Petitions

Debate between Andrew George and John McDonnell

Wednesday 10th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

I rise to present a petition on behalf of the people of the Penzance area, 3,000 of whom have already signed a public version to oppose the closure of the Lloyds bank, which is located in the iconic market house in the centre of Market Jew Street. The decision has been taken without any local consultation whatsoever. The significant impact on the vulnerable, on businesses and charities with complex transactions, and on the digitally excluded has not been taken into account. The petitioners observe that Lloyds was bailed out to the tune of £37 billion of taxpayers’ money during the financial crisis, yet it treats the town in this manner without any consultation, leaving customers with a two-hour bus journey to the nearest branch in Truro.

The petition states:

The petition of residents of the constituency of St Ives,

Declares that the decision by Lloyd’s bank to close its Penzance branch will have a severe and detrimental impact on older and disabled people, local businesses and on the digitally excluded; further declares that Lloyd’s has been established at the iconic Market House in the centre of the town for one hundred years and local people have appreciated the work of the staff and the service provided; and further declares that banking services should not be limited to being accessed electronically, by telephone, at Post Office counters and through the limited services and hours of Banking Hubs.

The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to bring forward measures to ensure a network of accessible full-time banks throughout the UK and in every market town, and to call on Lloyd’s to keep its Penzance branch open.

And the petitioners remain, etc.

[P003148]

[John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Lab)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I apologise for not having given notice of my point of order.

Earlier today, I raised a point of order with regard to correspondence that I had submitted to the Secretary of State for Justice. I said that I had written to the Secretary of State a week ago with regard to the Palestine Action prisoners who are on hunger strike at the moment, some of whom have been hospitalised, but received no response. This evening—I have just picked it up—a Ministry of Justice spokesperson has said in a press release:

“The Deputy Prime Minister has responded to and will continue to respond to correspondence on this issue”.

I have received no correspondence or any reply whatsoever. I have checked all my emails and consulted colleagues. May I, through you, Madam Deputy Speaker, urge those on the Treasury Bench to take back the message that that is an inaccurate statement? We need an urgent response on behalf of the several Members who put their names to that letter.

Groceries Code Adjudicator

Debate between Andrew George and John McDonnell

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) on an excellent and eloquent speech, which covered all the issues. I also thank the hon. Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) for contributing very tellingly.

My background in this subject is that, from 2002, I chaired what was known as the Grocery Market Action Group, which had among its members the National Farmers Union, the Country Land and Business Association, ActionAid, Traidcraft, Friends of the Earth and others. It was amazing to have such a disparate group of organisations in the same room, actually working together and agreeing 100% about the injustices and dysfunctionality of the way in which the grocery supply chain was operating.

We presented a range of evidence to the Competition Commission. That ultimately provoked an investigation in 2008, which resulted in the commission proposing the establishment of a groceries code to drive fair trade through the supply chain. The Groceries Code Adjudicator was created to enforce the code and ensure that it was applied by those supermarkets. In those days, only five had a turnover in excess of £1 billion, which was the recommendation of the Competition Commission at that stage.

Having done that, and having worked for over a decade to get the legislation through, I obviously have some skin in the game, which I probably need to declare. I am not trying to claim the credit myself, because it was a cross-party effort.

[John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Ind)]

Why not? Go on!

[Andrew George]

Well, I suppose I should—no, I will not. One stands on the shoulders of giants, and Colin Breed did a tremendous amount of work from 1997 to 2001. He produced an excellent report called “Checking out the Supermarkets”, which laid a lot of the groundwork for the Grocery Market Action Group. Albert Owen, David Drew and other Labour Members were also very supportive and active throughout those years. There was not always cross-party agreement, or even agreement within my own party, that we should intervene in the market in the way that was proposed. We had to win that argument, and ultimately we did.

At the end of the day, the justification for why the Groceries Code Adjudicator, or any kind of market intervention of that nature, was needed, was that, fundamentally, we had a dysfunctional supply chain operating largely to the benefit of the supermarkets. Not all of our agricultural sector was benefiting from European subsidies or any other public subsidies in those days, but it had become dependent on subsidies because the market was so dysfunctional that public money was needed to prop up the whole system. If we have a functioning market, one can enable the agricultural sector to free itself from dependence on public subsidy. That was largely what was behind what we were trying to do in those days.

When the Groceries Code Adjudicator was established and the code was created, the intention then was only that it would create a framework in which future Governments would review its progress and then build on the framework by introducing or reducing regulations. Certainly the framework was to provide the skeleton on which further developments could happen; of course one cannot anticipate all circumstances.

I want to follow up on the points made by the hon. Member for Salford and my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe. There are a number of improvements that I hope the Government will look at very closely. For example, the code should be applied throughout the supply chain, not just to the direct supplier to the supermarket. It was never the intention of the Grocery Market Action Group that the adjudicator should look only at the final transaction between the ultimate supplier to the supermarket and the supermarket itself, because the impact of that contract could be fed right down through the supply chain.

The second point concerned third-country suppliers. The reason why Traidcraft, the Fairtrade Foundation and so on were involved is because they were rightly hoping that third countries could be involved. Then, as my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe said, the adjudicator could launch its own investigation on the basis of market intelligence. Finally, it could work alongside the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority, for example, to use its intelligence to take matters forward. Fundamentally, we have a framework that can be developed and improved. It certainly should not depend on seconded staff. We do not get commitment to the cause if we depend entirely on seconded staff, as my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe said. I hope the Minister will look carefully at this. Thank you very much, Mr Twigg, for allowing me to speak.