All 2 Debates between Sarah Olney and Caroline Dinenage

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Sarah Olney and Caroline Dinenage
Thursday 18th March 2021

(3 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sarah Olney Portrait Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
- Hansard - -

What discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on establishing a Government-backed insurance fund to help support the return of live events and cultural festivals during the covid-19 outbreak.

Caroline Dinenage Portrait The Minister for Digital and Culture (Caroline Dinenage)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Government are aware of the concerns that have been raised about the challenge of securing indemnity cover for live events, and my officials and the rest of the team at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport continue to work closely with the affected sectors to understand all the barriers to reopening, including financial support, certainty around the public health situation and the potential challenges of insurance.

--- Later in debate ---
Sarah Olney Portrait Sarah Olney [V]
- Hansard - -

I was pleased to hear the Minister’s report of meetings with industry stakeholders and insurance bodies. Will she release all documents relating to those discussions, to allow proper scrutiny of the decision making around insurance for live events this summer?

Caroline Dinenage Portrait Caroline Dinenage
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Where appropriate, of course we can publish documents, but sometimes we have to have conversations behind closed doors, so that people can get off their chest how they are feeling and we can do our best to tackle it. We understand that there are a number of obstacles for our sectors at the moment, and the culture recovery fund has been fantastic at supporting them to keep going through this really difficult time. The hon. Lady will be delighted to know that her Richmond Park constituency has benefited to the tune of over £1 million from the culture recovery fund, which has supported so many incredible organisations, such as the Orange Tree theatre.

Visible Religious Symbols: European Court Ruling

Debate between Sarah Olney and Caroline Dinenage
Wednesday 15th March 2017

(7 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Caroline Dinenage Portrait Caroline Dinenage
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We know we are leaving the European Union. We are committed to a successful withdrawal and to forming a new relationship with Europe, and at that stage the court will have no power. We will preserve all the rights that employees currently enjoy and ensure that the robust protections that European legislation affords them are enshrined in domestic law.

Sarah Olney Portrait Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
- Hansard - -

The Minister talks about neutral dress codes applying to both genders, but does she accept that even if a no-headscarves rule applies to both genders it effectively discriminates against only women, and that a no-turbans rule effectively discriminates against only men? Is not something more robust required?

Caroline Dinenage Portrait Caroline Dinenage
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is absolutely clear that a no-headscarves rule or a no-turbans rule would be illegal, as it would constitute direct discrimination. The only form of discrimination that is allowed is a blanket ban on any form of religious clothing or symbols, under the legislation referred to in yesterday’s court case.