(1 week, 4 days ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Pritchard. I thank the hon. Member from Yorkshire, the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) for introducing this important debate. I stand here today to speak in support of the two petitions, both of which have attracted significant backing in my own constituency. More than 200 constituents signed the petition calling for a reduction in the maximum noise level of fireworks and more than 230 signed the petition seeking to limit their sale to local authority-approved events. Those numbers and the popularity of this debate reflect a genuine and deeply felt concern about the troubling effects that fireworks can have in our communities.
I have also had more than 100 emails since I was elected in July 2024. Paula, one of my constituents, wrote to me:
“They are constant, nearly every night…getting louder and are being let off at all hours. They are not only antisocial; they are harming my dog.”
Such stories are repeated across our nation.
David Smith (North Northumberland) (Lab)
I am very clear that I am owned by a chocolate labrador. Coco is 12 now and the problem seems to be getting worse every year. That is why the reduction in decibels would be the most effective way of dealing with the problem. People could let fireworks off when they wanted and where they wanted, as long as the sound was reduced. Does the hon. Gentleman agree?
Iqbal Mohamed
I completely agree that the biggest harm for pets, animals, children and veterans comes from the loud noises—and they are going off at all times of the day. I do not know how it is across the country, but I have people in my constituency setting off fireworks during daylight hours. What is the point of that? What should be a joyous moment of celebration has now become a source of fear, distress and disruption. The harm caused by fireworks is well evidenced and widely documented. Sudden, unpredictable explosions cause severe distress to animals, triggering panic responses and long-term behavioural trauma.
(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
David Smith (North Northumberland) (Lab)
Forty years ago in this place, the Conservative Minister of Trade and Industry said:
“I believe that…privatisation will enable”—
British Steel—
“and its work force to…secure a firmly based competitive industry with a long-term future”.
In the same debate, the then Labour shadow Minister asked whether the Minister has
“not rewarded British Steel…with a plan which quite unnecessarily places its future in jeopardy?”—[Official Report, 3 December 1987; Vol. 123, c. 1107.]
Today, I think we can conclude that that privatisation did indeed place British Steel in jeopardy and that privatisation has left Britain’s steel industry dangerously exposed.
In the post-war period, railways, steel, mines and mills covered the country in a thicket of industry, but for ideological reasons the Conservatives tore those networks apart, with the result that in my North Northumberland constituency, the electricity grid is owned by Warren Buffett, the water system is overseen from Hong Kong, and the buses are ultimately run out of Miami. We have the chance to correct this with British steelmaking, and that is what we are trying to do today. This matters because national security is about much more than defence; it is about trust, mutuality and our common endeavour.
Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)
Does my hon. Friend agree that home-made steel is the fire in the belly of this country’s industrial strategy, and that without steel being made on our shores to the highest quality, we are weaker? Today’s Bill—a Labour Bill—will guarantee the future of steelmaking in our country, which is essential.
David Smith
My hon. Friend makes a good point, and I agree absolutely. I want my constituents to trust that the people pumping their water, providing their power, connecting them to the wider world and making their steel have their interests at heart. I want them to get jobs in businesses that serve the common good, not international stock markets or foreign Governments. We need to have strategic industries in-house, so that we can trust that our economy is working for us.
As we have heard today, Jingye appears to have at heart not the interests of the British people, but its own profit. Why should we accept that a decision made in a boardroom in China with links to the Chinese communist party can risk wiping out an industry that is the heart of one of our communities, and vital to our nation’s flourishing? If we were ultimately to nationalise steel, that would not necessarily be a perfect solution. A sluggish and over-subsidised steel producer would not serve Britain’s interests any more than one owned by foreign firms, but I believe we should keep nationalisation on the table. As my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald) said, we have the expertise and certainly the passion here in this country to succeed, and recent events have proved that the safest way to safeguard strategic parts of our national infrastructure is to do it ourselves.
Privatisation has often been very bad for our country. That it takes Government intervention to secure the continuation of our last remaining plant producing virgin steel speaks volumes. My hope is that we soon move to the full nationalisation of British Steel and align that with our planned massive investment in skills through Skills England. After decades of fire sales of British industry, it is time for us to rebuild our industrial pride, our national security and our social covenant. To those ends, I urge the House to back Britain and back British Steel.
Several hon. Members rose—