks about me at the Dispatch Box did his government published private correspondence? No, of course they didn't. I have been clear throughout that UEFA and FIFA have no issue with the bill currently drafted.

Amendment 25 is simply scaremongering on the part of the opposition. And it is curiously odd -- at odds with one of their other amendments, amendment 21. The football governance statement also concluded in the other governments bill allows the government on the day to set out priorities in relation to the regulator. This is no different to the strategic stays the government can and does give to other regulators like the Competition and Markets Authority, without undermining their operational independence. The statement will be published and laid before Parliament.

Alimentary approval is neither appropriate nor necessary, especially given the need to avoid political interference. Amendments 24 and 28 on levy extensions are simply not needed. The cost of regulation should not place an undue burden on clubs, costs should be transparent as set out in clause 54. Regulator already has the power to exempt clubs paying a levy through its levy rules.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

We had a long discussion in the Bill committee about understanding how much this regulator was going to how much this regulator was going to cost and how big it was going to be. But all the amendments we put But all the amendments we put forward were voted down. When will the Minister no that this thing has

**** Possible New Speaker ****

grown too big and cost us too much. I'm grateful to the honourable

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to the honourable gentleman service on the committee, we did have a very good debate. The impact assessment was approved by impact assessment was approved by the previous sport Minister. Turning the previous sport Minister. Turning to amendment 18, the government's codon appointments is clear that political activity is not a party appointment. David Kogan has been found a .44 the role by a panel found a .44 the role by a panel including a senior independent panel including a senior independent panel member agreed by the commission of public appointments and has now been endorsed by the DCMS committee adding a further layer of adding a further layer of robustness.

We will not set a new precedent by going further from the precedent by going further from the governance code on points as this amendment proposes. Amendments 19 amendment proposes. Amendments 19 and 20 are conflict-of-interest, if the interest of a border panel mentor would prejudice their ability to carry out their functions then the bill already captures this as a conflict-of-interest. Turning to the owners and directors test. Members of a proscribed organisation is an offence under the terrorist act, that offence is included in section 2 of the Serious Crime Act.

These offences would already be considered when testing the fitness of an individual. Amendment 15 is therefore not required. Amendment 17, reporting on equality diversity and inclusion is a key part of good corporate governance. Clubs will simply have to state what they are doing on the issue. Amendment 27 on charities, I know from my own area of Barnsley the brilliant work the Barnsley community trust do. And through changes in the other place the corporate governance code gives the legs ability to a club to detail what activity is taken to contribute to the economic and social well- being of the community.

This can include work for official charities or wider work in the community, therefore amendment 27 is not needed. Turning to new clause one which calls for a consultation on lifting the ban on consuming alcohol in view of the pitch. This is outside of the scope of the bill which is focused on sustainability of clubs and the game overall. I raised the issue with the Home Office, as I committed to do during the Bill committee, as it is there

**** Possible New Speaker ****

policy lead. Going... On the final point you made, does

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On the final point you made, does my honourable friend agree with me that we do need to look at alcohol sales but we need to do it with all sales but we need to do it with all stakeholders and in the round, not to be thrown in as a gimmicky way to this bill about finance and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

governance. She makes a good point, I have reflected those comments to the Home reflected those comments to the Home Office Minister. I'm going to speak to amendments in the name of the Liberal Democrat spokesman, the Liberal Democrat spokesman, the honourable member for Cheltenham. I would like to thank for his constructive approach to the scrutiny of this legislation and for scrutiny of this legislation and for his parties support. A number of his amendments are outside the scope of the regulator but I'm sure he will put on record some important and put on record some important and valid points, I will address some of the amendments now.

Free-to-air TV, the amendments now. Free-to-air TV, the government believes the current list of events works well and it strikes an appropriate balance between access to sporting events and allowing sports to maximise and allowing sports to maximise broadcasting revenue. In domestic football the present arrangements under the listed events ranging have protected key moments such as the FA protected key moments such as the FA Cup final while ensuring the Premier League, the EFL and the FAA to raise billions annually which is invested back into the pyramid.

We all want back into the pyramid. We all want to see more matches televised free- to-air, but that must be balanced against investment and not risk it. New clause 4, the golden share, we expect the regulator will welcome clubs taking any measure to improve fan engagement and protect club heritage including the golden share. The regulator will not mandate them to do so, which brings me onto the issue of fan engagement which has been raised by members for Cheltenham and the Cheshire shell seized -- south-east.

This government has strengthened fan engagement. The previous governance bill required club savvy framework in place to ensure that regularly meet and consult with a red presenter Dave -- representative group on matters of importance. We improve this by requiring fan engagement to continue even if a club enters into insolvency and introduced a requirement for consultation on ticket prices. We have not prescribed A1 size fits all approach the fan engagement. We expect the regulator to consult the FSA where appropriate on fan issues, I know the fan regulator is already engaging with them.

We don't want to place unmanageable burdens on clubs unnecessarily, that's when you close or isn't needed. The honourable member also tabled amendments on protection for home grounds, an issue recently discussed. Home grounds are vital assets for clubs, that's why the bill introduces protections to inappropriate clubs... Requiring approval before clubs sell grounds. First let me clarify the legislation uses the word disposal rather than sale for technical legal reasons. For example a club might sell a portion of the stadium rather than the whole stadium.

This is because a club might divest a shareholding or transfer interest in the stadium without amounting to a full sale. Under clause 46 in all instances regulator approval is needed the sale of a stadium by a club, a sale can only be approved if it would not undermine the sustainability of the club. If the club has nowhere to play a few years down the line that means the club may not be sustainable, the regulator is unlikely to approve the sale. I will give way.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would she indicate that she would

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would she indicate that she would think the regulator looking into these matters would give fans a part

**** Possible New Speaker ****

these matters would give fans a part in the process in the normal way. Eight can very much indicate that. I am happy to meet the honourable gentleman to discuss it honourable gentleman to discuss it further. The issue of player

**** Possible New Speaker ****

further. The issue of player She addressed the amendments that my colleagues have put down, and my colleagues have put down, and that is the issue of degenerative conditions after time, so I was about she was about to say something about she was about to say something on this, but the proportion of footballers with these conditions is significantly greater compared to the general population, and so many the general population, and so many of them are left in a terrible situation and not supported by the Premier League.

What can regulator do to make sure that groups like football families the support they need to support those who suffer

**** Possible New Speaker ****

need to support those who suffer ?$$NEWLINE I appreciate that. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

?$$NEWLINE I appreciate that. I know the gentleman has spoken on this issue, and I'm hugely synthetic to it. The safety welfare and well- being of everyone taking part in sport is absolutely paramount.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The new regenerative disease is a real concern, and many people within the sport. I'm not sure whether that should be part of the governance bill with the biggest bill that bill with the biggest bill that there has ever been in our lifetime. It is a very serious issue. Can my honourable friend agree that this honourable friend agree that this needs to be looked at and that the government will look at this as a separate part of this bill because separate part of this bill because of the urgency and the fact that people up and down this country and people up and down this country and different levels of our suffering greatly as a result mainly of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

heading the ball. I know the honourable gentleman

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I know the honourable gentleman has done a huge amount of work on this, and I've heard call for members across the house. The Secretary of State and I worked with families including individuals associated with football families associated with football families for justice to discuss player safety for those with dementia. The government is committed to looking government is committed to looking further at this issue and supporting the families and football authorities to come together to address issues of lifelong consequences as well as post-career mental health and financial crises.

I'm afraid this amendment is not within the tight regulatory scope of the bell and that the government is aware for many former players and the families. This bill is focused on the financial sustainability of football clubs up and down the country. Too many fans have watched as their clubs make changes that they have no say on, selling the stadium, changing colours or in the worst case collapsing under inadequate ownership. This is unacceptable. It is devastating for fans and devastating for local communities.

It is this bill delivered by this Labour government will help protect one of our great sporting assets and ensure fans can focus on what is happening on the pitch rather than off it. Today, members across this house can vote against them, and today, we can deliver an independent football regulator. I commend this bill to the house. the house.
16:18
Max Wilkinson Portrait Max Wilkinson MP (Cheltenham, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
We welcome this bill, as do all sides of the house until a few short months ago. Some of them even came up with the idea. Like many in the chamber today, we were disappointed that the consensus remains broken after an apparent direction from the Leader of the Opposition and that the Conservatives are chosen to turn their backs on the sustainability of football so dramatically. Perhaps it is time to sack the manager. While the timing government had much to desire, they had to claim a win because it was their idea.

It was initiated and they started this process. But now they missed a goal at Villa Park in 1992. If I was generous, I would say the performance and this bill has been like man United, throwing away a massive points lead only to finish with nothing. I fear for the shadow minister instead, but they are more like Spurs in 2060. They managed to finish third in a two horserace. I suppose coming third as a sort of result they need to get used to.

Throughout this process, we have been clear on our position. We are in favour of the principles of protecting the heritage of our national game. We are in favour of greater financial sustainability and fan involvement in the game. We applaud the government's approach in delivering that and we will support the bill at third reading later today. Because we remain consistent in our view. But we think this bill could go further. Let me begin with the issue of free air coverage. Through new clause 3, we are calling for key fixtures from the football calendar to be made on free to add television to this increase Premier League matches each season.

The league cup final and the play-off final in the championship lead one. The shadow minister might have an interest in this one because he might make the play-offs one day. These would complement the existing free to a marquee events, the World Cup and the Euros. This is not about broadcasters who are South and declining. This is an opportunity for broadcasters and the footballers to innovate and deliver a more direct route to accessing fans without a pay wall. By introducing more games, broadcasters could look at sponsorship to generate opportunities and to engage fans who are currently priced out of football, not just in the stadium but on television as well.

This approach is proving successful in other countries. LaLiga broadcast one Spanish top-flight match free to air helping to maintain widespread public engagement with the sport. With the rising cost of living and subscription services required now totalling around about £700 a year, making more matches available without a pay will would ensure the game remains accessible. Turning to the issue of fan representation.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think the honourable for giving way. Charlton did reach the play- way. Charlton did reach the play- offs and we were promoted to the championships. Happy to correct the record. On the broadcasting issue, what is the cost analysis that the Lib Dems have done on this issue in Lib Dems have done on this issue in particular, given that we know the Premier League already signed broadcast deals with others. What is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the economic impact for those clubs? There is a huge amount of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

There is a huge amount of football going around in football and we know that when we get to the negotiations about contracts with the broadcasters and the leagues, these things are chunked up into these things are chunked up into packages and when the next contracts are up, this would be one of those packages. I don't see that there packages. I don't see that there would need to be any massive

**** Possible New Speaker ****

economic impact. Is a Scot, it might seem out that I want to intrude on this debate, but the health of English footballers valuable to us in footballers valuable to us in Scotland as well. With the member agree with me that if football is to agree with me that if football is to continue on the scale it is, it needs another generation to see it, to love it, and to want to take part, and the only really successful way of doing that with the two make it free to air to every household in this country at some point every week.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

The point here is that Jonesy and younger people than those in the younger people than those in the room today, and there are no gently as I look around, they consume sport and media in a very different way. and media in a very different way. Those of us, and out of touch. Those of us in the chamber today grew up watching football as a 90 minute watching football as a 90 minute game on television. Many of us on game on television.

Many of us on free to our. Today, youngsters will be watching clips on TikTok, and social media for so they will be social media for so they will be watching clips of people playing games on computers as well, and if we are to get the next generation involved, the easiest way to make sure they are entertained is by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

making football free to air. I do understand the point that the gentleman is trying to make, but the gentleman is trying to make, but on the point of cost, he suggests there wouldn't be a cost impact on the broadcasting rights because as the amendment states, this would be the amendment states, this would be required every season, and as such is highlighted in my previous is highlighted in my previous intervention, those already in place, swift members were to vote for this today, it would impact the
Feed Live - Click to view video
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page