I thank the Leader of the House very much for announcing the business, and I welcome all colleagues back to the House. I am sure that the whole House will wish to join me in congratulating His Majesty the King not only on the Gracious Speech yesterday, but on his glorious triumph in the United States of America, in particular reminding our American cousins of the joy not of monarchy, which they know well enough from recent experience and over the years, but of a genuinely constitutional monarchy.
The House will know of my obsession with building NMITE—the New Model Institute for Technology & Engineering—our new university in Hereford. I hope that colleagues across the House will join me in celebrating its second graduation ceremony last Saturday. Its flagship degree was recently accredited for chartered certification by the prestigious Institution of Engineering and Technology, making its graduates, in that sense, holders of degrees equal to those to be found at Oxbridge or Russell group universities. Its latest crop of graduates have gone on to companies including Airbus, Hitachi Energy and GKN, and there is huge interest from applicants in its new bachelor’s and master’s degrees in autonomous robotics and drone technologies, which start in September. If Members will excuse the pun, as an engineering institution, NMITE is really starting to motor. I strongly encourage any Members who might be interested and wish to know more to drop me a line, because this route to local economic growth is of great potential significance.
It is fair to say that we have known quieter weeks than the couple since we last convened. What have we discovered during that period? A previously undisclosed gift of £5 million from a foreign cryptocurrency donor to the leader of Reform UK is now being investigated by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. We are reassured that it is entirely unrelated to that hon. Member’s recent interest in investing in Bitcoin.
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his remarks—well, for some of his remarks. On a serious matter, I am sure that the whole House will join me in sending our condolences to the families of the three young women who died yesterday in the tragic incident in Brighton. Following the local elections, which took place last week, I wish to put on record my thanks to councillors for their service to their communities, irrespective of parties or of whether they are not party-aligned, and particularly to those who were not re-elected.
The King’s Speech opened our new parliamentary Session. Members will have heard your words, Mr Speaker, about how we should conduct ourselves. I fully support those remarks and thank you for setting them out to the House. This Session will be about economic growth, building infrastructure, improving public services and strengthening our national security. I have published a written ministerial statement this morning, which lists the Bills that we have announced, and Members will have an opportunity to debate the King’s Speech over the coming days. This is a serious, long-term plan, bringing about change and putting the country back in the service of working people.
Curiously, and in contrast, the Opposition brought forward an alternative King’s Speech, which, like most of the country, I had failed to notice until the Leader of the Opposition referred to it yesterday. I have a copy here, if anyone needs any night-time reading to put them to sleep. I read it with interest. The shadow Leader of the House is a distinguished author—I have read some of his works—who writes with genuine interest, clear thinking and even wit sometimes. All that demonstrates is that he had absolutely nothing to do with this alternative King’s Speech. The alternative King’s Speech is no more than a description of the long-term ills of our country, which merely serves to remind us that the previous Government had 12 legislative programmes and 14 long years to test these ideas, and they failed, so we will take no lectures from them.
On Monday I attended the Bradford City football club fire disaster memorial service. We remembered the 56 football fans who died in the tragic stadium fire 41 years ago. Young players from the club attended alongside fans who had survived and families of those who died. Will the Leader of the House join me in paying tribute to the club for keeping alive the memory of those who suffered, and will he find time to celebrate the role that football plays in bringing communities together?
I absolutely join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to Bradford City for keeping the memory of the 1985 disaster alive. Some of us remember that day and will never forget. I extend my heartfelt condolences to the friends and families of those who lost their lives on that tragic day. As she rightly points out, football and sports more widely bring communities together and can be a force for good. I hope we will see that in the coming months, not least when the world cup kicks off.
May I start by associating myself with the remarks of the Leader of the House in relation to Brighton and the elections? It is not easy to stand for elected office, particularly if you are not successful, and it does take a toll, so I thank him for those remarks.
I also thank the Leader of the House for providing us with the first set of business for the new Session, but I have to note that at the beginning of the previous Session the new Government made a virtue of the fact that they would be putting an end to the incessant chaos of the Conservatives, yet we find ourselves again with a Prime Minister who appears to have lost all authority. We all know that changing Prime Minister over and over again is deeply damaging for our economy and our place on the world stage. I heard us described in recent days as, “Italy without the cuisine.”
When we look at the content of the King’s Speech, we see the reason why this Prime Minister has run out of road, despite having such a large majority: there is no real change offered by this Government’s policy agenda, just a tinkering around the edges. There is an EU reset Bill that offers no reset and no attempt to boost growth by moving beyond the Government’s red lines. There are no measures to boost national security by introducing a programme of defence bonds, and there is nothing to fix the crisis in social care that plagues so many of our constituents.
Will the Leader of the House schedule a debate in Government time on how to stop this continued chaos of successive Conservative and Labour Governments? Perhaps some of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet colleagues might want to come along and make contributions. After last week’s results, one of the solutions that should be discussed in that debate is the need to move to a system of proportional representation for general elections, as well as for local government elections in England. That need has never been greater. We Liberal Democrats will always support calls for making every vote count, and that is despite results in Richmond upon Thames and some of the Scottish constituencies—including my own, I have to say—that would make Kim Jong Un blush. Will the Leader of the House speak to the Prime Minister and try to persuade him that if he wants to leave some form of legacy that he can be proud of, he should make time for a Bill on fair votes?
The King’s Speech made it clear, as has the Prime Minister, that the long-term national interest does require a closer relationship with our European allies—now more so than ever—because there are huge opportunities to strengthen our security and cut the cost of living. We have made progress with closer co-operation on agriculture, electricity, emissions trading and more, but I have to say that the previous Government’s Brexit deal did deep damage to the economy. We will not be joining the customs union or the single market and we will not be returning to freedom of movement, but legislation will be coming forward to reset the relationship with Europe, because the Prime Minister and the Government are very clear on the need for closer partnership.
On proportional representation, our party’s position is very clear. I note that the Liberal Democrats have an opportunity to table an amendment to the Address in reply to King’s Speech on this, if they so wish, and if they do so, I think they will get an answer they do not want to hear.
I recently held an event in High Green to listen to local people’s priorities for the area, because they have felt overlooked for far too long. Two of the areas in High Green have a bottom 3% and 7% score of deprivation in England. I want to change that so that High Green can receive £20 million of funding from the Government’s Pride in Place programme. I am ambitious for High Green, the home of the Arctic Monkeys, and I know that this investment will fulfil the potential of the talent and community spirit in that place. Will the Leader of the House advise me how I can work with Ministers to secure Pride in Place funding for High Green to breathe new life into our community and ensure that everyone locally can stay near but go far.
My hon. Friend is a doughty champion for her communities, and I once again pay tribute to her for that. We are committed to regenerating communities through our waste action plan and by investing in libraries, cultural venues and youth services, ensuring that communities across the country get the investment they need. She draws particular attention to Pride in Place, which is not just about investing in local neighbourhoods; it is also about putting people in charge of decisions about their local communities, and the things that they care about and that affect their lives. She makes a strong case for further funding, and I will ensure that the Secretary of State hears that.
First, I thank the Leader of the House for his unfailing courtesy at the Dispatch Box, and for the meticulous manner in which he refers Members’ concerns to the appropriate Ministers. Whoever emerges as the leader of the Labour party, I very much hope that he will remain in his post.
Given the Labour party’s manifesto commitments, some of us had rather hoped we might find in the King’s Speech a Bill to ban the proceeds of trophy hunting, something to do with hare coursing or improving farm animal welfare. The sad fact is that there was no such mention of any animal welfare issue whatsoever in the King’s Speech, and I would be grateful if the right hon. Gentleman addressed that.
While I am on my feet, could I also say that, with the hospitality industry on its knees, now is not the moment to introduce a tourism tax?
I am sincerely grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his comments. I do think it is important that we uphold standards wherever we can. As for his reference to not wishing the ultimate job on me, I suspect he has been talking to my wife in that regard, and I can assure him that it is clearly not going to happen, because apart from anything else there is no vacancy.
On the issues the right hon. Gentleman raises, I think we made a good start on animal welfare in the first Session, and there will be further Sessions in which we can bring forward such measures. Depending on the progress made in this second Session, there is also the possibility that other legislation will be brought forward. I am not promising him anything, but there is some flexibility there. There are also other routes that Members can take, not least private Members’ Bills, to address some of the important matters he raises.
On Sunday, there were scenes of wild celebration among the Dale fans at Wembley, as our beloved club staged a fabulous comeback and won the play-off final to return to the English football league. There were also fantastic civic celebrations at Rochdale town hall, where Jimmy McNulty and his lads could see for themselves just how proud we all were of the team’s heroics, grit and togetherness. Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the Dale on a fabulous season, and on proving that our club, like our town, never, ever gives up?
20 of 82 shown
The leader of the Green party, Zack Polanski, has admitted that he failed to pay council tax, was not in fact a spokesman for the Red Cross and was never a full member of the National Council for Hypnotherapy, which I am sure will come as a great relief to women across the country. He must be an acute embarrassment to my neighbour, the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns), and we thank her for her resilience. All that news will come as a surprise to precisely no one.
Lest we forget, nearly 100 Labour Members of Parliament, including four Ministers, have gone public with their opposition to the Prime Minister remaining in office. Three Cabinet Ministers have called on him to set a public timetable for his departure. Few Labour MPs, if any, believe that the Prime Minister will lead them into the next election.
Mr Speaker, you will be aware, I am sure, of the famous lines:
“The boy stood on the burning deck
Whence all but he had fled”.
It may be that the Leader of the House is the last person to occupy the position of standing on the burning deck when all but he has fled. Others are fleeing, and it is astonishing that Buckingham Palace had reportedly been forced to ask whether the King’s Speech was, in fact, really going ahead. Even now, I notice the slight sparsity of Members—actually, on all sides of the House—in this earlier sitting, and the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is widely reported to be preparing a bid for the leadership of the Labour party. King Lear asks in his bewilderment:
“Who is it that can tell me who I am?”
So it is with the Prime Minister. He does not know and nor, it seems, does anyone around him.
Amid all this Westminster madness, it falls to me to insert a nugget of something that actually affects every Member of this House in their constituencies—a matter of great local importance. The House will know that the Construction Industry Training Board is meant to be the guardian of construction skills in this country, funded by a statutory levy on the industry. Yet employer confidence is rapidly being eroded by the CITB’s recent behaviour. An Ofsted “requires improvement” judgment, the Farmer review’s call for a “fundamental reset”, poor communications with levy payers, a rarely updated website and a slow, cumbersome booking system all point in the same direction. At the same time, firms report duplication, delay and poor value for money.
For some courses—forklift training, for example—the CITB route can cost more than twice as much as the non-CITB route, take considerably longer and yet lead to precisely the same qualification. Many of the courses are not optional. Small construction firms must keep up with industry standards and legal health and safety requirements. They need a system that is fast, clear and good value, not one that makes compliance harder, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises that are so crucial to our economy. Meanwhile, the levy is a tax in all but name that must be paid regardless of the services offered.
The CITB has expenditures of nearly £300 million, but gives less than half of that away in grants, while its wage bill and headcount steadily rise. Will the Leader of the House ask the relevant Ministers to write to me explaining how they intend to restore employer confidence in the CITB, particularly among small construction companies, improve course access and value for money, and reform an organisation that appears to be losing its way?
I draw the House’s attention to the report published by the Modernisation Committee this morning. The report recommends a new pilot to allow Members to participate virtually in Select Committee meetings in limited circumstances. That is part of the Committee’s ongoing work to ensure that the House’s procedures remain effective, accessible and resilient. A motion will be brought forward in due course to allow the House to consider those proposals, which I hope will be supported.
Let me turn to the other remarks of the shadow Leader of the House. I certainly congratulate NMITE in his Hereford constituency. I have said this before, but I will say it again: the success of that organisation is due not least to the right hon. Gentleman’s commitment and leadership on this matter, and we should congratulate him on that.
I absolutely agree with the shadow Leader of the House on the matter of the donation to the leader of Reform. These are serious allegations. I welcome the fact that the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is looking into this, and I also welcome the independent Rycroft review into foreign financial interference in our democracy.
As for the other comments that the shadow Leader of the House makes about the current political situation, I encourage him to stop doomscrolling. The Prime Minister and the Government are getting on with the job of governing, and this King’s Speech is spreading opportunity and building a fairer Britain. On the CITB levy, this is a serious issue, and I will raise the matter with the relevant Minister and get them to write to him.