All 3 Debates between Paul Scully and Stephen Timms

Tue 17th Jul 2018
Offensive Weapons Bill (First sitting)
Public Bill Committees

Committee Debate: 1st sitting: House of Commons

Economic Crime: Planned Government Bill

Debate between Paul Scully and Stephen Timms
Wednesday 26th January 2022

(2 years, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Paul Scully Portrait Paul Scully
- View Speech - Hansard - -

We are really aware of the issues and we appreciate the comments in that report. As that Bill progresses, we will consider them with all due process.

Stephen Timms Portrait Stephen Timms (East Ham) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The introduction of universal credit has led to a big increase in fraud. The current growth of economic crime and corruption poses an existential threat to financial services—one of our biggest and most successful business sectors—and therefore to the UK economy as a whole. Does the Minister accept that effectively tackling this scourge urgently requires an economic crime Bill?

Paul Scully Portrait Paul Scully
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I dispute the right hon. Gentleman’s comments about universal credit, but yes, tackling economic crime requires legislation. That is why we remain undiminished in our appetite to push this forward.

Employment Rights

Debate between Paul Scully and Stephen Timms
Tuesday 8th June 2021

(2 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Paul Scully Portrait Paul Scully
- View Speech - Hansard - -

Nobody wants these restrictions to go on a single day longer than they need to. We are in the middle of a frustrating period, with the decision to be made on the 14th of this month. We are looking at the data, and every day that goes by gives us a richer set of data to make the best decision for businesses.

Stephen Timms Portrait Stephen Timms (East Ham) (Lab) [V]
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

The case won by the GMB trade union against Uber over the status of its drivers is immensely important, but why are the Government leaving it for these issues to be slugged out, employer by employer, worker group by worker group, in the courts? That is in nobody’s interests, so when will the Government finally bring forward the long-promised employment Bill, which is so urgently needed?

Paul Scully Portrait Paul Scully
- View Speech - Hansard - -

The Uber judgment that the right hon. Gentleman talks about was a landmark judgment. It is important that we reflect on that, but it is important that Uber, primarily, reflects on that and makes sure that workers are getting their rights, because every worker is different. Indeed, Uber contracts have changed over the last few years, and other companies working in the gig economy have different contracts, so it is complicated, but that is the definition of flexibility and dynamism. None the less, he asked about the employment Bill, and as I have said, it will come forward when parliamentary time allows.

Offensive Weapons Bill (First sitting)

Debate between Paul Scully and Stephen Timms
Committee Debate: 1st sitting: House of Commons
Tuesday 17th July 2018

(5 years, 9 months ago)

Public Bill Committees
Read Full debate Offensive Weapons Act 2019 View all Offensive Weapons Act 2019 Debates Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: Public Bill Committee Amendments as at 17 July 2018 - (17 Jul 2018)
Stephen Timms Portrait Stephen Timms
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Thank you very much.

Paul Scully Portrait Paul Scully (Sutton and Cheam) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Q I have four questions, so perhaps I can aim one at each person rather than going through everyone. Mr Owen, you are absolutely right to say that education is key to stopping knives. Clearly, by the time someone has a knife, it is too late. Stop-and-search and sentencing are important, but they are part of a whole, as you say. Notwithstanding what Mr Poynton said about custodial sentences and people knowing people who did not go to prison after committing two offences, what is people’s awareness of custodial sentencing? You said it is not really a deterrent. Is that just because they think they can get away with it, so they are going to do it anyway? What is the level of awareness that they might get caught?

Rob Owen: I think there is generally a very low level of awareness. If we twist this slightly, to stop this happening and effectively break the cycle of offending, in our view, you need to inject into that person’s life a credible caseworker who they can relate to and who will go that extra mile to start sorting out pragmatic issues. Often they revolve around the family situation. We are not talking about nuclear families here; we are talking about multiple siblings—many of them failing at school and being failed by school—who are very well known to social services and to nine-plus Government agencies, but there is no one in that person’s life who they actually want to engage with.

I suppose the great trick with these individuals is to put someone into their very complicated lives who they actually believe in and can see is on their side, and who is enabled to do something about it. We always talk about going the extra mile, but if you are trying to help someone with a housing situation and you go down to the homeless persons unit, it will take you five or six hours to advocate through that glass. Several times you will get back a piece of paper saying, “You brought the wrong form. Come back again tomorrow.” If you leave that to the client, it is never going to happen. You often need someone there with the right skills and the right determination, and who that client believes in, to start changing their attitude from, “I’m not going to engage in school.”

You need to get in place someone who is the right role model who will actually start changing their perceptions. The point about aspirations is interesting. Lots of young people who are very vulnerable want the trainers and so on, and they think the easy way to get them is by dealing drugs. The reality is that they earn less than they would do at McDonald’s, and they have a threat to their life. Education is about having someone in their life who they believe in and can engage with. A lot of people are put into their life but they do not want to engage with them, so it is a complete waste of time and makes things worse. That is the reality.