Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Douglas Alexander and Brendan O'Hara(1 week, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Alexander
As the UK Government, we have delivered more than 2 million extra NHS appointments seven months early, as the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster set out just a few moments ago. Yet we all know that, despite the brilliance of NHS staff, the NHS in Scotland is still on its knees. Today, from this Dispatch Box, I urge our colleagues in the Scottish Government to work with us and actually learn some lessons from our team in the Department of Health and Social Care who are already driving change across England.
Brendan O’Hara (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber) (SNP)
Of course, if the Government were serious about co-operating with the devolved Government, tomorrow’s Second Reading debate on devolving immigration policy to Scotland, which has been secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins), would not be necessary. The Minister will recall that, in the run-up to the general election, Labour’s Deputy Leader in Scotland, Jackie Baillie, said that they would be open to talks on this issue and, of course, it would be unthinkable that she would have said such a thing just to gain short-term electoral advantage. Therefore, having waited a year, can the Minister tell us when he expects those talks to open?
Mr Alexander
In the spirit of collegiality that has been the hallmark of this question session so far, let me respectfully suggest that there is a fundamental philosophical difference between our two parties. The SNP wants to end the United Kingdom and we believe in devolution, which is, ultimately, a two-Parliament, two-Government solution. There are two Governments who represent the best interests of the United Kingdom and, in that sense, I appreciate that there is a constant demand and a constant set of grievances from the SNP about why devolution is not working. It is about time that we had a Government in Scotland who were committed to making devolution work.
UK Supply Chains: Uyghur Forced Labour
Debate between Douglas Alexander and Brendan O'Hara(5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Alexander
My hon. Friend makes a powerful point, which is that we want to do this with business, rather than to business. Of course there is varied conduct and there are varied levels of adherence to requirements in the business community, and particularly in the retail sector, but my sense is that overwhelmingly, responsible retailers want to get this right, as surely as there is consensus in this House that we need to get this right. We will listen carefully to the voice of retailers. As he recognises, just-in-time goods, fast fashion, logistics and supply chains are rapidly changing and evolving. Notwithstanding our willingness to engage with business, we have to recognise that sadly, some businesses will not accept a voluntarist approach and will need statutory regulation if we are to systematically address the exploitation about which so many of us are concerned.
Brendan O’Hara (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber) (SNP)
Further to the question from the right hon. Member for Staffordshire Moorlands (Dame Karen Bradley), the US State Department has reported that products from clothing to pharmaceuticals, and everything in between, have been tainted by slave labour, and they have found their way into homes and businesses around the world. In 2021, President Biden signed the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which said that
“all goods, wares, articles and merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part”
in Xinjiang could not enter the United States unless the importer could prove that what they were importing had not been produced by slave labour. Given that UK regulations are simply ineffective, will the Government look to introduce something similar to the US provisions in the UK, and put the onus on importers, rather than consumers?
Mr Alexander
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. Since 2022, the US has been operating an import ban targeting goods from Xinjiang under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act. The Act sets out a rebuttable presumption that goods made in Xinjiang or produced by certain listed entities use forced labour. It is right to recognise that the State Department bears the significant cost implications of that. We as a Government certainly view import controls as one of the range of tools that could be used to tackle forced labour in global supply chains, and that is why we continue to engage with like-minded partners—Governments and businesses—to figure out exactly what is the most effective response.