Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Ben Gummer and Alan Brown
Wednesday 22nd March 2017

(7 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ben Gummer Portrait Ben Gummer
- Hansard - -

It is worth remembering that it was Margaret Thatcher who made it possible for local councils to conduct their hearings in public, which is something that we now take for granted. That is why we need to continue this if we are to reinforce the relationship between citizens and the public bodies that serve them.

Alan Brown Portrait Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many meetings he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer to discuss the Ayrshire growth deal. His answer was that he has had lots of meetings in general, but that the details of ministerial discussions are not routinely disclosed. Does the Minister agree that the lack of transparency in his answer is a disgrace?

Ben Gummer Portrait Ben Gummer
- Hansard - -

It sounds entirely transparent to me. The Secretary of State is on the Bench. He has heard the question and no doubt he will want to be caught afterwards to discuss it further. I know that he has almost daily discussions with the Chancellor about the interests of Scotland, which is why he was able to secure an additional £350 million for Scotland in the Budget. That shows the advantages of being in this Union of the United Kingdom.

--- Later in debate ---
Ben Gummer Portrait Ben Gummer
- Hansard - -

We have made considerable progress. According to our original timetable, we will be able to release the results of the first part later this year. That will be a moment of reckoning for this country, as we face up to the serious challenges still ahead of us in making sure that everyone has an equal opportunity, no matter what their colour or background.

Alan Brown Portrait Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

T4. Some £200,000 of election spending misreported or omitted from returns; an unwillingness to co-operate with the Electoral Commission; a £70,000 fine that the Tories can just shrug off because of their wealthy donors: does the Minister agree that there needs to be a greater punishment for political parties that break the election spending rules?

Advisory Committee on Business Appointments/Ministerial Code

Debate between Ben Gummer and Alan Brown
Monday 20th March 2017

(7 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ben Gummer Portrait Ben Gummer
- Hansard - -

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Member for Tatton will continue to contribute to this House. He has shown every indication of wishing to do so in the past few weeks, and I have no doubt that he will continue to do so over the months ahead. It is right that we all contribute in our own way, and in the way that best discharges our talents. I hope that would be the case for all Members of Parliament, not just the one in question.

Alan Brown Portrait Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Friends of the right hon. Member for Tatton (Mr Osborne) have all jumped to his defence and argued that outside interests help a Member to stay in Parliament and bring experience to it. If the outside interests are so extensive, a Member quite clearly will not be contributing to the House, so that argument is ridiculous. The Minister says that Members stand for re-election by their constituents, but unfortunately under the UK political system there are safe seats in which voters do not have a choice, so will the Government look at this issue in the round?

Ben Gummer Portrait Ben Gummer
- Hansard - -

The former leader of the hon. Gentleman’s party writes a column for a newspaper—[Interruption.] I am not saying whether that is right or wrong, but the reaction of Scottish National party Members suggests that they might feel a little guilty about putting that question.

The point is that this is not an easy or binary decision to come to. When is too much? Is it one newspaper column? Is it two or five? The House should come to a decision after long and careful thought. It would be good if Opposition Members expressed themselves in those terms, rather than expressing outrage, because Members on their side have outside interests.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Ben Gummer and Alan Brown
Wednesday 2nd November 2016

(7 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ben Gummer Portrait Ben Gummer
- Hansard - -

GOV.UK Notify is another excellent Government Digital Service product. We are putting more money into the GDS, which we are using more across Government. I hope that that will be one of many applications brought forward as a result of its success.

Alan Brown Portrait Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Given that the cost of special advisers has almost doubled in 10 years and that the Tory Government are spending more on special advisers than the new Labour Government, would not dealing with that be a simple cost-cutting measure?

Ben Gummer Portrait Ben Gummer
- Hansard - -

On the contrary, we have kept the cost of special advisers under review and fairly flat. The list of responsibilities has been published recently and the hon. Gentleman will see that that cost is fairly constant.

--- Later in debate ---
Ben Gummer Portrait Ben Gummer
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend makes a sensible point. We are learning a lot from the devolved Administrations, just as they are learning from us. His point is well made, which is why we signed a concordat on statistical evidence a few months ago, ensuring that we are sharing the same methods of evidence gathering across all the Administrations.

Alan Brown Portrait Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Instead of using the single example of an expat war veteran to justify extending the franchise to UK citizens abroad, should the Minister not concentrate on those who live here and pay their taxes—EU citizens—and those who will have to live with the consequences, the 16 and 17-year-olds?