Windrush

Debate between Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent and Sajid Javid

Monday 30th April 2018 Commons Chamber

[Sajid Javid]

I can make that commitment. Every part of this Government is committed to furthering social justice, and that will be at the heart of my Department.

[Ruth Smeeth (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

To follow on from my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn), such is the chaos of our immigration system post the Windrush crisis that a gentleman called my office this morning asking whether he was going to be “Windrushed”. He arrived here from Italy in 1967 at the age of seven. What does the Home Secretary want to say to him?

[Sajid Javid]

First, I am sorry that the gentleman whom the hon. Lady refers to has those concerns and that anxiety. No one wants anyone to suffer in that way. I do not know if she has already passed the details to my Department, but if she does, I will certainly look at that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent and Sajid Javid

Monday 4th December 2017 Commons Chamber

[Ruth Smeeth (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

T5. Bus users in the Potteries have been hit by a double whammy of fare increases and journey cuts. Although my constituents might appreciate the irony of two lots of bad bus news arriving at once, they certainly do not appreciate the inconvenience or the impact on their jobs. Many of those cuts could be avoided if Stoke-on-Trent City Council was prepared properly to subsidise public transport. What support is the Minister providing to make sure we have a bus system in the Potteries that is fit for purpose?

[Sajid Javid]

This Government have done much to improve bus facilities throughout the country, especially in the new metro mayor areas where we have extended bus franchising. If the hon. Lady has particular issues, the Department for Transport is the policy lead, and I would be happy to pass her questions on to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport.

UK Steel Industry

Debate between Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent and Sajid Javid

Monday 11th April 2016 Commons Chamber

[Sajid Javid]

What I can tell the right hon. Gentleman is that Tata is fully aware of its obligations, both legal and otherwise, on the pension scheme. I hope it will say more about that when it publishes its information memorandum. I am very much focused on making sure that the challenges of the pension scheme do not become an issue with regard to finding and securing a buyer. That is why we are talking to the trustees, to try to work together to make sure that the members’ interests are looked after and, at the same time, that we have the best chance of securing a sale.

[Ruth Smeeth (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

Given the Secretary of State’s new-found robustness in his attitude towards China, can he assure us that he will no longer block the EU’s attempts to ensure that China is not granted market economy status, which would not only affect the steel industry to the tune of thousands of jobs, but cost up to 2,500 jobs in my own constituency?

[Sajid Javid]

The decision on market economy status is for the EU collectively to make. I am sure that the hon. Lady will agree that any country, including China, that wants market economy status has to earn it. To do so, China says it is cutting overcapacity, and I think that the EU would want to see evidence of that. Let me further reassure her that even when countries such as Russia do have market economy status, that does not stop the EU taking defensive action, including on dumping.

Trade Union Bill

Debate between Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent and Sajid Javid

Monday 14th September 2015 Commons Chamber

[Sajid Javid]

I should emphasise that point: we are saving £17 million a year because of the transparency we have introduced into the civil service. It will no doubt have a similar impact on the rest of the public sector.

There are nurses, teachers and other public servants being paid a salary by the taxpayer while working for their union under the banner of facility time. There is no transparency around how much time they spend on union work and no controls in place to ensure that the taxpayer is getting value for money. It is a situation that most ordinary Britons, including many dedicated public servants I have spoken to, find absolutely baffling. That is why civil service Departments are already required to publish information about the use of facility time by their staff. The Bill allows the Government to make regulations extending that to all public sector employers. It will include information about an employer’s spending on trade union duties and activities and about how many of its union representatives spend a specified percentage of their time on their union role. We have already made considerable savings for the taxpayer by requiring Departments to publish this information, as we have just heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Wells (James Heappey). However, if transparency alone does not lead to further savings, the Bill also grants Ministers the power to set a cap on the time and money spent on facility time.

[Ruth Smeeth (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

Will the Secretary of State agree with one of his own donors, JCB, which has people in facility full-time to encourage positive industrial relations? If it is good enough for the private sector, surely it is good enough for our public sector.

[Sajid Javid]

It is good enough for all sectors. There is nothing wrong with facility time—the Bill is clear about that—but it should be open and transparent, and the current rules do not ensure that.