Getting Britain Working Again

Valerie Vaz Excerpts

Thursday 14th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Valerie Vaz (Walsall and Bloxwich) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to follow the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately). I will try to address some of the points she made, but I am bound to mention the recent elections. Engaging in the democratic process is important, but not all areas had elections. The turnout across the wards in Walsall and Bloxwich was an average of 38%. I want to put on record my thanks to all the councillors who served their community in Walsall and Bloxwich.

The leader of Reform, the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage), thought that Walsall council was Labour-controlled, but it was not; it was controlled by the Conservatives—I know it might be slightly difficult to see constituencies from a helicopter. Some of his candidates said that they had to pay to personalise their leaflets. The £5 million gift is quite interesting as he says it is for his personal safety. I know that Mr Speaker and all the Deputy Speakers take the safety of each and every one of us in this Chamber very seriously.

The Representation of the People Bill is a carry-over Bill, so there is still time to ensure that we have compulsory voting and that we prevent cryptocurrency and bitcoin being used for donations to political parties—say, from Thailand—particularly from donors who go under two different names.

I welcome the announcement in the Gracious Speech on improving our cyber-security defences. I do not know whether Members saw this, but there was an investigation by a consortium of journalists from The Guardian, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, The Insider, Delfi and VSquare about a Russian school called “Department 4” that provides special training on hacking and password attacks. A hacker unit known by western Governments as Sandworm is accused of unleashing destructive cyber-attacks targeting, for example, Ukraine’s power grid, the French presidential election in 2017 and the investigation of the Salisbury poisonings. That article was published on 7 May, and it is worth reading. We need to protect our democracy from the constant drip, drip of misinformation and disinformation on online fora.

I welcome the energy independence Bill in the Gracious Speech. We have seen how we have been at the mercy of other countries, but now we are investing in renewables, which will protect our planet, roll out energy efficiency and bring down bills.

[Harriet Cross]

The energy independence—or dependence, as I think we can probably call it—Bill will make us more reliant on overseas imports of oil and gas. We will use oil and gas for many years because our system needs it. The Bill bans new licences in the North sea, making us more reliant on imports. Does the right hon. Lady really welcome that?

[Valerie Vaz]

I welcome the energy independence Bill. Let us see what is in the clauses when it is published, but the Secretary of State wants to make this country independent of outside forces. This is the first time a Government have invested so heavily in renewables. All this will get Britain working.

It is outrageous that oil companies have made massive profits and traders have bet on the outcome of war in Iran as petrol prices go up. Someone somewhere is making money, and it is not my constituents. They may not even know who is making the money, yet they blame us.

[Jim Shannon]

I commend the right hon. Lady for her contribution. It is really important that we look upon renewables as an option, whether we like it or not—that is the way I see it. The Government are pushing their renewables policy for England and Wales, but does she believe that we should be doing this collectively? I think that Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England should be working together on a policy that can take us forward and meet the targets, which are very important not just for us but for our children and our grandchildren.

[Valerie Vaz]

We are the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, so it is very important that we all work together. When it comes to climate change policies, we cannot specify a particular area; they are for our whole country, and our whole planet.

Those of us who were around at the time of Brexit—and I am pleased to see an EU Bill in the King’s Speech—will remember that we were allowed to see the impact assessments only if we left our phones behind and went across the road with just a pencil and paper. There we saw the impact assessments for each sector, and how leaving the EU affected every single one; we knew how important it was. The Federation of Small Businesses has warned that post-Brexit red tape and costs are driving smaller companies out of European markets. In a survey of 645 businesses, 30% indicated that they might reduce or cease trading in the EU without eased regulations. Many small businesses—64%—reported issues with customs documentation, 21% reported issues with physical inspections and 17% reported issues with product marking. To get Britain working, we need a closer relationship with our nearest market. If these small businesses close, working people and all of us lose out.

I believe in the dignity of work. The hon. Member for Faversham and Mid Kent mentioned that there is no welfare Bill in the Gracious Speech, but measures have already been taken to increase the national minimum wage, rights at work and safety at work. We will get Britain working with the new work coaches and the right to try.

I do not know whether Members have seen the television programme “The Pitt”, but in season two, a construction worker has to be taken to A&E and cannot afford his medical care, which is about $20,000. Watching that, we all know how lucky and blessed we are that we have our NHS, free at the point of need. We give people dignity when they fall ill. We take it for granted that our doctors and nurses are trained to the highest level. The NHS modernisation Bill will bring back the Department of Health and Social Care as one Department with accountability to the Secretary of State. There will not be the extra cost of NHS England; instead, there will be more money for the frontline.

I have found some money down the back of the sofa, so I hope the Chancellor is listening. Fifty million pounds has been allocated for a free school in my constituency that, on the evidence, is not needed. The National Audit Office has reported falling rolls in primary schools, and that fall in numbers will feed into secondary schools. I was told that the decision about the school was made in 2017. There was a Walsall priority education investment area programme, and the Windsor Academy Trust just so happened to have a member on the programme’s board. Surprise, surprise—it got the contract for the free school. It is like insider trading with public money. A review was undertaken, but Ministers are pressing ahead with the decision. I am not sure why, when schools like Joseph Leckie, Blue Coat academy and All Saints academy require support for their buildings, as do many other schools. Despite what the evidence shows, there will be building on Reedswood Park, which is not what local people want. It is the same with the Walsall Leather Museum, a beloved local cultural and heritage icon; the deal with the then Conservative-controlled council was a novel and contentious transaction, made against the wishes of visitors, constituents and Government policy on promoting arts and culture. The museum must be retained in its current position.

I believe in the dignity of education, which is why I welcome the Bill to raise education standards for all. We already have Best Start hubs in train—we know what a difference Sure Start made—and breakfast clubs. Anyone who has visited breakfast clubs knows that there is a glorious cacophony of excited children who have had a good meal. There are also quiet places, and I am pleased that some are taking part in the year of reading. Children are set up for the day. We cannot measure the results of a good education tomorrow; we have to see the benefits over a lifetime. I believe in the dignity of opportunity, and that is what this Government are giving people. We give people the tools to find and exploit their talents. Many do not know what their talents are when they start off in life, and they want to discover them over the years. That is how we get Britain working.

We live in a society where, if we see something we want, we can buy it, and it is with us the next day, but Governments do not operate in that way. I want to end with a story about three workers constructing a road. When they were asked what they were doing, the first one said he was breaking stones; the second one said that he was constructing a road; and the third one said that he was constructing a road that would take children to their school, or the sick to hospital. We have to show people the significance of the actions that the Government are undertaking, so that they are like the third worker. Equality, opportunity, skills, justice and tolerance take time, patience and perseverance. We need to explain to people that our Government are standing up against vested interests and for all our citizens, and that is why I support the measures in our sovereign’s Gracious Speech.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

Food Banks

Valerie Vaz Excerpts

Tuesday 19th November 2024 Westminster Hall

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. As right hon. and hon. Members can see, quite a number of people want to speak. I do not really want to impose a formal time limit, so I suggest an informal limit of one minute and a half. I will see how the first two speeches go and then take it from there, because I want all Members to get in.

--- Later in debate ---

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. To correct what I said, the limit is two and a half minutes, and then we will reduce it to two. I hope to call the Lib Dem spokesperson at 10.28 am.

--- Later in debate ---

[David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) on securing this important debate. The work that food banks do is invaluable. I would like to thank all the dedicated volunteers in my constituency of Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe who run food banks—they do tremendous work across our communities. There is PANTRY food bank in Pontardawe. There are food banks in Brecon, Knighton and Presteigne, Llandrindod Wells, Rhayader, Ystradgynlais, Ystalyfera and Gwaun-Cae-Gurwen, all of which provide vital support to people in our communities and help those in need.

That need is growing across Wales. Food-bank parcel distribution has increased by 77% since 2018. An estimated 6% of households in Wales accessed food aid last year, and one in four households in Wales are either eating smaller meals or skipping meals altogether. In Wales, child poverty rates are significantly worse than elsewhere in the United Kingdom. In my own region, a staggering one third of children in Neath Port Talbot council and 20% in Powys live in absolute poverty. These high child poverty rates have remained stubbornly high across Wales, moving barely at all since the early 2000s.

That can only represent a failure of policy and political will across successive Governments on both sides of the M4. Volunteers often say that, although the work they do is valuable, food banks should not need to exist at all. They exist due to our state’s failure to address poverty within our communities, and are needed to support adequately those struggling to make ends meet.

Tackling food poverty requires a cross-sector approach. Rising energy and housing costs are pushing more and more people into poverty. The cost of energy itself makes producing food in this country even more expensive. In Wales, we urgently need more investment and well-paying jobs should be brought back in deprived areas. Former mining communities, such as those in the south of my constituency, are still waiting for new industries to arrive. The new Government cannot afford to continue to make the mistakes of the past. We cannot end up in a situation in which the same number, or even more, children are relying on food banks in 10 years’ time. We will continue to hold this Government, as well as those in the devolved Parliaments, to account to ensure that that is not the case.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. I have to reduce the time limit to two minutes.

--- Later in debate ---

[Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) for securing this vital debate. Austerity is, of course, ideologically driven. It was, in the first instance, an assault on the most vulnerable and the poorest in society. As poverty grew, we saw a decade in which the wealthiest in society accelerated away from everyone else as they enjoyed tax cuts. Obviously, gross inequality followed. Areas such as my constituency have seen industry leave and low-wage insecure employment become the norm, with rising poverty and suicide rates, and decreasing life expectancy.

Austerity has ripped the soul out of Britain, and has naturally increased food bank usage. After this ideological assault on the poorest and most vulnerable, a new target was needed. This was neatly labelled as the cost of living crisis, but really it was a continuation of the degradation of working-class people.

To show how things have changed, I am 42 and when I was at school, if there was a classmate who was poor, it was probably because mum and dad did not work. Nowadays, we have the creation of a new strand of society—the in-work poor. That is a situation where both mum and dad work full-time jobs but still do not have enough to put food on the table. The scale of the cost of living crisis cannot be denied—rocketing energy bills, increased food costs, wage suppression and stagnation and out-of-control inflation. Austerity and the cost of living crisis have been crises for the poorest, most vulnerable and most disadvantaged and for the working class. It is little wonder that food bank usage is what it is.

The Government cannot afford to tinker around the edges when it comes to what we do—we must transform society. The welfare system, as has been mentioned, needs to be changed. Universal credit is too low. People cannot afford the basic essentials needed merely to get by and to meet their basic needs for food, heating, toiletry and accommodation costs. The decline of local councils is well documented. It is local councils that provide vital public services. England has seen local councils declare bankruptcy, and that is a realistic possibility for Scottish local authorities. Bankruptcy is the result of councils eventually buckling under the strain of rising costs and funding cuts. Now is not the time for the Government to have limited ambition.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

Order. The hon. Member must conclude.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sam Carling (North West Cambridgeshire) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Vaz.

Food bank use massively increased under the last Government, and has nearly doubled since 2018-9. Of the 3.12 million emergency food parcels distributed by the Trussell Trust network in 2023-4, more than 1.14 million were for children. In June and July this year, 13.6% of households reported being food insecure, meaning that they ate less or went a day without eating because they could not access or afford food.

I want to highlight the Peterborough food partnership, which helps many of my constituents in North West Cambridgeshire. In October, the partnership received the Sustainable Food Places bronze award, in recognition of its work towards increasing access to healthy food, tackling diet-related ill health, and creating a vibrant and diverse sustainable food economy. The partnership includes over 100 organisations across the area, including from the local farming community, the public sector, Peterborough city council, local food businesses and, of course, Peterborough food bank.

Peterborough food bank served nearly 3,000 households in 2023, and saw a huge increase of 34% in parcels in 2023-24, compared with the previous financial year. The food bank partners with Peterborough citizens advice bureau, which has experienced an exponential increase in the number of people trying to access its services for income maximisation and debt advice, with up to 1,800 unique calls per month, of which it is able to answer only 15% to 20%, so there is a real issue there.

Through the partnership working, people who attend food banks in Peterborough—including the one at CSK Hampton church in my constituency—are able to receive wraparound support from the Citizens Advice and other organisations, so that they can start to tackle the root causes of their issues, which often include debt, which is in turn caused by general poverty. I am so grateful for the work that Peterborough food bank does, alongside all the other organisations in the sustainable food partnership. I hope we can start to replicate that approach elsewhere.

[Valerie Vaz (in the Chair)]

I am so sorry, but Douglas McAllister has only 30 seconds. We will then move on to the wind-ups.

Pension Schemes Bill [Lords]

Valerie Vaz Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd March 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Deputy Speaker]

I am not going to enter into debate at this stage. I just wanted to make sure that people were informed as to why we are in here and in lockdown.

[Valerie Vaz (Walsall South) (Lab)]

May I just thank you for that, Mr Deputy Speaker, and thank the Leader of the House for his statement? Our thoughts and prayers are with the police officer. I thank the police, all the security services and all the staff for looking after us so well.

[Mr Lidington]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady. I think that those sentiments will be shared without reservation in all parts of the House.

Atos Work Capability Assessments

Valerie Vaz Excerpts

Thursday 17th January 2013 Commons Chamber

[Valerie Vaz (Walsall South) (Lab)]

It is always a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke). I also pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West and Royton (Mr Meacher) and the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Dan Rogerson) for initiating the debate, and to the Backbench Business Committee for agreeing to it.

We are all here today because constituents have come to us and told us their stories. Constituents have come to me in their wheelchairs with their carers because they have wanted me to know about the difficulties that they are experiencing. They cannot understand why, in the face of overwhelming medical evidence, they are still being called in for interviews. Some cannot understand why they have been told “If you make it to this interview, you must be fit for work.”

[Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)]

Does my hon. Friend share my utter despair at the sheer amount of money that is wasted on calling in people whose well-documented histories clearly show that they suffer from conditions which, sadly, will not improve in any way, rather than being spent on trying to find ways of helping those who are in a better position to go back to work?

--- Later in debate ---

[Valerie Vaz]

I agree with my hon. Friend.

My constituents cannot understand why, although 40% of appeals are upheld, the Minister’s predecessor said that the system works. When I asked him, in a written question, how many people in Walsall South had been declared “not fit to work”, his response was:

“Please note that constituency information on the work capability assessment process is not available.”

It is no wonder that the Government have no idea why my constituents are suffering, but I will tell them now.

SD has cancer and is undergoing radiotherapy; she has been declared fit for work. SH suffered seven strokes, and also suffers from type 2 diabetes and a liver condition; she has had to appeal against a decision. KH was placed in a work-related group; she has incontinence of bowel and bladder as well as diabetes, and is partially sighted. CS has received zero points despite having a spinal disc prolapse. SA suffered a stroke and is blind, but has still been declared fit for work. LM has arthritis of the spine, and has had to appeal against a decision. Stephen Nye was so angry that he came to see me on behalf of his father, and said “I want to let you know what is going on. Sick people are being persecuted: the assessment system is flawed, and they are being harassed by the jobcentre.”

[Meg Hillier]

Does my hon. Friend agree that the tenor of the debate about “strivers and skivers” says a great deal about what the DWP intended when it set up the assessment system—as do my sheaf of papers relating to constituency cases and the list of cases that she is reading out?

[Valerie Vaz]

I entirely agree, and I do not subscribe to the “strivers and shirkers” nomenclature.

MD came to see me with her husband, who is blind and deaf. They told me that the work capability assessment did not take account of the issues faced by blind and partially sighted people. I wrote to the Minister’s predecessor, who replied that Professor Harrington had had considerable engagement with the Royal National Institute of Blind People, Sense, and Action on Hearing Loss. However, that was only at the time of the professor’s third review—it should have happened before the assessments had even been devised—and only at the time of his second review did he suggest the introduction of sensory descriptors and an additional descriptor addressing the impact of generalised pain and/or fatigue.

I am pleased to say that, at their annual conference, GPs called for the scrapping of the computer-based work capability assessment. They should know: they make the medical assessments every day, and they see the sick and the vulnerable every day. There is no common sense in these assessments, and there is no humanity or dignity for the most vulnerable members of society. I urge the Minister to listen to those who have to undergo these assessments, and to instruct Atos to start again.

Oral Answers to Questions

Valerie Vaz Excerpts

Monday 18th October 2010 Commons Chamber

[Maria Miller]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. I should like to set the record straight on that. There is no intention to introduce a medical assessment for DLA. The work capability assessment, which, after all, tests people’s ability to get into work, is very different. DLA is a benefit that is paid to disabled people to make up the additional costs that they incur for being disabled; it is not linked to their ability to work.

[Valerie Vaz (Walsall South) (Lab)]

Sir Stuart Rose is one of the signatories to the business letter. Is one of his strategies to employ unemployed university lecturers as till operators?