Oral Answers to Questions
Liz Kendall Excerpts(2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Liz Kendall)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I hope the House will bear with me, as I fear I may be losing my voice. Some people may be happy about that, but I will attempt to get through as best I can.
This Government are determined to ensure that everyone has access to the skills, support and confidence they need to take part in a modern digital society, wherever they live and whatever their circumstances. This is a hugely important issue in my hon. Friend’s constituency, which I believe has one of the lowest levels—if not the lowest level—of broadband coverage in the country. Building Digital UK recently signed a £157 million contract to deliver broadband across the Western Isles, including in my hon. Friend’s constituency. He is determined to make sure this happens as an urgent priority, as am I.
Torcuil Crichton
I welcome the Secretary of State and her friendly-faced team to their posts. I also welcome the millions going into Project Gigabit. However, that money is finding its way into Openreach’s coffers but not to the end of the road in the Western Isles. I have many constituents, including two in my own village of Swordale, who have built their homes and have all the utilities except broadband. The cabinet is just a couple of hundred metres away, but why should Openreach throw the switch? It has made millions from installation down the spine of the islands, but it is not going the last few yards. Can the Secretary of State press Openreach to go those last few yards and look at the physical infrastructure access costs that other providers have to pay for legacies like copper wiring and wooden poles from another era?
Liz Kendall
I thank my hon. Friend for his passion about this issue. He should come in and talk to Ministers, officials and Building Digital UK to set out what he thinks needs to happen, because we are only going to get this right if we work with people on the ground. The Western Isles contract will provide cover for 65,000 new premises across the area, including 8,000 in my hon. Friend’s constituency. We have to do this—we have to push further and faster—and I am sure my hon. Friend will make it happen on the ground.
Jamie Stone
On behalf of my party, I welcome the Secretary of State to her place.
On the other side of the highlands in the royal burgh of Cromarty—it is an adjacent seat, Mr Speaker—we have an appalling situation. I have in my constituency an old lady with a heart condition who had no means of communication whatsoever for days on end. Will the Secretary of State have a word in the right ear to sort out this desperate situation?
Liz Kendall
If the hon. Gentleman sends us the details, we will make that issue a top priority. As we build the country of the future through jobs, growth and transforming public services, we cannot deliver for everybody in every part of the country unless they have the broadband coverage they need. Three of the seven new contracts that BDUK has signed this year are in Scotland, with funding of—I believe—£287 million. We want value for money, and the hon. Gentleman wants to deliver for his constituents. Together, we will make it happen.
Matt Turmaine (Watford) (Lab)
Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Liz Kendall)
Protecting children from harmful content online is a top priority for this Government and for me personally, because it is a deeply concerning issue for parents and children across the country. Since implementing the Online Safety Act this summer, 6,000 sites have taken action to stop children seeing harmful content online, but I will be paying close attention to what is working and will not hesitate to go further if necessary. Indeed, on Monday I added self-harm material to the list of priority offences in the Act, so if companies do not take down content that promotes self-harm or actively stop it appearing, they will face enforcement action. I hope this shows the House my determination to take all necessary steps on this issue.
Matt Turmaine
It is so gratifying to see a Watfordian at the Dispatch Box. In my constituency of Watford, parents and families are rightly pleased with the protections being afforded to children and vulnerable people through the Online Safety Act 2023. We would not allow a child to get into a car and drive down the road, to go into an off-licence and buy tobacco or alcohol products, or to go into an adult entertainment establishment, so does the Secretary of State agree that children and vulnerable people need protections in the virtual world, just as they do in the physical one?
Liz Kendall
I absolutely agree, and that is why I am determined to do everything necessary to remove illegal content and to protect children from online harms. Many years ago, when I was a member of the Science and Technology Committee, as part of a report we were doing, I spoke to children in secondary and primary schools in my constituency to see what they felt were the benefits and difficulties of being online. It is an issue I have been concerned about for many years. I am determined to take action, not just for the fabulous people of Watford, but for children and young people right across the country.
Joe Powell
I also welcome my right hon. Friend to her place. Does she agree that Reform’s reckless plans to scrap the Online Safety Act would fail a generation of young people, including all the parents and children in my constituency of Kensington and Bayswater who have joined my local campaign to protect children online?
Liz Kendall
Yes. If Reform Members are so concerned about the Online Safety Act, why are they not here in the Chamber asking me questions about it? Reform wants to scrap the Act, which would mean ripping up protections that crack down on revenge porn, violent misogynistic content, and posts encouraging self-harm or suicide. I commend my hon. Friend on his campaign. Families in his constituency want action, and that is what we intend to take. Finally, we are putting child safety first by taking down illegal content, taming toxic algorithms and making age-inappropriate content harder to access. We will go further if we need to.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
I welcome the new Secretary of State to her position. Will she look at the downloading of virtual private networks, which allow people to get content from all over the world? Many VPNs are based overseas. Once they are downloaded, parents have no control whatsoever if their children are then accessing immoral and illegal content.
Liz Kendall
In the few days that I have been in post, a number of MPs and other organisations have already raised this issue with me. I will always be driven by evidence. I want to protect people’s rights to privacy, but I want to make sure that nothing is done that will put people at risk. If the hon. Member has evidence and wants to send that to me, I am more than happy to look at it, because I want to take the action required.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
I have been contacted by many constituents worried about the implementation of the Act. For example, Emily, who is home-schooled and has ME, struggles to access things that help with her learning and her rural isolation. Alexander says that he has accessed gambling sites, but cannot access suicide prevention content. As we mark World Suicide Prevention Day, how can we make sure that the Act is a little more nuanced?
Liz Kendall
I am glad that the hon. Lady has mentioned that today is World Suicide Prevention Day. Anyone who has experienced it in relation to their family or friends, or in their constituency, knows how devastating it can be.
The hon. Lady raises an important issue. From my constituency experience, children and young people want to benefit from all the opportunities and learning they can, but sometimes it is difficult to get it right. It is a complex issue. As a new Secretary of State, I need to get into the detail, but I will always listen. When the evidence is there, I hope to take the appropriate action.
Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)
I welcome the Secretary of State and the new ministerial team to their places, and thank the former team, who I have very much enjoyed sparring with over the past few months.
In light of the report of the Department’s plans to review the implementation of the Online Safety Act, can the Secretary of State confirm the scope of that review, including whether it will address the apparent confusion in the media between the powers of the Online Safety Act and the Public Order Act 1986? Will the review look at age verification to ensure that people’s data is safe and secure, and that the pass schemes they use are trusted? Will it tackle the use of VPNs, particularly by children, to get around age verification?
Liz Kendall
I am always driven by the evidence. We need to see how the Act is being implemented and whether and how it works, and that is the absolute priority for me. I will look at any evidence that hon. Members provide, but the key thing for me is that we are taking action. We have one of the strongest protections anywhere in the world, but I am very interested in the issue of addiction in children online and in how behaviours can become addictive. In this very fast-moving world, we need to be fleet of foot. I think the truth is that the technology develops much faster than we make legislation, and that is a nut that we have to crack.
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
I, too, thank the previous ministerial team and welcome the new one—I very much look forward to working together.
Following the roll-out of the Online Safety Act, there is evidence that harmful content is still being algorithmically shown to young children and that artificial intelligence technologies, which have been linked to teenage deaths, are not covered properly in the Act, and concerns have been raised about data protection and inappropriately age-gated educational content. We must get the Act right, so will the Secretary of State consider our calls for a digital Bill of Rights to set the standard, in order that we can truly adapt to this era of technological change?
Liz Kendall
We do need to adapt to this age of phenomenal technological development. I have already had a discussion with the chief executive of Ofcom and I intend to meet many other organisations, including those that champion stronger protections for children online. The hon. Lady raises the critical issue that we need to protect people’s privacy, and we need to protect freedom of speech, but we also need to make sure that illegal content, and harmful content for children, is removed. I will leave no stone unturned in delivering on that objective.
Lewis Cocking (Broxbourne) (Con)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Liz Kendall)
New technology in the workplace can help companies become more productive and efficient. In making workplaces more accessible so that people can get work and stay in work, it is also good for people. We are supporting companies in a number of ways, especially through our industrial strategy, and we have seen great examples of UK firms adopting tech—artificial intelligence, in particular—ahead of their international peers. We want to do all we can to support companies in this area, and I am determined to take action on that.
Lewis Cocking
I welcome the Secretary of State to her place. Small businesses in my constituency are vital to economic growth. What is her Department doing to ensure that small businesses can benefit from innovation and new technology?
Liz Kendall
The hon. Gentleman raises a really important point. My own constituency is dominated by small businesses, and one issue that they always raise is that we are great at start-ups in this country but we need to do more to help those companies to scale up. I am new in the job and open to ideas, so if the hon. Gentleman and the businesses in his constituency would like to say what they think they need to help them go from start-up to scale-up, I would be more than happy to listen to them.
Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)
I thank the outgoing ministerial team for their engagement as I congratulate the new team on succeeding to this important and inspiring brief.
The Government are committed to transforming public services through the adoption of new technologies. At the June spending review, Departments published their plans to deploy technologies to achieve efficiencies, but we are yet to see the detailed and fully funded road map for delivery promised by DSIT for this summer. Will the Secretary of State commit to publishing a road map that sets out what will be delivered, who will deliver it and by when, and how much it will cost, before her appearance before my Committee as part of our digital centre of government inquiry in November?
Liz Kendall
I have a feeling that will be one of the gentler questions that my hon. Friend asks me over the coming months. I am a passionate public service reformer and I believe there is huge potential for technology and AI to deliver better outcomes for the people who use services and better value for taxpayers’ money. I will definitely provide her with more detail on the questions that she asked, but let me give a fantastic example from my previous role. In our jobcentres in Wales, there were big queues for work coaches who were helping people do their CVs. They used AI, and it was better for the people who used the service and freed up the work coaches to spend time with the people who most needed help. That is a small example; we have to do more, and I will absolutely commit to setting out our further plans.
Mohammad Yasin (Bedford) (Lab)
Susan Murray (Mid Dunbartonshire) (LD)
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Liz Kendall)
I am delighted to join the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. This is a crucial area for our country, providing opportunities for jobs and work, and to improve our public services. As Secretary of State, I am getting to work straight away. As I said on Monday, I have strengthened the law to add further protections from dangerous self-harm material online. Social media companies now have to take action to not just remove that material but prevent it from coming up in the first place, so that the internet can live up to its real potential as a place of opportunity where everyone can learn, connect and be creative, free from fear.
Susan Murray
I, too, welcome the right hon. Member to her place. Her predecessor, the right hon. Member for Hove and Portslade (Peter Kyle), warned that losing control of artificial general intelligence would be catastrophic, yet he failed to deliver legislation to protect the public. Will the new Secretary of State deliver on an artificial intelligence Bill, and ensure that the British people benefit from the advantages of AI, without becoming its victims?
Liz Kendall
I want to ensure that people, businesses and creatives throughout the country can benefit from the huge opportunities that technological developments in AI promise, and that people are protected, too. It is early days in this job, and I am listening carefully to all those involved, but wherever action is required, I will take it.
Peter Lamb (Crawley) (Lab)
Liz Kendall
My hon. Friend will know that the UK is a world leader in research and innovation. Over the spending review period, we are delivering £86 billion for research and development—a record amount. UKRI invests more than £300 million a year in transport innovation, and sustainability is a key focus. Projects include work to develop new aviation fuel production technologies that could reduce emissions by up to 80%. There is more that we can do. I know he is passionate about this issue, and either I or my Ministers will be very happy to meet him to talk more about what we can do.
Mr Speaker
We now come to the shadow Secretary of State. I welcome her to her new position.
Julia Lopez (Hornchurch and Upminster) (Con)
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I welcome the new Secretary of State to her place and, of course, I welcome her stellar team. The Minister of State, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, the right hon. Member for Edinburgh South (Ian Murray), is so hot that he snared two jobs from the guy who just fired him. The Tech Secretary replaces the Ozempic of Whitehall, the right hon. Member for Hove and Portslade (Peter Kyle), who claimed that his digital plan would shear £45 billion of fat from the Government. By how much did it cut the civil service?
Liz Kendall
I believe that using tech and AI to modernise our public services enables the people who work in the public sector to spend more time on the things they want to spend time on—serving the users of public services—and less time on red tape and bureaucracy, much of which was put in place by the hon. Lady’s Government.
Julia Lopez
I fully agree with the right hon. Lady, but the number of civil servants has risen to a 20-year high under Labour. If somebody in the private sector led a reverse efficiency drive, they would get sacked; Labour made the person responsible Business Secretary. For a welfare meltdown, you get to be the Minister for the future, but while AI is screaming for cheap electricity, the Prime Minister cannot sack his failing Energy Secretary. Why should the tech sector believe that this is a Government of delivery?
Liz Kendall
Because this Government believe that science, technology and innovation are how this country will seize the opportunities of the future. Unlike Opposition Members, we are determined to deliver that change for people in every part of the country, no matter where they live, because our people are our best asset. We want to grow the economy, transform our public services, and sort out the mess left by Opposition Members.
Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)
Liz Kendall
We cannot ensure that everybody in this country benefits from being online and from developments unless everybody is joined up to fast broadband. We have put £1.8 billion over the spending review period into making connectivity work. I am working closely with Building Digital UK; if my hon. Friend has concerns about his constituents, he should come and meet me and Building Digital UK to get them online, because that is how they will seize the opportunities of the future.
Tributes to Her Late Majesty The Queen
Liz Kendall Excerpts(3 years ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
On behalf of the people of Leicester West, I would like to send our deepest sympathy and condolences to His Majesty the King and the royal family. They have lost their mother, grandmother and great-grandmother, as well as their sovereign. I hope the fact that the whole nation grieves alongside them provides some small comfort at this difficult time.
Queen Elizabeth was a simply remarkable public servant, unparalleled in our lifetime, who always put her people and country first. She dedicated her life to duty and to others; it was never ever about herself. I think this selfless service is why she holds such a unique place in our history and hearts, and it is what she will be remembered for most of all.
The Queen’s astonishing reign saw changes unimaginable 70 years ago. Her constant calm presence gave us stability through turbulent times, and her words of wisdom provided perspective and strengthened our resolve. I think in particular of her address to the nation during the covid pandemic. The Queen reminded us of how families had been separated during the second world war, and that although that was painful, it was the right thing to do. She also rightly said that the challenge of the pandemic was different from the war, because we joined nations across the globe in a common endeavour to beat the virus. There is nothing more powerful than hope for a better future—hope that better days lie ahead. That is what the Queen gave us so many times.
Finally, many hon. Members will know that I represent a very diverse constituency. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester South (Jonathan Ashworth) said, we were absolutely thrilled when the Queen decided to begin her diamond jubilee tour in Leicester 10 years ago. Her loss will be felt in every community and by those of every faith, as well as by those with none. Christian, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim, Jewish or Jain, the Queen stood for the values we all share—what we hold in common, not what divides us—as does His Majesty the King. I saw that when he visited the Narborough Road in my constituency. Often called the most diverse street in the country, it has more than 20 different nationalities along the way. That was a huge day, and he was welcomed with excitement, joy and open arms, as I am sure he will be as our new King.
I send my constituents’ thoughts and prayers to the royal family and our thanks to the late Queen for all she gave, and on behalf of us all, I say long live King Charles III.
Oral Answers to Questions
Liz Kendall Excerpts(5 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend raises a characteristically brilliant point, which I confess has not been drawn to my attention so far. I will look at it, and it certainly seems crazy that planes should be flying simply to retain the slots to which they are entitled, and we will see what we can do.
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
Mr Speaker
Order. I make the decisions; please, we want shorter questions. Now, just finish, very quickly—and when I get up, please give way.
Liz Kendall
Will the Prime Minister meet me to discuss a special migration route into social care, to stop the current crisis getting even worse?
The Prime Minister
I do not know quite what the hon. Lady means by excluding EU workers, since there are record numbers of EU workers currently in this country, and indeed more can come until the end of the year, when they can register. I have every confidence that we will solve the issue of social care. We will be bringing forward plans very shortly, which I hope will attract cross-party support, to ensure that everybody gets the dignity that they need in old age and nobody is forced to sell their home.
European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill
Liz Kendall ExcerptsTuesday 22nd October 2019
(5 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill 2019-19 View all European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill 2019-19 Debates Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I can indeed assure the hon. Lady that there will be no crashing out, because we will negotiate a great new friendship and partnership within the timescale. I know that hon. Members on both sides of the House have every confidence in the Government to do that. They said we could not change the withdrawal agreement in the 90 days we had, that we would never get rid of the backstop and that we would not get a new deal, but we did get a new deal—we got a great deal—for this House and this country, and we will get a great new free trade agreement and a new partnership for our country.
Before us lies the great project of building a new friendship with our closest neighbours across the channel. That is the common endeavour of our whole nation, and that will begin with clause 31, which will give Parliament a clear role, including the hon. Lady.
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
Is it not the case that to secure a deal with the EU, the Prime Minister had to make a choice over Northern Ireland? The choice that he made was to sign up to EU trading rules to secure frictionless trade with Ireland and the rest of the EU. Is not the truth that at the end of all the negotiations that the rest of the UK will face, we will be confronted with exactly the same dilemma? Either we remain close and sign up to the rules, in which case we give up our say—so what is the point of Brexit?—or we break totally free, in which case what is the price?
We have not made that choice. The Prime Minister has made it over Northern Ireland, and we face it over the rest of the UK. This is not getting Brexit done; it is continuing the agony for years to come.
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
Many Members on both sides of the House understand the risks that this deal poses to the economy and their constituents’ jobs and livelihoods. They understand the risks that it poses to the Union of the United Kingdom, too. But for some Members, the even greater concern is the risk that not getting a deal through Parliament poses to trust in politics and our democracy as a whole.
I have thought long and hard about this issue. While Leicester as a whole voted remain, my constituents voted leave by around the same margin as the country, and they voted leave for all sorts of different reasons—because they are fed up with the quality of local jobs and wages and problems in the NHS; because there are not enough affordable homes or local school places; or because they believe that levels of immigration are too high. Some had never voted before, and all wanted change. Believe me, I know the risk to our democracy and to trust in our democracy, especially among people who feel that their views have been ignored for years. But I believe that those who voted leave will feel even more betrayed when it becomes clear that this deal will not sort Brexit out, will not provide answers to their problems and will not deliver the changes that they desperately want and need.
We have not even begun the negotiations over our future trading relationship with the EU, which will take years to conclude. In the end, we will face exactly the same dilemma for Great Britain as the Prime Minister faced over Northern Ireland. Either we will decide that we want to stay as close as possible and sign up to EU standards and regulations to get frictionless trade, as the Prime Minister has chosen in Northern Ireland, or we will decide that we want to break with those standards, with all the implications that that has for our service sector and manufacturing, which rely on both the customs union and single market alignment.
The Government have never been honest with the British people about the inevitable choice that Brexit brings. They are at it again with this Bill, promising the ERG, “Of course we’ll break free from all this nasty EU regulation and red tape,” and at the same time promising Labour MPs, “Of course we have no intention of slashing workers’ rights and environmental standards.” Both cannot be true. If we want frictionless trade, we will have to sign up to EU rules but give up our say over how those rules are decided—in which case, what is the point of Brexit? If we want to break free from those rules, the EU will not give us frictionless trade—in which case, what is the price of Brexit, and crucially, who will pay?
The truth is that what the Prime Minister and the ERG want from the free trade agreement and their vision of the UK as a low-tax, small-state, deregulated country will not improve the quality of my constituents’ jobs and livelihoods or give them more say and control. It will guarantee a race to the bottom. It will not put more money into housing, schools or the NHS. It will risk the economic growth on which our public services depend.
We have to put the real, inevitable choice on Brexit back to the British people, alongside the option to remain. That is the only way it will have any legitimacy and the only way we will get Brexit done. Otherwise, we will simply end up back here again and again, and that would pose the biggest risk of all to our democracy and trust in politics.
Brexit Readiness: Operation Yellowhammer
Liz Kendall Excerpts(6 years ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Gove
I thank my right hon. Friend for his point. He speaks very effectively and clearly for the people of his constituency. I can confirm that that is Government policy. May I also say that the way in which he shaped his question, in a balanced, thoughtful and reasonable way, recommends him as a successor for your office, Mr Speaker?
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
Can the Minister confirm that according to the Government the food sector, which employs around 12,000 people across Leicester and Leicestershire, will be hardest hit by no deal, and that people on low incomes will be disproportionately affected by any rises in food prices? Have the Government done any planning on how on earth we are going to support the thousands of food banks in this country, which tell me they are desperately worried that no deal will threaten the supply of surplus food that we, tragically, now depend on to feed the poor?
Michael Gove
The hon. Lady raises three important points. The first is whether the food or agrifood sector, in the event of a no-deal scenario, is likely to be the worst affected. It is certainly the case that our agrifood exporters will face the highest tariffs if we leave without a deal, and in this job and my previous job, when at the Dispatch Box, I have not shied away from the consequences. There are risks and challenges; that is why DEFRA has taken steps in order to be able to mitigate those risks and challenges.
The hon. Lady asks about the impact on the vulnerable of a rise in prices. It may well be that some food commodity prices rise; others are likely to fall overall. She makes the point about food banks. It is vital that we support those who work with food banks, but I have seen no evidence or indication so far—I am very happy to talk to the hon. Lady—that the supply of food to food banks would be affected in any scenario, deal or no deal.
G7 Summit
Liz Kendall Excerpts(6 years ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
Yes, indeed there is time, and we have gone over that thoroughly. I am delighted by my hon. Friend’s confidence; she speaks as someone well-acquainted with the ways of Brussels and the EU, and she will know that the deals are always done, as it were, on the steps of the court in the final furlong. That is where we will get the deal.
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
Can the Prime Minister completely set the record straight on this? If Parliament passes legislation requiring him to request an extension of article 50 beyond 31 October, will he abide by the law?
The Prime Minister
I have answered this question twice before. We will abide by the law, but I have to say I think it is a quite incredible thing to propose, deleterious to the interests of this country and this Government, and it will make it impossible for us to get the deal this country needs.
Priorities for Government
Liz Kendall Excerpts(6 years, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I thank my right hon. Friend, who has been zealous in his pursuit of arrangements to prevent the no-deal option. I share his desire not to get to a no-deal outcome. I am delighted that he is willing to put his shoulder to the wheel and work to find a solution that will bring us together across the House and get this thing done, because that is what the people want us to do.
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
If optimism was all it took to get things done, I am sure that thousands of people would be spending this blisteringly hot and sunny day waltzing across the Prime Minister’s garden bridge and jetting off on holiday from Boris island airport. As it is, people need real solutions to their problems. Does the Prime Minister agree with me that fixing the crisis in social care requires an immediate cash injection as well as long-term funding reform, and a system that works for disabled adults as well as older people; and that, above all, it means deciding that funding cannot be left to individuals and families alone? We must pool our resources and share our risks to ensure security and dignity for all.
The Prime Minister
I thank the hon. Lady very much for her question. I agree very strongly with the thrust of what she says. I suggest it is high time that this House again tried to work across parties to find a cross-party consensus about the way forward. That is absolutely vital. [Interruption.] If the Opposition are not interested, we will fix it ourselves, but I urge them to think of the good of the nation.
Leaving the European Union
Liz Kendall Excerpts(6 years, 4 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
I have said to my right hon. Friend and others on many occasions, and the EU Council has made it clear on many occasions, that the EU is not reopening the withdrawal agreement. What we have done in the processes that we have taken through the House up until now—until the most recent discussions with the European Union—is to be able to have certain legally binding commitments made by both the UK and the European Union in addition to the text of the withdrawal agreement, which cover a number of issues that have been of concern to people in this House.
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
Does the Prime Minister understand that she will not get enough support from Opposition Members to allow her withdrawal agreement to pass unless she includes a confirmatory vote in the Bill? She has come to the end of the road. But if she and indeed any Conservative MP wants to stop the Prime Minister’s successor from inevitably pursuing a no-deal Brexit, they must back giving the public the final say. Time is running out. Prime Minister, please change your mind.
The Prime Minister
This is an issue on which, as I say, there are very strong feelings across this House. I have met Members from all sides of the House who support a second referendum and who have put forward their case with their sincere belief in that second referendum. I have a different view. I believe we should be delivering on the first referendum, but I believe—because of the strength of view across this House, on both sides of the argument—that it is important that the House has the opportunity properly to consider it in a way that is appropriate, and that is through the withdrawal agreement Bill.
European Council
Liz Kendall Excerpts(6 years, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It is important for us to deliver on the vote in the referendum. He reminds the House that the two main parties in the Chamber both campaigned at the last general election on manifestos precisely to deliver that Brexit, and that is what we should be looking to do.
Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab)
Prime Minister, we need to use this extension for a purpose. One more heave is not good enough, and it will not work. Neither will trying to con people that we can have all the benefits of a customs union and still have a completely independent trade policy. I ask her once again: does she acknowledge that, even if it is not what she wants, putting her withdrawal agreement to the public is the way to break this Brexit deadlock and get the resolution our country desperately needs?
The Prime Minister
I genuinely believe that the way to break the Brexit deadlock is for this House to be able to agree on a deal that will deliver on the vote of the British people.
European Union (Withdrawal) Act
Liz Kendall Excerpts(6 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Lidington
As I said a moment ago, if amendment (a) is not passed, we will make available a first day this week for the process to which we have committed ourselves to proceed. It may be that further time would be needed, but that would be a matter for consideration after the first day had concluded.
Mr Lidington
I will give way first to the hon. Member for Leicester West and then to the right hon. Member for Broxtowe, but after that—I hope that the House will forgive me—I will try to move on.
Liz Kendall
The right hon. Gentleman is being very generous in giving way.
If amendment (a) is voted down and the Government do indeed propose their own slot, will they determine the options on which the House will vote, or will Members of Parliament do so?
Mr Lidington
The hon. Lady has pre-empted my next paragraph. I was about to say that we do not think it is for the Government to tell the House what options it should and should not consider—that should be a matter for the House—but that, in turn, does not mean that the Government will be silent about the options that might be debated. We will certainly continue to be strong advocates for the deal that we have negotiated, and we will continue to urge Members in all parts of the House to be realistic.
Liz Kendall
Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree it is important that MPs should determine not just the options but how those options are voted on? Many hon. Members would be concerned if we voted on one option after another, rather than voting on all at the same time. The benefit of amendment (a) is that it allows precisely that, for MPs to vote on all options at the same time, as well as determining what those options are.
Keir Starmer
My hon. Friend anticipates my next sentence, which is that we recognise that Members will have different views on how the process should go forward. There will have to be intensive discussions over the next couple of days as to how that operates, but it needs to be a process that allows us to arrive at a sustainable majority view.