Brexit: No-deal Ferry Contracts

Debate between Lord Campbell-Savours and Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Wednesday 1st May 2019

(4 years, 12 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I was trying to get across to noble Lords the complexity of the maritime market. Flexibility is possible, but it is not unlimited. For example, DFDS had to charter new vessels from very far away to fulfil these contracts. Other vessels had to be reconfigured. Those vessels will now need to go back to what they were beforehand to take on passengers. The noble Baroness looks incredulous, but the contract offered extremely good value to the taxpayer.

Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Are the Government planning an out-of-court settlement with the ferry companies or do they intend to contest the case?

Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am pleased to be able to tell the noble Lord that we have reached a settlement with the ferry companies, as I pointed out earlier, and that the termination fees are £43.8 million. It is clear that we have co-operated with the ferry companies, and we are grateful to them for the amount of mitigation that they have been able to do to reduce the amount of money that we have had to pay. We have had negotiations with them. We tried to sell as many tickets as possible to reduce the cost to the taxpayer and the ferry companies have cancelled sailings. We are grateful for their co-operation and believe that this is a fair settlement of the contract.

Honda in Swindon

Debate between Lord Campbell-Savours and Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Tuesday 19th February 2019

(5 years, 2 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Those are wise words from my noble friend Lord Lansley. The decision by Honda will clearly have been reached after some very detailed financial analysis of the cost benefit of manufacturing in various parts of the world. Our relationship with Japan will certainly be very important and constructing a good free trade agreement with it will, I am sure, be towards the top of the list of work that Liam Fox will have to do. I will pass my noble friend’s comments on to the department and I am sure they will be well received.

Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, does the Minister accept that car manufacturers will build electric cars only in the event that charging infrastructure is in place? The Government have today announced £400 million, which is peanuts, for charging appliances—maybe it was preannounced but it was repeated today and the Minister referred to it. I estimate that to be about 20,000 charging units. How can we expect manufacturers to stay in a market where the Government do not back them up with the very infrastructure needed to ensure that sales of electrical cars make that worth doing in the United Kingdom?

Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I beg to differ with the noble Lord: £400 million is certainly not peanuts but a significant investment in the charging infrastructure in our country. We also have the plug-in car grant. Based on the many people I know who have electric cars, I think those drivers will have their own charging points at home and will not need to use charging points outside the home. As innovation in batteries continues and their range improves, I would expect that to be more the case.

Sexual Offences Legislation

Debate between Lord Campbell-Savours and Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Monday 28th January 2019

(5 years, 3 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours
- Hansard - -

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what plans they have to reform sexual offences legislation.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Government are committed to ensuring that the law on sexual offences is fit for purpose and responsive to changes in attitudes and behaviours. The Sexual Offences Act 2003, amended in 2015 and 2017, has a clear and comprehensive framework of offences to deal with the scourge of sexual abuse and exploitation.

Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I have a simple question: is the law credible in helping genuine accusers when a man now on remand, charged with making false allegations of multiple homicides, fantasy assaults by paedophile rings and fraud, is able to accuse Sir Edward Heath and Lord Janner of rape, and is believed by the police so that the press publishes their names, destroying their reputations? The innocent are treated as guilty and the guilty, false accusers are treated as innocent until found to be lying, by which time the damage is done. Their real motive is compensation under the criminal injuries compensation scheme. The law is a shambles.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I respect the tenacity of the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, and his simple questions in this area. The case that he has raised has been the subject of extensive debate in your Lordships’ House in recent months. To wrongly and deliberately accuse someone of a sexual offence is a very serious matter and is treated as such by the police. The noble Lord will be aware that Carl Beech, aka “Nick”, has been charged with 12 counts of perverting the course of justice and one of fraud. All people charged with, or indeed accused of, an offence, sexual or otherwise, remain innocent until proven guilty.

Inquiries Act 2005: Child Sexual Abuse

Debate between Lord Campbell-Savours and Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Thursday 22nd November 2018

(5 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, in begging leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper, I add that I have given the Minister notice of the supplementary that I intend to ask.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

And that she intends to answer. The Inquiries Act 2005 and the Inquiry Rules 2006 that underpin it provide a robust and effective framework for the conduct of public inquiries. We do not see a need to make special provision for conducting inquiries into specific matters such as child sex abuse.

Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours
- Hansard - -

My Lords, IICSA has selected the late Greville Janner as the only named individual strand in its inquiry into child sexual abuse, despite the fact that wholly exculpatory evidence vital to Janner’s defence was never considered by IICSA when it took its decision. In that light, will the Minister support the proposition that the only way that justice can be done in this case is if all social services reports and criminal records relating to complainants, particularly reports on the main complainant who was named in the Beck trial in 1991, are considered by the inquiry before it proceeds any further?

Baroness Vere of Norbiton Portrait Baroness Vere of Norbiton
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the House and the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, well know that it is not the role of government to interfere in statutory inquiries. Their independence would be undermined if the Government were seen to interfere in their conduct. The noble Lord may wish to note that the inquiry published on its website in April and May 2017 notices of determination regarding this investigative strand. These summarise submissions received by the chair and decisions subsequently taken, and they confirm the inquiry’s position on this strand as being kept under review. The noble Lord is of course free to raise his concerns directly with the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. It would be a matter for the inquiry chair and panel to decide how to proceed.