Debates between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow

There have been 14 exchanges between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow

1 Thu 31st October 2019 Standards
Leader of the House
8 interactions (2,938 words)
2 Thu 18th July 2019 Oral Answers to Questions
Department for Transport
2 interactions (79 words)
3 Tue 11th June 2019 Oral Answers to Questions
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
2 interactions (82 words)
4 Tue 19th February 2019 Oral Answers to Questions
Department of Health and Social Care
2 interactions (62 words)
5 Mon 28th January 2019 Venezuela 3 interactions (140 words)
6 Wed 9th January 2019 Points of Order
Leader of the House
3 interactions (146 words)
7 Wed 18th July 2018 Points of Order 3 interactions (325 words)
8 Mon 18th June 2018 Oral Answers to Questions
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
2 interactions (104 words)
9 Wed 23rd May 2018 Points of Order 6 interactions (335 words)
10 Wed 21st February 2018 Oral Answers to Questions
Cabinet Office
2 interactions (92 words)
11 Mon 5th February 2018 Oral Answers to Questions
Department for Work and Pensions
2 interactions (93 words)
12 Mon 8th January 2018 NHS Winter Crisis
Department of Health and Social Care
2 interactions (167 words)
13 Tue 24th October 2017 Universal Credit Roll-out
Department for Work and Pensions
5 interactions (258 words)
14 Mon 9th October 2017 Monarch Airlines
Department for Transport
2 interactions (96 words)

Standards

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Thursday 31st October 2019

(9 months, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Leader of the House
Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Hansard
31 Oct 2019, 2:13 p.m.

I thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to speak in this debate. Although I am the originator of the complaint to the Committee on Standards in September 2016, I rise more in sorrow than anger to comment on these matters. I, too, wish to thank the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Kathryn Stone, for her diligent work on our behalf, protecting the reputation of this House. I also thank her predecessor, Kathryn Hudson, and all elected and lay members of the Committee on Standards.

After 37 months we have the report. It is 69 pages long, and it makes grim reading for those colleagues who have taken the time to wade through it. The recommendations of the Committee include the longest suspension to be handed out since records began—six months—which in normal times would trigger a recall. The Committee also said that the right hon. Member for Leicester East (Keith Vaz) should not be offered a former Member’s pass when his time in this House ceases.

It is clear why this investigation has taken so long, and the delays, deflection and confusion that the Committee believes the right hon. Gentleman to have conducted, have been quite damning on his character. He sought to drag out these proceedings so that if he does not stand at the next election, none of the punishment will be meted out to him, and he will have avoided a suspension. If the House decides to accept the recommendations, they will be in place for only a few days, not for six months, and there will therefore be no recall. Effectively, the only censure that he will face is that of not having the privilege of a former Member’s pass when he ceases to be here.

I am aware that the right hon. Gentleman is not present, but the Chair of the Committee on Standards hinted at a statement that he put on his website immediately after the publication of this report. In fairness to the right hon. Gentleman, and to inform the House, I would like to read the statement that was posted on his website on 28 October, shortly after the release of the report by the Committee on Standards into his conduct:

“The events of 27th August 2016 were purely personal and private, and occurred in circumstances where neither Mr Vaz’s public nor his Parliamentary role were engaged.

Mr Vaz has never bought, possessed, dealt with or used illegal drugs. He has a cardiovascular condition which would mean that were he to consume any non-prescribed drugs he would in all likelihood die. The Commissioner has confirmed that Mr Vaz has not committed any criminal acts. The referrals made (including by Andrew Bridgen MP) were a waste of police resources.

The transcript of the recording which the Committee and Commissioner rely on has been completed discredited by a highly qualified forensic scientist, who has cast considerable doubt on its reliability. She stated: “Overall the transcript supplied to me fell significantly short of what is expected in terms of a transcript intended for use in legal, disciplinary or similar proceedings and it cannot be considered a reliable evidential record of the speech content of the questioned recording.

Mr Vaz has cooperated at all stages of this process. At no stage during the inquiry has either Commissioner stated in writing or otherwise that Mr Vaz has been uncooperative. Commissioner Hudson stated in terms that Mr Vaz has been helpful. Mr Vaz vigorously rejects the allegation that he has failed to cooperate with the inquiry: to the contrary he holds the standards system in the highest regard and with the highest respect.”

There are then some links to reports from the inquiry that are available on the parliamentary website, and it indicates where people should look in the report for various information that the right hon. Gentleman regards as evidential to support his statement. The statement concludes:

“Keith Vaz has been treated for a serious mental health condition for the last three years as a result of the events of 27th August 2016. He has shared all his medical reports in confidence with the Committee. He has today been admitted to hospital and this office will not be making any further comments.”

I have read the report, and there is no apology from the right hon. Member for Leicester East. There is no hint of apology, no hint of regret, and a complete denial of the unanimous conclusions of the Committee on Standards. That may hint at his state of mind—he is in complete denial about the level of dissatisfaction that the public feel with the behaviour of some Members of this House, and he has certainly detracted from our reputation.

Many tributes have been paid to you today, Mr Speaker, and I wish to add my own. If you had acted on the letter that I wrote to you in September 2015—a year before the incident involving the then Chair of the Home Affairs Committee—in which I raised my concerns that if the actions and activities of the right hon. Gentleman came to light, they would risk seriously damaging—

Mr Speaker Hansard
31 Oct 2019, 2:29 p.m.

Order. The hon. Gentleman will resume his seat. This matter was raised on a previous occasion and I am going to say, in all solemnity and with firmness, to the hon. Gentleman and to the House what the position is.

I could not have known that the hon. Gentleman intended to use this debate in the way that he has thus far—in an orderly fashion, but in a way that I could not have predicted. I certainly could not have anticipated, and the hon. Gentleman did not do me the courtesy of telling me, that he intended to address my reaction to these matters, but I will say to the House that I do recall—I do not have the detail in front of me—the hon. Gentleman writing to me highlighting his concerns about the right hon. Member for Leicester East (Keith Vaz) and imploring me to act. I indicated to the hon. Gentleman, in terms, that both on the basis of my own knowledge, I say to the House, of the role and responsibility of the Chair, and on the strength of the professional advice of the Clerk of the House, that it was not—repeat, not—for me to intervene in any way, shape or form.

The premise upon which the request by the hon. Gentleman for me to intervene was based was entirely—I emphasise the word “entirely”—misplaced. It is not for the Speaker to get involved in the study of, or investigation into, complaints that are made about individual Members of Parliament. It is not for the Speaker to perform a second job as a kind of night-time Columbo looking into matters that one Member wants to raise about another. That is not only not necessary, but not appropriate. It is totally outwith—I say this with complete clarity and for the avoidance of doubt—the role of the Speaker.

If, after nine and a half years in this place, notwithstanding my best efforts to help the hon. Gentleman to do better, he still labours under not merely the misapprehension but the ignorant delusion that it is somehow the responsibility of the Chair to intervene, frankly, I have to say to colleagues, I cannot help him. I cannot help him. I have tried to help the hon. Gentleman and I have tried on many occasions to educate the hon. Gentleman, but if the hon. Gentleman will not be helped or educated, I cannot do anything about that.

What I can do something about—I have sought to do so for 10 years—is securing compliance with the procedures of this House. It is absolutely legitimate for the hon. Gentleman to speak in this debate if he thinks it is proper to do so. If the hon. Gentleman feels that the general approach that he has adopted to these sorts of matters—allegations of misconduct against other Members—enhances his standing in the House, it is entirely for him to make that judgment. If he thinks it makes him a more popular or respected Member to spend quite a lot of time writing to the Standards Commissioner to complain about this one, that one or the other one—if that is the approach to parliamentary service, or a part of the approach to parliamentary service, for which the hon. Gentleman opts—that is his privilege. If he wishes to speak in this debate, including when I have resumed my seat, he is welcome to do so. He might usefully make a judgment about whether the House wants to hear him at great length when there is a clear judgment by the Committee that has been accepted and endorsed by the Opposition Chief Whip, but if he still feels he wants to speak at some considerable length, if it makes him feel better and if he thinks what an excellent contribution he has made, that is his prerogative.

What the hon. Gentleman will not do is to breach the rules of this House and tell me—I say this not least to members of the public—what the job of the Chair is. I know what the job of the Chair is and I have done it to the best of my ability. To err is human, so I make my mistakes, but I have done it to the best of my ability for over a decade. I do not simply assert or suggest but state with complete confidence that it is not part of my job to make representations to a Member that, because of this rumour or that rumour, or this allegation or that allegation, or this person disliking him or that person disliking him, it would be best if he stood down from the chairmanship of his Select Committee. That is not the responsibility of the Speaker of the House of Commons. If the hon. Gentleman still thinks otherwise, I fear he is beyond redemption in the matter. I would like to help him, but he just does not want to be helped.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen - Hansard
31 Oct 2019, 2:25 p.m.

Mr Speaker, I thank you for your advice, as always. For the past 10 years you have advised me on many occasions, but had you waited for my conclusion, you would have seen that I was going to extol your decision not to get involved in this matter. Had you done so, we may well have protected the reputation of this House, but I doubt that we ever would have got to see the full report that is now before us.

Despite this report being public knowledge—it has been available for Members to read for several days—the right hon. Member for Leicester East remains a member of the Labour party. He has the Labour Whip. He is still a serving member of the Labour national executive committee and he is still currently the candidate for Leicester East at the forthcoming election. That, of course, is a matter for the Labour party, and it is also, I believe, a matter for the public we all serve in our constituencies, not least in Leicester East. I believe—I think that many other people do—that Leicester East deserves rather better, Mr Speaker.

We can recall what we have done in the past and the way we have voted. We will all be held to account for that very shortly, on 12 December. Only a month after the right hon. Member for Leicester East rather reluctantly resigned, following the rent boy and cocaine scandal, from the chairmanship of the Home Affairs Committee, he was nominated by the Labour party to serve on the Justice Committee. That was only four weeks after he had considered himself unsuitable to continue as Chair of the Home Affairs Committee.

Mr Speaker Hansard
31 Oct 2019, 2:27 p.m.

Order. I am sorry, but I must invite the hon. Gentleman to resume his seat and I will tell him why.

The hon. Gentleman tries to demonstrate how fair he is being by saying that, belatedly, he agrees with me, which he has never previously given any indication of at all. If that is what he now says, I am glad he has come to recognise the error of his past ways and the extreme folly, as well as the sheer nastiness, of making repeated representations to the Chair to intercede in a matter in which the Chair should not, of course, intercede.

What the hon. Gentleman is doing now is what he attempted to do on the occasion of the debate about the nomination of the right hon. Member for Leicester East to the Justice Committee. What the hon. Member for North West Leicestershire (Andrew Bridgen) is seeking to do is to drag into this debate, as he dragged into that debate, material that it is not appropriate to share with the House in the context of the debate. This is a short debate on a report. The reason why the hon. Gentleman’s point is not relevant or appropriate is, first of all, that he is going back on matters to do with the Justice Committee, of which I think the report does not treat. The report does not get involved in that. That is a historical matter. It was a matter of political opinion and parliamentary debate at the time; it is not relevant to the Standards Committee’s report.

Secondly, I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman, who is a party politician and a campaigning party politician—I acknowledge that—just cannot resist getting into the subject of whether it is or is not appropriate for a particular person to be a candidate in a given election. The hon. Gentleman gives his view—he obviously thinks it is enormously important and interesting, although it may not be enormously important or interesting to anyone else—as to whether the health of the people of Leicester East is best served by representation by its current right hon. Member or by someone else. I have to say to the hon. Gentleman that I am not interested in that. Frankly, I do not think that the House is interested in that. If the hon. Gentleman wants to say, “Look, I complained and I was right, and the report has criticised, censured and punished, or proposes to do so, the right hon. Gentleman,” he could have done that and sat down by now.

I give him a final warning, and it is a warning: I am not going to have the House abused by the way in which the hon. Gentleman chooses to behave. If he has a sentence or two that he wants to utter as to why he thinks that this is a decent report and he agrees with it, that is fine. If he wants to launch a further ad hominem attack on the right hon. Member for Leicester East, this is not the time or place to do so.

I say in all sincerity and kindness to the hon. Gentleman: show some antennae, man, for the will of the House, and show some sensitivity. You have made your point in making a complaint, which you had every right to do, and the Committee has determined the matter. It would be, I think, seemly if the hon. Gentleman speedily brought his speech to a conclusion.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen - Hansard
31 Oct 2019, 2:30 p.m.

Thank you once again for more help and advice, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker Hansard
31 Oct 2019, 2:30 p.m.

Order. The hon. Gentleman will resume his seat. It is not help and advice; I am telling him what the position is. Don’t mix it with the Chair. If you have a couple more sentences to utter, you will do so; if you want to dilate at length, you will not.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen - Hansard

Mr Speaker, I will bring my remarks to a conclusion, but it is clear to me, and it will be clear to the public, that to the fag-end of your tenure in that Chair, you are defending the indefensible and your very close relationship with the right hon. Member in question. The House can come to its own conclusions. The Standards Committee has come to its own conclusions. And, Mr Speaker, the public will come to theirs. Thank you very much.

Mr Speaker Hansard
31 Oct 2019, 2:31 p.m.

I am quite sure that the public will come to their own conclusions. Let me say to the hon. Gentleman that he can try to smear me; he will get the square root of nowhere. I am friendly with the right hon. Member for Leicester East, as I am friendly with the hon. Member for Christchurch (Sir Christopher Chope), the right hon. Member for Aylesbury (Sir David Lidington), and the hon. Members for Stroud (Dr Drew) and for Strangford (Jim Shannon). I am friendly with a great many Members, having served in this place for 22 years. I do not get involved in matters appertaining to standards. There is a machinery for deliberation on those matters in the form of a Parliamentary Standards Commissioner and a Committee. They deal with those matters.

The hon. Gentleman, only a few moments ago, was saying, in what he thought was a frightfully clever twist, that he had come to accept that I was right to say that I could not get involved. If he is now saying that, in fact, my close relationship shows that I am trying to defend the right hon. Member for Leicester East, he is contradicting himself not within days, weeks or months; he is contradicting himself within minutes. I am not trying to defend the conduct of the right hon. Gentleman. What I am doing, on behalf of and in support of the House, is—colleagues; members of the public—defending the integrity of an independent process. If the hon. Gentleman cannot or will not grasp that fact, with the very greatest of respect to him—or such respect as I can muster—that says more about him than it does about me.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Thursday 18th July 2019

(1 year ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Department for Transport
Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Parliament Live - Hansard

Contrary to popular myth, most particulates do not come from modern diesel engines, but from wear between the vehicle’s tyres and the road. Given that electric vehicles tend to be heavier than their conventional counterparts owing to the weight of the batteries, which increases tyre wear and road wear, does the Minister have any concerns that the increased use of electric vehicles may lead to increasing levels of particulates?

Mr Speaker Hansard
18 Jul 2019, 9:41 a.m.

Interesting—the hon. Gentleman is giving the impression of knowing something.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Tuesday 11th June 2019

(1 year, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Mr Speaker Hansard
11 Jun 2019, 12:23 p.m.

Lateral thinking, I say to the hon. Member for North West Leicestershire (Andrew Bridgen). Solar power and engineering are not altogether unrelated; with a degree of imagination, the hon. Gentleman could shoehorn his inquiry into this matter.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Parliament Live - Hansard

22. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does my hon. Friend agree that we should be doing more to enhance technical education and engineering, and that one of the best ways to do that will be with T-levels? What impact does he think they will have? [911264]

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Tuesday 19th February 2019

(1 year, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Department of Health and Social Care
Mr Speaker Hansard
19 Feb 2019, 11:46 a.m.

Young Bridgen was a bit slow to stand but, now that I have seen him, let us hear from the fellow.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Parliament Live - Hansard
19 Feb 2019, 11:47 a.m.

Will the Minister join me in welcoming the work of UK researchers to develop a new protocol for managing asthma, such as a pill to reduce the number of attacks by targeting airway muscles, developed in partnership with researchers in Canada?

Venezuela

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Monday 28th January 2019

(1 year, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Mr Speaker Hansard

The hon. Member for North West Leicestershire is poised like a panther about to pounce. Let us hear the fellow.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Parliament Live - Hansard

It is the only way to be noticed, Mr Speaker.

I welcome the urgent question. For too long, the House has stood by and watched Venezuela, which should be a prosperous country, slip into tyranny and destitution. Did my right hon. Friend hear the comments made on the radio by Ken Livingstone, the former Labour Mayor of London? He said that the reason for the problems in Venezuela was that the Marxist regime, when it seized power, did not execute enough people.

Mr Speaker Hansard

This is all very well, and I look forward to hearing the Minister of State, but it is fair to say that he has no responsibility for the pronouncements of Mr Livingstone, and is probably pleased not to have.

Points of Order

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Wednesday 9th January 2019

(1 year, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Leader of the House
Mr Speaker Hansard
9 Jan 2019, 12:51 p.m.

I did hear those words. I did not hear a particular Member, and I did not see a Member mouth those words, but I did hear those words. I think it was most unfortunate that that was said. People sometimes say things instinctively and rashly, but it was most unfortunate. The hon. Lady was perfectly properly paying tribute to an extremely distinguished former Member of this House and someone that many would regard as an international statesperson. What was said should not have been said. If the person who said it wishes to take the opportunity to apologise, it is open to that person to do so.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Hansard

Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I will apologise for my remarks if any offence was caused to any Member of the House.

Mr Speaker Hansard
9 Jan 2019, 12:51 p.m.

The hon. Gentleman’s words stand, and I thank him for what he has said.

Points of Order

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Wednesday 18th July 2018

(2 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Mr Speaker Hansard
18 Jul 2018, 3:10 p.m.

Order. The right hon. Gentleman will resume his seat. I indulged him and allowed him to develop his thinking.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Hansard
18 Jul 2018, 3:09 p.m.

Too much.

Mr Speaker Hansard
18 Jul 2018, 3:09 p.m.

Well, maybe I erred on the side of generosity. I will treat of the point in more detail, because it is of importance to the House, but let me say two things to the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake).

The right hon. Gentleman, the former Foreign Secretary, was absolutely in order to request that he be allowed to make a personal statement, and utterly in order also in its delivery. Secondly—forgive me, colleagues, but it is important for the authority of the House that this point be made—I, too, was absolutely right to allow him to make that personal statement, and it would have been quite wrong for me to seek to stand in his way.

Good order has applied but, in so far as the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington is interested not in point scoring, as I am sure he is not, but in asking a genuine question of the Chair, let me say to him on the point of procedure that it is the long-standing practice of the House that Members may make a personal statement with the leave of the Speaker. It is not especially common in recent times for such requests to be made, but when they are made, it is right that they should be acceded to by the Chair.

Moreover, I note that the former Foreign Secretary, former Leader of the House and former Deputy Prime Minister, the late Sir Geoffrey Howe, resigned on 1 November 1990—I remember it well—and delivered a personal statement on 13 November 1990, so nothing disorderly, nothing irregular and, in procedural terms, nothing objectionable has occurred. I thank the right hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington, and it was perfectly legitimate for him to raise the point of order, but I think it right that I leave it there.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Monday 18th June 2018

(2 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Mr Speaker Hansard
18 Jun 2018, 2:45 p.m.

The Secretary of State is quite right to disavow responsibility for the Backbench Business Committee. The hon. Lady could, however, usefully sidle up to and have a word with the hon. Member for Gateshead (Ian Mearns), who chairs that Committee. He is not in his place at the moment, but I dare say that he will be in due course. I am sure that she will find that a most useful conversation.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Parliament Live - Hansard
18 Jun 2018, 2:45 p.m.

Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the fact that North West Leicestershire District Council is building the first new council houses in my constituency in the past 30 years?

Points of Order

(1st reading: House of Commons)
(1st reading: House of Commons)
Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Wednesday 23rd May 2018

(2 years, 2 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Bill Main Page
Mr Speaker Hansard
23 May 2018, 12:50 p.m.

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I hope he will not take it amiss if I begin my response to him by saying that, although it is an attempted point of order, in a very real sense it appeared to me to resemble an intellectual dissertation, which of itself is no surprise to those of us familiar with the cerebral quality of the hon. Gentleman. I think it is important to distinguish between parliamentary proceedings on the one hand, in respect of which I may have some modest powers and capacity to assist Members, and freedom of information requests on the other, in relation to which I am literally powerless, as those are not matters for me. However, the hon. Gentleman has raised a concern, and it may well be shared by others. It is on the record, and I hope, consistent both with the letter of obligation to those who submit such requests and with its spirit, that full account will be taken of the situation the hon. Gentleman has painstakingly highlighted. If I may, I suggest we leave it there for today.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Hansard

rose—

Break in Debate

Mr Speaker Hansard
23 May 2018, 12:50 p.m.

I will come to the hon. Gentleman, of course, but I call Andrew Bridgen.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen - Hansard

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Following last Wednesday’s difficult day, will you clarify a point of Chamber etiquette? Is it now acceptable in the Chamber to call a colleague a liar?

Mr Speaker Hansard
23 May 2018, 12:51 p.m.

I am extremely grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his point of order. I would say to him very respectfully and courteously by way of reply that I made a statement on those matters in the Chamber. I think what I said at the time was very clear to people, and I do not feel the need to add to that statement. My position has been very explicit. I thank the hon. Gentleman for inviting me to dilate on the matter, but I do not intend to do so, and we shall leave it there. I am deeply obliged to him.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Wednesday 21st February 2018

(2 years, 5 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Cabinet Office
Mr Speaker Hansard
21 Feb 2018, 12:05 p.m.

I am afraid that that is not good enough. Forgive me—I have to make instant judgments. If the Prime Minister wishes to issue some sort of response, she is free to do so, but she is under no obligation. No? Then I call Andrew Bridgen.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Hansard
21 Feb 2018, 12:05 p.m.

Twice in the last four weeks, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has had cause to write to the Labour party regarding breaches of equality law. Does the Prime Minister agree that equality law must be applied equally, and that it exists to protect all groups equally?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Monday 5th February 2018

(2 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Department for Work and Pensions
Mr Speaker Hansard
5 Feb 2018, 3:19 p.m.

It is always useful to have a little bit of additional information, and we are deeply obliged to the Minister.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen - Parliament Live - Hansard
5 Feb 2018, 3:20 p.m.

Last year, I attended a disability confident workshop in my constituency, where unemployment now stands at an all-time low of 1%. Also present were representatives of the DWP and the local council, as well as local employers, many of whom signed up to the scheme immediately. Will my hon. Friend give further feedback on the national roll-out of a programme that encourages employers to take advantage of keen, loyal staff who are disabled?

NHS Winter Crisis

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Monday 8th January 2018

(2 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Department of Health and Social Care
Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Parliament Live - Hansard
8 Jan 2018, 4:27 p.m.

On my behalf and that, I hope, of the hon. Member for Leicester South (Jonathan Ashworth), may I welcome the £4.2 million of additional winter funding for the University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust? To remind the Labour party what an NHS crisis really is, will my hon. Friend tell the House who was in charge at the time of the Mid Staffs crisis—

Mr Speaker Hansard
8 Jan 2018, 4:28 p.m.

Order. I have tried over a period of seven and a half years to educate the hon. Gentleman, and I am afraid that on the whole my efforts have been unavailing. I have tried to explain to him that his responsibility is to ask questions about the policy of the Government, for which it is the responsibility of the Government to answer; it is not the occasion for asking questions about the policy of the Opposition or the opposing party when in government. It is a point that is so blindingly obvious that only an extraordinarily sophisticated person could fail to grasp it.

Universal Credit Roll-out

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Tuesday 24th October 2017

(2 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Department for Work and Pensions
Mr Speaker Hansard

The Question is as on the Order Paper. I will say it again—[Interruption.] Order. Some people seem to need help. [Interruption.] Order. I do not need harrumphing from a sedentary position from a junior Whip, the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Mrs Wheeler). It does not avail her, and it does not assist the service of the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the Government’s response to the decision of the House on pausing the Universal Credit full service roll-out.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con) - Hansard
24 Oct 2017, 4:54 p.m.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker Hansard
24 Oct 2017, 4:55 p.m.

We have a lot of pressure on time. If the hon. Gentleman really thinks it is necessary—I know he thinks everything that concerns him is terribly important —we will hear it.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen - Hansard

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Could you clarify how a Member of this House would raise an issue relating to equality and standards—

Mr Speaker Hansard
24 Oct 2017, 4:54 p.m.

Order. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman was in his place or not, but there were points of order raised about equality matters and respect issues earlier, with which I dealt. No clarification is required. My guidance was sought and I proffered it. We are short of time, and there is a debate now in which other people wish to take part. If the hon. Gentleman is interested, he can always seek guidance from my office. He does not need to raise a point of order now and it is desperately insensitive to other colleagues who wish to take part in current debates in the Chamber. This is not complicated.

Monarch Airlines

Debate between Andrew Bridgen and John Bercow
Monday 9th October 2017

(2 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Department for Transport
Mr Speaker Hansard
9 Oct 2017, 4:26 p.m.

I do not think the hon. Gentleman realised how popular he was—and I do not think anyone else did either.

Andrew Bridgen Portrait Andrew Bridgen - Hansard
9 Oct 2017, 4:26 p.m.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does the Secretary of State agree that, although every lost job is a human tragedy, the British aviation industry remains robust and resilient? I am reminded of 2012, when British Midland International collapsed, with the loss of 1,200 jobs at East Midlands airport in my constituency. These are very highly skilled people who are quickly absorbed back into the economy. Unemployment in North West Leicestershire remains at a record low of 1%.