sign in sign up
<<
Home , Alister Jack, Edward Argar, John Whittingdale, Nadine Dorries, Neil Garratt, Robert Halfon

Monday Volume 685 30 November 2020 No. 143

HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES ()

Monday 30 November 2020 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2020 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT

MEMBERS OF THE CABINET (FORMED BY THE RT HON. , MP, DECEMBER 2019)

PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY,MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND MINISTER FOR THE UNION— The Rt Hon. Boris Johnson, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN,COMMONWEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT AFFAIRS AND FIRST SECRETARY OF STATE— The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT—The Rt Hon. , MP CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER AND MINISTER FOR THE —The Rt Hon. , MP AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE—The Rt Hon. , QC, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR BUSINESS,ENERGY AND INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE, AND MINISTER FOR WOMEN AND EQUALITIES—The Rt Hon. Elizabeth Truss, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WORK AND PENSIONS—The Rt Hon. Dr Thérèse Coffey, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION—The Rt Hon. CBE, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENVIRONMENT,FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HOUSING,COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT—The Rt Hon. , MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR NORTHERN —The Rt Hon. CBE, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR —The Rt Hon. Alister Jack, MP SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WALES—The Rt Hon. , MP LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS AND —The Rt Hon. Baroness Evans of Bowes Park SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DIGITAL,CULTURE,MEDIA AND SPORT—The Rt Hon. CBE, MP MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO—The Rt Hon. , MP DEPARTMENTS OF STATE AND MINISTERS Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Alok Sharma, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. , MP (Minister for Business, Energy and Clean Growth) Lord Grimstone of Boscobel, Kt (Minister for Investment) § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Nadhim Zahawi, MP § , MP Paul Scully, MP Lord Callanan Cabinet Office— PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY,MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND MINISTER FOR THE UNION— The Rt Hon. Boris Johnson, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER AND MINISTER FOR THE CABINET OFFICE—The Rt Hon. Michael Gove, MP MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO—The Rt Hon. Amanda Milling, MP —The Rt Hon. Penny Mordaunt, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— , MP (Minister for the Constitution and Devolution) Lord Agnew of Oulton (Minister for Efficiency and Transformation) § Lord True CBE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARIES— Julia Lopez, MP Johnny Mercer, MP (Minister for Defence People and Veterans) § Defence— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Ben Wallace, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— Jeremy Quin, MP (Minister for Defence Procurement) Baroness Goldie DL PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— James Heappey, MP (Minister for the Armed Forces) Johnny Mercer, MP (Minister for Defence People and Veterans) § ii HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT—cont.

Digital, Culture, Media and Sport— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Oliver Dowden CBE, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— Caroline Dinenage, MP (Minister for Digital and Culture) The Rt Hon. , MP (Minister for Media and Data) PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— , MP Nigel Huddleston, MP § Baroness Barran MBE Education— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Gavin Williamson CBE, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— Michelle Donelan, MP (Minister for Universities) The Rt Hon. Nick Gibb, MP (Minister for School Standards) PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— , MP Gillian Keegan, MP Baroness Berridge of the Vale of Catmose § Environment, Food and Rural Affairs— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. George Eustice, MP —The Rt Hon. Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Rebecca Pow, MP Lord Gardiner of Kimble Victoria Prentis, MP Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office— SECRETARY OF STATE AND FIRST SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Dominic Raab, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. , MP (Minister for the Middle East and North Africa) The Rt Hon. Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Minister for the Pacific and the Environment) § , MP (Minister for Asia) Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Minister for South Asia and the Commonwealth) PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— , MP Wendy Morton, MP Health and Social Care— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Matt Hancock, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— Edward Argar, MP (Minister for Health) Helen Whately, MP (Minister for Care) , MP (Minister for Patient Safety, Suicide Prevention and Mental Health) PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— , MP Lord Bethell of Romford Nadhim Zahawi, MP § Home Office— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Priti Patel, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. , MP (Minister for Security) Kit Malthouse, MP (Minister for Crime and Policing) § Baroness Williams of Trafford Lord Greenhalgh (Minister for Building Safety and Communities) § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— , MP Kevin Foster, MP , MP § Housing, Communities and Local Government— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Robert Jenrick, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— Luke Hall, MP (Minister for Regional Growth and Local Government) The Rt Hon. Christopher Pincher, MP (Minister for Housing) Lord Greenhalgh (Minister for Building Safety and Communities) § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE—Kelly Tolhurst, MP HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT—cont. iii

International Trade— SECRETARY OF STATE AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE, AND MINISTER FOR WOMEN AND EQUALITIES— The Rt Hon. Elizabeth Truss, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— The Rt Hon. , MP (Minister for Trade Policy) Lord Grimstone of Boscobel, Kt (Minister for Investment) § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Graham Stuart, MP Ranil Jayawardena, MP , MP (Minister for Equalities) § Baroness Berridge of the Vale of Catmose (Minister for Women) § Justice— LORD CHANCELLOR AND SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Robert Buckland, QC, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— , QC, MP Kit Malthouse, MP (Minister for Crime and Policing) § PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— , MP § Chris Philp, MP § Law Officers— ATTORNEY GENERAL—The Rt Hon. , QC, MP SOLICITOR GENERAL—The Rt Hon. Michael Ellis, QC, MP ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND—Lord Stewart of Dirleton, QC Leader of the House of Commons— LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL AND LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS—The Rt Hon. Jacob Rees-Mogg, MP Leader of the House of Lords— LORD PRIVY SEAL AND LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS—The Rt. Hon. Baroness Evans of Bowes Park DEPUTY LEADER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS—The Rt Hon. Earl Howe CBE Northern Ireland Office— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Brandon Lewis CBE, MP MINISTER OF STATE—, MP Scotland Office— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Alister Jack, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Iain Stewart, MP David Duguid, MP § Transport— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Grant Shapps, MP MINISTERS OF STATE— Chris Heaton-Harris, MP , MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Robert Courts, MP Rachel Maclean, MP Baroness Vere of Norbiton Treasury— PRIME MINISTER,FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY,MINISTER FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE AND MINISTER FOR THE UNION— The Rt Hon. Boris Johnson, MP CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER—The Rt Hon. Rishi Sunak, MP CHIEF SECRETARY—The Rt Hon. , MP FINANCIAL SECRETARY—The Rt Hon. , MP MINISTER OF STATE—Lord Agnew of Oulton DL (Minister for Efficiency and Transformation) § ECONOMIC SECRETARY—John Glen, MP EXCHEQUER SECRETARY—Kemi Badenoch, MP § PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY—The Rt Hon. Mark Spencer, MP LORDS COMMISSIONERS— James Morris, MP , MP David Duguid, MP § David Rutley, MP , MP Michael Tomlinson, MP iv HER MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT—cont.

ASSISTANT WHIPS— Leo Docherty, MP David T. C. Davies, MP § Alex Chalk, MP § , MP Maria Caulfield, MP Nigel Huddleston, MP § Eddie Hughes, MP UK Export Finance— SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE—The Rt Hon. Elizabeth Truss, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE—Graham Stuart, MP Wales Office— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Simon Hart, MP PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE—David T. C. Davies, MP § Work and Pensions— SECRETARY OF STATE—The Rt Hon. Dr Thérèse Coffey, MP MINISTER OF STATE—Justin Tomlinson, MP (Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work) PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARIES OF STATE— Mims Davies, MP Guy Opperman, MP , MP Baroness Stedman-Scott OBE, DL Her Majesty’s Household— LORD CHAMBERLAIN—The Rt Hon. Earl Peel GCVO, DL LORD STEWARD—The Earl of Dalhousie MASTER OF THE HORSE—Lord de Mauley TREASURER—Stuart Andrew, MP COMPTROLLER—Mike Freer, MP VICE-CHAMBERLAIN—Marcus Jones, MP CAPTAIN OF THE HONOURABLE CORPS OF GENTLEMEN-AT-ARMS—The Rt Hon. Lord Ashton of Hyde CAPTAIN OF THE QUEEN’S BODYGUARD OF THE YEOMEN OF THE GUARD—Earl of Courtown BARONESSES IN WAITING— Baroness Penn Baroness Scott of Bybrook OBE Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist LORDS IN WAITING— Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay Viscount Younger of Leckie

§ Members of the Government listed under more than one Department

SECOND CHURCH ESTATES COMMISSIONER,REPRESENTING THE CHURCH COMMISSIONERS—, MP REPRESENTING THE SPEAKER’S COMMITTEE ON THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION—Christian Matheson, MP REPRESENTING THE SPEAKER’S COMMITTEE FOR PARLIAMENTARY STANDARDS AUTHORITY— Sir Charles Walker, MP REPRESENTING THE HOUSE OF COMMONS COMMISSION—, MP CHAIRMAN OF THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMISSION—The Rt Hon. Sir , MP HOUSE OF COMMONS

THE SPEAKER—The Rt Hon. Sir , MP

CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS—The Rt Hon. Dame , MP FIRST DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS—The Rt Hon. Dame Rosie Winterton, MP SECOND DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS—Mr Nigel Evans, MP

PANEL OF CHAIRS— Rushanara Ali, Sir , Hannah Bardell, Mr , Mr , Sir Graham Brady, Sir Christopher Chope, Judith Cummins, Geraint Davies, Philip Davies, Peter Dowd, Ms Angela Eagle, Clive Efford, Julie Elliott, Yvonne Fovargue, The Rt Hon. Sir Roger Gale, Ms Nusrat Ghani, The Rt Hon. Dame , James Gray, Sir Mark Hendrick, Mr , Stewart Hosie, The Rt Hon. Sir George Howarth, Dr Rupa Huq, The Rt Hon. Sir Edward Leigh, Steve McCabe, Siobhain McDonagh, The Rt Hon. Esther McVey, The Rt Hon. , The Rt Hon. , Mrs Sheryll Murray, The Rt Hon. , , Mark Pritchard, Christina Rees, Mr Laurence Robertson, Andrew Rosindell, Mr Virendra Sharma, Sir , Graham Stringer, Derek Twigg, Sir Charles Walker SECRETARY—Chris Stanton

HOUSE OF COMMONS COMMISSION— The Rt Hon. The Speaker (Chairman), Ian Ailles (Director General of the House of Commons), Dr John Benger (Clerk of the House and Head of the House of Commons Service), Jane McCall (External Member), Dr Rima Makarem (External Member), The Rt Hon. Jacob Rees-Mogg, MP (Leader of the House), The Rt Hon. Valerie Vaz, MP, Sir Charles Walker, MP, The Rt Hon. Dame Rosie Winterton, MP, Pete Wishart, MP SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION—Marianne Cwynarski ASSISTANT SECRETARY—Robert Cope

ADMINISTRATION ESTIMATE AUDIT AND RISK ASSURANCE COMMITTEE AND MEMBERS ESTIMATE AUDIT COMMITTEE— Dr Rima Makarem (Chair), Harriett Baldwin, MP, Mr Clive Betts, MP, Frances Done, Jane McCall, Sir Charles Walker, MP SECRETARY TO THE COMMITTEE—Hannah Bryce

COMMONS EXECUTIVE BOARD— Mostaque Ahmed (Finance Director and Managing Director, Finance, Portfolio and Performance), Ian Ailles (Director General of the House of Commons), Dr John Benger (Clerk of the House and Head of the House of Commons Service), Isabel Coman (Managing Director, In-House Services & Estates), Sarah Davies (Clerk Assistant and Managing Director, Chamber and Committees), Mandy Eddolls (Managing Director, HR and Diversity), Eric Hepburn (Director of Security for Parliament), Tracey Jessup (UK Parliament Chief Digital and Information Officer), Dr Edge Watchorn (Managing Director, Participation), Penny Young (Librarian and Managing Director, Research and Information) SECRETARY TO THE BOARD—Rhiannon Hollis

SPEAKER’S SECRETARY—Helen Wood SPEAKER’S COUNSEL—Saira Salimi SPEAKER’S CHAPLAIN—The Rev. Canon Patricia Hillas PARLIAMENTARY COMMISSIONER FOR STANDARDS—Kathryn Stone

Monday 30 November 2020

1 30 NOVEMBER 2020 2 THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES OFFICIAL REPORT

IN THE FIRST SESSION OF THE FIFTY-EIGHTH PARLIAMENT OF THE OF AND NORTHERN IRELAND [WHICH OPENED 17 DECEMBER 2019]

SIXTY-NINTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II

SIXTH SERIES VOLUME 685 SEVENTEENTH VOLUME OF SESSION 2019-2021

Mohammad Yasin [V]: The number of households House of Commons with children receiving universal credit who are subject to the benefit cap in my Bedford and Kempston Monday 30 November 2020 constituency rose by a staggering 186% between January and May this year, so will the Minister guarantee that the £20 UC uplift will reach the families who need it? The House met at half-past Two o’clock Dr Coffey: My understanding is that 460 households PRAYERS with children were subject to the UC cap in the Bedford local authority area. I am conscious that that is a higher number than the hon. Gentleman may wish, but I point [MR SPEAKER in the Chair] out to him that we can also make the effort to encourage Virtual participation in proceedings commenced (Order, people to go for vacancies, so that they can start to earn 4 June). more money, which at some point triggers a removal of [NB: [V] denotes a Member participating virtually.] the benefit cap.

Mr Speaker: I call the Chair of the Select Committee, Oral Answers to Questions .

Stephen Timms (East Ham) (Lab): The number of households affected by the cap has more than doubled WORK AND PENSIONS since the start of the pandemic, to 170,000. In addition, 160,000 households will come to the end of their nine- The Secretary of State was asked— month benefit cap grace period in the coming month. So will the Secretary of State consider extending the Benefit Cap: Families with Children grace period, to avoid cutting the benefits of hard-pressed families in the run-up to Christmas? Mohammad Yasin (Bedford) (Lab): What recent assessment she has made of the effect of the benefit cap Dr Coffey: The statistics indicate that 140,000 households on families with children. [909444] with children have their benefit capped; my understanding is that overall it is about 3.1% of the UC case load. I am The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Dr Thérèse conscious of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman Coffey): The most recent statistics, released last week, wrote to me last week, in his role as Chairman of the show that 140,000 households with children have had Select Committee, with a variety of questions on the benefit their benefit capped. The proportion capped remains cap. I will respond to him shortly, and I believe that is low by comparison with the overall universal credit case one of the questions he has asked me to address. load. New and existing claimants can benefit from a nine-month grace period when their benefit will not be Seema Malhotra (Feltham and Heston) (Lab/Co-op): capped if they have a sustained work history, and Some 85% of capped households have families with exemptions of course also remain in place for vulnerable children, and the Minister revealed last week that more claimants. Since the introduction of the cap, 190,000 than 160,000 households on UC could see their benefits households are no longer capped under such benefits capped in December, when their grace period comes to and nearly 80,000 are no longer capped under UC. an end. Does she feel no shame in plunging families and 3 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 4 children into hardship right before Christmas? Children Felicity Buchan (Kensington) (Con): What steps her are paying the price for their parents losing their jobs. Department is taking to encourage businesses to participate This is a ticking time bomb and she can stop it—it is her in the kickstart scheme. [909456] choice: will she scrap the cap? Mrs (Mid Derbyshire) (Con): What Dr Coffey: The cap has been in an important part of steps her Department is taking to encourage businesses policy in trying to stimulate entrance into work. I am to participate in the kickstart scheme. [909468] conscious that there are still only about half a million vacancies, compared with a significant number of people unemployed. However, I am sure the hon. Lady will Catherine West (Hornsey and Wood Green) (Lab): welcome, with me, some of the actions that are possible What steps her Department is taking to encourage for some of the most disadvantaged families, particularly employers to participate in the kickstart scheme. those supported by the £170 million covid winter grant, [909470] from which I understand her local council will benefit to the tune of about £823,000. Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab): What steps her Department is taking to encourage employers Housing Benefit: Supported Exempt Accommodation to participate in the Kickstart scheme. [909471]

Shabana Mahmood (Birmingham, Ladywood) (Lab): The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work What recent assessment she has made of the effectiveness and Pensions (Mims Davies):Weare working with employers of the more than minimal test for determining housing at a local, national and regional level, and we continue to benefit payments for supported exempt accommodation. have wide-ranging engagement to promote the scheme. [909445] Department for Work and Pensions officials are supporting applications through existing and growing partnerships. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work From day one, we have engaged with more than and Pensions (Will Quince): Local authorities apply the 300 stakeholders to ensure that the design of the kickstart minimal test for determining housing benefit for supported scheme delivers for our young people and employers housing accommodation. No assessment has been made alike. We continue to work with those in growing sectors of the effectiveness of the more than minimal test for to boost further opportunities, so far creating more housing benefit. However, we are reviewing the guidance than 4,000 applications and more than 20,000 approved to help improve consistency in decision making. kickstart roles—these numbers are growing daily.

Shabana Mahmood: The annual housing benefit bill Mark Menzies [V]: Last week, I met with Ameon, a in Birmingham for supported exempt accommodation building services company based in Fylde that is looking is now a massive £200 million. Too many housing to grow its team due to the recent construction boom in providers are exploiting the extremely weak regulations the north-west. In construction, qualifications are vital that govern the payment of enhanced housing benefit; to building a career. Will my hon. Friend outline how all they have to do is show that the support they provide the kickstart scheme interacts with sixth-form and further is more than minimal, and this is causing misery for education colleges to help enrolees to get valuable experience vulnerable tenants and the communities they live in. So of work and certified lifetime skills? will the Minister meet me to discuss the situation in Birmingham, and will he bring forward urgent proposals to change the situation and get a grip of this growing Mims Davies: Businesses in my hon. Friend’sconstituency national scandal? are coming forward daily, and DWP employer advisers are running daily sessions to get young people ready to Will Quince: Although we recognise there are problem be matched with placements. In addition, we have created areas, it is worth noting that the majority of supported new youth hubs and are working with local partners to housing is provided by well-run registered social landlords assist young people in removing any barriers. Alongside with a strong social mission. These are regulated by the that, we have allocated every kickstarter an additional Regulator of Social Housing, for registered charities, or £1,500 of employability support to ensure that they are by the Charity Commission. But I do recognise that ready to take up future work opportunities. there is a problem, and I would be happy to meet the hon. Lady. Alan Mak: Small and medium-sized enterprises in my Havant constituency are major local employers and Kickstart Scheme: Business Participation already support apprenticeships in large numbers. What steps is my hon. Friend’s Department taking to help Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con): What steps her Department kickstart gateway providers, particularly local authorities, is taking to encourage businesses to participate in the to help SMEs to benefit from the scheme? kickstart scheme. [909446] Mims Davies: We are determined that SMEs can take Alan Mak (Havant) (Con): What steps her Department part in kickstart. We are actively working with a range is taking to encourage businesses to participate in the of gateway organisations,including chambers of commerce, kickstart scheme. [909453] local authorities and charities, so that they can support smaller employers to offer kickstart roles. Guidance is Dr Kieran Mullan (Crewe and Nantwich) (Con): What regularly updated through the kickstart portal on gov.uk steps her Department is taking to encourage businesses to clarify the process and highlight changes, and SMEs to participate in the kickstart scheme. [909454] can access local employer contracts through those pages. 5 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 6

Dr Mullan: More than a dozen local businesses and they are already working directly on this in her Wood charities have put forward applications, working with Green jobcentre, and I encourage her to go to see it if myself and the South Cheshire chamber of commerce. she has not already done so. They are keen to get going and want to give young people opportunities. When might they be able to start Andrew Gwynne [V]: Partnership will be crucial to deploying the roles? drive down youth unemployment. I know that areas such as Greater Manchester are keen to understand Mims Davies: We are encouraging employers to create how kickstart performs locally to assist in making the a range of opportunities through the kickstart scheme initiative a success. Can the Minister give clarity as for all young people aged 16 to 24 who are at risk of to whether all the information relating to kickstart long-term unemployment, including those who have participation, which now comes in terms of gateway disabilities. Our work coaches will help to identify those organisations, number of job placements applied for, young people in need of any extra support available sector information and so on, will be shared with mayoral through the kickstart scheme and any other suitable combined authorities such as the Greater Manchester provision to support them. Meanwhile, my hon. Friend Combined Authority so that they are able to identify will be interested to know that the wide-ranging gaps that may then require more local partnership opportunities in his constituency go to the approval intervention? board this week for consideration. Mims Davies: I am meeting with the M9 Group of Felicity Buchan: The kickstart scheme is proving to Mayors once again and they have been absolutely crucial be a great success in my North Kensington jobcentre, in terms of local design, local mayors, local enterprise with many placements already made and a number—for partnerships, and our local chambers of commerce. The instance, in gyms—awaiting the end of lockdown. Does scheme has been designed with local authorities and my hon. Friend agree that it is critical that we get young local labour markets in mind. The hon. Member will be people into work, especially in , where the cost pleased to know that we are working closely with Stockport of living is so high? local authority, particularly with its job match service Mims Davies: I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend: around kickstart. it is vital that we support young people into employment. As we know, they are often the most affected in these Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab) [V]: I am times of economic uncertainty. My hon. Friend will be sure that, like me, the Minister wants to ensure that pleased to know that in addition to kickstart, the DWP kickstart works for disabled people. I would like to Kensington youth team is actively working with local know whether the Government have carried out an partners, such as the Rugby Portobello Trust, to help equality impact assessment of this scheme, and whether young people in her constituency back into work. they will publish it. Will they also commit to the following: support from Access to Work from day one of employment; Mrs Latham [V]: Young people are particularly at access to kickstart for recipients of employment and risk of being left behind as a result of this pandemic. support allowance; and disability awareness training for Will my hon. Friend assure me that as we get our all employment advisers? These small changes could economy moving again, she will ensure that younger help to ensure that every young person is able to benefit people have the chance to develop the skills that they from kickstart. need for future employment? Mims Davies: I thank the hon. Lady for her question. Mims Davies: The Secretary of State and I are determined I know that she is focused on young people, as am I. She that the kickstart scheme will provide for young people may have heard from the Secretary of State that we are a vital springboard to gain vital skills and experience in absolutely determined about this and that that work is fully subsidised six-month roles, which will help to build already embedded; it is part of kickstart. This placement their networks and their future opportunities before is treated like regular work, so all existing schemes such they move into long-term employment, apprenticeships, as Access to Work can be used, and our young people in traineeships or further training. I was delighted to be in jobcentres will be able to discuss all the options via the Derbyshire earlier this year to see exactly how the work coach. scheme will work on the ground. Vulnerable Families: Winter Support Catherine West: In the previous Parliament, Members will recall that the apprenticeship levy scheme was a bit of a flop. It let down businesses, young people, local (Mansfield) (Con): What steps she is authorities and colleges. With my local area seeing a taking with Cabinet colleagues to help vulnerable families 182% increase in unemployment, youngsters are having with the cost of food and bills in winter 2020-21. their lives blighted by joblessness now. What urgent [909447] action is being taken to work with local authorities, with employers and, of course, with colleges to promote Jack Lopresti (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Con): What apprenticeships as a viable future option? steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help vulnerable families with the cost of food and bills in Mims Davies: I thank the hon. Lady for that question. winter 2020-21. [909452] It is very important that kickstart works with all the opportunities that are available for young people, and The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Dr Thérèse my Department is working across Government to achieve Coffey): Earlier this month, I announced the £170 million that. The Haringey youth team is made up of 10 work covid winter grant scheme to help disadvantaged people, coaches focused on 18 to 24-year-olds and, absolutely, particularly children, through the challenging winter 7 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 8 months ahead, with food and essential utility bills over work coaches shows our focus on helping people to Christmas through to the end of March. The first half get back into work. Through Barnett consequentials, of funding for the scheme will reach local authorities in £36 million of funding will be available for equivalent this week. I am delighted to say that measures in Scotland next year. Other elements, such as Nottinghamshire has been allocated £2.3 million and the record increase in defence spending and the 10-point South Gloucestershire £569,000. plan for a green industrial revolution, will help to create new jobs that will positively impact Scotland and the Ben Bradley [V]: Does my right hon. Friend agree wider UK. that it is hugely important for the most vulnerable children—those whose welfare we know is a source of Patrick Grady: That will be news to my constituents worry for their teachers when they do not see them for in Glasgow North, who have had to cope with the weeks—that we can offer the best possible help in the closure of their jobcentre. That decision, along with the holidays, with proper structured and face-to-face support closure of 200 other jobcentres since 2010, is starting to for those children and their families such as that offered look a little bit short-sighted. The Chancellor says that through our holiday activity clubs? he will do everything it takes to support the estimated 2.6 million people who will be unemployed next year, so Dr Coffey: I agree with my hon. Friend and he looks where exactly are these job coaches going to be based, ready and dressed to support a holiday activity fund and will the Government prioritise the places that have when the opportunity comes along. Maintaining that already suffered from the closure of local jobcentres? important link over the longer holidays can be transformative for children’s health and educational Dr Coffey: I think it is the situation in Glasgow that a prospects, which is why I was proud to announce earlier number of jobcentres were consolidated into one area. I this month the £220 million expansion of the programme am a great believer that, instead of necessarily investing for the longer school holidays right throughout 2021. money in bricks and mortar, we should invest in the This will offer enriching activities such as arts and people who will provide that support. In Scotland more sports, which will help them to perform better in school, broadly, we are aiming to hire over 800 new work as well as a free nutritious meal while they are there. coaches; 400 have already been recruited to date, and I know that some of those are in Glasgow. Jack Lopresti: I welcome the announcement of the additional winter support funding across South Patricia Gibson: The Chancellor could have made the Gloucestershire, which will benefit lots of my constituents, £20 uplift to universal credit permanent, but instead he but can my right hon. Friend assure me that this additional has left households deeply concerned as they face funding will be spent efficiently by the councils and go the prospect of a cut to this vital lifeline in spring. We in to the people who need it? the have pressed UK Ministers on this matter countless times. Will the Secretary of Dr Coffey: My hon. Friend is absolutely right to State tell the House whether she discussed extending the stress that point. As I have already indicated, his council universal credit uplift with the Chancellor prior to the will receive just over half a million pounds. The grant spending review, and whether she believes that this has come with conditions to ensure that the money is extension should have been included? targeted towards the most disadvantaged people, and councils will be expected to report on that. They have a Dr Coffey: The hon. Lady will be aware that the wide range of information to help them, including temporary extension of the £20 universal credit uplift access to who is on benefits and other elements, to was made in line with the fiscal measures made earlier ensure that they reach people who really are disadvantaged this year. With regard to the benefit uprating, I put that at this time of year. through as that is the normal process that we go through, but, as has been indicated, we will continue to look at Spending Review 2020 this matter again in the new year.

Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP): What assessment Allan Dorans [V]: For the last eight months, around she has made of the implications for her Department’s 2 million disabled people and others on legacy benefits policies of the spending review 2020. [909448] have been discriminated against through being excluded from the £20 uplift granted to those receiving universal Patricia Gibson (North Ayrshire and Arran) (SNP): credit. The Chancellor’s failure to extend the £20 uplift What assessment she has made of the implications for to them is another humiliating insult to the most her Department’s policies of the spending review 2020. disadvantaged and vulnerable in our society, and only [909451] granting them an additional 37p a week from next April is nothing short of abhorrent. Does the Secretary of Allan Dorans (Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) (SNP): State think it is acceptable that people on legacy benefits What assessment she has made of the implications for are now facing a second year without sufficient financial her Department’s policies of the spending review 2020. support from this Government? [909460] Dr Coffey: Last year we actually increased benefits by The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Dr Thérèse inflation, and we have made sure that that has happened Coffey): The further funding for our plan for jobs— again so that there are no cuts in that regard. I am keen particularly the £2.9 billion for the restart programme to continue to do what we can to encourage people to that is focusing on those at risk of long-term unemployment move across to universal credit. There is only one group —as well as ongoing support for our other schemes and of claimants who are effectively barred from doing that, 9 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 10 and that will change in January next year. I genuinely Dr Coffey: The best way to get out of poverty is to get want to put across how important it is; by using things into work. I am very conscious that there are real such as Help to Claim and getting support directly, challenges right now, as we see an increasing number of people can often see that they will be considerably unemployed people. There are vacancies, but part of the better off under universal credit. Government’s job is to stimulate interest, which we are doing with a multibillion-pound investment in a variety Ms Karen Buck (Westminster North) (Lab): The of schemes, not only to create jobs, with kickstart, but Secretary of State announced that the local housing to make sure that people are ready to get back into allowance would again be frozen in cash terms in 2021, work. The idea is that we need to try to create confidence having only moved out of the previous freeze in March. within business, and that will be a key part of that. I am That means, as the Office for Budget Responsibility has sure the hon. Gentleman welcomed the money that pointed out, that LHA rates will fall back below the came through the Barnett consequentials that will support 30th percentile. The Government have cut local housing initiatives that the might wish to allowance consistently since 2010-11, including freezing undertake. it from 2016 to this year. Will the Secretary of State tell us what estimate the Department has made of the effect Neil Gray: The Secretary of State talks about jobs, on children in poverty of pushing the LHA back below yet just as employment is expected to reach 2.6 million, the 30th percentile? she plans, shamefully, to cut universal credit. Ahead of the spending review, a petition organised by the Disability Benefits Consortium and signed by 119,000 people was Dr Coffey: The decision made last year was to increase handed in to the Government, calling for the UC uplift to the 30th percentile in cash terms—that is around to be extended to legacy benefits. Given that living costs £1 billion of welfare support that has been added. On have increased dramatically for disabled people during consideration, we felt it was right to continue the cash the pandemic, why have the Government not acted? freeze as we recognise that around the country we are Does that not just summarise perfectly the tale of two seeing rents potentially going down, although I recognise Governments: a Scottish Government extending support that in some places they may continue to rise. Overall, to those who need it while the UK Government increases people have certainty in the amount of cash that they disability benefits by a derisory 37p? have. It is certainly not going back but about making sure that this is a permanent change and was not just a Dr Coffey: Last week I published the benefit uprating temporary one. statement, which indicated the inflation rise for benefits, as well as the 2.5% for state pensions. I am conscious Ms Buck: The fact is that the number of children in that a number of different things are going on with benefit poverty in the private rented sector rose by half a spending—my hon. Friend the Minister for Disabled million between 2010 and 2019, so whatever uplift has People, Health and Work just reminded me that benefit been put in over the past year is in that context and we spending on people with disabilities is up 5%. I think will see more children plunged into poverty as a result. there is a lack of understanding of what the spending Will the Secretary of State tell us exactly what steps she review is: it is not about budgetary measures, which will take to ensure that more children do not fall into tend to come with major fiscal events. As has been poverty as a result of the re-freezing of housing allowances? indicated before, the decision to consider the temporary uplift to universal credit will be made in the new year. Dr Coffey: I think I have already answered the hon. Lady. We have not reduced the LHA back to pre-covid Statutory Sick Pay: Covid-19 arrangements; we decided to make that change a permanent fixture but to freeze it at cash levels, recognising that, as Margaret Greenwood (Wirral West) (Lab): What I said, nearly £1 billion had been injected into welfare assessment she has made of the effectiveness of statutory support. Wewill continue to work on this issue throughout sick pay during the covid-19 outbreak. [909449] the country and I am keen to see what we can do on aspects of housing, which is why I am in regular Gerald Jones (Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) (Lab): conversation with the Ministry of Housing, Communities What assessment she has made of the effectiveness of and Local Government about how we do things such as statutory sick pay during the covid-19 outbreak. bring empty homes back into use as accommodation. I [909465] want to make sure that people have as much affordable housing as possible, and the increase to LHA of nearly Emma Hardy (Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle) £1 billion is one way to achieve that. (Lab): What assessment she has made of the effectiveness of statutory sick pay during the covid-19 outbreak. Neil Gray (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) [V]: Shortly, [909474] Nicola Sturgeon will outline in her conference speech plans to pay families who receive free school meals a The Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work £100 grant to help them through winter till the new, (Justin Tomlinson): Statutory sick pay provides a minimum game-changing Scottish child payment starts in the new level of income for employees who are unable to work. year. The Secretary of State’s Government could have We have made temporary changes to support people to matched the Scottish Government’santi-poverty ambition follow public health advice on coronavirus. at the spending review, but they failed even to make the UC uplift permanent or extend it to legacy benefits. Margaret Greenwood [V]: At £95.85 a week, the level Can she point to anything in the spending review that is of statutory sick pay is just too low, and it excludes there to address poverty? 2 million of those on the lowest pay. To qualify for the 11 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 12

Government’s test and trace support payment, people We have also introduced new processes to cut telephony need to be receiving social security payments like universal waiting times and enhanced our digital platforms. That credit; according to the Resolution Foundation, seven empowers our work coaches to engage with customers out of eight workers will not qualify for it. What assessment through appropriate channels, based on their knowledge have the Government made of the number of people of the customer and the local situation. who are ineligible for either statutory sick pay or the test and trace support payment? Will they commit to Andrew Jones: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer, increasing the level of statutory sick pay and extend it but in some parts of our country, including parts of to everyone, including the low-paid and the self-employed? Harrogate and Knaresborough, access to broadband or even a mobile phone signal can be quite limited. How is Justin Tomlinson: Those required to stay at home by he helping the excellent team at Harrogate jobcentre NHS Test and Trace could be eligible for the additional help those who cannot have a face-to-face appointment, £500 of financial support if they are on UC, working tax yet struggle to gain access to the internet? credits, employment and support allowance, jobseeker’s allowance, income support, housing benefit or pension Will Quince: My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and credit, and that is just part of our wider targeted welfare he is a huge advocate and supporter of his local jobcentre. safety net. We have made all our jobcentres covid-secure, including Harrogate, by introducing a range of safety measures, Gerald Jones [V]: For testing and tracing to work including screened desks, social distancing signage, effectively, people need the reassurance that they will be mandatory face covering for claimants, the provision of able to feed their families. Statutory sick pay is not hand sanitiser and regular touch-point cleaning, but for adequate to support people who need to self-isolate, so those who are unable to attend a jobcentre, and depending will the Minister give us hope that the Government will on their individual circumstances, alternative arrangements provide the necessary support to allow people not to can of course be put in place. have to choose between their health and their livelihoods? Work Coaches: Recruitment Justin Tomlinson: The hon. Member is right to highlight the importance of this matter, and that is why statutory Craig Tracey (North Warwickshire) (Con): What progress sick pay is part of the wider targeted financial support her Department has made in recruiting additional work that we offer. Depending on eligibility for individual coaches. [909455] households, they could also get support through universal The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work credit, new-style ESA or the self-employed income support and Pensions (Mims Davies): My hon. Friend will be scheme. aware that we have committed to recruit an additional 13,500 work coaches by March 2021, and we are on Emma Hardy [V]: I have been inundated with constituents track to meet that. Since July, 5,468 have been recruited, contacting me about low statutory sick pay and problems and I had the pleasure of meeting some of our new claiming the isolation benefit. One said: London recruits at the Department for Work and Pensions’ “I work as an agency nurse. If I don’t work I don’t get paid. My Caxton House. I was delighted by the additional positivity, husband tested positive who works and so I had to self-isolate. I fulfilled 3 of the 4 isolation criteria so I didn’t get a penny. As a diversity of skills and fresh knowledge they bring to the result I have lost 2 weeks wages. I am NOT happy. I can very DWP family. easily see why people don’t bother to get tested and go into work even if they have symptoms or have been in contact. Simply lack Craig Tracey: It is great to hear that progress is being of income.” made on that, and I am sure the Minister would agree What will the Minister do to stop people on low incomes that its success depends not just on quantity, but quality. being financially punished when they are trying to do Can she confirm what measures are being taken to the right thing? ensure that these coaches have the right experience and training to ensure that they provide real value? In Justin Tomlinson: Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs recognising that people will have vastly different needs, and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial what will be done to ensure that they are connected with Strategy rightly have been introducing stronger and the right coach, rather than just a coach? clearer guidance for employers. Employees who are not able to get reasonable adjustments put in place should Mims Davies: All our new work coaches receive six either speak to their union representatives or can go weeks’up-front training. That includes a week’sinduction, through ACAS to seek resolution. Nobody should be followed by an initial 25 days’ intensive training, 20 days’ going into work when they are meant to be self-isolating facilitated learning and five days’ consolidation. Their or are sick through covid. ongoing learning continues with access to action learning sets, bite-sized products and a learning hub to help Universal Credit Claimants: Covid-19 Support build their confidence and skills as they continue to grow in their role. My hon. Friend will be pleased to Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (Con): know that a second round of recruitment will kick off What steps her Department is taking to support universal in his region in the run-up to Christmas, looking for credit claimants as a result of restrictions on face-to face almost 200 more work coaches. appointments during the covid-19 outbreak. [909450] Employment: Young People The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Will Quince): Throughout the pandemic, Danny Kruger (Devizes) (Con): What steps her our covid-secure jobcentres have remained open to the Department is taking to incentivise employers to hire most vulnerable in society who require face-to-face support. young people. [909457] 13 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 14

Mark Jenkinson (Workington) (Con): What steps her being flexible and responsive in the way that the Minister Department is taking to incentivise employers to hire described. Will she join me in thanking the staff at the young people. [909463] UC service centre in St Austell, which I believe is the busiest and best performing service centre in the country, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work for their excellent hard work and dedication this year? and Pensions (Mims Davies): The new enhanced DWP Does she share my concern that all we hear from the youth offer commenced in September. That is in addition Opposition is dragging down the system, which is working to kickstart. We are increasing the support offered via a so much better than the legacy system we inherited, and 13-week youth employment programme to help young while they call for it to be scrapped, they never say what people gain the skills and experience that employers are they would replace it with? looking for. We are also working with our network of external partners to deliver 100 new youth hubs, co-located Mims Davies: I would be delighted to extend my and co-delivered locally, alongside expanding the number thanks to the dedicated and hard-working team at the of our youth employability work coaches. St Austell service centre and their colleagues across the rest of the DWP,who have played their part in processing Danny Kruger: I am encouraged to hear about the a 90% national increase in UC claims since March. I progress being made on the kickstart scheme. Does my agree with my hon. Friend’s point about the Opposition. hon. Friend agree that schemes that provide young Without the agile, digital universal credit system, we people with not only a job placement and coaching but simply would not have been able to quickly and safely wider personal skills training and even opportunities process millions of additional claims and get money for social action are more likely to be successful in and support to the people who needed it most in this equipping young people for their careers and incentivising health emergency. employers to keep them on? Access to Work Scheme Mims Davies: I absolutely agree, and I thank my hon. Friend for his work and interest in supporting young Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD): What steps she is taking people and focusing on their progression. I remind all to increase promotion of the Access to Work scheme to Members that, outside the 25 hours that a kickstart employers. [909461] work placement provides, jobseekers are encouraged by their work coaches to undertake other activities to help The Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work them progress towards long-term employment. (Justin Tomlinson): We are committed to ensuring that people with disabilities and long-term health conditions Mark Jenkinson: I thank my hon. Friend for that get the vital support that Access to Work provides. That answer and appreciate the work that the Department is includes working with more than 19,000 Disability doing in this important area. Youth unemployment Confident employers to enable them to promote access remains a challenge in Workington. Can she outline the to work through their networks. steps that her Department is taking to assist my young constituents at a local level? Wera Hobhouse: According to recent research, 42% of employers feel discouraged from hiring people with a Mims Davies: My hon. Friend will be pleased to hear disability because they are not confident about how to that his excellent Workington jobcentre has developed support their needs through the pandemic. Will the five mentoring circles for young people, covering topics Government consider fast-tracking Access to Work such as first impressions, transferable skills, interview applications for disabled people through the kickstart skills and CVs. There has been much interest by local scheme, as recommended by the charity Leonard Cheshire? employers in Workington to become part of kickstart, Justin Tomlinson: I thank the hon. Member for that with new job opportunities available across many sectors, question. I know I am meeting the hon. Member on 14 including roles in adult social care and additional placements December to discuss this in more detail. I am also working with businesses such as Tesco. meeting the new chief executive of Leonard Cheshire, so I will discuss that report in detail. I am very proud, as Self-Employed Universal Credit Claimants: Covid-19 a Government, that we have delivered record disability employment, and last year 43,000 people benefited from Steve Double (St Austell and Newquay) (Con): What Access to Work—up 20%. Through schemes such as steps her Department is taking to support self-employed Access to Work and Disability Confident, and our universal credit claimants during the covid-19 outbreak. highly trained and skilful work coaches, we will continue [909458] to engage with employers of all sizes to give them the confidence to take advantage of the huge wealth of The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work talent that is available with a diverse workforce. and Pensions (Mims Davies): The minimum income floor —the MIF—was first suspended in March this year, Plan for Jobs 2020 and we have now extended the suspension until the end of April 2021. This provides vital support for self-employed Christian Wakeford (Bury South) (Con): What steps claimants by ensuring that they receive a full UC award she is taking through the Plan for Jobs 2020 to help during these uncertain times. people of all ages back into work. [909464]

Steve Double: There is no doubt that the universal The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Dr Thérèse credit system has stood up well to the unprecedented Coffey): Our plan for jobs includes a range of targeted increase in demand placed on it this year, including by measures to help claimants of all ages. Our job entry 15 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 16 targeted support scheme—JETS—will help over 250,000 Jobcentres do work locally with external partners—with people of all ages who are unemployed for three months charities, local employers and key organisations across to re-engage with the labour market. Young people at and elsewhere—on local recovery plans and Bury jobcentre are currently receiving support from a local needs. specialist work coach, offering tailored support, and linking with local authorities to establish a virtual youth Unemployment Trends hub, Bury works. Rachel Hopkins (Luton South) (Lab): What recent Christian Wakeford: Mr Speaker, I hope you were assessment her Department has made of trends in the able to enjoy a happy Lancashire Day, although in a level of unemployment. [909467] covid-secure manner. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work Can I thank my right hon. Friend for the work she is and Pensions (Mims Davies): The latest ONS labour doing on getting young people back into work with market unemployment level in the east of England is programmes such as kickstart, and can I ask my right 137,000, and the national rate now stands at 4.8%. In hon. Friend to advise what work is being done to help addition to other measures, the DWP has established get those over 50 back into work also? “job help” and “employer help” websites to provide jobseekers locally and employers the opportunity to get Dr Coffey: There is a wide range of programmes guidance and tools to help people find new roles. where people can consider potential changes of career. That could be through SWAPs—sector-based work Rachel Hopkins: Nearly 15,000 people are relying on academy programmes, JETS, which is specifically targeted the inadequate support provided by universal credit. at older people, or kickstart, which tends to be focused So, to get a grip of the jobs crisis, what discussions is the on younger people. It is important to recognise that Minister having with the Chancellor regarding reasons there is a wide range of opportunities with which our for using the furlough scheme to keep people in work work coaches will be trying to help people at this and to incentivise employers to use it as flexibly as difficult time in their lives, but there are wider schemes possible—for example, to allow workers at risk of that people can consider. I am particularly excited by redundancy a trial period in a new role, rather than the proposals on things such proceeding to make them redundant? as Teach Last, because I think there is a lot of talent that could be used to help the next generation too. Mims Davies: That is absolutely the reason we have the job help website and at DWP our rapid response Unemployment: Covid-19 service. That is why we have our £30 billion plan for jobs, which includes the JETS—job entry targeted (Harlow) (Con): What assessment she support—scheme, the “find a job” support service and has made of the effect of the covid-19 outbreak on the new employer help and job help websites. levels of unemployment. [909466] Universal Credit and Working Tax Credit Reductions

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work (Nottingham South) (Lab): Whether and Pensions (Mims Davies): The latest Office for National she has made an assessment of the potential effect on Statistics labour market figures show a level of (a) working age and (b) child poverty of reducing unemployment of 1.6 million. This has increased by (i) universal credit and (ii) working tax credit by £20 a around 260,000 since the start of the pandemic. As part week in April 2021. [909472] of our plan for jobs package, the DWP has launched new programmes, including kickstart, JETS and the job The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work finding support service to help people who have been and Pensions (Will Quince): Analysis from Her Majesty’s impacted by the pandemic to find new employment. Treasury shows that the Government’s interventions have supported the poorest working households the most, Robert Halfon [V]: My hon. Friend will be aware that with those in the bottom 10% of the income distribution since March, because of covid, youth unemployment in seeing no reduction in income. As the Government have my constituency of Harlow has, sadly, risen by 134%. done throughout this crisis, they will continue to assess Will my hon. Friend pay tribute to the extraordinary how best to support low-income families, which is why work of the Harlow jobcentre, and to the education, we will look at the economic and health context in the skills and training provided by Harlow further education new year. college, which will be at the forefront of creating jobs? Can she set out how Harlow businesses can access the Lilian Greenwood: In 2018-19, 34.8% of children in kickstart scheme and the apprentice funding announced my constituency were living in poverty when housing by the Chancellor? costs were taken into account, and from January to August this year there was a 68% increase in the number Mims Davies: I join my right hon. Friend in paying of families claiming universal credit. Last week the tribute to the hard work and commitment of the Harlow Chancellor told us that the jobcentre staff throughout these difficult times. We are “economic emergency has only just begun”—[Official Report, in active discussions on a new DWP youth hub in 25 November 2020; Vol. 684, c. 827.] Harlow.Those at Harlow jobcentre, alongside our 600-plus and that unemployment is set to rise for months to other jobcentres, do an immense job daily, encouraging come. When the Minister knows that more and more and helping our most vulnerable claimants and supporting families in Nottingham are going to face wage cuts and all individuals based on their circumstances, and that is job losses, how can he argue that universal credit should where kickstart and other programmes will come in. be cut in just a few months’ time? 17 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 18

Will Quince: First, I do not recognise those figures The Government’s major announcement to tackle that and certainly nobody is making that case. The Chancellor was the restart programme, but analysis of the spending of the Exchequer has confirmed the universal credit review document shows that restart will not get up to uplift until March 2021, and it is right that we wait for scale until 2022, a full year after unemployment has more clarity on the national economic and social picture peaked, so what will the Government be doing next before assessing the best way to support low-income year, as unemployment peaks, to help people get through families moving forward. I would just gently say to the the crisis? hon. Lady that the uplift is just one part of a comprehensive package that we have put in place to support people Dr Coffey: The hon. Gentleman is right to draw through this most difficult of periods. attention to our plan for jobs. He will be aware that there are a number of schemes already under way, including Topical Questions kickstart, JETS and the sector-based work academy programme. It will take a little time to contract for the [909504] Steve McCabe (Birmingham, Selly Oak) (Lab): long-term unemployment programme, but I assure him If she will make a statement on her departmental that, compared with the last financial crisis just over a responsibilities. decade ago under the Labour Government, we have acted far more quickly in getting these employment The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Dr Thérèse contracts in place, because we need to make sure that Coffey): Last week I announced the outcome of my people do what they can to try to remain connected to annual uprating review. It delivers on our manifesto the labour market. commitment for the pensions triple lock, thus providing financial peace of mind for pensioners across the UK. Jonathan Reynolds: I am grateful to the Secretary of The basic and new state pension will be increased by State for that answer, but last week the Chancellor said 2.5% as that is the highest of the increases—inflation, that this is the biggest economic crisis for 300 years, and earnings or 2.5%—and it means that from April 2021 he is right, so I cannot understand how those same the yearly basic state pension will be worth around spending review documents show the Government cutting £2,050 more in cash terms than in 2010. universal credit next April—a £1,000-a-year cut, taken from 6 million families just when they need it most. No Steve McCabe: With Birmingham set for an extended Government since the great depression have cut period in tier 3, does the Secretary of State have any unemployment benefits during a crisis, so how can the plans to revisit the plight of pregnant mothers who are biggest economic crisis for 300 years be the time to eligible for universal credit but ineligible for statutory do so? maternity pay and therefore at a considerable financial disadvantage? Dr Coffey: As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Government introduced a raft of temporary measures Dr Coffey: Of course, being in tier 3 has been put to support those hardest hit, including the furlough forward by the Government, and I am very conscious of scheme, the self-employment income support scheme the efforts that were being made right across Birmingham and the £20 UC uplift. The Chancellor has confirmed and other areas of the west midlands to get out of that the UC uplift until March ’21, and it is right that we tier. As regards matters such as statutory maternity pay, wait for more clarity on the national economic and social a lot of these things continue to be under consideration, picture before assessing the best way to support low-income but I will consider the points the hon. Gentleman has families moving forward. That is exactly what I put in made. the written ministerial statement last week.

[909506] Damien Moore (Southport) (Con): Last week [909508] Mark Jenkinson (Workington) (Con): The many of my Southport constituents warmly welcomed Government’s investment in work coaches is hugely the creation of 250,000 green-collar jobs, but may I ask my welcome. I have seen for myself what an important role right hon. Friend to outline what more her Department they play in helping people into new roles and careers in is doing to encourage environmentally sustainable Workington. Will the Minister join me in encouraging investments by pension funds? people across the country to consider joining the DWP as a work coach? Dr Coffey: My hon. Friend rightly draws attention to this important point. As a result of actions by this The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work Government the UK is the first major economy to put and Pensions (Mims Davies): Work coaches are vital in climate risk and disclosure into statute for pension delivering our £30 billion plan for jobs. They have done schemes, leading the way on this issue, having already an amazing job already this year, with an additional legislated for net zero by 2050 and introduced ESG— almost 5,000 work coaches already recruited, another environment, social and governance—legislation through 1,700 agreed starts in the pipeline and recruitment open 2018 amendments to the occupational pension schemes again. Wewill be advertising for 3,000 more posts between investment regulations. I genuinely look forward to now and the end of January, in addition to the posts when we manage to complete the Pension Schemes Bill currently advertised. Search “work coach” on gov.uk to to bring all that into effect. apply.

Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op): [909505] Stuart C. McDonald (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth Last week the Chancellor described the scale of the and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP): Fixing the low uptake of unemployment crisis in the UK when he said that we pension credit could lift 450,000 pensioners out of could be facing 2.6 million people out of work next year. poverty and save taxpayers £4 billion of NHS and 19 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 20 social care costs. Unlike the Scottish Government, the may well happen, but that does rely on those agreements UK Government have no legal obligation to produce a being in place. That has been the policy on pensions for take-up plan, but they have a moral obligation to act, longer than any of us in this House have been alive, I so can we see a proper, published and ambitious expect, and it continues to be honoured. I am conscious take-up plan and targets, please? of what the hon. Member says, but there may well be other elements of support that the constituent to whom Dr Coffey: We want to make sure that all eligible she refers may be entitled. pensioners claim the pension credit to which they are rightly entitled, and we want to encourage people to [909516] Mike Hill (Hartlepool) (Lab): Some sources either call the free claim line—0800 999 1234—or go predict that 2.6 million people could be unemployed by online to gov.uk/pension-credit. We did a considerable next year. Five years on from universal credit being amount of advertising earlier in the year to encourage piloted in my constituency of Hartlepool, it still has that, and of course the BBC has, in effect, done some teething problems. Can the Minister assure the House free advertising, recognising that those people who have that the system will cope, should claimant numbers rise pension credit will also get a free TV licence. significantly?

[909511] Mark Menzies (Fylde) (Con) [V]: What steps Will Quince: The universal credit system has risen to will my hon. Friend take to ensure that the Department the challenge, going up from 2.2 million to 5.8 million works with job coaches and jobcentres to help people claimants. That is why we have this modern, agile, find new employment over the coming months? dynamic system. It has performed incredibly well and I have no doubt that it will continue to do so. Mims Davies: As part of our plan for jobs, the new job-finding support and JETS services will, crucially, T15. [909515] Rob Roberts (Delyn) (Con): Further to help jobseekers move back into employment as quickly the Secretary of State’s previous answer, take-up of as possible, helping them to identify sectors that could pension credit remains low, which is a particular be growing or new to them. I met our JETS providers challenge in my Delyn constituency, which has a much just last week to hear some of their early success stories higher proportion of over-65s than average. Will she from across England and Wales. JETS rolls out in commit to meeting me to discuss how we can use places Scotland in early January. such as the BBC and other Government agencies to enhance the take-up of this important benefit? [909512] Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con): Is there any evidence that the financial effects of Dr Coffey: I know that the Pensions Minister—the coronavirus have been less severe on the recipients of Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, my legacy benefits than those on universal credit? hon. Friend the Member for Hexham (Guy Opperman)— will be delighted to meet my hon. Friend and to look at The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work this matter. We take this absolutely seriously, in terms of and Pensions (Will Quince): First, let me say that I wanting people to get the benefits to which they are appreciate that many people are facing financial disruption entitled, and I am sure that he, as a very diligent local due to the pandemic, and the Government have put an MP, will be able to use every lever that he has to unprecedented package of support in place. The universal improve the prospects of his constituents. credit uplift was designed to be targeted at those facing the most financial disruption, but most working-age [909520] Jonathan Gullis (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Con): legacy benefits will be increased in April next year in The £170 million winter support package recently line with inflation, and legacy benefits recipients could announced by my right hon. Friend will be a lifeline for benefit from the local housing allowance or, indeed, the families hardest hit by covid-19 in Stoke-on-Trent local welfare assistance schemes. I remind the House North, Kidsgrove and Talke, so will she ensure that that claimants on legacy benefits can make a claim to community groups like the pop-up pantry in Chell and universal credit if they believe they would be better off, the Salvation Armies in Smallthorne, Kidsgrove and but I would encourage them to check their eligibility as Tunstall get the support they need in order to support their legacy benefit entitlement will cease on application. the most vulnerable in my community?

[909513] Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Streatham) (Lab): Eighty- Will Quince: Our £170 million covid winter grant two-year-old Monica Philip emigrated to the UK as part scheme will enable local authorities to support vulnerable of the Windrush generation and worked for 37 years as households this winter with food and key utilities. As a civil servant. She now lives on a UK state pension of the Secretary of State has made clear,there are conditions, just £74.11p a week because she returned to Antigua to but I would certainly encourage local authorities to care for her ailing mother. Pensioners such as Monica work with partners on the ground, making sure that this came to the UK at the invitation of the British Government, support reaches people across our communities. but they are now being penalised for returning to their country of birth, sometimes not through their own Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab): The choice. Will the Secretary of State review the unfair Minister will be aware that, according to the Office for policy that sees half a million UK state pensioners National Statistics, the national average increase in denied annual increases to their UK state pension? unemployment is 24%, but for over-50s, it has risen by a third. Yet vacancies have fallen by 278,000 since the Dr Coffey: The situation that happens with aspects of pre-pandemic period. Does the Minister agree that there pensions is quite complicated and often these are reciprocal are approximately a quarter of a million people over 50 arrangements, so that is where such things as aggregation who will never find work again? 21 Oral Answers 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Oral Answers 22

Mims Davies: The latest ONS labour market data organisations and disability stakeholder groups on the puts the unemployment level in the west midlands region Green Paper to shape the way we provide financial at 145,000. Due to the pandemic, this rate has risen support and general support across our services. However, nationally. DWP is working across Government and I remind the hon. Gentleman that this year, there has looking very closely at these figures, using, for example, been a 5% increase—up to £20 billion—in supporting on older workers, our “Fuller Working Lives” plan. We people with disabilities through benefits, and that the are working with external organisations and partners to legacy benefit increases also impacted on the changes in ensure a local and tailored response for all communities the local housing allowance. There has also been the so that people are not left behind. As the hon. Member increase in discretionary housing support, the various will have heard, we are recruiting additional work coaches employment support schemes and additional support as well to make sure that new and existing claimants get from local authorities, from which many disabled people the opportunity to return to fulfilling work. will have benefited.

Jonathan Edwards (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) Mr Speaker: I say thank you to Secretary of State (Ind):Thedecisiontodenydisabledpeopleonlegacybenefits Coffey and her team—we have cleared everyone on the the crucial £20 uplift has been a bitter blow to those who list. Thank you, everybody—we have all worked well already face years of navigating barriers in the welfare together. system. Will the Department commit to using the welfare Green Paper and the national disability strategy to ensure In order to allow the safe exit of hon. Members that disabled people have access to a welfare system that participating in this item of business and the safe arrival provides financial security without cruel sanctions? of those participating in the next, I am suspending the House for three minutes. The Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work (Justin Tomlinson): The Department for Work and Pensions 3.30 pm will work with disabled people, disabled people’s Sitting suspended. 23 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 24 Jamaica Scheduled Mass Deportation: Jamaica some lesser offences have already served their custodial sentence? Does he recognise the message that that sends about the consequences of being a white offender or a 3.33 pm black offender, given the racial disparities in sentencing? Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Streatham) (Lab)(Urgent Question): I hope the Minister agrees that no one is above the To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department law, not even the Government, and that no one is to make a statement on the scheduled mass deportation beneath adequate defence and proper legal representation, by charter plane to Jamaica. not even those born in other countries. Will he therefore outline whether the deportees have been granted access The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the to adequate legal advice and representation, and whether Home Department (Chris Philp): This charter flight to any have been allowed to appeal this decision, particularly Jamaica is specifically to remove foreign criminals. The given the lockdown restrictions and the likelihood that offences committed by the individuals on this flight they would have no access to legal aid? include sexual assault against children, murder, rape, On being above the law, the Equality and Human drug dealing and violent crime. Those are serious offences, Rights Commission recently found that the Home Office which have a real and lasting impact on the victims and unlawfully ignored warnings that the hostile environment on our communities. This flight is about criminality, not was discriminatory. Can the Minister explain why the nationality. Let me emphasise: it has nothing to do with Government are so comfortable continuing with a key the terrible wrongs faced by the Windrush generation. part of the hostile environment policy when it has been Despite the extensive lobbying by some, who claim that so damningly called into question? Has he considered the flight is about the Windrush generation, it is not. the 31 children who will be impacted by having a parent Not a single individual on the flight is eligible for the removed from this country? Windrush scheme. They are all Jamaican citizens and no one on the flight was born in the United Kingdom. The Home Office has got it wrong again and again on They are all foreign national offenders who between them immigration. Will it therefore think again, halt this have served 228 years plus a life sentence in prison. deportation flight and finally end the illegal hostile environment? It is a long-standing Government policy that any foreign national offender will be considered for deportation. Chris Philp: The hon. Lady speaks of what she calls Under the UK Borders Act 2007, which was introduced mass deportations. I have already pointed out that, over and passed by a Labour Government with the votes of the last year, of the 5,800 people who have been removed, a number of hon. Members who are present today, a only 33 have been of Jamaican nationality. deportation order must be made where a foreign national offender has been convicted of an offence and received The hon. Lady mentioned black versus white. She was a custodial sentence of 12 months or more. Under the insinuating in her question that there was some element Immigration Act 1971, FNOs who have caused serious of underlying racism in this, but I have pointed out harm or are persistent offenders are also eligible for already that the vast majority of people who have been consideration. removed this year have been removed to European countries. This policy applies to people from Spain, France and Let me put this flight in context. In the year ending Italy as much as it does to people from Jamaica. There June 2020, there were 5,208 enforced returns, of which is no element of discrimination in this policy whatever, 2,630, or over half, were to European Union countries, and the hon. Lady was completely wrong to insinuate and only 33 out of over 5,000 were to Jamaica—less that, in some way, there was. than 1%. During the pandemic, we have continued with returns and deportations on scheduled flights and on The hon. Lady asked about double jeopardy. She said over 30 charter flights to countries including Albania, that these people have been punished by a prison sentence France, Germany, Ghana, Lithuania, Nigeria, Poland already, but I say this: if somebody comes to this country, and Spain, none of which, I notice, provoked an urgent commits a serious criminal offence and puts our constituents question. The clear majority of the charter flights this at risk, it is right that, once they have served their year have been to European countries. sentence, or a great part of it, they should be removed. Those being deported have ample opportunity to It is not just me who thinks that; it is the Labour raise reasons why they should not be. We are, however, Members who voted for this law in 2007 who think that, already seeing a number of last-minute legal claims, some of whom are sitting in this Chamber today. including, in the last few days, by a convicted murderer, The hon. Lady mentioned the EHRCand the compliant who has now been removed from the flight. environment. This case is nothing to do with the compliant This Government’s priority is keeping the people of environment; it is about implementing the Borders Act 2007, this country safe, and we make no apology—no apology— as we are obliged to do. In terms of due process, there for seeking to remove dangerous foreign criminals. Any are ample opportunities to complain and appeal, as Member of this House with the safety of their constituents many people do, and I have mentioned already the case at heart would do exactly the same. of a murderer who was taken off the flight just a few days ago following legal appeals. Bell Ribeiro-Addy: First, no one opposing this flight We are protecting our fellow citizens, and I suggest condones any of the crimes that these individuals have that the hon. Lady takes a similar approach. been found guilty of. It is the process of mass deportation that is fundamentally wrong, and it is notorious for (Harrow East) (Con) [V]: Will my bundling people out of the country without due process. hon. Friend make it clear that people who come to the Does the Minister recognise that this decision effectively United Kingdom to contribute to our economy and our amounts to double jeopardy when those involved in society are most welcome, but that those who come 25 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 26 Jamaica Jamaica from foreign countries and then commit the most heinous It has also been reported that the Home Office has of crimes, be it murder, sexual violence, violence against reached an agreement with the Jamaican Government children or violence against the person, can expect to that people who left Jamaica as children will no longer experience the full force of law and then be required to be repatriated. Can the Minister confirm whether this is leave the country at the end of their sentence? Does he the case, and can he also confirm what age someone agree that, far from the public disagreeing with that, would need to be to have been determined to be a child? they are wholly in support of it and expect the Government to take this action to keep society safe? Chris Philp: The hon. Lady, the shadow Minister, asks about the Windrush scheme. As she will be aware, Chris Philp: My hon. Friend, as always, puts it very over 6,300 people have now been given citizenship, well. Of course, when people come to this country as quite rightly, and 13,300 documents have been issued to immigrants and make a contribution—to academia, to those people who suffered terrible wrongs in the past. In the work environment, and in myriad other ways—we terms of compensation, 226 people have now received welcome them with open arms. Our new points-based claims totalling in excess of £2.1 million, with a great system, which will become active in just a few days’ deal more to pay out. I can also confirm that all of these time, does precisely that. However,as he says, if somebody cases on the plane have been individually assessed, and comes to this country and enjoys our hospitality, but none of them is eligible for the Windrush compensation abuses that hospitality by committing a serious criminal scheme. offence, they can, should, and will be removed in the The hon. Lady spent a great deal of time talking interests of public protection. about Windrush during her question, but I say again—as I said in my letter to her—that it is completely wrong to Holly Lynch (Halifax) (Lab): I first pay tribute to my conflate the people who were the victims of terrible hon. Friend the Member for Streatham (Bell Ribeiro-Addy) injustice in the Windrush cases with these cases, who for having secured such an important and time-critical are nothing to do with Windrush, have no Windrush urgent question. I also pay tribute to my right hon. entitlement at all, and have committed terrible criminal Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy) for his offences. She also asks about the age eligibility. The previous work and advocacy in this important area. Government are fully committed to discharging their The news of this flight comes just days after the obligation under the 2007 Act, which is to seek to Equality and Human Rights Commission found that remove anyone of any age who has been sentenced to a the Government, as we have heard, acted unlawfully in custodial term of over 12 months. That has been, is, and their treatment of the Windrush generation through the will remain our policy. hostile environment. As Caroline Waters, the chair of I am not going to comment on the individual operational the EHRC, said, circumstances surrounding any particular flight, but we “The treatment of the Windrush generation as a result of are fully committed to the 2007 Act’s provisions. In hostile environment policies was a shameful stain on British relation to children, there is a well defined test around history.” family rights and how they interact with removal. It is There is no clear timetable for implementing the possible for people to go to the courts if they want recommendations of the Wendy Williams report, and to test their family rights against the Government’s with just 12% of applicants having received a payment obligations to remove them. But we are clear that our and at least nine people having died waiting, the Windrush priority is protecting British citizens from dangerous compensation scheme is failing badly. In his written criminals, and that is what we are doing. response to me over the weekend, the Minister said that it is wrong and offensive to conflate this returns flight Ben Bradley (Mansfield) (Con) [V]: The overwhelming with the Windrush scandal, but I am afraid that given majority of Mansfield residents will feel that foreign this Government’strack record, their failings on Windrush criminals of any nationality who violate our laws and and the delays in the compensation scheme, we simply our values should be removed from this country. Will have no faith that this Government have done their due my hon. Friend assure me and my constituents that it is diligence in relation to those on this scheduled flight, public safety that is at the front of his mind; will he be and we would not be doing ours if we did not ask the clear that Labour’s attempts to draw everything into an questions. argument about race are both plainly wrong and quite Of course, we recognise that those who engage in brazenly an attempt to silence people it disagrees with; violent and criminal acts must face justice. However, we and will he call out those celebrities who have spent the also hear that at least one person on that flight has a weekend trying to use their public profiles to shame Windrush generation grandfather; there is another whose businesses into not helping to remove murderers from great-aunt was on the HMT Windrush, and another the UK? whose grandfather fought in the second world war for Britain. It is clear that we have not yet established just Chris Philp: I agree with my hon. Friend’s sentiments. how far the consequences of the Windrush injustice This is about protecting the British public. I am aware extend. With that in mind, what assessment has been of cases where people have been removed from the made to ensure that none of those scheduled to be on deportation or removal programme owing to various the flight are eligible under the Windrush scheme, or appeals and have then gone on to commit crimes against have been affected by the wider immigration injustices our fellow citizens. It is precisely the kind of repeat that impacted the victims of the Windrush scandal? crimes that damage our fellow citizens, our constituents, What assurances can the Minister provide the House that we are seeking to prevent. that the mandatory duty to safeguard and promote the In relation to the celebrities and everything they have welfare of the children left behind, who are innocent in been saying, they should pay attention to the fact that, this, has been considered? as I said before, the majority of removals and deportations 27 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 28 Jamaica Jamaica [Chris Philp] (Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford) (Lab): The Minister will understand that there is a are to European countries, and any suggestion that backdrop of distrust among the communities affected there is a racial element to this is obviously confounded by the Windrush scandal that he should be trying to by a straightforward look at the facts. Over half of the address in order to build confidence in deportation flights are to European countries.Less than 1% of removals decisions. Given the Home Office’s response to a previous in the past year have been to Jamaica, and anyone Select Committee report on Windrush that identified who is assisting the Home Office in those flights is 32 people who had been deported as deemed foreign doing a service to the country by protecting our fellow national offenders but who were likely to be part of the citizens. Windrush generation and whose circumstances had never been investigated, and given that the National Audit Stuart C. McDonald (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Office and Wendy Williams have recommended that the Kirkintilloch East) (SNP) [V]: While some deportation circumstances of those cases should be investigated, decisions are clear cut, many more involve careful balancing will he now do so? exercises weighing up a whole range of factors.The problem is that it is very difficult to trust the Home Office to Chris Philp: Let me start by offering the Home Affairs make those judgment calls as week after week its policies Committee Chairman reassurance in regard to the flight and practices are torn to pieces in report after report. this week. All the people in scope for that flight have Stephen Shaw, in his Government-commissioned report, had their cases individually checked, and none of them said that the deportation and removal of people brought is in the scope of the Windrush compensation scheme. up here from a young age was “deeply troubling” and As I have said, none was born in the United Kingdom. entirely “disproportionate”. Why not act on that advice So those checks that she rightly calls for have been and exclude in law the deportation of those who have diligently carried out. In relation to the 32 historical spent their childhood years here? cases that she refers to, I will look into that and write More broadly, why not commission Stephen Shaw to to her. review the whole framework on deportation ? Until something like that happens, we simply cannot and will Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con): not have any faith in those decisions. The Minister appears I find it extraordinary that the Opposition should choose to repeatedly conflate deportations and removals, so can an urgent question to plead the case for serious foreign he give us the separate figures for deportations only? criminals rather than standing up for the victims of crime, particularly on a day when an urgent question Chris Philp: In relation to deportations only, the might be more appropriate on the issue of the imminent 1% figure is very similar to the figure for removals more and extraordinarily early release of a woman, Mairead generally. In relation to the hon. Gentleman’s point Philpott, who was jailed for the killing of six of her own about Stephen Shaw,we did not accept his recommendation children. Can my hon. Friend— about age back in 2018, and we do not accept it now. We remain fully committed to implementing the obligations Mr Speaker: Order. I believe that it was correct to imposed by the UK Borders Act 2007, as passed by the have this urgent question. Also, there is no alternative last Labour Government. In terms of due process and urgent question. Maybe if the hon. Gentleman had put decision making, of course there is an extensive set of legal one in, we could have considered it. processes that anyone is able to avail themselves of, and they frequently do. I mentioned that just a few days ago Tim Loughton: I am not criticising you, Mr Speaker; I somebody convicted of murder got themselves taken off am just questioning priorities. Can I ask the Minister the flight by launching just such an appeal, so there are how much we are spending already on housing these plenty of processes—I say that advisedly—that people foreign criminals in the UK, and how much taxpayers’ can avail themselves of if they disagree with any particular money is being wasted on chartering places on flights decision. that are not taken, often at the last minute?

Jack Brereton (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Con): The Chris Philp: I certainly concur that Mr Speaker is Opposition have been very clear that they oppose the wholly infallible in all matters. Government’s efforts to deport foreign criminals who I share my hon. Friend’s surprise at this question pose a risk to the British public and the people of Stoke-on- being tabled when the Government are simply discharging Trent. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Conservative not only their duty but their obligation under an Act of party is the only party committed to law and order, Parliament passed by the last Labour Government, evidenced further by our extra funding for more police? with the votes of a number of Members who are sitting on the Opposition side of the Chamber this afternoon. Chris Philp: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. He We are doing the right thing by protecting our fellow is a great champion for the people of Stoke-on-Trent citizens. Many of the people concerned were living in and in ensuring their safety as well. It is very disappointing the community rather than being housed. Our principal to hear Labour Members questioning the removal objective is public safety rather than finances, but his last of dangerous foreign nationals, although, interestingly, point about charter flights is right. Wesuffer astonishingly they are only raising it now, when we have had more high levels of legal attrition on these flights, largely as a than 30 charter flights go this year. This is the first time result of legal claims often made at the very last minute— they have thought to raise this issue. This Government sometimes I wonder if they are intentionally made at will defend the public and stand up for the safety the last minute—and we need to tighten up our legal of our constituents, and that is what we will do system. As my hon. Friend may know, the Government on Wednesday. intend to legislate next year to do exactly that. 29 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 30 Jamaica Jamaica Mr (Orkney and Shetland) (LD): criminal activity,breaks our laws and abuses our hospitality Even if the Home Office were halfway competent in has no place in our society, and that the Government dealing with these matters, this area would still be are therefore doing the correct thing in the interests of absolutely fraught with difficulties, as the figures given national security by removing these people from our to the House by the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee country? indicate. It has been reported that the Government have now entered into an agreement with the Government of Chris Philp: Yes, I agree entirely. As I have said Jamaica regarding this flight and others. When will that repeatedly, we are protecting our constituents from agreement be published? harm. These are dangerous offenders, whose offences including murder,rape and sexual assault against children. Chris Philp: We do not have any formal agreements. It would be irresponsible of us to allow people such as What we have is an ongoing dialogue about any individual that to remain in this country when they are not nationals flight or any individual operational circumstance, but of the United Kingdom. let me make it completely clear that our commitment to discharging our duty under the 2007 Act, which is to Afzal Khan (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab) [V]: Last seek to deport anyone committing an offence of over a week, the Equality and Human Rights Commission one-year sentence, regardless of their age on arrival, concluded that the hostile environment policies pursued remains steadfastly in place. by this Government broke equalities law. Specifically, the EHRC noted: Rob Butler (Aylesbury) (Con): As a magistrate and “When negative equality impacts were identified by the Home on many prison visits, I have frequently encountered Office and stakeholders, they were repeatedly ignored, dismissed, criminals who came to the UK from overseas and or their severity disregarded”. committed serious offences that caused pain, suffering With that in mind, can the Minister say with absolute and long-lasting psychological harm. Does my hon. certainty that neither his Department nor any stakeholders Friend agree that the responsibility of all of us across have identified any negative equality impacts with this this House is to stand up for the victims of those scheduled deportation flight? If he cannot, does he not crimes? then agree that the flight should be halted immediately?

Chris Philp: My hon. Friend, speaking as a magistrate, Chris Philp: This flight and others like it are not part hits the nail exactly on the head. The principal concern of the compliant environment to which the EHRC report of Members of Parliament should be protecting the victims referred. This is taking place as a statutory obligation of crime and protecting our constituents from the harm under an Act of Parliament that was passed, as I have that might otherwise be done to them by foreign national said already, by the last Labour Government. I am offenders. That is precisely why it is right to remove confident that they gave careful consideration to the foreign national offenders—so that they cannot commit equalities implications of the Act of Parliament that any more offences against our constituents. they passed. As I have also said, we have looked at each case individually and are confident—we know,in fact—that Ms Diane Abbott (Hackney North and Stoke Newington) none of these cases are Windrush eligible. On the question (Lab) [V]: Does the Minister accept that many people of the equalities impact more widely, I have already feel that this mass deportation is both cruel and potentially pointed out two or three times that the majority of dangerous: cruel because he is separating, just weeks people subject to these charter flight deportations and from Christmas, families of people who have served removals are going to the European Union, which their sentence; and possibly dangerous because he is should tell the hon. Member a great deal. deporting vulnerable people—communities that we know are particularly vulnerable to coronavirus—in the middle Caroline Nokes (Romsey and Southampton North) of a pandemic? (Con) [V]: Can my hon. Friend explain what level of discretion the 2007 Act gives Ministers and reassure the Chris Philp: The right hon. Lady asks whether this is House that both he and my right hon. Friend the Home the right thing to do. The answer to that question is Secretary have considered every single case on this categorically yes—an answer that she herself gave when flight and deem them to be suitable for deportation she voted in 2007 for the Act of Parliament under which under the conditions of that Act? the Government are required to carry out these deportations. The right hon. Lady voted for this measure Chris Philp: We are very mindful of the obligations herself. In relation to coronavirus risks, as I said already, placed upon the Home Office and the Government by we have been carrying out these flights throughout the the terms of the 2007 Act, and we seek to fully abide by entire summer and autumn period, using methods that its terms. As I said, everyone in the scope of the charter the High Court has found to be covid-safe in immigration flight going in a few days’ time has been very carefully removal centres, such as reverse cohorting, distancing, considered to ensure that they are fully compliant with frequent testing, temperature checks and so on and so the obligations imposed by the Act. forth. I therefore do not accept the right hon. Lady’s point. Let me saythis again: the overwhelming consideration Abena Oppong-Asare (Erith and Thamesmead) (Lab): for Members of this House should be the protection of The cost of deportation—economic, ethical and, most our constituents. importantly,human—cannot be justified. Can the Minister confirm that an equalities impact assessment has been Marco Longhi (Dudley North) (Con): Does my hon. completed regarding these proposed deportations, to Friend agree with me and my constituents in Dudley North demonstrate that due regard has been paid to equalities that any person who comes to this country, engages in legislation? 31 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 32 Jamaica Jamaica Chris Philp: The hon. Lady talks about human cost. Chris Philp: My hon. Friend is right to raise concerns Let me tell her about the human cost caused by these about abuse of legal process. We find, not just in this criminals. What about the children who have been sexually context but across the entire immigration system, that assaulted by these criminals? What about the victims last-minute claims are made—often immediately before who have been murdered by these people? What about removal or deportation, often 24 hours in advance—even the victims of violent assault? What about the people though there has been plenty of opportunity to make whose lives have been ruined by drug addiction or who such a claim previously, apparently with the express have been the victims of rape? What about those human intention of frustrating the process. There is also an tragedies? The hon. Lady and many Opposition Members opportunity for people to raise repeated claims in sequence appear to have nothing whatsoever to say about the and sometimes over a period of many years in a manner human tragedy of the victims. Let us put the victims at that would appear to me to be potentially vexatious. the centre of today’s debate. They are the people we That is something that the Government need to act on should be standing up for and speaking for. This to sort out—my hon. Friend is right—and we do intend Government will protect them. Why will she not? to legislate next year to close precisely the problematic areas to which he rightly refers. Christian Wakeford (Bury South) (Con): Welcome to the modern Labour party—more concerned about stopping Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab): My constituent the deportation of foreign criminals than keeping our on this flight came to the UK in 1997 aged 26. He streets safe. We on the Government Benches do take that married a British citizen in 2004 and has two children obligation and duty seriously; that is why we are taking aged 21 and 18. He was in prison for two years, and had these measures. I thank my hon. Friend for all the work he not been he would have been able to complete the that he is doing to deport these foreign serious criminals process of indefinite leave to remain. His life was under and make our country safer. Can he confirm that this threat when he was in Jamaica. It will be under threat if Government are removing foreign criminals from the he is returned there. He is on suicide watch at the UK every week and that this flight is no different? moment and has an active asylum claim. He was picked up last week and due to be deported this week. Will the Chris Philp: My hon. Friend is absolutely right: it is Minister at least agree that this is not a proportionate this Conservative Government who are prioritising the reaction and that this flight should be delayed at least to victims and public safety. He is also right to say that give the opportunity for proper legal advice to be taken? the deportation of foreign national offenders, as we are required to do by law, happens as a matter of routine, Chris Philp: I have the particulars of the case in front week in, week out. of me. He was sentenced to four years and served two. The offences were very serious indeed. No, we certainly Dr Philippa Whitford (Central Ayrshire) (SNP) [V]: will not be stopping the flight, but I do know that the Happy St Andrew’s day, Mr Speaker. This is not just hon. Gentleman has written to me about this particular about whether people are themselves connected to the case and I will, of course, respond to his letter. Windrush generation. Deporting those who have been in the UK since childhood shows that the lessons of Gareth Johnson (Dartford) (Con): Will the Minister Windrush have not been learned. The Minister keeps commit to review any law that prevents the deportation referring to murderers and rapists, yet deportation applies of these people, because no law should stop us removing to those with sentences as short as 12 months. Is it not foreign nationals who have committed very serious criminal time to provide legislative certainty and protection for offences, thereby undermining the very kindness and those who come to the UK as children? Can the Minister the hospitality that we have shown them and abusing say how many were originally included in this flight? the process in doing so? Chris Philp: I entirely agree with my hon. Friend and Chris Philp: I would like to reciprocate by wishing the I can give him that assurance. He puts it very well. We hon. Lady a happy St Andrew’s day as well; I am sure have extended a welcome and hospitality to people who the whole House will join me in that. come to this country, and rightly so. We have a long When it comes to removing people who are not and proud history of welcoming people who make a British citizens—who are citizens of another country—but contribution to our society, and this Government are who put our constituents at risk, it is right that we move the first to recognise the enormous contribution that to deport as we currently do. The debate about whether people who have come to this country as immigrants some age threshold is appropriate is one that this House have made, and the points-based system embraces that had in 2007, when the House rightly decided that anyone very principle. Where people abuse our hospitality by who is convicted of an offence and sentenced to more committing serious criminal offences, it is right that we than a year is in scope. [Interruption.] The right hon. remove them. Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy) says something from a sedentary position. He himself voted for that Dawn Butler (Brent Central) (Lab) [V]: The Minister Act, so he expressed his opinion on this matter in the does not seem to understand the sensitivities around the Division Lobby back in 2007. Windrush scandal, but nobody is arguing about deporting very serious violent criminals. Can the Minister say with Brendan Clarke-Smith (Bassetlaw) (Con): I fully support certainty that nobody on this flight has been committed what my hon. Friend is doing to deport these dangerous of just driving offences or has been groomed as a child? criminals and to keep people in this country safe. Is he as concerned as I am by reports that activist lawyers are Chris Philp: As the hon. Lady will know,only people who trying to thwart the Government’s legal efforts to deport have been sentenced to a custodial sentence of a year or these criminals and keep the British people safe? more are eligible, so, clearly, minor driving offences are 33 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 34 Jamaica Jamaica outside the scope of that. It applies only to people who (Vauxhall) (Lab/Co-op) [V]: I have have been sentenced to a year or more in prison. She been contacted by many of my constituents in Vauxhall knows that very well because she voted for the Act of who are concerned about these deportations. Given the Parliament in 2007 that instituted these measures. Government’s track record on Windrush and the delay in implementing the lessons from the Wendy Williams Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con): The fact that it is in review, it is understandable that hon. Members in this any way controversial to deport foreign nationals who House seek assurances and more detailed information commit serious offences and are persistent offenders from the Minister in regard to this deportation. The Home shows just what a farce the Labour party has become in Secretary has rightly committed to implement all of recent years—Lord knows what the public must think the 30 recommendations in that review. Will the Minister of this exchange. May I say to the Minister that the confirm how many recommendations have been overwhelming majority of my constituents will absolutely implemented? Will he today give a clear timetable for support what he is doing? Actually, they would want when each of the 30 recommendations will be implemented? him to ignore the siren voices from the party opposite, and make it easier to deport foreign nationals who Chris Philp: I have already given the House a clear commit offences—perhaps to take in those who commit assurance that all these cases have been individually any offence at all, not just those who have to serve more looked at and, as I have said several times already, that than a year in prison. none is eligible for the Windrush compensation scheme. It is wrong, and indeed almost offensive, to conflate, in Chris Philp: I am very grateful for the support emanating any way,these people who have committed terrible criminal from the people of Shipley. I think the public will be offences with those victims of the Windrush scandal; astonished to see Labour MPs standing up on the side they are completely different things and it is completely of dangerous criminals instead of on the side of victims wrong to conflate them. As the hon. Lady says, the and, even more importantly, people who might be victims is fully committed to implementing in the future. On improving the legal system so that we each and every one of Wendy Williams’recommendations; can more readily deport people who are dangerous— she published a response to the Williams review back in dangerous criminals and others—we do, as I say, want September and I know that she will be keeping the House to legislate to improve the system. It does not really regularly updated about the timing of the implementation work at the moment as it should, and my hon. Friend of each and every one of those 30 recommendations. will have plenty of opportunities to support legislation with that purpose in mind next year. Mark Jenkinson (Workington) (Con): Nearly 12 months Kim Johnson (, Riverside) (Lab): Government ago, in constituencies such as Workington, this people’s plans to push ahead with the mass deportation of Government were elected on a promise to make Britain 50 people to Jamaica this week are both obscene and safer and more secure. Does my hon. Friend agree that irresponsible, and they fly in the face of the damning by continuing to remove these dangerous criminals Equality and Human Rights Commission report released from this country we are delivering on that commitment only last week, which declared the hostile environment we made to the British people? policies illegal. We talk about victims, but what about the Windrush generation victims who are still fighting Chris Philp: Yes I do agree, of course. My hon. for compensation and justice? Will the Minister outline Friend puts the point very well. One of the most whether the EHRC’s findings have been taken into fundamental duties of any Government is to protect account during this process? their citizens, and ensuring that foreign nationals convicted of serious offences are removed from the country is one Chris Philp: I have already pointed out that these very important way in which the Government can protect flights are nothing to do with the compliant environment; our fellow citizens. As I have said, I am aware of cases none of these individuals is in the scope of the Windrush where people were eligible for removal or deportation compensation scheme. I must say that the hon. Lady is but for some legal challenge reason this was not done going a great disservice to those genuine victims of the and they then went on to commit some serious offences. Windrush tragedy—the Windrush scandal—by conflating them with dangerous offenders who are not British Vicky Foxcroft (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab) [V]: I citizens and who are eligible for deportation under an have a constituent on the flight who came to the UK Act that the Labour Government passed in 2007. She aged 11. He has no friends or family in Jamaica, but he should reserve her indignation for those victims who does have three children who do not know that he is have been affected by these terrible, terrible crimes. likely to be deported. Although he is desperate to see Mr (South West Hertfordshire) (Con): them one last time, he does not want them to worry. The British people will expect foreign national offenders Have the Government carried out any assessment of the who have violated our laws and our values to be removed impact this will have on his children, who are likely to from our country. Does my hon. Friend agree that this never see their father again? charter flight shows that we are acting in the interests of the British people and that we have their overwhelming Chris Philp: The balance between family rights and support in taking this action? the obligation on the Government to remove dangerous offenders is laid out in statute. If a challenge is brought, Chris Philp: Yes, I strongly agree. The public watching it is up to the courts to determine in each individual this afternoon’s debate will be astonished to see some case how that balance is struck. I would say—I have the Opposition Members apparently not willing to stand case details in front of me, but I do not want to recite up for our fellow citizens who have been victims of them to the House, for reasons of confidentiality—that these terrible offences. the hon. Lady’s constituent is an extremely persistent 35 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 36 Jamaica Jamaica [Chris Philp] Chris Philp: My hon. Friend makes a very good point. It has been conspicuous this afternoon that it has and prolific offender, and that includes some quite been Government Members who have stood up to dangerous offences. As I say, the balance between family speak out for victims and for the safety of their constituents; rights and public safety is set out in statute and is struck we have heard almost nothing of that from Opposition by the courts, but I make no apology for putting public Members. The British public will have heard that, and safety first. they will draw their own conclusions.

Nigel Mills (Amber Valley) (Con) [V]: There is great Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab): If the Minister support in Amber Valley for the deportation of serious listens carefully, he will hear that I am also speaking foreign national offenders but also great concern at how about victims and rehabilitation. The recommendations long the process takes. Does the Minister have any made by the Windrush lessons learned review have still plans to revert to the position in the Immigration Act not been implemented in full, and we still do not know 2014, where some—[Inaudible.] why people are illegally deported. It is this that has Chris Philp: I am afraid that the roll-out of rural caused distrust in the Government. Many of these broadband to my hon. Friend’s house clearly has a bit predominantly black people set for deportation have of a way to go, because he broke up a little. I think he already served their sentence. Many committed these was asking about finding ways to expedite the proceedings, offences when they were young, as they were victims of and we are looking at ways we can do that, including by drugs operations known as county lines or have been making sure that provisions in previous Acts of Parliament, criminalised in association. I put it to the Government which he may have been asking about, can be properly that many of these people have grown up in this country implemented. That is very high on the Government’s since childhood, and it is our country’smoral responsibility agenda. to rehabilitate them. Scott Benton (Blackpool South) (Con): Dangerous Chris Philp: The hon. Lady said a few moments ago foreign criminals, including murderers, rapists and drug that the people subject to deportation proceedings are dealers, have no right whatever to remain in this country. mainly black. That is not true because, as I said earlier The people of Blackpool South expect the Government very clearly, the majority of people removed and deported to be resolute in standing up to those activist, left-wing are removed and deported to European Union countries, lawyers who, in this instance, are working against the and in the last year well under 1% of people subject to clear national interest. Will my hon. Friend confirm these proceedings have come from Jamaica. In relation that he will never compromise the security and safety of to age, the test, as we have discussed already, is set out in my constituents by letting such dangerous offenders statute—in the UK Borders Act 2007. It is an Act remain in the UK? passed by the last Labour Government with the votes of a number of her colleagues who are sitting on the Chris Philp: As always, my hon. Friend speaks very Opposition Benches right now. well for his constituents. It is absolutely our intention to make sure that, where there are dangerous people in the Lee Anderson (Ashfield) (Con): Unlike Opposition United Kingdom, we will tirelessly seek to remove Members, the people of Ashfield are absolutely delighted them. That is our duty as a Government, and we will that murderers, rapists and other dangerous criminals work tirelessly, as I know he will, to discharge that duty. are being flown out of the UK and deported to their country of origin. This will keep our streets safer and John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab): What worries send out a clear message to anyone who does not share me about the case of my constituent, who is due to be the values of our great country. Can my hon. Friend deported, is that I cannot even name him today, because please reassure me and the people of Ashfield that this there are genuine and credible grounds for him to Government will continue to send vile criminals back to believe that his life is under threat. That is surely a where they come from as they have no place in our reason to pause and rethink whether he should be society, and can he also thank Opposition Members for deported. supporting this Act when it was passed in 2007? Chris Philp: There are obviously legal channels through which individuals can raise concerns of the type of the Chris Philp: I am sure the Opposition Members who hon. Gentleman just referred to. As I say, many people voted for the 2007 Act are extremely grateful for my do precisely that. Just a few days ago, a convicted hon. Friend’s reminder and thanks, but the thrust of his murderer was removed from the flight for similar reasons. point I completely agree with. It is right that where However, let me make it clear that it is our priority to someone endangers our fellow citizens, we act to deport protect British citizens, and that should be the hon. them, because if we do not do that, we are exposing our Gentleman’s priority, too. constituents to ongoing risk. That is completely unacceptable, and this Government will take action. Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con): It is disappointing that Opposition Members have been less than supportive Stephen Timms (East Ham) (Lab): The Minister is of the Government’s efforts to deport dangerous foreign making it clear that he and his Department find it criminals who pose a serious threat to this country’s irksome having to comply with the current requirements national security and to the safety of the British people. of the law. Thank goodness they do, because the law is Does my hon. Friend agree that the Conservative party there to protect everyone, and I get the impression that is the only party committed to standing up for the a number of Government Members do not approve of victims, to having a firm hand on law and order and to that. What access have those who were due to be on this making sure that this country remains safe and secure? flight had to legal advice prior to the flight’s departure? 37 Scheduled Mass Deportation: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 38 Jamaica Chris Philp: I would not say the Government find it Agricultural Transition Plan irksome to offer people due legal process; of course we do not, because we respect those legal processes. However, we do find it deeply frustrating and, frankly, at times 4.25 pm inappropriate when the legal system and the legal process The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural are used in an abusive or vexatious way, as they apparently Affairs (George Eustice): With permission, Mr Speaker, sometimes are. That is something we intend to come I would like to make a statement on the Government’s back to in legislation next year. In relation to access to agricultural transition plan, published today. justice, there are very ample opportunities provided for consultation with lawyers by all kinds of means. I would The Agriculture Bill received Royal Assent on say that in my observation of people subject to Home 11 November. The Agriculture Act 2020 sets out powers Office proceedings, one thing they are not short of to reward farmers and land managers who protect our is legal advice—very often legally aided. The access to environment, improve animal welfare and produce high- justice point that the right hon. Member makes is certainly quality food in a more sustainable way. These powers amply catered for in a whole range of different ways. will also help farmers to stay competitive, with measures to increase productivity and invest in new technology. Mr Speaker: In order to allow the safe exit of hon. We will also improve transparency in the supply chain Members participating in this item of business and the to help food producers strengthen their position in the safe arrival of those participating in the next, I am market and seek a fairer return for the food they produce. suspending the House. Today,we are publishing further details of our approach to exercising the powers under the Agriculture Act over 4.23 pm the next seven years. We will remove arbitrary area-based Sitting suspended. subsidies on land ownership or tenure and replace them with new payments and new incentives to reward farmers for farming more sustainably, creating space for nature on their land, enhancing animal welfare and delivering the other objectives set out in the Agriculture Act. The central plank of our future policy will be made up of the three components of environmental land management. The sustainable farming incentive will pay farmers for actions that they take to manage their land in an environmentally sustainable way. This could include schemes encouraging catchment-sensitive farming, integrated pest management and sensitive hedgerow management. Local nature recovery will pay farmers for actions that support local nature recovery, creating space for nature and habitats on farm and encouraging co-operation between farmers. Finally, the landscape recovery component will support the delivery of landscape- scale projects to deliver ecosystem recovery through longer-term land use change. This will help us meet our targets to plant 30,000 hectares of woodland a year by 2025, create and restore peatland, protect 30% of UK land by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050. We know that this policy marks a significant change. I am also very conscious of the fact that many farm enterprises are dependent on the area-based subsidy payments to generate a profit, and that without them, some might judge they would not be profitable, so we have created a seven-year transition period. We want this to be an evolution, not an overnight revolution. That means making year-on-year reductions to the legacy direct payments scheme and simultaneously making year-on-year increases to the money available to support the replacement schemes. Between 2021 and 2024, we will help farmers prepare to take part in our environmental land management offer. This will include expanding the existing countryside stewardship scheme and opening the new sustainable farming incentive to every farmer from 2022 onwards. We recognise that there is a problem with poor profitability in agriculture. The premise behind our new policy is to tackle the causes of that poor profitability rather than simply masking it with a subsidy payment. Our new financial incentives for sustainable farming and nature recovery will be set at a rate to incentivise 39 Agricultural Transition Plan30 NOVEMBER 2020 Agricultural Transition Plan 40

[George Eustice] is there a gap? Given that we are both west country MPs, does the Secretary of State share my concern that widespread participation and give consideration to natural many south-west farmers will be forced out of business capital principles. So in some areas they will go beyond because of the changes? Does he have regional figures the “income forgone” methodology of the past. on the expected farm bankruptcies? The estimates that I We will also make a significant number of grants have heard are deeply worrying. With the Government’s available to support farmers in reducing their costs and new farm exit schemes, there are huge incentives for improving their profitability, to help those who want to people to leave agriculture early.How many small farmers retire or leave the industry to do so with dignity, and to does the Secretary of State expect to take that exit create opportunities and support for new entrants coming scheme rather than go bust? into the industry. Labour has five simple tests for the effectiveness of The dysfunctional, top-down rules and draconian the policy. Will there be more family farms in 2024 than penalties that were a feature of the EU era will be there are now? I doubt it. Will there be more family removed or reformed. The binary divide between advice farm bankruptcies under the proposals? I expect so. and enforcement will also be broken down. Instead, Will Britain produce more of its food here rather than there will be a modern approach to regulation, with importing it? Will we be more reliant on food from more holistic assessments of regulatory compliance and America and Australia in future? Will English farmers greater emphasis on advice and improvement so that have a tougher time than farmers in Scotland, Wales farmers and regulators work together to improve standards. and Northern Ireland with their mix of direct payments By 2027, we want to see a reformed agricultural and environmental funding? Labour backs our British sector. We want farmers to manage their business in a farmers. I am very concerned that the Secretary of State’s way that delivers profitable food production and the announcement today risks breaking English family farms. recovery of nature, fusing the best modern technology available today with the rediscovery of the traditional George Eustice: First, let me confirm that the policy art of good farm husbandry. Our plan delivers those we set out today is for England. Indeed, most of the objectives, and I commend the statement to the House. powers in the Agriculture Act 2020 were for England. It will be open to the devolved Administrations to pursue 4.31 pm their own policy. Even under the common agricultural Luke Pollard (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) (Lab/ policy, devolved Administrations had some freedom Co-op): I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight about the pillar 2 schemes that they could put in place. of the statement, even if most of it was announced this We will also co-ordinate policy with the devolved morning in his online conference. For transparency, I Administrations to ensure that there is no disturbance remind hon. Members that my little sister is a sheep within the internal market. It is the case that over time, farmer in Cornwall. albeit at different paces, other devolved Administrations will not want to be shackled to the common agricultural The Secretary of State has majored on the green policy that we have inherited, and they will want to take elements of the announcement, but this is about more the opportunity to do things better. than our environment. Of course Labour supports public money for public goods, but that is not what the statement The second point I would make relates to the profitability is about. Strip away the green coating and the proposals of agriculture. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the are a full-throttle attack on English family farms. I say position of smaller farms. In fact, work done by AB Agri “English” because Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish on farm productivity shows that there is not a correlation farmers are going in a different direction because the between farm size and productivity. Indeed, it is often devolved Governments are maintaining support for small the case that highly technically proficient, smaller family farms for longer. Under the Government’s proposals, farms will have lower overheads and can look forward many small farmers will lose up to half their current to the future with confidence. Agriculture is an industry support payments within just three years, leaving many that needs attention to detail, and that attention to financially unviable. detail is often best given by some smaller enterprises. The public and farmers back high standards, but The other point I would make relates to food standards, many farms will not be sustainable economically if the which have been debated extensively in this House during economic foundations of their business are undercut by the passage of the Agriculture Bill, now the Agriculture food produced to lower standards abroad. British farmers Act. We made changes to the Bill to introduce the Trade remain at risk from future trade deals as the Government and Agriculture Commission and to require the Secretary have chosen not to require food imports to meet the of State to bring a report to Parliament outlining the same standards that we hold our own farmers to. impacts of any trade agreements on those standards. Farmers themselves have not given today’sannouncement We have also been very clear as a Government that we a ringing endorsement. The panel that farmers convened will protect our producers from being undermined by to heap praise on the Secretary of State’s speech this substandard products produced overseas by using a morning described it as, “disappointing”, “lacking detail” combination of sanitary and phytosanitary policy in and, “an announcement about further announcements”— trade agreements and tariff policy. not a glowing endorsement. I do not accept the criticism that the plan lacks detail. I am concerned about the 5% cuts for all, the 50% cuts It is a 65-page document with many detailed annexes. It in three years and the new system not even starting until sets out in great detail the pace at which we intend to 2022. Why was no sustainable farming initiative announced reduce the basic payment scheme, the other schemes we for next year,just a 5% cut and no bridge to environmental intend to roll out and the years we intend to roll them funding? Why was there so little detail on that and why out. There will be some further consultations in the new 41 Agricultural Transition Plan30 NOVEMBER 2020 Agricultural Transition Plan 42 year, in particular on the design of the voluntary exit and enduring the uncertainties of a global pandemic, scheme that we have said we will offer to those farmers with so many details still to be outlined. Scottish farmers who want to exit the industry with dignity. and crofters do not face the same difficulties, because in I should make one final point, which is that our Scotland the Government have committed to continuing Agriculture Act requires the Government to report on payments at their current level. However, our Ministers food security every three years. The coronavirus pandemic were told just days ago in the spending review that, has proven to us that domestic food production is a despite the Government’s manifesto commitment to critical component of the food security of our nation, match EU support, rural Scotland will be £170 million and that is something we will continue to measure and short of what was promised by 2025. The chair of NFU to support, so that we can have a vibrant food-producing Scotland has said that this shortfall will undermine agriculture sector in this country. environmental and biodiversity targets for Scottish farmers and crofters. How does the Secretary of State answer that? Philip Dunne (Ludlow) (Con) [V]: I broadly welcome Finally, I would like to hear from the Secretary of the thrust of these transition arrangements to improve State what the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill the environment, although as a farmer I am concerned and control over state aid being in the hands of Westminster about farming viability—given the phased 50% cut in means for the Scottish Government’s ability to maintain support over the next three to four years—for those a divergent path to England on farming support. Can who will miss out on the environmental land management he provide assurances that the Bill will have absolutely scheme pilots for 5,500 successful applicants, until the no impact on Scotland’s ability to set support in Scotland new ELM scheme comes in from 2024. The Secretary of independent of the system chosen for England? State is offering a lump sum exit scheme to encourage farmers to retire and a new scheme for new entrants George Eustice: It is the case that England is a long from 2022, but in view of the high costs of mechanisation way ahead of Scotland in terms of developing future and the time to achieve the viability of a new enterprise, policy. We want to take the opportunities that come does that not risk continuing the process of consolidation from leaving the European Union to chart a different of farming businesses into larger holdings, in particular course and put in place a policy that makes more sense. in disadvantaged areas? Our view is that arbitrary area-based subsidies for people based only on the amount of land that they own George Eustice: My right hon. Friend makes an or rent makes no sense in this day and age, and we important point, and we are considering that in the design should be directing those funds in a different way. of our schemes. We are working with county farms The hon. Lady mentions funds for Scotland. In line across the country to improve the offer that county with our manifesto commitment, Scotland will have farms have, to create opportunities for new entrants and £595 million for its agriculture budget. She should note to encourage them into partnership with other landowners that we chose an exchange rate fixed in 2019 that is far so that there can be more opportunities for those new more favourable for farmers right across the UK than entrants and to create an incubator model for these new the average exchange rate across the last perspective. entrants. She should also note that the European Union has just In terms of the viability of farms as we progressively slashed its agriculture spending by 10%, while the UK reduce the basic payment scheme, it is important to Government have maintained it, and changes to the recognise that this is an evolution, not a revolution. It is exchange rate mean that the rate of payment is some the case that from 2022 we will open the sustainable 20% higher than it would have been had we not voted to farming incentive to all farmers. leave the European Union. On the hon. Lady’sfinal point about divergence,Scotland Deidre Brock ( North and Leith) (SNP) and other devolved Administrations will have more [V]: I see the headlines of stories that the Government freedom than ever before to design a policy that they have planted today promising that will transform judge to be right for them. We will set up a joint group our fields and farms. One would have to agree, although across the UK to do market surveillance, to ensure that that transformation will not only be in ways that many there is not disturbance to the internal market and to in agricultural areas will necessarily welcome. The speed share ideas on what works. and scale of the reductions proposed worry many others, including, it seems, the Minister’s own colleagues, with David Mundell (, Clydesdale and the head of the National Farmers Union describing the Tweeddale) (Con): As it is St Andrew’s day, it would be Government’s approach as remiss not to highlight the excellence of Scotch beef, “high risk and a very big ask”. lamb and other agricultural products. The Secretary of State said that the measures he has announced will not Lack of clarity on the detail of the replacement apply in Scotland. Does he agree that the Scottish environmental land schemes remains a big concern for Government should now get on with devising a bespoke agricultural and environmental representatives alike. It support scheme for Scotland to take into account our seems to me that what qualifying criteria we have been unique geography and climate—for example, continuing made aware of could lend themselves equally well to withanenhancedlessfavouredareasupportscheme—rather shooting estates as to hill farmers, for example. I would than pursuing an independence agenda, which would be grateful if the Secretary of State could enlighten us disrupt Scottish farmers’ biggest single market: the rest further on that point. of the UK? I find it astonishing that the Government have had since 2016 to construct replacement schemes, and yet George Eustice: My right hon. Friend makes an incredibly here we are, just days away from either a no-deal or a important point. When the current incarnation of the low-deal Brexit, amid fears of lower imported standards common agricultural policy was put in place, NFU 43 Agricultural Transition Plan30 NOVEMBER 2020 Agricultural Transition Plan 44

[George Eustice] George Eustice: Since agriculture is devolved, it will be for Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland Executive, Scotland was very clear that area-based payments could and the Department of Agriculture, Environment and not be made to work properly in Scotland. It is difficult Rural Affairs to develop a policy that is right for them. therefore to see the justification for maintaining a policy However, I can confirm that we have maintained the built solely on area-based payments, given the large budget for every part of the UK at the point at which variance in land types. I agree with him that the Scottish we left the EU, and we will maintain that for every year Government should, in line with all other parts of the of this Parliament. For Northern Ireland, that equates UK, take this opportunity to do things differently and to £330 million per year. to do them better. Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD): British Dr James Davies (Vale of Clwyd) (Con): I thank my farming genuinely is the best in the world, fundamentally right hon. Friend for his statement. Will he outline the because of the family farming unit upon which it is importance being placed on flood mitigation in the based. The Government’s plan to deliver environmental environmental land management scheme, and urge goods through the environmental land management the Welsh Government to adopt similar measures to scheme is good and laudable, and we support it. However, help protect communities such as St Asaph and Rhuddlan the transition whereby, in a revolutionary way, people from flooding? will lose half their income in three years’ time—when the average livestock farmer is reliant on basic payment George Eustice: My hon. Friend makes an important for 60% of their revenue—will lead to hundreds upon point. We will be looking to use the powers in the hundreds of those family farms going out of business Agriculture Act to make provision to support and and therefore not being in a position to deliver those financially reward farmers who may allow their land to environmental goods by 2028. The landscape of the be used in certain water catchments to protect communities Lake district and the Yorkshire dales is shaped by from flooding—a nature-based solution to that flood centuries of family farming. By accident, the Government risk, as it were. We will also be using this money to could undo all of that in a few short years—even support improvements in water quality by supporting months—so will the Secretary of State think again, not an expansion of catchment-sensitive farming. It will be penny pinch, and make sure that the basic payment is for the Welsh Government to decide their own priorities rolled over in full until the point at which the environmental and the pace at which they detach themselves from the land management scheme is available for everyone? legacy schemes, but we believe that redirecting support in this way is the correct way to go. George Eustice: The concept of area-based payments has only been around for about 15 years, and it has not Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab) [V]: I always been in the interests of agriculture. The truth is welcome the emphasis on ensuring that farm subsidies that farmers may be the recipients of the BPS, but they in the future encourage animal welfare, environmental are not the only beneficiaries: the BPS payment has sustainability and nature recovery. However, given that inflated land rents and input costs, prevented people this new policy will see income for some farms fall by from retiring, and also prevented new entrants from 50% over the next three years, what assessment has the getting on to the land. That is why we believe there is a Secretary of State made of the numbers that will be better way to pay and reward farmers in future. impacted by these changes, and what opportunity is (Chipping Barnet) (Con): I believe there in the nature recovery initiative he has outlined for that replacing the common agricultural policy with those with marginal farm holdings, often in the urban these reforms will help us to achieve crucial goals on fringes, where the land now has more of a recreational protecting nature and the natural environment, and to and environmental benefit than an agricultural one? improve animal welfare—things our constituents really care about. I want the Secretary of State to also confirm George Eustice: It is the case that some of those lands today that another crucial goal of these schemes will be that are in more marginal areas, where it is less productive, food security, and ensuring we are supporting people to will see more opportunities to access local nature recovery, make a living from growing food. and in some cases even landscape recovery, to get some significant support from the Government for either George Eustice: Let me commend the role that my land use change or making more space for nature on right hon. Friend played in the development of this their land. Some of those upland and more marginal policy and, indeed, some of the changes that were areas will be able to get access to the scheme. As I said introduced in the latest incarnation of the Agriculture in my statement, we will also be looking at different Bill. During her time in this post, she was passionate payment methodologies to calculate the payment, departing about the importance of food security and the financial from the income forgone methodology of the past. viability of our farms. Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP) [V]: The Secretary Edward Timpson (Eddisbury) (Con): I am pleased to of State will be aware that farmers need time to transition hear from my right hon. Friend that there will be a to a new system. He will also be aware that over 100,000 period of engagement with farmers, landowners, managers people are employed in the agrifood sector in Northern and other key stakeholders in Cheshire before finalising Ireland, and therefore direct support to farmers is vital. the detailed design and operation of this fairer farming Will he give assurances to UK farmers that the Government system. To that end, will my right hon. Friend tell the will fund agriculture appropriately, to ensure we deliver House what economic impact assessment his Department a productive, profitable and sustainable farming business has done to help inform these significant and potentially model for generations? transformative policy decisions? 45 Agricultural Transition Plan30 NOVEMBER 2020 Agricultural Transition Plan 46

George Eustice: My hon. Friend makes a very important Simon Fell (Barrow and Furness) (Con): Earlier this point. We are looking at this matter. We believe that by year I was fortunate enough to visit Hobkin Ground farm removing the area-based subsidies, there could be some in my constituency,which is actively pursuing regenerative adjustment in land rents to reduce costs for farmers. farming and trying to reduce the carbon footprint of Through the changes that we are making in the supply raising a cow from field to fork through measures such chain, it could also be the case that farmers will have a as new grasses. What assurances can my right hon. fairer share of the value for the food that they produce. Friend give to farmers like Megan and Mark that the By investing in technology, we can help farmers to new environmental management scheme will help us to reduce costs so that they become profitable without the help them meet our stringent net zero targets? need for area-based subsidies. George Eustice: My hon. Friend makes an important Mr (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op) [V]: point. We are looking at a number of different disciplines The Secretary of State knows that I believe him to be an within regenerative farming, including methods such as honourable man, but he is a member of a Government mob grazing, the use of different types of leguminous who are now notorious for their chumocracy and favours nitrogen-fixing plant mix in grassland and reduced fertiliser for friends. What he is ushering in today is a charter for use. If we manage grassland and soils correctly, they City slickers, carpetbaggers and spivs to take over our can be a really useful store of carbon and contribute to farming sector, and to drive out the traditional smaller net zero. English farmers, who have been feeding our nation for so many years. Will he please think again before he Dame Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) eradicates the good English farmer? (Lab) [V]: Food poverty in my Hull North constituency is already a huge issue. Will the Secretary of State George Eustice: The hon. Gentleman has a habit of guarantee that under the new agricultural transition starting off by suggesting that he is going to pay me a policy we will not see higher food prices for working compliment, and things go downhill quite quickly thereon. families who are only just managing? The area-based subsidy that we currently have has a habit of giving the largest payments to the wealthiest George Eustice: We think that the policy will lead to landowners. Sometimes these are people who are not stable food prices, but also to a situation in which we really actively farming. Sometimes it is people who change the way we reward farmers. We will reward them made their wealth in the City and are trying to shelter it not just for occupying land but for farming their land in in land, and then also qualify for taxpayers’ payments— a nature-sensitive way and a way that enhances animal sometimes running into millions of pounds. That cannot welfare. be right. The system that we are developing will reward people for what they do with their land and what they Dr Neil Hudson (Penrith and The Border) (Con) [V]: do to help nature recover. I welcome the statement and, as a vet, the fact that high animal welfare and health will be recognised as a key Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con): My right hon. Friend public good. Farmers in Penrith and The Border and has said that he hopes that this plan will encourage new throughout the UK produce top-quality food to the entrants of people trying to get into farming. Will he highest standards. Will my right hon. Friend assure the briefly outline in what way it will be different from what farmers and land managers in my constituency and happens now? throughout the UK that when the direct payments scheme ends, the new way of funding will be secure and George Eustice: All the studies that have been done long term, so that they can plan accordingly and continue on this issue have shown that the single most important to produce local food sustainably to benefit our rural thing that we can do to help new entrants on to the land communities for generations to come? is to help those who perhaps should retire, or those who want to retire, to retire with dignity, so that more George Eustice: Yes. The Agriculture Act 2020 sets holdings come on to the market, land rents adjust to a out clear objectives on animal health and welfare, as sustainable level and there are opportunities for new well as the environmental objectives. We recognise that entrants. We will then make available grants to support animal health and welfare is a public good, and it is new entrants to invest and set up in their new enterprises. right that the public are willing to support improvements in that regard. The Act also includes support for genetic Marion Fellows (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) [V]: resources—such as our native and rare breeds—that A recent poll from AgriScot’s online annual event has many farmers in many parts of the country will be able shown that 75% of Scottish farmers now oppose Brexit. to access. That is hardly surprising, given the harm, disruption and uncertainty that Brexit has caused the agricultural Christian Matheson (City of Chester) (Lab): The sector. Does the Secretary of State understand why so Secretary of State is a farmer himself, so he will know many have now turned their backs on his Government’s that farms cannot simply be turned on or off, as local flagship policy, and does he understand the need for farmers around my constituency in Cheshire have pointed this Government to listen to their concerns? out to me. They have noticed that participants in the ELM scheme will be paid a “competitive” rate; when George Eustice: Agriculture policy is devolved, so will they be given details of what that competitive rate Scottish farmers are not turning their backs on the is, so that they can start to plan for the future and know policy that I have announced today for England. Perhaps exactly when they can alter their long-term plans for the the lack of enthusiasm is because of the failure of the management of their farms to meet the requirements Scottish Government to show leadership in this area. proposed in the White Paper? 47 Agricultural Transition Plan30 NOVEMBER 2020 Agricultural Transition Plan 48

George Eustice: We will consult on the design of the Craig Williams (Montgomeryshire) (Con): On sustainable farming incentive in the first half of next Friday, I visited the Wynnstay Group headquarters in year. Montgomeryshire, who supply supplies and services to agricultural communities across England and Wales. Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans): Jacob Young My constituency has cross-border farms, so I welcome is next on the call sheet, but he is down as both physical the tone—especially of evolution, not overnight revolution and virtual. If he is not going to appear, I shall call —of the Secretary of State’s comments. Can I draw him Alistair Carmichael. on the funding? We welcome that commitment in Wales, but my farmers have long dealt with the modulation Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD): from pillar 1 to pillar 2 in Wales, which is 50%: the The Secretary of State has told us that the Scottish highest in the United Kingdom. While Opposition Members Government’s budget for the scheme will be £595 million, talk strong on agricultural funding, for the last decade which is the budget that they carry over at present. That they have been taking out of direct payments to my figure is not going to last forever; by what means will farmers. May I draw him on that support and welcome future budgets be fixed? What mechanisms will be used what he is doing in England more broadly? to resolve any disputes? What will happen if the divergent agricultural policies in any part of the United Kingdom, George Eustice: My hon. Friend makes an important including England, then have a distorting effect on the point. Indeed, the indications to date are that the Welsh UK’s internal market? Government will probably strike a similar approach to that which we are taking in England. It may be that George Eustice: The Government set out in our manifesto Northern Ireland, because of its proximity to the Irish that we will keep the budget for each part of the UK the Republic and, indeed, Scotland, for other reasons, may same in cash terms for every year of this Parliament, decide to change things at a slower pace. But it is the and that is what we intend to do. Matters thereafter will case that Wales has, even in the last five years, transferred be a matter for all the political parties in their manifestos money from the pillar 1 basic payment scheme to the for future elections and, of course, for future spending pillar 2 agri-environment schemes. reviews. I should point out that the European Union’s budget runs for only seven years and it has cut its Mike Amesbury (Weaver Vale) (Lab): Cutting income budget by 10% for the next perspective. payments by 50% over a period of three years, starting in January, is not evolutionary as the Secretary of State Anthony Mangnall (Totnes) (Con): Many of us were said, but revolutionary. In fact, some might argue— woken this morning by the Secretary of State speaking including me—that it is downright stupid. It needs to be on Times Radio about the need to end bureaucracy for rethought. On consultation, there are plenty of voices farmers. Now that he is, with this statement, pushing out there at the moment expressing real concern about the fact that DEFRA is going to be a help, not a the future of local farms in Weaver Vale and Cheshire. hindrance, will he explain how ending the bureaucracy and unnecessary form-filling is going to help to ensure George Eustice: We will not be cutting the budget: we that all our farmers are exactly where they need to be, will be cutting the payments that go through the rather which is on the land? dysfunctional legacy basic payment scheme, and we will instead be directing that money into new schemes, including the sustainable farming incentive that farmers George Eustice: My hon. Friend makes a very important will be able to access from 2022. point. Under the current common agricultural policy, we have rules about the maximum width of a gateway, Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con): Hill the minimum width of a hedge, the maximum width of farmers are hugely important to the landscapes and a hedge, whether a cabbage should be treated the same communities of Thirsk and Malton, particularly in the as a cauliflower for the purposes of the three-crop North York Moors national park. They are very dependent rule—the list goes on and on. It makes no sense at all on financial support. Will the Secretary of State commit and we will sweep away those unnecessary rules. to looking after their interests and also consider delegating the distribution and administration of moneys direct to Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP): I am not sure the national parks, so they can work directly with their that the answers so far from the Secretary of State on farmers, who understand their landscapes most closely? the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill will provide much reassurance to the agricultural sector or, indeed, George Eustice: I do think that there will be opportunities anyone in Scotland who values the devolution settlement. for some of those upland and moorland areas to be able Can he guarantee that the Government will not use to really benefit from a new policy that is based on powers in the Bill to prevent the Scottish Government payment for the delivery of environmental goods. There from pursuing their own agenda on issues related to have been many opportunities for them to do so alongside standards or state aid? their food production. We are also looking at ways to involve local partners in terms of designing schemes George Eustice: When it comes to standards in trade that fit a particular geography. That could include the agreements, which is one of the issues that was debated, national parks and local nature partnerships. that of course is a reserved matter, since it is a matter for those international negotiations. Of course, when it Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): I thank the Minister comes to setting standards around animal welfare, those for his statement. I note that the changes will be designed matters are devolved now and will remain devolved, as to ensure that by 2028 farmers in England can sustainably will the design and administration of any future scheme produce healthy food profitably without subsidy, while to replace the common agricultural policy scheme. taking steps to improve the environment, improve animal 49 Agricultural Transition Plan30 NOVEMBER 2020 Agricultural Transition Plan 50 health and welfare and reduce carbon emissions. That is (Waveney) (Con): I draw attention to all very laudable and welcome, but it would be remiss of my involvement in family farms as detailed in the Register me not to ask what discussions have taken place with of Members’Financial Interests and I thank the Secretary the devolved Northern Ireland Assembly to ensure that of State for his statement. To enable farmers to access this transition will be applicable—and therefore funded— new markets and to obtain fair prices for their high-quality UK-wide. UK-reared-and-grown produce, both at home and abroad, there is a need for investment in food and drink processing George Eustice: It is obviously a devolved policy facilities. I would be grateful if the Secretary of State area, so the Northern Ireland Executive and DAERA will could outline the strategy for securing this. make their own decisions. I suspect that it is likely that they will depart from the legacy schemes in a more George Eustice: Our paper today outlines plans for a cautious fashion, given their proximity to the Irish farming investment fund. That can include small grants Republic and some of the cross-border trade that takes to support the deployment of new agricultural technology place, but it will be open to them and they will have the and larger grants—transformation grants—that could freedom to design policies that work for them. I suspect support adding value through food processing facilities that, in common with other parts of the UK, they will on farms, but also for groups of growers or producers quite quickly want to switch off some of the bureaucratic to come together and collectively invest in such a way. requirements that have been there in the existing basic payment scheme. Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP) [V]: We know that the Tories have already broken a manifesto (Broadland) (Con): As well as wanting promise on matching EU funding and that it is going to to be custodians of the land, people farm because they cost Scotland £170 million, but we have real concerns want to produce food. While I warmly welcome the that the Government are going to use the United Kingdom thrust of the plan, will my right hon. Friend confirm Internal Market Bill to prevent the Scottish Government that the Government remain committed to increased from providing the right level of support for Scottish food security and, if so, can he clarify how this plan will farmers. Can we get absolute clarification that the Tory help farmers to maintain or increase food production? Government will not use the Bill to block any devolved policies, such as using headage payments for the production George Eustice: My hon. Friend makes an important of cattle and sheep? point. We are absolutely committed to domestic food production and the crucial role that that plays towards George Eustice: I reject the hon. Gentleman’s claim our food security. The Agriculture Act 2020 requires that the budget is not what was promised. We promised that every three years, there will be a review of our food to maintain the budget in each part of the UK in cash security, and that will look at the viability and profitability terms at the juncture where we left. That is exactly what of our domestic food production. The paper that we we are doing. It means that Scotland will receive have published today sets out plans for a farm investment £595 million per year, 22% higher than it would have fund that will have a whole suite of grants available to received had we used the exchange rate at the start of support farmers to produce food in a more cost-effective the last EU programme, and 10% higher than it would way and to add value. have received had we stayed in the EU since it has cut Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower) (Lab): The Secretary of the agriculture budget. This is a good deal for farmers. State continues to say that he has maintained the budget Indeed it will be open to the devolved Administrations for the devolved nations. However, farmers in Wales will to design their own policy and that could include if they be £95 million short compared with if they were still in wanted an element of coupled payments. the EU, due to what would have been a crossover of the programme. I find it quite tedious that the hon. Member Danny Kruger (Devizes) (Con): Can my right hon. for Montgomeryshire (Craig Williams) and the UK Friend reassure farmers in Wiltshire that food production Government point the finger at the Welsh Government, will still be supported under the new scheme and that who are rightly acting in accordance with the EU rules they will not be undercut by farmers, including in the for agricultural funding until 2023, which the National devolved nations, who are subsidised for food production Farmers Union of Wales confirmed with me just over or by area, not just for stewardship? an hour ago. Will the Secretary of State back up the promises that he has made to farmers and rural communities George Eustice: I can give my hon. Friend that in my constituency of Gower and across Wales? commitment. The aim of this policy is very much to support and reward farmers for farming more sustainably, George Eustice: The confusion on this stemmed from but the emphasis throughout is on sustainable food the fact that the EU budget runs on a cycle called n+3, production, not on taking land out of production. where n is seven years, so effectively, the EU budget is across a decade. The budget that we have announced is Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) across a Parliament and we have guaranteed the same in (LD): In his statement, the right hon. Gentleman made each year. A typical spending review cycle is five years. mention of the production of high-quality food in “a We cannot compare a 10-year EU budget with a five-year sustainable way”, and I say amen to that. The reputation UK one that will be renewed at the end of that. The and quality of British farm produce is second to none—it reality is that we have set a favourable exchange rate is a world beater—so will he consider having a discussion that is 22% higher than before the referendum result, with the devolved Administrations with a view to setting and that benefits farm incomes. The reality is also that up an agency to promote British farm produce for the European Union has had to slash spending on export, thereby earning money for the Exchequer of agriculture by 10%. our United Kingdom? 51 Agricultural Transition Plan30 NOVEMBER 2020 Agricultural Transition Plan 52

George Eustice: The hon. Gentleman makes a very Welsh farming following the shortfall of a third in important point. We do work with the devolved Welsh agricultural support, which revealed itself in last Administrations on the design of future policy. There week’s comprehensive spending review? This is labelled will be a co-ordinating group on future policy. We also by the Welsh farming unions as a Brexit betrayal. work with all the levy bodies through the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, and the devolved George Eustice: As I have said several times, we do equivalents of those, on a joint approach to marketing not recognise the caricature that the budget has been our fantastic food and produce around the world. cut. We were clear that we would maintain the budget in cash terms for each year of this Parliament. That is Damian Hinds (East Hampshire) (Con): It is right precisely what we have done. that the equipment and technology fund and the transformation fund should focus on core agricultural Tony Lloyd (Rochdale) (Lab) [V]: I very much welcome business and productivity, but can my right hon. Friend what the Minister has had to say about the restoration also reassure me that his Department will continue to of peatlands, but can he go a little further in terms of support farm diversification, which has been so important the natural environment? Does he guarantee that there to so many Hampshire farmers? will be less use, for example, of phosphates and therefore less phosphate run-off? Does he guarantee that we will George Eustice: My right hon. Friend makes a very see no return to the use of the pernicious neonicotinoids important point and I can confirm that that will be that are so damaging to our pollinators, which are so possible. We made some changes to the Agriculture Bill necessary to our agriculture? that was brought through this Parliament to ensure it could support farm diversification projects to help farmers George Eustice: As we have outlined in the paper add value. published today, we want to incentivise farmers to Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab): Many embrace integrated pest management. Across the piece, farmers in my area of Warwick and Leamington and we are likely to see reductions in the use of synthetic the villages around are really concerned. As far as they chemistry and the adoption of other processes to tackle are concerned, they are in business—they have been the problems of pests and diseases. It is also the case farmers for generations to look after and steward the land, that we want to be able to support the restoration of but also to look after their herds and to produce the peatlands and so forth. grain and crops that we depend on. Their real concern is Richard Fuller (North East ) (Con): I to do with livestock, where 80% of their income has come thank my right hon. Friend for outlining the principles from the BPS—basic payment scheme—payments. They and programmes for these changes in payments. As he see the proposed changes as being all about preserving a will be aware, however, it will be in the implementation landscape, not about preserving food resilience and of those programmes and the inspection of those schemes their businesses. that issues will appear. Farmers will have worries about George Eustice: It is important to note that since the the implications of not changing, transitioning and advent of area-based payments the subsidy payments falling in accordance with the new plans. What reassurance have been totally decoupled from production. Indeed, can he give to farmers about how implementation will had we had our time again a better way to have done it take place? might have been to introduce conditionality to the old payments that were there before. It is already the case George Eustice: I can reassure my hon. Friend that I that there are people who own a plot of land and claim am alive to that danger.When introducing any new scheme, on it but who are not actually producing food. The logic it is critical that we do not over-engineer its design and of our policy today is to focus the payments towards that we tack towards simplicity to make sure that things what farmers do with the land, not just dole out money are deliverable. What we want to do on this new scheme based on how much land they own. is move away from the endless form filling, endless mapping, and arguments over maps, and instead get to Mrs Flick Drummond (Meon Valley) (Con) [V]: The a position where a trusted adviser or agronomist walks chalky soils of the Meon Valley are very different from the farm with the farmer, sits down around the kitchen the peatlands of the Derbyshire dales, so how will my table and helps them put together a plan that is right for right hon. Friend ensure that farmers in all areas are their farm. incentivised to improve soil quality, for sustainability as well as for farming? Peter Grant (Glenrothes) (SNP) [V]: Moran Taing, Mr Deputy Speaker, agus Latha Noamh Anndra sona George Eustice: My hon. Friend makes an incredibly dhuibh. A happy St Andrews Day to you. important point. We made an explicit change to the Agriculture Bill in this latest incarnation to ensure that I recently met Fife and Kinross representatives of the soil health was recognised as a public good. Different National Farmers Union, Scotland. They already face soil types need different approaches and different treatments severe problems because of combined impacts of the to bring them back into health. We are working with a covid pandemic, the looming chaos of Brexit and serious number of stakeholders and universities now to establish difficulties in recruiting seasonal workers. Now we find how best to manage and measure soil health on a range that farmers in Scotland are likely to face a funding loss of different soils, and we will have incentives in place to of £170 million compared with what the Tories promised support that endeavour. in their manifesto. The president of the NFUS says that this will undermine the crucial delivery of promises to Jonathan Edwards (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) meet climate change and biodiversity challenges. Why (Ind): While this statement refers to the future of English should I believe that the Minister is right and that the policy, what future does the Secretary of State see for president of the NFUS is wrong? 53 Agricultural Transition Plan 30 NOVEMBER 2020 54

George Eustice: I think I have explained at the Dispatch Patrick Finucane: Box several times the cause of the confusion that there Supreme Court Judgment might have been. It is because people are trying to compare a seven plus three year—a 10-year—EU budget with a five-year parliamentary term that we have set for 5.23 pm the current budget. We cannot compare two entirely different timescales for a quantum of sum of money. The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Brandon Lewis): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a Greg Smith (Buckingham) (Con): For transparency, I statement. remind the House that my wife’s family are farmers in The murder of Patrick Finucane on 12 February receipt of subsidy. I warmly welcome my right hon. 1989 in front of his family was an appalling crime that Friend’s statement and, as we set our own trade policy has caused tremendous suffering. It occurred during a for the first time in decades, have enormous optimism difficult and dark period in this nation’s history, which for the future of British farming. It is also the case, brought untold pain to many families across the United though, that farmers face a great deal of uncertainty as Kingdom and, indeed, Ireland. demonstrated by the weather conditions that led to a Northern Ireland has made massive strides since the particularly poor 2020 for so many. With that in mind, Belfast/Good Friday agreement to create a vibrant, will he outline when the detail of the sustainable farming inclusive and forward-looking future. However,the legacy incentive and other bridging schemes will come forward of the troubles for many still hangs like a shadow over so that farmers can have certainty as they plan for the society. This Government are determined to work hand future? in hand with the people of Northern Ireland from all George Eustice: We will be publishing more papers in communities, with victims and survivors, and with our the new year on some of the more specific elements of Irish partners. We want to find a way to bring truth and scheme designs, including the voluntary exit scheme, reconciliation where there is currently hurt, and where which we mention in the paper today. As I said earlier, too many people continue to suffer due to the absence in the first six months of next year, we will be consulting of information about the circumstances of the deaths of on the design of the sustainable farming incentive. their loved ones. It is plain that the levels of collusion in the Finucane Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans): Happy St case, made clear by previous investigations, are totally Andrew’s day to all my Scottish friends, wherever you unacceptable. Former Prime Minister may be. I thank the Secretary of State for his statement rightly apologised publicly in 2012, and I unreservedly and for responding to 39 questions.The House is suspended repeat that apology today. I also acknowledge that an for three minutes. apology cannot undo history, and nor can it alleviate the years of pain that the Finucane family have felt. It is 5.20 pm none the less right that this Government acknowledge Sitting suspended. that, at the height of the troubles, actions were taken that fell far short of what can and should be expected. The murder of Patrick Finucane has been the subject of a considerable number of investigations and reviews, including the Stevens 3 investigation and the de Silva review. These investigations led to the conviction of Ken Barrett, a loyalist terrorist who pled guilty to the murder. In February 2019, the Supreme Court made a declaration that the state had not discharged its obligation to conduct an article 2-compliant investigation into the death of Mr Finucane. That judgment specifically set out that it is for the state to decide what form of investigation, if indeed any is now feasible, is required in order to meet that requirement. It did not order a public inquiry, but in considering all the options open to me to meet the state’s obligations under article 2, I have considered whether a public inquiry would be the most appropriate step to address the specific findings of the courts at this time. I have, this afternoon, spoken to the Finucane family. I advised them of my decision not to establish a public inquiry at this time. Our public statement, published this afternoon, set out the considered rationale for this decision, which I will now explain directly to the House. In reaching its conclusion, the Supreme Court identified a number of issues with previous investigations in this case. First, there was no identification of the officers within the Royal Ulster Constabulary,Security Service and Secret Intelligence Service who failed to warn Patrick Finucane of known threats to his life in 1981 and 1985, together 55 Patrick Finucane: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Patrick Finucane: 56 Supreme Court Judgment Supreme Court Judgment [Brandon Lewis] steps in this case. Critically, a review would consider whether further investigative steps could be taken in with the circumstances in which these failures occurred. this case and whether the PSNI should do this—these Secondly, there was no identification of the RUC officers were key elements of the Supreme Court judgment. It who, as Desmond de Silva said, probably did propose is, quite properly, for the Chief Constable of the PSNI Mr Finucane as a target for loyalist terrorists in December to determine the precise scope and format of any review, 1988. Thirdly, there was no identification of the police in accordance with their own priorities and review source who provided intelligence about Patrick Finucane procedures, and the police have indicated that they expect to Ken Barrett. that any review would need to be conducted independently The Supreme Court identified these shortcomings of the PSNI. Such a process, in addition to the ongoing and other failures of process, but it did not render the investigations being conducted by the police ombudsman, previous reviews and investigations, which resulted in can play an important role in addressing the issues significant findings and information being released into identified by the Supreme Court. I want to be clear: I the public domain, null and void. The work conducted am not taking the possibility of a public inquiry off the by, and the findings of, those previous independent table at this stage. It is important that we allow the investigations and reviews remain valid. The state’s PSNI and police ombudsman processes to move forward, article 2 obligations can be met through a series of and that we avoid the risk of prejudicing any emerging processes taken by independent authorities on the initiative conclusions from their work. I will then consider all options of the state, which, cumulatively, can establish the facts available to me to meet the Government’s obligations. and identify the perpetrators and hold them to account I assure the House that this decision has been taken where sufficient evidence exists. following careful consideration of the facts, the findings In June 2019, an independent review of previous of the Supreme Court judgment, the outcome of the investigations was commissioned by my right hon. Friend independent counsel review and the United Kingdom’s the Member for Staffordshire Moorlands (). obligations under article 2 of the European convention The first purpose of this review was to gain a clear on human rights. This Government have demonstrated understanding of what investigative steps had already that when the public interest requires it, we will establish been taken to identify all individuals of concern. Its public inquiries to look at any potential failings by second purpose was to understand the actions taken as government or state bodies, as, for example, we have part of previous investigations in respect of these individuals. done in the case of the Manchester bombing. In this The review was conducted by independent counsel from instance, I believe it is in the public interest to allow the Northern Ireland. It highlighted that steps had in fact police and ombudsman processes to proceed before been taken during previous investigations which had taking any decision on whether the state’s article 2 not been considered by the Supreme Court but which obligations have been discharged or whether further were relevant to the issues it identified. For example, it steps are required. found that a number of officers from the Royal Ulster This case, it has to be said, is, sadly, just one example Constabulary and the Army’s force research unit had of the violence and tragedy experienced by so many been interviewed as part of the Stevens investigation, individuals and families across Northern Ireland, the and that Stevens accepted that there was no direct rest of the United Kingdom and indeed Ireland during breach of policy by any individual officer at the time. the troubles. That is why, as a Government, we remain As my right hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire committed to dealing with the legacy of the past in its (Mr Paterson) stated in 2011, accepting that collusion entirety. We are determined to get this right, working occurred is not sufficient in itself. closely with communities. This is vital, so that society in The Government recognise the need to ensure sufficient Northern Ireland can look beyond its divisive past and levels of public scrutiny of critical investigations and towards a shared future. I commend this statement to their results. I am today publishing further information the House. that was considered by the independent counsel in their review since the Supreme Court judgment, some of 5.32 pm which has not previously been released into the public Louise Haigh (Sheffield, Heeley) (Lab): I thank the domain. That includes information pertaining to a Police Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement. First, Service of Northern Ireland review conducted in 2015. may I pay tribute, on behalf of my party, to the widow As set out in the 2015 police review, a number of of Pat Finucane, Geraldine, and her whole family? As issues were referred to the Police Ombudsman for Northern with so many victims I have met, the dignity,determination Ireland in 2016, and also remain subject to investigation. and strength they have shown in the face of horror In addition, the legacy investigation branch of the unimaginable to many of us in this House is humbling, PSNI informed my Department on 2 November 2020 and I know how difficult today has been for them. that Patrick Finucane’s case is shortly due to undergo a The murder of Pat Finucane in 1989, gunned down in process of review in accordance with the priorities set front of his young family in his kitchen by loyalist out in its case sequencing model. The Chief Constable paramilitaries, involved shocking levels of state collusion. confirmed that that is expected to begin early in the It is welcome to hear the Secretary of State repeat new year. former Prime Minister David Cameron’s apology, but To be clear, this is a purely operational police matter. he is right: it is not enough. There has never been an The UK Government, rightly, have no role whatsoever adequate investigation into Pat Finucane’s murder and in determining how or when the police deal with their Supreme Court justice Lord Kerr has said that previous outstanding legacy case load. However, the fact that a investigations have had profound “shortcomings” that decision on a police review is due shortly is an important “have hampered, if not indeed prevented, the uncovering of the development and was a factor in determining the next truth about this murder.” 57 Patrick Finucane: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Patrick Finucane: 58 Supreme Court Judgment Supreme Court Judgment That this crime could happen at all in our country is deal with the legacy of its past, then he must urgently shocking, and that it has never been investigated to a engage with all communities, victims and of course our lawful standard is unjustifiable. We have to ask ourselves, partners to the Good Friday agreement, the Irish as we do with all legacy issues from the troubles: do we Government. This was the essence of the Stormont accept a lesser standard of justice for citizens in Northern House agreement, which his Government committed to Ireland than we would if this terrible crime had happened legislating for just this year. in our own constituencies? The Secretary of State references Today’s announcement is a painful setback for those the Manchester inquiry. Do victims in Northern Ireland who have campaigned for the truth for decades and in not deserve the same transparency and justice? the faith that the Government are committed to I have listened carefully to the Secretary of State, but reconciliation. I would strongly urge the Secretary of the decision he has taken today will be a desperate State, in the further difficult decisions that lie ahead, to disappointment to the Finucanes, and I struggle to see remember the deep responsibility that he has to deliver how he can make the case that it prevents him from the truth to all victims and to reconciliation in Northern remaining in breach of his human rights obligations, as Ireland. the Supreme Court found last year. Indeed, an initial reading suggests that it is at odds with some of the Brandon Lewis: The hon. Lady is absolutely right: we central conclusions the Supreme Court reached. He says all should be working to find a holistic approach to the that through a series of processes the state can cumulatively legacy issues for Northern Ireland. It is something we meet its article 2 obligations. That was the same argument agreed to do and pledged to do as part of the new made by Sir James Eadie for the Government, who said decade, new approach agreement that saw the return of that although the de Silva review had not been article 2 Stormont this year. I think it is a hugely important compliant, previous investigations, taken together, meant piece of work, and it is something we owe to the next it was. It is of fundamental importance that the House generation and the current generations of people across is aware that Lord Kerr rejected that argument in the Northern Ireland of all communities. There are still, as Supreme Court case last year. Furthermore, he said that she said, far too many families across societies in Northern the legal standard had not been met because: Ireland who do not know what happened to members of their family and do not have the details of what “Sir Desmond did not have power to compel the attendance of happened during the troubles. We should all be working witnesses. Those who did meet him were not subject to testing by way of challenging probes as to the veracity and accuracy of their across parties and across society to look at how we can evidence.” get that information so that families can have a way to reconciliation and information that allows that to happen. If Sir Desmond had been able to compel witnesses and That is how we allow Northern Ireland to continue not had had the opportunity to probe their accounts, it may just to build on the peace process, but to really look have led to the identification of those in the police and forward to a more prosperous and forward-looking the security services involved in the targeting of future. That cannot change what happened in the past, Mr Finucane. but it does give families and people an opportunity to It appears that nothing the Secretary of State has know more and to understand across all communities. announced today will make up for these most fundamental I have to say I differ from the hon. Lady in what she shortcomings in previous reviews, and the family have understands is our approach today, because it is quite described his approach as farcical. Is he not concerned the opposite. I have been clear and consistent all the that all this does is leave him open to further legal way through that we want, and I want, to make sure challenge and to being back here in a few months’ or that we are engaged not just across all political parties years’ time? Waiting for a legacy investigation branch in Northern Ireland, but across civic society and in review, which the police themselves acknowledge they dealing with our partners in the Irish Government, to are not operationally independent enough to conduct, whom I speak regularly on these issues as well. We will and an ombudsman’s review of existing evidence is continue to do that work. People were rightly focused simply delaying the inevitability of the only right and over the last few months of this year on dealing with legal course of action. I note that he is not ruling out a covid-19, but it is right that we start to move to talk to full public inquiry in the future. Why does he not grasp people about the future relating to the troubles of the this opportunity to deliver it now? past and how we move forward. We are doing that The troubles were a dark and violent time in our across civic society and across all parties, and we will be history. More than 3,000 civilians, soldiers and police doing so. officers lost their lives. Many have never received justice. I also differ from the hon. Lady in what seems to The trauma of loss and grief from losing loved ones to be her lack of confidence in the PSNI. The PSNI is such violence has been compounded by the prolonged independent. Its review and investigation is independent failures of successive Governments to deliver the truth of Government, and I have confidence in its ability. We about what happened to them. That trauma echoes saw just this summer phenomenal work from the PSNI, through the generations and is felt at a societal level in with partners, on dealing with issues in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland. It is incumbent on the Secretary of I have absolute confidence that it will deal with this State urgently to bring forward legacy proposals that review in the right way and in a proper way. I support would deliver the truth for all victims. It remains the the opinion that the PSNI has outlined: that it will most significant outstanding element of the Good Friday potentially seek to have an independent force work on agreement, 22 years on. However, I regret to say that the this issue. We will support and help it on that, but that is Secretary of State’s unilateral approach so far in dealing a matter for the PSNI. I believe it is right that we allow with legacy has been harmful and hurtful to victims this process and the police ombudsman process, which across Northern Ireland. If we are finally to take is equally independent, to happen and then to look at responsibility in this House for helping Northern Ireland the findings from them, because until we know what 59 Patrick Finucane: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Patrick Finucane: 60 Supreme Court Judgment Supreme Court Judgment [Brandon Lewis] legacy in its entirety and recognising that a great number of people across communities have suffered loss and comes from those reviews and investigations, it is too still do not have information or understanding of what soon to know whether that would bring compliance happened to some of their family. We have to find a way with article 2. The hon. Lady seems to want to prejudge through this. We have a duty to do everything we can to that, but we should let the police do their job. bring that information forward. That is why this week, we will publish further information on this case that has (North ) (Con) [V]: The Secretary not yet been in the public domain. The more information of State has announced a very difficult decision, which we can bring out and secure for families and victims, the he will know is not without consequences. Like many better for the future of Northern Ireland. It is right that with an interest in the affairs of Northern Ireland, my we do that for everybody who was affected. Committee is increasingly perplexed with regard to the Government’s current approach to legacy issues. In Theresa Villiers (Chipping Barnet) (Con): I welcome terms of dealing with legacy and building trust across my right hon. Friend’s statement and support his decision. the communities, what has he assessed the ramification As he said, the murder of Pat Finucane was an appalling, of his announcement today to be, and is he prepared to shocking crime, and the involvement of the state, as publish an update in Hansard of his written ministerial documented by the de Silva review,was utterly unacceptable. statement of 20 March? The lacuna that the Government However, I would urge my right hon. Friend, in his have created in dealing with legacy is causing enormous approach to legacy, not to let the appalling events of consternation on both sides of the community. this case overshadow the reality that the vast majority of those who served in the police and armed services in Brandon Lewis: I would say to my hon. Friend, who Northern Ireland during the troubles did so with the chairs the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, that highest degree of integrity and professionalism. shortly after the statement in March, when we discussed legacy issues with victims groups, they asked us to Brandon Lewis: My right hon. Friend makes a strong pause because the people they represent were facing the point. I know how much time and effort she put into challenges of covid. I felt that that was the right thing to these issues when she was in my role as Secretary of do, so we paused that engagement. Over the last few State. She is absolutely right. As I have said, and as she weeks, I have been talking to civic society, as I do and the right hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sir Jeffrey regularly, and people across civic society and across the M. Donaldson) and former Prime Minister David Cameron communities obviously have a huge interest in legacy. have said, this case is an example of completely unacceptable The point I have made consistently since the written behaviour that fell way below not just what we expect ministerial statement in March this year is that, to move today but what we should have expected at any time. forward on legacy and to move forward in Northern There is no escaping that fact, but this should equally Ireland, we have to bring people together, and as my not distract us from the fact that so many people so hon. Friend rightly says, people across communities often give so much in the defence of our freedom, our have to be clear about what they need to look forward safety and our security across the United Kingdom and and get the information that can lead to reconciliation. have also done so in Northern Ireland, across the armed It is right that we engage widely and deeply with civic forces and through our services as well. society and victims groups, as well as political parties and our partners in the Irish Government, before we Colum Eastwood (Foyle) (SDLP) [V]: I absolutely do come back with proposals. I am determined to do that. not thank the Secretary of State for that statement. The We have a duty to do that—a duty to the people of British state murdered Pat Finucane, and the Secretary Northern Ireland—but we want to do that in a methodical of State has failed miserably to do right by his family and proper way. I hope people will see that going today. Does he not realise that he is sending out a clear through these investigations in a methodical and proper message to all victims? That message is: “If you want way plays a part in that. the truth about what happened to your loved ones, don’t come looking for it here.” Sir Jeffrey M. Donaldson (Lagan Valley) (DUP): We welcome the Secretary of State’s decision. Equally, we Brandon Lewis: I am afraid that I would say quite the condemn the murder of Pat Finucane.On my 21st birthday, opposite. I am saying clearly that there is a process that my friend and colleague Edgar Graham, a lawyer and we will go through and that we want to ensure that we lecturer at Queen’s University, was murdered by the abide by and meet our article 2 obligations. We will Provisional IRA. There were people involved—not only assess this again following the PSNI investigation and the gunman, but others who gave information that led the police ombudsman’s work. That is a clear message to his murder, pointing the finger towards Edgar’s about following proper due process and letting those movements and so on. Is it not the case that all innocent investigations work through to see what information we victims are entitled to access to justice and to truth, can bring out. Ultimately, the aim of all the work we including the family of Edgar Graham, a young lawyer should be doing on the legacy is to ensure that we secure cut down in his prime, and that what we really need is information for families who have been waiting for it for not special attention to any one case but an holistic far too long. approach to legacy that enables all innocent victims to have access to truth and justice? Sir Robert Neill (Bromley and Chislehurst) (Con) [V]: I appreciate that these are very sensitive issues and that Brandon Lewis: The right hon. Gentleman makes a this was a difficult decision for my right hon. Friend to very powerful point. That is why I specifically made the make. I was pleased to hear him say just now that the point in my opening remarks about dealing with the Government accept their obligations under article 2. 61 Patrick Finucane: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Patrick Finucane: 62 Supreme Court Judgment Supreme Court Judgment Will he confirm that they also accept their obligations Brandon Lewis: We speak to the Irish Government under section 6 of the Human Rights Act? I was a regularly, and I have spoken to them today. Before I professional friend and colleague of the late Sir Desmond came to the House, I spoke to the Irish Government de Silva. Would my right hon. Friend accept that the and to the Finucane family. difficulties with his inquiry were related not to any lack of professionalism or integrity on Sir Desmond’s part Stephen Farry (North Down) (Alliance): This is a but to the procedural constraints that were placed upon very poor decision. It comes on top of sidelining the him and that that was what caused the Supreme Court Stormont House agreement, which is the key to a to find that, thus far, the article 2 obligations had not comprehensive approach for all victims. But the Finucane been met? Will my right hon. Friend confirm that no case in particular raises serious questions about the rule such procedural constraints will be placed on the ongoing of law, actions of the state and accountability. I strongly inquiries and investigations and that the Government support the PSNI, but this approach turns back the will ensure that the article 2 obligations, as set out by clock in terms of investigations. How does it enable the Supreme Court’s judgment, will be complied with documents and witnesses to be compelled and how is it fully and in a timely manner? compatible with the independence required under article 2 of the European convention on human rights? Brandon Lewis: We are absolutely committed to our obligations under article 2. That is why I have said that I Brandon Lewis: As I have outlined to the hon. Gentleman will reassess this, following the work by the PSNI and before, the principles of Stormont House are important. the police ombudsman. On the question of scope, as a More widely, in looking at how we deal with legacy police-led investigation, this obviously has different issues and the issues of the troubles, that ability for connotations and different powers from those that Desmond reconciliation and information is built on those Stormont de Silva had, and that is quite right. This is a matter for House principles, and we must ensure that we deliver on the PSNI, which is independent of the Government, that. In this particular case, I say to the hon. Gentleman and it will be for the Chief Constable to outline the that the PSNI is independent. It has already indicated remit and the process of the review. As I said, he intends that it expects and will seek to appoint an independent to start that early next year. In fact, he told me that he force to look at this. I support it in that, but it is a matter hoped it would start in January. The PSNI will be for the Chief Constable of the PSNI. Obviously, the engaging with the Finucane family around that work, PSNI has its own abilities in a police investigation, and and we will ensure that it does so ahead of the work it will set its remit for taking the case forward. beginning in early 2021. Rob Butler (Aylesbury) (Con): Picking up from the Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD): previous point, will my right hon. Friend give a little If I can accentuate the positive, I welcome the fact that more clarity on the PSNI review of the Finucane case to the Secretary of State says that the question of a future allay any concerns that the PSNI would be marking its public inquiry is not yet off the table. However, I have to own homework? tell him that his reliance on police and ombudsman inquiries as a justification would have a lot more weight Brandon Lewis: My hon. Friend makes an important if the case were new or recent. But it is 31 years plus point. We need to be clear about the difference between since Pat Finucane was murdered. We have had the the PSNI process and the police ombudsman work. The apologies for collusion, but as others have said, that can independent Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland never be enough. Surely, those who seek truth and will look at the actions and the activities of the Royal closure in other cases would find that their case for the Ulster Constabulary.The PSNI will look at the case through same closure that the Finucane family want through a the eyes of a police force. It is operationally independent public inquiry was enhanced not diminished by holding of the Government, and as I said, it has indicated that it a public inquiry. is likely to ask an independent force to take the case forward. I therefore believe that we can have confidence Brandon Lewis: I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman in the PSNI’s independence and in that of the process. appreciates that every case is different and has to be assessed on its merits. That is how the judicial process Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP): and the police process work. It is right that we allow the There can be no justification or reservation regarding police process to do its work. We have seen that evidence, the murder of Pat Finucane. However, unlike thousands including some evidence to the Northern Ireland Affairs of other wrong and unjustifiable murders, there have been Committee, from Operation Kenova, is bringing out investigations, people in court and people convicted of information and understanding that was not there about this murder. Thousands of other relatives had none of things that happened many decades ago. There are those outcomes. Does the Secretary of State agree that good examples of new bits of information and evidence to properly deal with the past, we need to see the same and of how evidence can be assessed differently as unequivocal condemnation from across the House of techniques have changed, which recent work has shown, the murder of Pat Finucane applied to all the other particularly Operation Kenova. That is positive, but we murders, including the terror campaign that was carried will assess the matter after the processes are completed out by the organisation that Pat Finucane’s brothers, so that we continue to ensure that we fulfil our article 2 Seamus, John and Dermot, were part of for many years? obligations. Brandon Lewis: The hon. Gentleman has just highlighted Joy Morrissey (Beaconsfield) (Con): Has my right the strength of feeling across communities on this issue, hon. Friend spoken to the Irish Government about this and understandably so. It is absolutely right that we are matter? all clear that there are too many people from across 63 Patrick Finucane: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Patrick Finucane: 64 Supreme Court Judgment Supreme Court Judgment [Brandon Lewis] how they take this case forward. I have confidence not only in their independence, but in their expertise and Northern Ireland—and, indeed, the rest of the United professionalism to do that in a proper way. It is after Kingdom—who lost people and who still do not have those reviews that we will fully assess where we are in the information about and understanding of what happened terms of article 2 obligations, before making any further in the way that they should. We must all work to ensure decisions, to ensure that we have completed them. that we are doing everything that we can to get that information, with a pathway to reconciliation for people. Craig Williams (Montgomeryshire) (Con): I broadly Any life lost is one too many, and none of us should be welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. Members on doing anything other than respecting the people who both sides of this House appreciate that he has one of lost people through the troubles in such tragic circumstances the most difficult jobs in government and the weight of and often in a way that none of us today could ever history on his shoulders. May I draw him on the article 2 excuse. obligations to which he alluded? Does he believe that this course of action fully discharged our obligations Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans): I just want to under article 2? remind everybody to take care that they do not make reference to any live cases that may be ongoing at the moment. Brandon Lewis: My hon. Friend asks a hugely important question, and the very straight answer to the House is Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con) [V]: I welcome that I cannot answer that yet; I do not know. I believe that my right hon. Friend’s statement. Will he set out for the these are the right next steps in terms of our article 2 House what he expects the timescales to be for these obligations. As I have said, we will assess things after reviews? This has all gone on over an extended period. these processes have gone through. They could well be The family are clearly concerned. Indeed, everyone in hugely important in the information they contribute, this House will be concerned about the length of time but the final decision on where we are with article 2 for which this has been allowed to drag on. If he could compliance will have to be taken after those processes give us a position on timescales, I think that would have completed and we can assess what they have settle some of the issues of concern. brought in terms of information and understanding of the case. Brandon Lewis: As always, my hon. Friend makes an accurate point. Owing to the independence of the PSNI, Dave Doogan (Angus) (SNP) [V]: The Secretary of the exact timing of the process is a matter for it. As I State rightly acknowledges that this was an appalling said earlier, it is expecting to start in early 2021. I saw crime, but then continues that it was in a difficult and the Chief Constable about a week or 10 days ago, when dark period in this nation’s history—a qualification that he indicated to me that it could well start as early as changes nothing, because no context is relevant here. It January. The PSNI will be engaging with the family to is not for the state or its agencies to uphold the rule of seek their views on how they wish to engage with the law when it is easy; indeed, the obligation may be seen process before that happens. The question how long the to increase commensurately with any extenuating challenge review will take to go forward is an operational matter in compliance. Almost 32 years later, there will still be for the PSNI. Operational matters—even if they are no public inquiry ordered by the British state into its part of the review process in investigation cases—are a collusion in this crime. How does he expect Pat Finucane’s matter for the PSNI, which is operationally independent. family to maintain confidence regarding this latest failure to secure justice through a public inquiry? Tony Lloyd (Rochdale) (Lab) [V]: I very much regret the Secretary of State’s decision; it is the wrong one. I Brandon Lewis: I suggest that the hon. Gentleman am sure that we will return to a public inquiry in the looks back at my statement in Hansard later on, because fullness of time. Does he accept the fact that the decision he has misunderstood the point I was making. This was not to hold a public inquiry looks like the state still a dark time—that is a simple fact of the reality of the determined to protect the state? This was no failure by troubles. I am sure we are all pleased that the Good actors of the state; it was collusion by agents of the Friday/Belfast agreement has meant that we have been state. Of course, the reality is that we still need to find able to move forward from that period and develop a out how far that collusion went. Can the Secretary of peace process that is leading to prosperity in Northern State be specific: will the PSNI and ombudsman inquiry Ireland that we should be building on. have access to the records of the security services? Without that, frankly, their own inquiries will not come I have spoken to the Finucane family today.I understand to the conclusions that we need to be put into the public and appreciate that they will be disappointed by the domain. decision we have made today, because they clearly would like to see a public inquiry. The decision we have to Brandon Lewis: The hon. Gentleman has a long history make and the decision I have made is around what is of working on issues for Northern Ireland; it is good to in the public interest and what the right steps are in see him today, even via video link. As the former Prime completing our obligations under article 2, as per the Minister David Cameron outlined and as I have reconfirmed Supreme Court’s decisions. today, the fact that we have apologised for the collusion The police investigation and the police ombudsman’s that happened—the unacceptable levels—is in the public work in its investigation is an important part of that domain. That was a matter of record back in 2011, as process. We have to see what comes through with that. I we all know and have discussed a few times today. The think it is right that we allow that methodical approach operational independence of the PSNI means that this to happen without pre-judging what the outcomes of is a matter for the PSNI. They will assess the remit and that may be or creating a dual piece of work that could 65 Patrick Finucane: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Patrick Finucane: 66 Supreme Court Judgment Supreme Court Judgment prejudice the work of the police or the police ombudsman. In this case, I will be happy to give the PSNI all the That is the right way forward and the proper due support it needs to go through this process in a proper, process to follow. efficient way, while always respecting the fact that it is an independent, autonomous body. We have to respect (Gedling) (Con): Would I be right in its independence to do its work properly and professionally, concluding from my right hon. Friend’s statement that as I know it will. while a public inquiry has not been ruled out, at this stage to proceed with one would not much advance the Gavin Robinson (Belfast East) (DUP): May I thank matter and, in fact, would become entangled with the the Secretary of State for outlining what I believe was a PSNI review he has announced? fair and balanced response to the House today? I think he has very clearly dealt with the issues, and recognises that the complexity of our legacy and our past means Brandon Lewis: My hon. Friend asks a good question. that there are many hundreds, if not thousands, of It is right that with the PSNI taking forward this review families who equally have a sincere and earnest desire and investigation and the police ombudsman doing its for truth and justice, and that all needs to be considered review and investigative work, it could be prejudicial to in the round. have another process running alongside. In terms of assessing whether the Government have fulfilled our However, if the Secretary of State is committed to article 2 obligations, we need to let these processes work informing us of his plans on legacy in the weeks to through and then make that decision. come, can I ask him sincerely to reconsider the position he has adopted: that the Northern Ireland Office and Her Majesty’s Government will not financially support Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab): In 2012, victims’ pensions? It was his Government that extended Sir Desmond de Silva QC’s review found that the eligibility criteria last year, doing so in a way that “a series of positive actions by employers of the State that increased the costs exponentially, and gave commitments actively furthered and facilitated his murder”, in “New Decade, New Approach”. If the Secretary of yet even that review had serious shortcomings, as identified State is sincere about dealing with legacy and supporting by the Supreme Court. At long last, the Government those who are victims of our troubled past, will he put must hold a full public inquiry into the murder of his money where his mouth is and make sure that lawyer Patrick Finucane, because in direct contravention people get the support they so desperately need? of what the Secretary of State has just mentioned, the chief constable of the PSNI has said it is Brandon Lewis: The hon. Gentleman makes a hugely “our view that there are currently no new lines of inquiry. We now important point, and I fully accept and agree with what need to decide if a further review is merited given all the previous he said in the first part of his question. I firmly believe investigations into this case.” that we have a duty to find a way forward on legacy that allows families to have an understanding, and to get Why is the Secretary of State procrastinating and adding that information and reconciliation for Northern Ireland, to the heartache and pain of the Finucane family? building on the peace and prosperity we have seen since the Belfast/Good Friday agreement. That is a duty we Brandon Lewis: I think I have answered the hon. should all take seriously, and we should do everything Gentleman’s question several times already today. The we can, working across civic society, to find a way simple fact is that on 2 November, the PSNI notified my forward that we can all come together and deliver on. Department of the investigative review process it will be The hon. Gentleman also makes an important point starting in early 2021. I think he might be getting his about victims’ payments, which I will answer briefly, timelines wrong in terms of what he is referring to, Mr Deputy Speaker, if you will allow me. I do think because it is not until that is completed that the PSNI that victims have waited for far too long. I was hugely can know whether there is anything new that will also disappointed with how long it took to get even the inform our decision around our article 2 obligations. designation of the Department arranged by the Northern That is the right process. I trust the PSNI to do its job Ireland Executive; I am as frustrated as others that that professionally. is not there. To be fair, I know that the Department of Justice and the Minister are working hard, along with Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con): I would like to see the First Minister, to get this done as quickly as possible, more focus on all the unsolved murders in Northern and both are equally passionate about delivering for the Ireland. I welcome the independent involvement of the victims. legacy investigation branch into the murder of Patrick Bearing in mind that the Northern Ireland Executive Finucane. However, can I be reassured by my right hon. have had somewhere in the region of £20 billion this Friend that the branch will be given sufficient resources, year, even as part of the £15 billion block grant, it is access to records and the time to determine what exactly important that they work out what amount of that happened on that fateful day 31 years ago? money they are putting into something that they—including the Deputy First Minister—say is a priority, to make Brandon Lewis: On the budgetary issue, obviously the sure that money gets to the victims who need it. I investigatory work that the PSNI is doing on cases, encourage the Department of Finance to pull together including this case coming forward, is part of its budgetary an independent fiscal council, as agreed under “New plan. I share my hon. Friend’s view that we must all be Decade, New Approach”, to get proper transparency working to secure information for families right across about these finances, which will help budget in a way the United Kingdom, and particularly those affected by that will mean it can properly fund the Department the troubles in Northern Ireland, who do not yet have of Justice, through the Executive, to deliver on this that information. He is absolutely right about that. for victims. 67 Patrick Finucane: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Patrick Finucane: 68 Supreme Court Judgment Supreme Court Judgment Brendan Clarke-Smith (Bassetlaw) (Con): Can my interesting work that has been submitted to the Northern right hon. Friend confirm that he is fully convinced that Ireland Affairs Committee in its report on legacy. We the path forward he has set out today in his statement to will engage widely with civic society as well as political this House fully discharges the Government’s duties parties and our partners in the Irish Government to so and responsibilities towards meeting the Supreme Court’s that Northern Ireland can look forward, while never statements about this case? forgetting the past, to reconciliation, with information for survivors and victims at the heart of that. Brandon Lewis: Yes, I think this is the right next step: for the police and the police ombudsman to do their Mary Kelly Foy (City of Durham) (Lab): I am appalled work, so that we can then assess whether we have fully that the Secretary of State has failed to grant an independent completed our obligations under article 2. Once those public inquiry. What that means is that the UK, in effect, processes have finished, we will make that assessment remains in breach of our international human rights and take any decisions we need to, because we are obligations.The Finucane family and the wider community determined to make sure we deliver on those obligations. in Northern Ireland have been let down once again. With reference to anyfuture criminal conduct authorisations Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP): Tens of arising from the Covert Human Intelligence Sources millions—indeed, hundreds of millions—of pounds have (Criminal Conduct) Bill, does the Secretary of State already been spent on four investigations into the murder agree that intelligence sources should never be offered of Pat Finucane, whose family have well-documented blanket immunity from criminal or civil prosecutions? terrorist links. One brother died while engaged in terrorist activity and two were captured while engaged in terrorist Brandon Lewis: I am afraid that I disagree with the activity.Indeed, informers have alleged that Pat Finucane hon. Lady about the process that we are going through. himself, for one reason or another, was the solicitor of We are determined and focused on delivering on our choice for IRA terrorists when they were captured. The article 2 obligations, as I have outlined. I would also expenditure contrasts starkly with the derisory efforts suggest that she looks at the information that we will that have been made to deal with the cases of thousands now be publishing. It has not been in the public domain of people who were killed by the IRA, which have not before this stage, and it is an important part of the been investigated and for which no one has been brought process, as is the work of the police ombudsman and to justice. the Police Service of Northern Ireland. We thank people across society for the work they have done to keep this It is a great pity that the Secretary of State has not country safe at various times in our history. today ruled out unequivocally the expenditure of more British taxpayers’ money on further investigation some Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): I too thank the time in the future. I think that many people in Northern Secretary of State for his statement. I wish to extend my Ireland would have had much more comfort had he sympathy to those who grieve the loss of their father, done so. husband, son and brother, but will the Secretary of State further outline whether the rationale used to exclude Brandon Lewis: I hear what the right hon. Gentleman this case from public inquiry is the same as the criteria has said. We have a core judgment that outlines that we used to refuse requests for inquiries into the La Mon have not yet fulfilled the article 2 obligations. We are atrocity, for example, where 12 were killed and 30 were clear that we will seek to do that. This is the next step of injured, including my constituent Billy McDowell and the process. As I say, the Police Service of Northern his late wife Lily, or the slaughter of the four Ulster Ireland and the police ombudsman are independent in Defence Regiment men, John Birch, Michael Adams, terms of coming to those conclusions and decisions. We Steven Smart and Lance Corporal Bradley, at Ballydugan will let them do their work. I agree with his point about outside Downpatrick some 30 years ago? Weneed equality, people across Northern Ireland who have lost their and we want to see it. lives, been injured or lost loved ones in the troubles. It is important that we all do all we can to get to the bottom Brandon Lewis: The hon. Gentleman highlights, as of what happened. It was unacceptable and we should have other colleagues this afternoon, some of the tragic work together across parties, across civic society and circumstances and the importance of people across all with our partners in the Irish Government to get as communities, and us all, understanding the losses that much information as we can for those families, so that have been seen across all communities. I would just say we can understand what happened and move forward to him, as I have said, that every case has to be looked at into a period of reconciliation. on the merits of that individual case. In this particular case, as I say, I believe the next steps are the right ones: Scott Benton (Blackpool South) (Con): I welcome my to allow the PSNI and the police ombudsman to do right hon. Friend’s statement, and specifically the decision their work. not to proceed with a full public inquiry at this time for the reasons that he outlined. Does he agree that there is Rachel Hopkins (Luton South) (Lab): I, too, am so much more we can do to help individuals in Northern thoroughly disappointed that the Secretary of State has Ireland on both sides of the community to heal the not decided to grant a full public inquiry into the death wounds from the past? The broad approach outlined in of Pat Finucane. Concern over the Secretary of State’s the legacy proposals can help to deliver that in a fair, approach to dealing with legacy is not limited to Opposition consistent and clear manner. Members; the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee said that the proposals in his March statement raised Brandon Lewis: My hon. Friend makes a powerful “profound legal, ethical and human rights issues.” point. He is right that there is not just a duty on us, but Does he agree with that assessment? Will he commit to a desire in all of us to give people the ability to reconcile resetting his approach to dealing with legacy to win and move forward. I have seen some of the really back the trust of victims and their families? 69 Patrick Finucane: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 70 Supreme Court Judgment Brandon Lewis: I do not agree with what the hon. Telecommunications (Security) Bill Lady has outlined. The March statement was the start of a conversation, which, as I said, we obviously paused; [Relevant Documents: Oral evidence taken before the victims groups particularly requested that we pause it Science and Technology Committee on 24 June, 9 and while they were dealing with that first core wave of 22 July, 30 September and 28 October 2020, on UK covid. My view has been, as I have said all along, that I telecommunications infrastructure and the UK’s domestic want to engage with civic society, as well as political capability, HC 450; Second Report of the Defence parties and our partners in the Irish Government, on Committee, Session 2019-21, The Security of 5G,HC 201.] legacy—on finding a way forward that we can then Second Reading. bring back. I find it interesting sometimes to read what 6.20 pm people assume is our position when I have not outlined it yet. It is important that we engage and listen to the people of Northern Ireland rather than making The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and assumptions. Sport (Oliver Dowden): I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time. Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Nigel Evans): I thank the Cutting-edge technology such as 5G and gigabit Secretary of State for his statement and for responding broadband have the potential to transform our lives to 25 questions. The House stands suspended for three and this Government are investing billions of pounds in minutes. their roll-out nationwide, but we can only have confidence Virtual participation in proceedings concluded (Order, in that technology if we know it is secure, and this Bill 4 June). will create one of the toughest telecoms security regimes in the world, one that will protect our networks even as 6.16 pm technologies grow and evolve, shielding our critical Sitting suspended. national infrastructure both now and for the future. This Bill acts on the recommendations of the United Kingdom telecoms supply chain review, which in turn was informed by the expert technical advice at the National Cyber Security Centre in GCHQ. First, it establishes a tough new security framework for all the UK’s public telecoms providers. This will be overseen by and the Government, and they will have a legal duty to design and manage their networks securely. Rigorous new security requirements will be set out in secondary legislation, and codes of practice will set technical guidance on how providers should meet the law, and where providers are found wanting, Ofcom will have the power to impose steep fines. For example, under the current regime fines for failing to protect security are limited to just £2 million or £20,000 per day, while under the new regime they will rise significantly, to up to 10% of turnover or £100,000 per day. Under the current regime Ofcom has limited monitoring and enforcement powers. Under the new regime it will have the power to enter premises of telecoms providers, to interview staff and to require technical systems tests. If we pass this Bill, few other countries in the world will have a tougher enforcement regime, and the point of this Bill is not just to tackle one high-risk vendor; it raises the security bar across the board and protects us against a whole range of threats. According to the NCSC, the past two years have seen malicious cyber-activity from Russia and China as well as North Korea and Iranian actors. While I know that telecoms providers are working hard to protect our networks against this hostile activity, the Government have lacked the power to ensure they do so. This Bill puts a robust security framework in place, guaranteeing the protection of our networks.

Mr (Bournemouth East) (Con): It feels like a long time since we had debates about Huawei at, I think, the beginning of the year, which perhaps started this national conversation about our critical national infrastructure. My right hon. Friend speaks about threats: what is the biggest long-term geostrategic threat facing the UK now? 71 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 72

Oliver Dowden: The purpose of this Bill is to give us (Tonbridge and Malling) (Con): I flexibility so that we do not get bound by the particular welcome both the Secretary of State’s direction and his circumstances of today, and we have designed it to give much earlier than expected announcement of no new us that. The four big threats we consistently face in installations. Does he agree that this fundamentally cyber in this country are, as my right hon. Friend knows, changes the incentives on any boardroom for using any in relation to Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, and kit—in this case, Huawei—that is a risk? The cost is we are seeing an evolution in some of those threats, going to be laid with the company—that they will have particularly in relation to China. to remove it anyway—which changes the pricing structure This new security framework is just one half of the that any other company would have to bid for. Bill; the second half gives the Government unprecedented new national security powers to identify and tackle Oliver Dowden: My hon. Friend makes a very important high-risk vendors. Under the Bill the Government will point, and I will be coming on to that in a minute. It is be able to designate specific vendors that pose risks to actually happening now because telecoms providers and our national security and issue directions to telecoms mobile network operators know three things. They have providers to control their use of goods, services or to remove Huawei equipment in respect of 5G by 2027 facilities provided by those vendors. entirely. They cannot purchase any equipment from the end of this year, and—I will come on to this shortly—we have double locked that, as it were, by having the Mr Kevan Jones (North Durham) (Lab): In principle, installation requirement. Mobile network operators are I welcome the Bill. Its focus, however, is on kit, hardware already working on that assumption. and vendors, and that will go some way towards protecting our telecoms systems, but we are also still facing threats Mr Kevan Jones: I find that very strange because the from hacking, so making sure we have basic good Bill is about security. The Secretary of State is now cyber-hygiene will be just as important as some of these saying that he is introducing proposals which mean that measures we are discussing today. if, for example, Vodafone or any other operator has got some stock in, it cannot put it in from the end of this Oliver Dowden: In short, yes, the right hon. Gentleman year. What is the security risk there? The only reason we is absolutely correct. What this Bill does is bite in three changed the projections earlier last year—which I respects. First, it sets out the overarching duties on supported—was the US sanctions on future kit. There mobile network operators and other telecoms providers is not a security risk to the kit that is going in now so in statute. It then empowers the Government through how can he use this Bill, on security, for doing that? Is secondary legislation to provide further requirements this not just a political decision that he is making? on them. On top of that, for the tier 1 providers, which will basically be all the big telecoms providers, it also Oliver Dowden: To clarify the position for the right introduces a code of practice whereby they have to hon.Gentleman,mobilenetworkoperatorscannotpurchase comply with that to ensure that they are secure. Across from December this year—so they can purchase it now— the board, the Bill tightens the requirements on them. and the installation limit will then apply from September 2021. The point of these measures is to address the concerns Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con): To follow up on the that Members rightly raised that companies could be comments of my good friend the right hon. Member for incentivised to purchase large amounts of stock, stockpile North Durham (Mr Jones), does the Bill also give it and then roll it out right the way through to 2027. I added protection to private individuals using their mobile told the House in July that I would set us on a clear and phone, to stop them having it tapped by, say, a unambiguous path to 2027, and these measures do reporter? exactly that. (Vale of Glamorgan) (Con): Does the Oliver Dowden: I cannot imagine what my hon. Friend Secretary of State agree that, associated with the Bill, is alluding to. This is aimed at the telecoms providers, there needs to be a plan for the greatest diversity in the but in tightening the security requirements on them, it supply chains? That is the long-term solution, because in turn, of course, tightens the security for individual part of the challenge is that we have ended up focusing telecoms users. The Bill makes it a duty for telecoms on one supplier, Huawei, which has been dominant in providers to comply with those directions and introduces this field. What action is he taking in that area? robust penalties for those that fail to do so. The point is that these powers will protect us against Oliver Dowden: I thank my right hon. Friend for his both the high-risk vendors of today and the threats of intervention. The interventions are tempting me to jump tomorrow. I know that for right hon. and hon. Members around points that I intend to make, but he is right there are significant concerns about one high-risk vendor, about the importance of diversification. Wehave published Huawei. This has rightly attracted the attention and the diversification strategy,which is available for Members concern of many hon. Members and I want, first, to to examine, and I will come on to it in a moment. reassure them that I have heard them, that I am acting It is this Bill and this Bill alone that gives Members and that I am taking a clear-eyed approach to protecting the assurances they seek for the security of our networks our national security. both now and in the future. Further to the point made In July, I announced that UK telecoms providers by my hon. Friend the Member for Tonbridge and should cease to procure any new 5G equipment from Malling (Tom Tugendhat), operators are already taking Huawei after 31 December 2020 and remove all Huawei our approach seriously—they are working now to meet equipment from our 5G networks by the end of 2027. the Government’s requirements. For example, BT has This Bill enables us to implement those decisions in law. signed a deal with Ericsson for 5G equipment to enable 73 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 74 it to phase out Huawei and is already in the process of Oliver Dowden: My hon. Friend raises an important using Ericsson products to replace Huawei in its core. point. We are clear-eyed about putting national security Where operators can go further and faster without first. If national security and economic interests are in jeopardising the stability of our network, we will of conflict with each other, national security comes first. course encourage them to do so, but it would be a big But within the context of that, we have properly weighed risk to force them to go even further. BT and others up the risks as between different dates. I believe that have warned that moving faster could put our networks 2027 strikes the appropriate balance in that it can be under considerable strain, creating significant risk of delivered with impact, in the way that I described in my blackouts, and it would take longer for 5G to reach the statement to the House in July—it will have an impact parts of the country where it would make the most in terms of cost and roll-out for mobile network difference. operators—but it does not run the risk that we go too far and too fast, whereby we risk some sort of blackout Mr Ellwood: O2, Three and BT had concerns that and loss of provision. they would have to cancel their contracts with Huawei In addition to the draft directions, we are going a step but still pay for them, because the equipment was on its further by using the illustrative directions to set out a way. Could my right hon. Friend clarify what happens new hard deadline for the installation of Huawei equipment. to contracts that are in the pipeline, which could see That direction makes it clear that all operators must not these companies go bust if they have to pay for them? install Huawei equipment in their networks from the Oliver Dowden: My Department is in close contact end of September 2021. with mobile network operators. I do not think that the That clarification has clear practical implications. It sort of risk my right hon. Friend describes of companies will prevent any operator from stockpiling Huawei kit going bust is remotely the case. Furthermore, we have in the hope that the ban might be reversed. The new given clear advance notice of this. For example, we made installation deadline will create cold hard facts on the the first statements in January this year. We updated the ground, effectively turning the plan for Huawei’s removal guidance in July, and we also consulted extensively with into an irreversible reality. the mobile network operators on the requirements in The powers in the Bill also allow us to keep an relation to installation that I am announcing today. eagle eye on the progress of Huawei’s removal. They enable us to require Ofcom to obtain information from Mr Kevan Jones: Will the Secretary of State give way? companies to see whether a provider has complied, or is complying, and they allow us to require providers to Oliver Dowden: I will make some progress. I may prepare a plan setting out exactly how they intend to get come back to the right hon. Gentleman later, but I have to zero Huawei by 2027. already given way to him twice. Using those powers, we will not just publish an I know that some Members are concerned that we annual report of compliance on the removal of Huawei have not named Huawei on the face of the Bill and that equipment, but keep a close watch on the future progress our approach could be reversed in years to come. I want of all telecoms companies where Huawei is concerned. to reassure those Members on a number of fronts. We Under this rigorous monitoring and reporting system, have not chosen to name Huawei for two compelling no provider will be able to drag their feet. They will practical reasons. First, as we discussed, this Bill is need to provide proof that they are working to meet the designed to tackle not only the Huaweis of today but 2027 deadline. But, critically, we can do this only if we the Huaweis of tomorrow, wherever they come from. It secure these important powers—the powers that will needs to be flexible enough to cover future threats and enable us to take action in relation to Huawei to protect not tie our hands by limiting our response to one our networks, but also to take action against any other company and one company alone. Secondly—this is the potential high-risk vendors now and in the future. most crucial point—making reference to any one company would create a hybrid Bill, dramatically slowing the Mr Kevan Jones: The right hon. Gentleman is wrong. passage of the Bill and therefore our ability to combat This Bill is actually about security. The reason he is all high-risk vendors, including Huawei. going to get the powers is to take out vendors who are a However, as a concrete sign of our commitment to clear high risk. Huawei has been there for a while. The tackling the national security risks posed by Huawei, I kit that he is talking about banning after 2021—even if can confirm today that we are going further in two it is stockpiled or part of a contract—has not got a significant ways. First—I hope Members will have had security implication at all because it has already gone a chance to see this—we have published an illustrative through our Huawei centre. So I am not sure that he has designation notice and an illustrative designated vendor the powers in the Bill to do that. I am sorry, but if I were direction to demonstrate how the Bill’s powers in relation a telecoms provider and I had a contract or a stockpile to a high-risk vendor could be exercised. Given the level of kit that I could not use, I would be looking at taking of concern in this House and in the other place about legal action against the Government, because he cannot Huawei’s role in 5G infrastructure, these illustrative use the Bill if that equipment is not a threat to national drafts name Huawei explicitly, clarifying our position security, which it is not. beyond doubt, and set out a clear pathway to the reduction and removal of its equipment. Oliver Dowden: I say to the hon. Gentleman— [Interruption.] I beg his pardon. It is the right hon. Dr (Bosworth) (Con): Does the Secretary Gentleman. I stand corrected. I say to the right hon. of State believe that taking out companies such as Gentleman that, first, this Bill and the measures in it Huawei may damage the economic impact, and what implement what we announced as a Government in assessment has he made about making sure that we are January and July, which, in turn, was based on the advice at the forefront of growing 5G network in the UK? of the National Cyber Security Centre and GCHQ. 75 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 76

[Oliver Dowden] the market by stopping that, the private sector will come back into this industry because competition will In relation to whether I, or any Secretary of State, has be real competition, not broken competition. That is sufficient powers in the Bill, I refer him to clause 16(2), the key point. which inserts new section 105Z8(4)(a) to (l) into the Communications Act 2003, which sets out a very wide Oliver Dowden: My right hon. Friend highlights one range of bases on which I can designate a provider as of a range of different market distortions that have high risk and take measures, so I am confident that I been going on. Toa certain extent, there will be some market have those sufficient powers. correction, but the Government also need to intervene, We must never find ourselves in this position again. and our diversification strategy addresses that. If we are Over the last few decades, countless countries across the to get existing vendors who are not currently in the UK world have become over-reliant on too few vendors, market back in, or to create a new open RAN solution, thanks to a lack of competition in the global telecoms we need to provide financial incentives, and the supply chain. While this is a global problem, today this diversification strategy touches on many of the steps Government are officially leading the way in solving it. that we propose to take. Alongside the Bill, we have published an ambitious We are taking concrete steps towards a solution, but diversification strategy—the first such strategy to be diversification is not just a problem to be solved. It is published anywhere in the world. It sets out our vision also an opportunity to be seized. As part of our strategy, of what an open, competitive, diverse supply market for we will invest in homegrown solutions that will put us at telecoms will look like, and the measures we will bring the forefront of developing 5G technology and all the forward to develop an innovative and dynamic market. transformative benefits it brings. The next phase of this We want to make progress as quickly as possible, so work will be taken forward by the Telecoms Diversification today I can also confirm that we are committing Task Force, chaired by Lord Livingston, formerly of £250 million to kick-start this work. That includes BT, and others. I am grateful for the work that he, funding and building a state-of-the-art national telecoms industry and academic experts have done in developing lab, which will bring together suppliers from across the the strategy and in taking it forward. world to test the performance and security of their The Bill has not been designed around one company, equipment. We are also running a 5G open radio access one country or one threat. Its strength is that it creates network trial with the Japanese supplier NEC in Wales an enduring, flexible and far-reaching telecoms regime, to help the entire UK benefit from this exciting new one that keeps pace with changing technology and industry.That, of course,comes on top of NEC establishing changing threats, that supports billions of phone calls, a global open RAN centre of excellence in the UK just email exchanges and file transfers in this country every last month. We also know that Vodafone has recently day, and that is essential to the UK’s economy and its announced that it intends to deploy open RAN technology future prosperity. across more than 2,600 of its sites—the largest commitment I listened carefully to the concerns of Members on of its kind across any European network. both sides of the House in designing the legislation, and Tom Tugendhat: The Secretary of State is rightly I have sought to address those concerns head on in the focusing on open RAN and the opportunity to partner Bill as it stands before the House. I genuinely hope that with others in the democratic and law-abiding world. the Bill will command cross-party support and that we What has he done to reach out to countries such as will be able to work together in the national interest to South Korea, whose Samsung system could provide for ensure the security of our telecoms networks. I commend the UK, and to encourage Nokia, Ericsson and Fujitsu the Bill to the House. in Japan? 6.45 pm Oliver Dowden: I am pleased to say that the Minister for Digital Infrastructure has met every one of the Jo Stevens (Cardiff Central) (Lab): It is a pleasure parties my hon. Friend named; indeed, I have met many to speak in this Second Reading debate on the of them. Essentially, we are working across three strands. Telecommunications (Security) Bill on behalf of the First, we are working with the existing vendors—there official Opposition. Labour will always put national were three, now to become two—to secure them and security first, so we are pleased to finally see this Bill make sure we do not lose a further one. We are also brought forward by the Government. All sides of the working with new potential incumbents such as NEC House agree that the first duty of any Government is to and Samsung. In addition, we are working across a protect their citizens, and we have confidence in our range of countries, in particular the D10, to ensure that national security services, which go to such lengths to we work together to improve standards in telecoms. keep us all safe. I say I am pleased to finally see this Bill brought forward Sir (Chingford and Woodford because it has been clear for a long time that there were Green) (Con): I am grateful to my right hon. Friend, serious questions over whether high-risk vendors,specifically who is being customarily generous in giving way, but Huawei, should be allowed to control large sections of can I just make a point to him and hear his answer? This our country’s telecoms networks. But let us be frank: situation has constantly been wrongly described as a until this year, the Government had failed to face reality. market failure. It was not a market failure; the failure I agree with the shadow digital Minister,my hon. Friend the was in the reality of one country abusing and breaking Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central (Chi Onwurah), World Trade Organisation rules on subsidies. The key who said here in July that the Government’s problem has been that China has subsidised its providers “approach to our 5G capability, Huawei and our national security dramatically, even over 100% on contract, which has has been incomprehensibly negligent.”—[Official Report, 14 July killed this market over the last 10 years. Once we release 2020; Vol. 678, c. 1378.] 77 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 78

As long ago as June 2013, the Intelligence and Security current Secretary of State for Education, the right hon. Committee report on “Foreign involvement in the Critical Member for South Staffordshire (Gavin Williamson) was National Infrastructure” made it absolutely clear that sacked as Secretary of State for Defence following an risks had to be properly identified, assessed and managed, inquiry into a leak from a National Security Council and that processes and procedures had to be put in place meeting at which it was reported that the Government to achieve this, and those needed to be completely robust. had been advised in May 2019 to remove Huawei from I am sure that Conservative Members will be keen to the network. It was not until January this year—eight mention that Huawei first entered the UK network in months later—that the Government decided that Huawei 2006 under a Labour Government, but as is very clear equipment should be excluded from the sensitive core from the ISC report, that decision was one taken by parts of the 5G and gigabit-capable networks and from officers, and Ministers were not told about it at the time. sensitive and safety-critical locations such as critical In fact, they were not even told that a contract had been national infrastructure, and that its access to the non- signed until a year later, seemingly because those officials sensitive parts of the network described as the “edge” felt that to invest in Huawei brought significant trade, would be capped at 35%. financial and diplomatic consequences. Since that decision, In May, the United States imposed sanctions on much has changed with the situation of the UK’s Huawei through changes to their foreign direct product relationship with China. The Conservative party have rules that restricted Huawei’s ability to produce important had ample time not only to begin that removal process, products using US technology or software. The NCSC should it have wished to, but to invest in the diversification advised that the UK could no longer be confident that that could have meant we had a homegrown alternative it would be able to guarantee the security of future ready to use. It is only today, after 10 and a half years in Huawei 5G equipment affected by the change in those government, that this diversification strategy has finally US rules so, as the Secretary of State outlined, the been published. Government changed their position again in July, We know that the political background to this Bill announcing a ban on the buying of new 5G Huawei has much to do with the power of many Conservative equipment after December this year and the removal of Back Benchers—many are here today, and I am looking all equipment from our 5G networks by the end of 2027. forward to hearing all the contributions to the debate in The UK has been slower to take action than our Five due course—but it is as much to do with what had been Eyes allies. In August 2018, the Australian Government a desire to satisfy the now outgoing President of the blacklisted Huawei from the country’s 5G network in United States as it is with the safety of our critical response to security advice, and New Zealand took the national infrastructure, and this political soap opera same decision in that same year. Our Intelligence and has been an unnecessary distraction. Security Committee made it clear 18 months ago that Tom Tugendhat: The hon. Lady will forgive me for the debate on high-risk vendors had been “unnecessarily picking just a very small hole in her argument. One of protracted” and damaging. the very few policies on which President-elect Biden and President Trump, and indeed even Speaker Pelosi, do Mr Kevan Jones: It is worse than that. I know we had absolutely agree is the challenge of China and digital the panda-hugging days of Osborne and Cameron, but infrastructure, and particularly Huawei, so I am not an ISC report in 2013 raised the issue of critical national entirely sure this can be put down to satisfying the infrastructure, with particular reference to Huawei, and Trump Administration. Indeed, it is something on which nothing was done. we agree with Australia, Japan, South Korea, Germany, the Czech Republic—I can keep going—while France Jo Stevens: My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. banned it in 2009. This is not just an American issue. For the benefit of anyone who has not read that report, Jo Stevens: I accept that it is not just an American it is pretty damning. We now find ourselves in a situation issue, but it was the right thing for the wrong reasons, in which drastic action is necessary to safeguard national essentially. As I say, this political soap opera has been security and our critical national infrastructure, while at an unnecessary distraction when it comes to the serious the very same time the economic imperative of the matter of extracting high-risk vendors from the network, roll-out of 5G for the country has never been more which has been slow and fragmented. urgent—and that has obviously been added to by the impact of the covid pandemic. Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con): On a point of It is worth putting on the record that there are fact and detail, I recall in 2009 the Chinese Premier reasons other than national security in respect of Huawei being with the then Prime Minister in that concern many Members from all parties in this Downing Street, welcoming the strategic partnership—with House. The telecoms company has provided surveillance an all-singing, all-dancing party in Downing Street— technology to the Xinjiang public security bureau, between Vodafone and Huawei. It is therefore a little facilitating the construction of the world’s most invasive party political to suggest that it is only the Conservatives surveillance state. Last November,an Australian Strategic who have perhaps taken their eyes off the ball, something Policy Institute report detailed how Huawei has developed which we are correcting today. the Xinjiang public security cloud, which makes possible Jo Stevens: The hon. Gentleman seems to have forgotten the total control and repression of Uyghur Muslims. As about the former Prime Minister David Cameron and my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North West the former Chancellor of the Exchequer , (Alex Sobel) set out in a Westminster Hall debate on who also gave such a welcome. 4 March this year, the company has a shameful record It is worth outlining for the record the meandering on workers’ rights, operating journey that we have been on towards the publication of “a ‘wolf’ work culture of long hours and brutal workplace the Bill. The House will recall that in May 2019 the norms.”—[Official Report, 4 March 2020; Vol. 672, c. 282WH.] 79 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 80

Mr Ellwood: The hon. Lady is setting out a long list completely take over from the existing platform until of concerns with which many in the House would 2024-25. This delay is costing taxpayers millions. If the absolutely agree. Does she agree that for the reasons she Government are forced to keep airwaves going beyond is outlining it is perhaps now time for us to review the 2022, every year of delay adds an extra cost of about overseas aid that we give to China? £550 million. The core of the ESM network does feature Huawei equipment, but EE has said that it is already Jo Stevens: I do not want to step beyond my brief and working to strip this out and hopes to complete that by interfere in that of my shadow Cabinet colleague, but 2023. However, can the Secretary of State reassure the we certainly should not be doing business with any House that the presence of Huawei kit in the 4G ESM companies that breach both human rights and workers’ network will not have any impact on its lifespan, financial rights. We have international labour standards in place implications or security status and safety concerns? and these are not companies with which to do business. I turn now to the removal of high-risk vendors’ Turning now to broadband and 5G roll-out, and the equipment from the 5G networks. For the purposes of delays and the costs layering on top of them, we have this debate, it is probably easier to refer to it as the already seen delays in the roll-out of second and third removal of Huawei equipment, because that is where generation fixed broadband, and we are now at the everybody’s current focus is. This must all be removed bottom of the OECD tables. In fact, only last week the from networks by 2027. There is the “no new purchasing” Government sneaked out in the Chancellor’s spending rule from the end of this month, and the Secretary of review plans to water down their broadband promises. State has announced today that existing stocks cannot Instead of keeping to their manifesto promise to roll be used after September 2021. However,there are questions out gigabit-speed broadband to every home in Britain for the Government around the implementation of this by 2025, the Chancellor revealed that the Government that I hope the Minister will be able to answer. are now aiming to have a minimum of 85% coverage by I have five specific questions. First, given that the Bill that date. The budget for that plan remains the same, is based on a distinction between the core and the edge but now only £1.2 billion of the £5 billion will be made of the networks, how confident are the Government of available up until 2024, so this will impact on the the durability of the barrier between the core and the so-called levelling-up agenda. edge? Secondly, what steps are the Government taking The Government’s delay in dealing with the issue of to prioritise the removal of any existing Huawei equipment high-risk vendors until now has also meant that there from the more sensitive core part of the network, and will be added delays and costs to the roll-out of 5G. The how much equipment does Huawei have in it? Thirdly, Secretary of State accepted that in July, when he said are the Government proposing to provide help to businesses that the cumulative delay would be two to three years. who have invested in Huawei equipment ahead of this However, the Government’s impact assessment for the decision, and will there be legal support, as many operators Bill does not establish the effect of removing Huawei may have to honour contracts that they cannot actually from the core network on the timescale for the 5G use or possibly afford? Fourthly, what steps will the roll-out, so has the Secretary of State’s position, set out Government be taking to work with local authorities in July, of a two to three-year delay changed at all, and and others to minimise disruption to businesses and why does the impact assessment fail to address that individuals when removing the equipment? Fifthly and issue? Also in July, the Secretary of State predicted that finally, what steps are being taken to minimise the costs removing Huawei would cost operators up to £2 billion, to business? but that could be a huge underestimate, because BT I have one other point, from a different policy angle. alone is saying that it will cost it £500 million, and the When Australia banned Huawei from participating in costs could be far greater, including the knock-on effects its 5G network in 2018, China imposed retaliatory in terms of lost revenue and wider economic benefits. measures on Australian goods. The Government’s impact As well as those economic consequences, there is assessment does not address the economic consequences another impact, because the provision of 5G for most of potential retaliatory measures, so can they explain of the UK will increase the digital divide without significant what steps are being taken to plan for that possibility? measures to tackle it. The three central problems at the heart of this divide are lack of internet connection, lack Sir Iain Duncan Smith: The hon. Lady makes reference of technological devices, and lack of the skills to use to what the Chinese Government have been doing with new technology in a meaningful way. The Government regards to the Australians, which is appalling and breaches have promised, and so far failed, to solve the lack of WTO rules. In a way, her request for the Government to connection, which is a particular problem for under-served formulate plans against such a breach is really a request communities. There is nothing about 5G that will make of the WTO to act in this case, as it should have done it a better option for those communities, who are already earlier against China’s abuses and breaking of the WTO lacking affordable access to fast internet. In addition, rules. there is the distinct possibility that in order to access mobile 5G internet, users will need newer and more Jo Stevens: The right hon. Gentleman makes a valid expensive devices built for those increased speeds. The point. pandemic has highlighted these divides and thrown into This Bill gives huge powers to the Secretary of State stark relief the need for help and support for those under the auspices of national security, but it does not whose lack of connection, skills and equipment is a real define what that means. The Secretary of State will be barrier both in terms of employment and other meaningful responsible for making national security judgments and connections. decisions in relation to potential high-risk vendors. The There is one other significant consequence to the impact assessment suggests that he will not do so unilaterally Government’s delay, and that is the new 4G-based and that he will consult with the NCSC, but it is emergency services network. That is now unlikely to incumbent on the Government to explain why they 81 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 82 consider that the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, The Secretary of State claims that this Bill will give Media and Sport—I mean nothing personal to the right the UK one of the toughest telecoms security regimes in hon. Gentleman in saying this—is the appropriate decision the world and allow us to take the action necessary to maker on issues of national security. Would it not be protect our networks, and I hope he is right. We will not better for the Secretary of State to conduct a multi-agency oppose the Bill’s Second Reading, but we have many review prior to using these national security powers, as concerns that will need to be considered and addressed my right hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster North in Committee. The Bill that the House eventually passes (Edward Miliband) has suggested in relation to the must take steps to ensure that our telecoms supply National Security and Investment Bill, which hands chain is resilient in the future, or we will be forced to similar powers to the Secretary of State for Business, return here in a short time to deal with the next Huawei. Energy and Industrial Strategy? We must be mindful, as with all legislation, that we The lack of a definition of national security in this seek to anticipate the problems of the future rather than Bill raises particular concerns about the significant level just deal with the issues that we face today. We of course of discretion afforded to the Secretary of State, the fully support steps to remove high-risk vendors from transparency with which such decisions will be made the network, but they must go hand in hand with and the ability of Parliament to scrutinise those decisions. credible measures to diversify the supply chain. We are On another issue relating to scrutiny, Parliament is in this situation because there are no viable alternatives being asked to vote on this primary legislation before to Huawei, homegrown or otherwise, and that is, in significant elements of how it will operate have been part, a result of the chronic under-investment and lack published, because secondary legislation will set out of leadership from the Government on digital infrastructure. specific security requirements that providers must meet We have to ensure that this does not happen again. and the codes of practice that have been mentioned. Those will only be available after the Bill has received 7.6 pm Royal Assent. Dr (New Forest East) (Ind): It is an We have concerns about the role and the scope of the absolute pleasure to follow such sensible speeches from powers given to Ofcom in this legislation. These are new those on both Front Benches. There is a history to powers, which are pretty onerous. With Ofcom also today’s legislation which I shall set out and against expected to be named as the regulator in the promised which my Committee colleagues can develop the Intelligence online harms Bill—when that finally arrives—we are and Security Committee’s current perspectives. As the concerned about the resourcing of and the expertise hon. Member for Cardiff Central (Jo Stevens) mentioned, within Ofcom to be able to deliver its statutory duties it was in June 2013 that the Intelligence and Security and responsibilities. We are concerned not so much Committee, on which I served under Sir ’s about the volume of work, but that the administering of chairmanship, published a no-holds-barred report on this new security regime may require skills that Ofcom, foreign involvement in the critical national infrastructure. and potentially DCMS, are unlikely currently to possess. It focused on the casual and cavalier way in which contracts The impact assessment with the Bill suggests a combined were signed between British Telecom and Huawei prior monitoring cost for DCMS and Ofcom of £7 million to to any ministerial involvement, and it insisted that: £12 million over a 10-year period. Do the Government “The National Security Council should ensure that there are really think that this resourcing budget will be sufficient? effective procedures and powers in place…when it comes to Finally, I turn to the issue of diversification of the investment in the CNI.” telecoms sector. In the ’80s and ’90s, as BT was privatised, We demanded an effective process by which Government our telecoms supply chain was allowed to fall mainly are alerted to potential foreign investment in the CNI; into foreign hands, although they were the hands of our an established procedure for assessing the risks; a process allies. Conservative Governments over the last decade for developing a strategy to manage these risks throughout squandered the world-leading position that our broadband the lifetime of the contract and beyond; clarity as to infrastructure had been left in by the last Labour what powers the Government have or need to have; and Government. Successive Conservative Governments have clear lines of responsibility and accountability. The lost, given away or under-invested in our sovereign Committee was telecoms capability as that supply chain has become “shocked that officials chose not to inform, let alone consult, dominated by high-risk vendors. There are of course Ministers on such an issue.” added benefits to reducing reliance on a small number That, we concluded, must never again be allowed to happen. of global vendors, including increasing competition, driving innovation and improving resilience, but, as BT The Government’s July 2013 response to the report and others have warned, it will take time to move at bordered on complacency. They conceded that scale towards new approaches. Network operators need “with hindsight, we agree that Ministers should have been informed” to be confident in the maturity, performance, integration and put their faith in the relatively new National Security and security credentials of new vendors and technologies Council, in conjunction with “cross industry-government before they are deployed in their main networks. We groups”, to provide better protection in future. Replying agree that the Government can and should help to to our main finding that their accelerate that progress, because in doing so, there is the “duty to protect the safety and security of its citizens should not potential to create opportunities for the UK to take the be compromised by fears of financial consequences”, lead, as well as to create much-needed jobs. The strategy the Government observed that published today will need significant scrutiny. The “HMG’s approach balances economic prosperity…with national £250 million announced in the spending review last security…Boosting trade and investment is a key part of the week is obviously welcome, but it lacks sufficient detail, Government’s plan for growth and we are working hard to and we look forward to hearing more about how it will develop our economic relationships with key trading partners, be spent. including China.” 83 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 84

[Dr Julian Lewis] would enable our hard-working staff to obtain relevant confidential material and advance sight of such legislation As Huawei’s chief executive officer had been given the to allow proper prior consideration. The tiny window of full red-carpet treatment at 10 Downing Street only the opportunity afforded by the parliamentary timetabling previous September, that response was all too predictable, has prevented this from happening, and our staff had to and thus the courtship continued, despite growing anxiety fall back purely on publicly available sources. among our Five Eyes partners, such as Australia and Proposals such as those in this Bill, which the Committee the United States. first recommended in 2013, are therefore to be welcomed, There can be no doubt of the sincerity of the technical but the public rely on the ISC to assure them that we advice given by our experts at GCHQ and, more recently, have asked those questions in private that cannot be in the National Cyber Security Centre, its public-facing discussed more openly. As that has not yet happened, arm. They recognise—as does the Bill—that the lack of our support for the Bill in principle cannot be as unqualified diverse suppliers is a critical future vulnerability. For at this stage, as we should like it to be, though I welcome telecommunications to be resilient, their networks need the Minister’s offer to speak to the Committee later more than two providers on which to depend. Otherwise, this week. the collapse of one provider means total reliance on the Here are a few of the questions that can be asked on other. Yet should that really override the danger of the Floor of the House. First, as the Department for ever-closer involvement with a company legally in thrall Digital, Culture, Media and Sport has not traditionally to potentially hostile Chinese intelligence services? specialised in national security,on whom will the Secretary In a statement in July last year, the ISC acknowledged of State rely for advice when deciding whether to issue the National Cyber Security Centre’s paradoxical point restrictions against high-risk vendors, or directions to that three providers might be safer than two, even when telecoms providers? the third comes from an adversarial state. Yet it rightly Secondly, if the answer is the National Cyber Security pointed out that Centre and our wider intelligence community, will there “the issue cannot be viewed solely through a technical lens—because be procedures to guarantee that they will be consulted it is not simply about telecommunications equipment. This is a with adequate notice, and who will ensure that their geostrategic decision, the ramifications of which may be felt for advice is given sufficient weight? Thirdly, in view of the decades to come… It is about perception as much as anything: our Five Eyes partners need to be able to trust the UK and we revolving door, via which too many businessmen and must not do anything which puts that at risk… And there is the ex-civil servants effortlessly glide between their former question as to whether other countries might follow the UK’s roles and the Huawei boardroom, what assurance can decision” we have that the Government will be immune from when they are not as capable of protecting their networks lobbying campaigns by those on the payroll of high-risk as we are of protecting our own. vendors? Some say that the Government’s perseverance with Finally, I have a question that I was pleased, I think, Huawei was justified on the basis of the technical to hear the Secretary of State answer 15 minutes into advice they were given—right up to the point earlier his opening speech, but it would be nice to have the this year when the United States brought in its fierce Minister reiterate that answer: unlike in 2013, do the further sanctions. Yet the fact that the US would take Government now fully accept that national security such a step should have been anticipated. Our belated must always be their overriding consideration where U-turn in July shows what happens when multifaceted critical national infrastructure is concerned? problems are examined in a one-dimensional way. Seven long years after our Huawei report, the 7.15 pm Government have—in the space of a fortnight—introduced Richard Thomson (Gordon) (SNP): It is a pleasure to two important Bills: this one and the National Security speak in this Second Reading debate and to follow the and Investment Bill. Taken together, according to the Chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, the National Cyber Security Centre, they should help to right hon. Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis), establish an who has given us some very important historical context “appropriately secure and resilient telecoms infrastructure” to how we have arrived at the point we have arrived at and today. He posed some pointed and pertinent questions, “effect the security transformation we”— which we look forward to seeing addressed as the Bill the NCSC— progresses. “believe to be necessary”. The Bill provides a very much stronger security We are assured that framework for telecommunications infrastructure and gives the Government the ability to manage the risk “operators adhering in totality to the new security regime will be among the most secure in the world”. posed by high-risk vendors. I speak on behalf of my group when I say that we support it in all that it is trying Hopefully, our US partners—currently promoting an to achieve. 5G technology offers great opportunities for international clean network initiative—will agree and connectivity and for commerce, through the internet of Five Eyes harmony on those vital matters can now be things, including the greater use of telemedicine, automated reinstated. threat detection and even autonomous vehicles, but Having waited so long for two such necessary Bills, anything that compromises the access to or proper use the ISC must sadly record our concern that, in both of telecommunications networks or the security and cases, their Second Reading debates were held within integrity of the information that flows through them is just four working days of their introduction on First a cause for concern. Whether in terms of intercepting Reading. Normally, adequate notice of about two weeks information, interfering with information or stopping it 85 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 86 from being transmitted or received, it represents a above its weight in the world. In our military and commercial and security threat to be very much guarded intelligence services, that is almost certainly the case, against. but I believe there needs to be a realisation and an Clearly, the infrastructure that the suppliers use to embracing of the concept of total defence and resilience. provide us with that communications bandwidth is of At this point in time, our Scandinavian and, particularly, crucial importance in maintaining the security and integrity Baltic neighbours seem to have a much better grasp of of that information. Therefore, it is something of a the significance of that concept than the UK Government surprise that the UK Government appear to have come do. It is to be very much hoped that with this legislation to the realisation only comparatively recently that having and recent announcements on defence spending, the too much of the critical national infrastructure in too UK might now be beginning to come to terms with the few hands might be a problem. many ways in which our economic activities, our public space, and even our political space can be undermined The Scottish National party is clear: the UK Government in asymmetric and unconventional ways and finally need to learn the lessons of how we have got to where taking steps to properly address that. we have got to on security in awarding the 5G contracts and to provide assurances going forward that the Toget into some of the detail of the Bill, the Government replacement strategy will be a safe and secure one. My have made it clear that vendors who they consider to be party very much wishes us to be among the forward-looking high risk should not have access to the core 5G nations at the forefront of the 5G age. However, given infrastructure. Obviously, we agree, but this needs to be that these new opportunities carry new risks, security a formal part of any requirements for infrastructure of and resilience need to be built into it from the outset. this kind, and there should be assurances from the We also wish to be assured that this legislation and the Government that any replacement vendors for Huawei impacts that it may go on to have will not adversely or, indeed, others meet the very highest standards that impact network roll-out or consumer costs in the longer we would expect with that objective in mind. term, and we also want to make sure that the opportunities The Government also need to ensure that there is a for building our domestic capabilities in manufacturing, proper dialogue with our international allies, to ensure in open RAN and in the broader supply chain will be conformity—as far as possible—with high standards of fully seized. protection. Like many western countries, we are an Inevitably, in this debate so far there has been a focus importer of technology, and as such we need to be on Huawei and China, and for all that Huawei has seeking unity, as far as possible, in the standards we are previously been regarded as a reliable partner, that willing to allow for this infrastructure that we will focus is entirely understandable. The point needs to be ultimately be sharing with our allies and neighbours. made that Huawei did not suddenly become a potentially For all that technology is a matter that is reserved to high-risk vendor overnight. This has not just crept up Westminster under the , there are on us; it has been allowed to creep up on us. The clear implications in how the Bill may operate for Chinese Government’s involvement in recent state- devolved nations. We would very much like to see in it a sponsored cyber-attacks ought to have been enough to duty on the part of Ministers to consult with devolved set the alarm bells ringing, if they were not already nations before taking any ministerial actions under the ringing, and to give proper cause for refection over the Bill, as well as a duty on the Minister to consult with possible security concerns in that well before now. It is devolved nations when it comes to the five-yearly review right that we use this opportunity to pause for reflection of the effectiveness of clauses 1 to 13. Given the reserved on the relationship we have with China. nature of telecommunications, if there are any additional Clearly, it is important to have a strong relationship, costs that accrue to businesses or Governments—by one on which we would seek to exert a positive influence, businesses, I do not necessarily mean the telecoms especially when it comes to human rights. However, companies themselves—the UK Government may be internationalrelationshipsneedtobefoundedonself-respect willing to at least contemplate assuming some of the as well as on mutual respect, and if this Government costs that might otherwise fall on tiers of government wish to be able to deal with other Governments on as or the non-telecoms businesses. close to equal or favourable terms as is possible, it is I wish to spend some time dwelling on the impact of important to ensure that they do not leave us in a the roll-out. As a Member of Parliament for rural position where we are too reliant on any other single Scotland, I know that this problem is not unique to state for technology or investment. rural Scotland—other parts of the UK are affected as Make no mistake: a rapid de-engagement of this kind well—but there is a recurring theme. From the original with Huawei technology is not helpful to maintaining Vodafone and Cellnet networks through 3G and to 4G, constructive relationships. In our relationship with China, the coverage maps for mobile phones inevitably roll out there will now inevitably be a price to pay in terms of in exactly the same way and cover pretty much exactly loss of influence, as well as an economic price to pay at the same pattern, with the same notspots being missed out. home if this holds up our roll-out of the technology. To It is my earnest hope that the same thing does not be absolutely clear, we are glad that the decision was happen with 5G. It is also important to point out that taken, but although that U-turn was necessary,there needs the roll-out of 4G, and even 3G, across Scotland has to be a clearer commitment to domestic manufacturing not been as complete as we would like, and it would be than in previous years—decades, even—and better visibility naive in the extreme to think that 5G roll-out will be on emerging threats from Governments. This situation any different unless there are some significant changes. was avoidable. It would also be naive not to recognise some of the Hybrid threats are growing, as are the capabilities of potential problems that the Bill might present in that states and non-state bad actors to enact them, and the light, in terms of the rate of build-out that would UK very much likes to see itself as a country that punches otherwise have occurred. 87 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 88

[Richard Thomson] 7.28 pm

Toput the issue into perspective, just 42% of Scotland’s Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con): I welcome the land mass has 4G coverage from all four main UK introduction of the Bill. It is long overdue. Over the operators, and 80% from at least one mobile operator. past two years, the Government have attributed a range Almost 1 million people living in rural areas currently of significant cyber-attacks to Russia, China, North have no reliable mobile service at that speed of connectivity. Korea and Iran. Such attacks are unlikely to reduce any That is unacceptable, and has to be an early part of any time soon, but our legislative and technological resilience levelling up agenda. can increase in the meantime. The UK needs to be proactive in staying ahead of its adversaries, rather than Owing to the lack of hardware interoperability that just reactive. The Bill and the National Security and the mobile network has been built with, mobile network Investment Bill will help in that regard. operators will have to rip out and replace a large amount The attacks, often through arm’s length third parties, of high-risk vendor equipment from existing 4G mobile include dangerous espionage attacks, often on the networks masts before they can even be upgraded to 5G using of companies that deliver equipment to telecom providers equipment from an alternative supplier, as well as writing but whose security is currently inadequate. That can no off and replacing that equipment from high-risk vendors longer be acceptable, and the Bill will go a long way to already deployed. It is inevitable that the resulting reduced making the UK’s networks more secure. competition will drive prices higher. I would like to pay tribute, as has already been done, From discussions with and briefings from the industry, to my predecessors on the ISC, who, in the Committee’s it is clear to me that while operators can absorb the 2013 report “Foreign involvement in the Critical National costs of the decision to remove Huawei equipment, BT Infrastructure”, noted that estimates that the cost will be as much as half a billion pounds for it alone. It will not be possible to move any “there is no general requirement on companies that own CNI assets to inform or consult Government prior to awarding a faster than the 2027 deadline that the Minister mentioned contract, whether that be to a UK company or a foreign company. without creating a significant risk of network blackouts, Instead, the Government relies on informal processes or the as well the loss of economic benefits that would otherwise private company taking the initiative themselves. This is far too accrue to all parts of the UK. It is a huge challenge for haphazard an approach given what is at stake.” the network operators, and we should not underestimate The same Committee also stated: it. I would like to hear the Minister give a clear assurance that the Government will stick to the 2027 deadline and “Government must have a proper procedure for assessing the … will not make what is already a difficult job for the risks and also for developing a strategy for managing those risks. Crucially, this should be an integral part of the process, mobile network operators even harder. both before and after contracts are awarded, and not merely an I would also like the Government to look at ways of afterthought.” trying to counteract the negative effect on the speed of I hope that the Bill marks a national security turning the roll-out. Governments of all political stripes have point, where key infrastructure decisions are based on been rewarded handsomely from selling off electromagnetic fact-based risk assessments, not on trust, commercial spectrum portions for mobile roll-out. Looking again at convenience, political convenience or naivety. some of the licence fees might allow some of the Of course, the Bill is also a recognition—I differ from telecommunications companies to save that money to some colleagues—of market failure. The dominance of invest in new infrastructure from non-high-risk vendors, major telecoms companies, driving out or buying out which would compensate for that level of roll-out and the competition, has led to companies such as Huawei give consumers and business the coverage that we all positioning themselves as perhaps too big to fail or, in hope they can get from 5G. the context of the telecoms market, too big not to buy On diversification of the marketplace, we very much from, or too big not to supply to. In my view, that is welcome the Government’s5G supply chain diversification down to political and commercial failure, and I am glad strategy, which has been announced alongside the Bill. that the Government are putting wrong—putting right Reducing the reliance on a comparatively small number that wrong. [Interruption.] I was just making sure that of big-player vendors will be hugely important in increasing the Minister is on his toes—not literally, but I am glad competition, driving innovation and improving resilience. he is paying attention. I am glad that the Government It will take time to move at scale towards new approaches are putting that right; it is long overdue, as I said. such as open RAN, and to be successful, network I hope that the new diversification strategy that has operators need to be confident in the maturity of the been alluded to today will include enough commercial performance and the integration and the security credentials incentives to attract new vendors and suppliers into the of new vendors and technologies before they are deployed market for the first time, or for existing providers to on the main networks. The Government can help to seek new capital raises in order to maximise new markets, accelerate that process and create real opportunities for many of them in the public sector—the public sector is leadership and job creation with an ambitious commitment a good customer in most cases—and global in nature. to research and development and trials. The funding of £250 million for that activity in the spending review and I hope that there might be a new global collaboration the Government’s national infrastructure strategy are in joint development of 6G, 7G and beyond. Five very much to be welcomed. Eyes-based companies might be a good place to start, but trusted EU partners can play a key part too. I think This is an important and necessary Bill. It is one that about Airbus and the collaboration on civilian airframes we very much look forward to getting into the detail of across the world; I think about Typhoon and, prior to and scrutinising further as it makes progress. that, Tornado—large collaboration, R&D developmental 89 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 90 projects that brought together trusted partners around diversification that the Government want and, more the world to look after our national security, albeit on a widely, to the partnership in cyber-security resilience in different platform and in a different context. both the private and public sectors. We do not want to As it stands, as we have already heard, there are only have enmity with the very people that the Government three potential suppliers of mobile access network need to work more closely with in dealing with these equipment in the UK: Nokia, Ericsson and Huawei. issues. The lack of diversity across the telecoms supply chain The Bill makes Ofcom responsible for monitoring has invariably led—that is why we are here today—to a and enforcing telecoms providers’ compliance with their national dependence on limited suppliers. security duties where providers do not meet their obligations. I gently ask the Government whether they feel that Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) Ofcom has the necessary teeth. Will Ofcom outsource (LD): The point the hon. Member makes about or buy in any additional and required expertise? international co-operation is a very good one. In buying The Bill, rightly, does not allow vendors to have into joint efforts with allies, we have a share of the access to the UK telecoms network denied, removed or intellectual knowledge.Does he agree that that is something limited for any reasons other than the protection of the we would not have had with Huawei? UK’s national security, again making sure that we are not putting up new barriers to new entrants to the Mark Pritchard: The hon. Gentleman is absolutely marketplace. It is also welcome that the Bill does not right, and I am delighted that the Secretary of State has give the Secretary of State the right to limit or remove set out that there is going to be a new national telecoms vendors to protect or improve the commercial interests lab. I am not sure whether he has decided on the of other vendors in the marketplace. I hope that the location, but I commend the telecoms expertise of Minister will elucidate this important point so that Shropshire and the west midlands to the Minister. there can be, from today, investor, shareholder and The Government’s own telecoms supply chain review, commercial safeguards that will allow any of those published by DCMS in July 2019, found that reading Hansard in the private sector to be reassured. “the telecoms market is not working in a way that incentivises I would like to ask the Minister some questions. How good cyber security”— will the Government ensure that Ofcom has sufficient perhaps another example of British understatement. staff with the necessary skills to undertake this work This Bill will end that, and rightly so. before it assumes its new responsibilities, which are In its October 2020 report, the Defence Committee, separate from the point of buying in or outsourcing? ably led by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member Even if someone is buying in or outsourcing, they need for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood), concluded that to have the skills to know what they are outsourcing to the current 5G and for, and so it is with buying it in, making sure that they are getting the right people in. “regulatory situation for network security is outdated and unsatisfactory.” How will the Minister’s Department ensure that Ofcom is provided with the necessary information and relevant I thank all the members of that Committee for the work data on what is a new area of expertise and work for it, that they have done in highlighting that. particularly in this detail? I welcome the fact that the I welcome the fact that the Bill will strengthen the Bill requires the Secretary of State to lay before Parliament security framework for technology used in 5G and a copy of all designated vendor directions and designation full-fibre networks, including electronic equipment and notices, except where doing so would be contrary to the the hardware and software at phone mast sites and interests of national security. However, when such telephone exchanges, and that it will give the Government information cannot be laid before Parliament, as was new powers to issue directions to public telecoms providers alluded to by my right hon. Friend the Member for New to manage the risk of perceived high-risk vendors. It is Forest East (Dr Lewis), the Chair of the Intelligence right that the Bill will allow the Government to impose and Security Committee, will the Minister undertake to controls on telecom providers’ use of any goods, services provide that information to the Intelligence and Security or facilities supplied by high-risk vendors. Committee so that Parliament and the public know that I very much welcome the Government’s new powers there is sufficient and adequate oversight? to limit and remove high-risk vendors, such as Huawei, Finally, as the shadow Secretary of State asked, given about which we have heard so much already, from the the recent experience of the Australian Government, UK telecoms network. I also very much welcome the what can the Minister say today on the record to deter new and revised timetable that the Government have any temptation by the Chinese Government to take any announced today for doing this. In saying that, I hope similar retaliatory measures against the UK? Does he that the Government are not being overly ambitious, as agree that if they were so tempted—I hope they would we heard from other hon. Members, but it is right to not be—perhaps the £20 billion trade surplus for China establish the principle today and move more swiftly on might focus calmer and more reasonable heads in Beijing this key issue of national security and diversity in the today? marketplace. I welcome the Bill incentivising better security by Sir Iain Duncan Smith: I hear my hon. Friend’s point, financially penalising providers that operate below minimum but does he not agree that one of the greatest bastions security standards, but I hope—the Minister is here—that against this behaviour by the Chinese Government would a carrot-and-stick approach will be the default DCMS be for all members of the free world, particularly the Five and Ofcom approach, rather than just a stick, as it is the Eyes, to come together both to condemn their behaviour private sector’s co-operation that will help us to move and to themselves talk about introducing sanctions forward on this. It is very much key to the market against China if it carries on behaving like this? 91 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 92

Mark Pritchard: Colleagues will be pleased to hear the Bill are clearly around security, and my only problem that I am reaching my concluding comments and I will is with the definition of the word. I would argue that the address that question then. While I have huge respect way in which the Government approached the matter of for my right hon. Friend—he is absolutely right and has the Huawei security centre had security its centre in been leading the way on this and I pay tribute to him on order to protect our networks. As the Minister knows, I that—there is a lot we can do with China. In fact, I will was one of those who agreed with the Government’s put my notes down and jump to my conclusion now. decision in July to allow Huawei to have 35% of the This is not an anti-China Bill; this is not an anti-Huawei market as long as the security was there. The National Bill. This is about ensuring the greater resilience of our Cyber Security Centre was clear in its evidence that that national security through our telecoms infrastructure. could be maintained. It was the American sanctions It is not about putting up barriers to entry for existing that changed that. or new companies coming into the marketplace. I agree When a Secretary of State makes his or her decision that we have to be robust against China when that is on whether to take a vendor out, the important thing is right, but we also need to recognise that there is a lot of that it is made on the ground of security. It is not clear co-operation and collaboration with China on trade from the Bill how that will be looked at. I would not and on climate change, so we agree on many things and want to see lobbying for a certain company, for example, we disagree on many things, but I do not think talk of or a situation such as we are currently seeing on the sanctions is necessarily right at this stage. Conservative Back Benches where anything with “China” I support this Bill. It is long overdue; I commend the on it has to be resisted. I should point out that many Government for bringing it forward. people in the Chamber tonight will have mobile phones in their pockets that contain Chinese components. Even Several hon. Members rose— Ericsson and Nokia, which we are going to allow into our system, use components that are made in China. Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton): We cannot just close our minds to China altogether, so Order. There is now less than two hours until the wind-ups these decisions must have security at their centre. are likely to start. By my calculation, that means that if Any decisions made by the Secretary of State have to everybody is going to have equal time, contributions be around security, and I have some concerns about ought to take about eight minutes. I do not want to set a DCMS having control over this. I raised a similar point time limit, but that is a rough guide for the debate. on the National Security and Investment Bill. I am not sure that the Department has the necessary expertise. 7.42 pm Personally, I would sooner see the Secretary of State Mr Kevan Jones (North Durham) (Lab): I join the taking such decisions alongside the National Security right hon. Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis) in Council, or a sub-committee of the NSC, for example, welcoming this Bill in principle but giving it a qualified to ensure that security could be at the heart of those welcome. It amends the Communications Act 2003, and decisions. Likewise, I have reservations about Ofcom. in terms of technology 2003 is light years away. As a regulator, it has been around for quite a while now, When I was at school computers were not as common but I wonder whether it has the expertise to look at the as today and even having a telephone at home was a security sector. rarity, so great changes have taken place in these types A specific practical point about DCMS and Ofcom is of technologies—as I have seen even in my short lifetime— that if a decision were taken by the Secretary of State and the pace of change is only going to increase. That is on security grounds, a lot of the relevant information why this Bill is welcome in updating our laws, and it will would be highly classified and would not be available to not be the last Bill we require, because as technology people without the necessary security clearance. I presume advances, further updating will be needed. However, as that the Secretary of State has the highest security the right hon. Gentleman said, the Intelligence and clearance, but I doubt whether anyone in Ofcom would Security Committee warned about all this in 2013. It do so. I would like to hear more about how that will was the same with the National Security and Investment work in practice when they are dealing with highly Bill last week; the warnings have been there. Yes, there classified information, because the Bill makes it clear has been a change of direction in the Conservative that that is the only way in which a vendor can be struck party from panda hugging to panda bashing now as the from the marketplace. flavour of the day, but the question of security should Another issue, which has already been raised, is whether always be central to all this. Ofcom will have the necessary budget and focus to To be fair to the Government, they have not stood undertake this work. The right hon. Member for New still. We have been ahead of other nations in terms of Forest East made the point about a revolving door, and Huawei and security and having the Huawei cyber that is an issue that concerns many people. There is a security evaluation centre, which has helped us protect revolving door between industry, the various regulatory our networks. But a balance must be struck between bodies and the Government. open competition and being able to interact with other There is also an issue around oversight. I do not see nations, and also protecting our security. anything in the Bill that will allow parliamentary oversight I want to touch briefly on the issue of security, as that of these decisions. Clause 17 refers to the Secretary of is what the Bill is about. I think some people are getting State being required to lay a copy of their decisions carried away in thinking that the Bill will be used in a before Parliament, but there is also a get-out clause in protectionist way to protect our own suppliers or as a that the requirement way of cutting off altogether any trade with regimes that “does not apply if the Secretary of State considers that laying a we might have huge reservations about, such as China. copy of the direction or notice (as the case may be) before We are never going to be able to do that. The powers in Parliament would be contrary to the interests of national security.” 93 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 94

Anyone who has been in the House for any length of With those concerns, I welcome the Bill as a step forward. time and who has worked in this field will know that that Let us see it not just as a way for us to somehow solve all is the usual way for civil servants to get out of any kind our cyber-problems, because we will not. We still have of question whatsoever. There is a need for oversight in to be vigilant, and we still have to make sure that our this regard. I am not trying to make work for the security services have the finance, ability and expertise Intelligence and Security Committee, which I am a to respond to the enemies who are attacking us. member of, but it is the only Committee of Parliament that has a high enough security clearance to be able to 7.54 pm see the information that will inform these decisions. Without that, there is an issue in the Bill in terms of Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con): This Bill makes how Parliament will scrutinise the Secretary of State’s sense. I agree with the right hon. Member for North decisions effectively. Durham (Mr Jones) that it is primarily about security. It is a top priority for us to ensure the security of all telecommunications networks, particularly those that Anthony Mangnall (Totnes) (Con): I am sorry to might carry classified information and that is what this interrupt the right hon. Gentleman while he is making Bill is all about. I particularly endorse those clauses in such good progress. If a decision were not to be laid the Bill that give the Government robust powers to before Parliament, would he accept the idea of it going manage high-risk vendors based, of course, on National before the Intelligence and Security Committee? Cyber Security Centre advice. That may well also include direct guidance from other intelligence agencies as well. Mr Jones: Yes. If we were able to see it, at least we It is also absolutely right that the Government have would be able to get access to the intelligence that placed a ban on purchasing new equipment from high-risk informed it. The DCMS has its own Select Committee, vendors from September 2021 and ordered the removal but that Committee does not have the clearance, so I of high-risk vendor equipment from our networks by would suggest taking the approach the hon. Gentleman 2027, but, as I will go on to say, it will have implications. describes. There is a way of doing that. Under the I wish we could achieve that earlier, but, obviously, Justice and Security Act 2013, the DCMS does not industry needs time to manage the transition required. come under the Intelligence and Security Committee’s remit, but we could change the memorandum of The NCSC is at the forefront in developing understanding to include this issue. I think that is telecommunications security requirements. It has done needed, and I said the same thing on the National this in collaboration with industry and these requirements Security and Investment Bill. are detailed and effectively designed to establish a layered defence against cyber-attacks and infiltration. Codes of On diversity, we would love to have a large number of practice will devolve from these requirements and they vendors, but there is a clear issue we have to recognise. will form a method of operation as well as being a way People talk about market failure. There has been a of calculating risks for operators Ofcom, DCMS, and market failure because, in terms of Huawei and the Chinese NCSC. I endorse the view that these requirements and state, there has been a deliberate decision to buy in to a codes of practice will definitely increase the difficulty, sector. There has also been a tendency among us all, as the cost and the risks faced by a hostile player attempting consumers of telecoms services, to make sure that the to infiltrate or to compromise a UK telecommunications rates go down as low as possible. That has led the prices network, but, as the right hon. Gentleman has said, that down, so there is no money in the infrastructure at all, does not mean that we are invulnerable—oh, no, it does which is why companies have got out of the sector. not. There are still risks. There is an area where diversity can come in, and that Next year, I gather that we will need to pass secondary is open RAN. If the investment goes into that, we could legislation to endorse codes of practice that will, thereafter, be a world leader, but let us not make the mistakes we be used to instruct operators on how to meet their security have in the past, where we have been a world leader—for obligations. Such codes of practice will be policed by example, in fibre technology in the early 1990s—and Ofcom—we have talked about that a little. Most certainly, then gave that lead away. it will require training on how to do this. Here there On the removal of Huawei from the 5G network, the needs to be a serious interchange with the NCSC where 2027 deadline needs to be maintained. I am sorry, but I a working relationship between the two bodies is crucial— think the Secretary of State is wrong in what he is and at cost. Of course there are penalties for this decision. suggesting. If he does what he suggests, that will add Not only will this change delay the roll-out of the 5G further costs and slow our progress. The equipment that network, but significant consequent costs will be incurred is there now has been through the cyber security centre. by industry.I know that industry may need the Government We are satisfied that there is no security risk from that to support it in consequence of this decision. On the equipment, so why rip it out before we have to do so? other hand, a recent report has also suggested that All that that will do is slow our system down and slow upgrading the UK’s 5G infrastructure could be worth the economic advantages that can come from 5G. about £158 billion to the economy over a 10-year period. We have concentrated a lot in the debate on the Wehave already mentioned that there are three significant hardware. Will the Bill somehow make us completely vendors who provide large-scale telecommunications immune from cyber-attack? No, it will not. The other equipment in the UK. These are Ericsson, Nokia and side to this, which is just as important, is to ensure that Huawei. With the significant removal of Huawei as a we educate companies to ensure that they use their result of this Bill, choice of vendors is of course reduced systems safely and that upgrades are done on security by a third, which is most certainly not ideal. It would be networks and other things. That is about the basic far better if we had more choice and competition, but education of the people who use a mobile phone or any we do not—that is the fact of it. However, Ericsson and type of computer network. Nokia are very good, trusted and long-standing companies 95 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 96

[Bob Stewart] contorted their language quite deliberately to cover this stuff up. I make no apologies for saying these things. I whose security credentials are tried and trusted. I am very had hoped that a state being able to behave in that way pleased by the idea of the open radio access network—open had been left behind in 1945 or the end of Stalin’s RAN—being developed. It is crucial to develop the UK Russia, but, alas, all is not as it should be. as a world leader in 5G. Essentially, open RAN allows I welcome this Bill as being a bit like the Government interconnectivity between different telecommunications discovering their moral compass. Coming away from mobile networks,and avoids the necessity of all components Huawei has the benefit that we are helping, in our small coming from just one supplier. For instance, Ericsson way, to bring an end to this sort of behaviour by China. equipment can be interfaced with that of Nokia, or It is only a first step. We are going to have to co-operate perhaps another new supplier—let’s hope so. That aids with other nations. There is a great benefit to what the the drive towards competition andthus has cost benefits. right hon. Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis) I have been an extremely good boy, Madam Deputy said, about an alliance with Five Eyes, but that is for Speaker. I hope I am going to get a thumbs up for finishing another day. The road ahead is beyond our borders. As in six minutes. I commend this Bill to the House. a good Liberal Democrat, I would make this point: not only should we co-operate as much as we can with Five Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton) Eyes, who are crucial to our security and defence, but indicated assent. we should also try to maintain the best possible relationship with our friends in the European Community. Bob Stewart: I got a thumbs up from Madam Deputy Let me turn to my second point. The hon. Member Speaker; I sit down with a big glow on my face. for Gordon (Richard Thomson) made an excellent speech, and said that 4G and 3G are, at best, patchy. I am afraid 8 pm that my constituents might be afforded a hollow laugh Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) if I talk about the roll-out of 5G, because in so many (LD): Follow that if you can. parts of Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, there are not a lot of Gs at all—it is not particularly good. The hon. Member for Beckenham (Bob Stewart) and the right hon. Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) My appeal to Her Majesty’s Government is that they make the point: it is about security, absolutely. Anyone try to address the inequality of provision as they roll who thinks that there are not states out there, which out 5G. It is wrong that people should be disadvantaged have been named here today, that are not about the simply because of where they live. All United Kingdom UK’s good health, is kidding themselves; it is as simple citizens have a right to these services, and it is fundamental as that. We have come a long way since the Westminster to the way we think of ourselves as a nation—we believe Hall debate earlier this year, if my memory serves me in fairness and fairness of provision. As we come out of rightly, but I always think that a late convert is the best this dreadful pandemic, we will have to punch above convert of all, and we are where we are today. My party our weight economically, and access to 5G means that and I support the Bill at this stage. we can mobilise our bright innovators and entrepreneurs all over the United Kingdom, whether they live in the It is an incredibly complex situation, which gets more glens and straths of Sutherland, the central belt of complex almost by the month and the year. Frankly, the Scotland or down here in England. whole subject of cyber-security terrifies me. When I first came down here three years ago, a humble—no, I will I will conclude with two points. First, I agree that the not say a humble crofter, because that nomenclature 5G diversification strategy brings great opportunities. belongs to another Member on this side of the House. There will be a financial injection into the UK economy, When I came down here from the highlands, the situation which will be incredibly useful. Secondly, the right hon. was forcibly brought home to me when I went to Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) was spot on: it Estonia with the Armed Forces Parliamentary Scheme. is not just about the hardware. It is about the software I was firmly instructed by a Sergeant Major from the and the clever things we do to safeguard ourselves from 3rd Battalion the Yorkshire Regiment on no account cyber-attacks, because as I described with the example whatever to turn on my mobile, otherwise a state not of the iPhone in Estonia, there are people and states out terribly keen on our good health would simply triangulate there who are not for the good of our health. in on me, and would probably try to hack in; that brought it home to me in no uncertain terms. 8.6 pm In the short time available—I will try to be as good as the hon. Member for Beckenham—I want to make two Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford points. The first was touched on, correctly, by the Green) (Con): I welcome the Government bringing forward shadow Secretary of State: there is, alas, an unsavoury this Bill now, and I congratulate them on having listened, side to the way in which China does some things. We are which is not always something that Governments can all aware of the reports coming out of that country of be accused of. The Secretary of State and his Minister, the horrendous abuse of the Uyghur people in Xinjiang whom I welcome—the Under-Secretary of State for Digital, province; it is an ugly scene. A recent report suggests Culture, Media and Sport, my hon. Friend the Member that some 82 foreign and Chinese companies benefit for Boston and Skegness (Matt Warman) —have listened from the forced labour programme by the Chinese to many concerns, and measures to address them are Government. Of course, the Chinese Government would now embedded in the Bill. say, “No, no, no. That’s not right at all. It’s not forced China recently said that if there was any further labour; it’s not like that.” They have described it as interference, it would poke the eyes out of the Five “detention centres”, “re-education” facilities and—this Eyes. This Bill puts the missing fifth eye back into the is quite sinister—“de-extremification” camps. They have Five Eyes, because we have been laggard, lazy and late 97 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 98 on this, and I think this would probably be the case keen on a golden era, to be leant on and told, “Do you across the board, so perhaps that is a positive. The right really need to go down this road?” That will happen. I hon. Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) made sat as a Secretary of State, and I can tell the House that a very good speech. He was right to say that this is not all that stuff happens, and anyone else will say that, too. about China. There are plenty of security risks, as my A more structured approach would not allow the Secretary right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East of State to miss the right people on advice. That will be (Dr Lewis), the Chair of the Intelligence and Security very important. Committee, said. Russia is a massive security risk to us The descriptions in the proposed new sections of the and has probably carried out more cyber-attacks on us Communications Act 2003 under clause 16 of the Bill than anybody else. That is debatable, but it has a very are important, and I will come back to those, because big criminal network that attacks us the whole time. the list gives the Secretary of State plenty of scope. I accept that. However, the difference is that China is Tightening up the advice means that that scope will not now the driving force for our introducing this Bill, therefore be wasted. because it poses a very different kind of threat. The fact We are here because of the mistakes of the golden is that China has juxtaposed the ability to dominate in a era—the great kowtow, as I would rather call it—where market sense, which sucks us in—I will come to project we too often ignored the realities of what was going on kowtow and the mistakes that were made—while at the in security terms for the sake of this great drive that we same time forcing us to often turn a blind eye to some of would benefit massively from the opening up of trade the work it did, which we do not do with Russia and with China. There was also a mistaken belief: too often, some of the more immediate threats. It is a peculiar and liberal democracies and all of us who believe in freedom different challenge, which is now embedded in the Bill. of speech and the general freedoms believe, rather My right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest arrogantly, that all we have to do is open up markets East made the important point that the nature of our and everyone else will realise that their system must be exposure has been known about for some considerable wrong and therefore they will change it. time, and we should not have ignored it. I thank my That was the great belief. I was told it endlessly in colleagues who joined the Huawei interest group early government, “Don’t worry about this sort of stuff. on, in winter last year, and who have campaigned to try China will change once they realise exactly how wonderful to tighten up these security measures. Following that, it is to trade with the west.” Well, they did not. They do the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China was set up, not want to change, because they think that their form of which is now made up of politicians on the left and government is a better form of government. They will right from 38 countries, and they are asking us to say, “We are opened up to the markets. We are getting tighten up our security co-operation and ensure that we the benefits of the marketplace.” China was invited to get this right. join the World Trade Organisation back in 2001. There This Bill is long overdue, and it is welcome, but I want have been real problems since then with market forces, to highlight three issues in it. First, although it is not in but I want to come back to the security elements. the text of the Bill, the Government have now announced The worry is that others of the Five Eyes spotted that they accept 2027 as the end point for Huawei as a what was going on long before us, and we ignored a lot provider that may be high-risk and that no new Huawei of the evidence that we should have been tightening up equipment may be installed from September 2021. That much, much earlier. We should have been concerned. I is very welcome. In fact, the September 2021 date is cannot remember which Member said that security better than I would have expected at this point, so I should be the No. 1 consideration, over everything else. congratulate the Government on being very clear about We lost that—I hate to say that—and considered it just that. That is a more important date than 2027, in effect, one of the things we might look at. because it opens the market and allows others to recognise now that they have a possibility of re-entering a market Mr Kevan Jones: I am not one for doing the that was closed to them by one company in particular— Government’s job or supporting them, but I do not there are other companies in China—that has manipulated think we did that actually, in terms of the Huawei the normal rules of market adherence and subsidy. It cyber-security evaluation centre. We were ahead of other has been a disaster for us not to recognise that on that countries that did not do that, including the United basis alone, forgetting the security risks as well. States, and let Huawei into their country networks I am, however, concerned by another point about the without any checks whatever. But the issue has to be process, which leaves the Secretary of State to make security. I know that the right hon. Gentleman has these decisions going forward, against criteria that are strong views about China trade, but security has to be at laid out, and I will come back to that. I think my right the heart of things, which I think is where we have been hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East said, up to now. “Who will be the advisers? Who will advise?” That is absolutely right, and the Secretary of State should Sir Iain Duncan Smith: I have to say that I do not listen to the Chair of the Committee on that point. It is agree with the right hon. Gentleman on this. Although important to structure who will advise the Secretary of the Huawei cyber-security evaluation centre was installed, State and how that will happen. Perhaps the Committee when I sat and listened to people from it making a can have a very strong look at that and advise the presentation to us earlier in the year, it was almost as Government on how to structure that. though we were watching people who were kind of There should be a more formal structure embedded squeezing their own genuine,real opinion, which would have in the Bill, otherwise it will be too easy for a Secretary been coming via GCHQ, about how the real threat was of State, under pressure from the Business Secretary or formed. Their arguments did not stand up, even in the face a Chancellor, such as one we once had, who was very of people who were not every day working on security. 99 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 100

[Sir Iain Duncan Smith] and then went further into abuse of the Government. Subsequently, it has gone on to sanctions: the Chinese The truth is we need to be careful, and it should have has now broken WTO rules, with sanctions of more been a tighter position from the word go. The very fact than 200% on Australian wine. that the Government are bringing this measure forward In the past couple of days, the Chinese have produced now suggests that that was not the case. [Interruption.] what I think is called a meme—which is a mocked-up Listen, I am critical of my own Government. I resigned instrument on the internet—that shows something about from the damn thing at one point. I have to say that I an Australian soldier trying to kill a child. This is therefore do believe it is possible for great Governments, appalling behaviour and I want my Government, at like mine, to get things wrong. some point, to be very clear that such behaviour is simply not to be borne. Although we have said that we Dr Julian Lewis: In defence of the Huawei cyber-security stand with China, the key thing about this sort of thing evaluation centre, its sixth annual report, from September and our co-operation with our Five Eyes partners is to this year, is absolutely devastating in its criticisms of do more than stand with China: we should condemn Huawei’s failures to be secure or to make improvements behaviour like that that deliberately targets and demeans when insecurities have been highlighted. a democratic nation that goes by the rule of law and human rights, which is something that China does not Sir Iain Duncan Smith: I agree completely. The point do. I do hope that the Minister will pass on to his is that when we were talking about this earlier on, it was colleagues that no matter what we do with this Bill, we clear that that was, underneath it all, the centre’s real need to make sure that we stand up with our Five Eyes opinion, but it was kind of moving and modifying. It partners, now that we have the National Security and was also used in a political way, by the way, which I did Investment Bill and are moving in that direction, and not think was right. An opinion is either there or it is never allow any one of them to be isolated and picked not; do not get people in to brief Back Benchers about off one at a time. I commend the Bill to the House. what they should be thinking. I thought that was wrong. We are absolutely in the right place at this point and Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton): the Bill goes a long way towards achieving that. However, The next listed speaker has withdrawn, so we go straight we need to do some other things that could be in the to the Chair of the Defence Committee, Tobias Ellwood. Bill. For example, the Bill is about security but it does say on the front that it goes slightly wider than security: 8.18 pm the Under-Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media Mr Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth East) (Con): Thank and Sport, my hon. Friend the Member for Boston and you, Madam Deputy Speaker—does that mean that I Skegness (Matt Warman) signed the bit that says: get 16 minutes to speak? That is fantastic. [Interruption.] “In my view the provisions of the Telecommunications (Security) That is my first intervention, so it is now 17 minutes. It Bill are compatible with the Convention rights.” is good to catch your eye in this important debate, That convention is the European convention on human Madam Deputy Speaker, and to see present so many rights. We need to ask ourselves whether that idea colleagues who were there at the start of the journey—I applies to many regimes—not just China—and companies referred to this in the first intervention I made—when that come from those regimes that may be guilty of we first discussed Huawei in the Chamber. human rights abuses. The Defence Committee looked at this subject because I asked the Minister previously, in a private context, the security of 5G is now critical, given our ever-growing whether he would consider including in proposed new reliance on data movement. To establish a new security section 105Z8 of the Communications Act 2003, on framework for the UK telecoms sector and to ensure designation notices, the inclusion of the ability, where it that telecoms providers operate a secure network and may arise, to do something in the area of genocide and resilient services and manage their supply chains is the involvement of companies in that process. There is absolutely fundamental to our new way of life. The very strong evidence in a couple of cases—particularly completion of 5G over the next decade will be nothing in the Uyghur case—of the use of slave labour, which short of revolutionary. Every aspect of our lives as we should result in those companies being outlawed. The know them, including how we communicate, socialise, Minister may argue that this Bill might not be the work, travel and manufacture things, will become appropriate vehicle for that because it is specifically increasingly dependent on lightning movements of wireless about security, but every Bill has on its face that we data. The advantages of such scope and scale in our abide by human rights laws. I am not trying to widen growing online world have very much been appreciated the Bill’s scope; I am giving the Minister the opportunity during this pandemic, but, equally, we must recognise to have that extra element as part of his possible how our reliance leaves us very much exposed to those designations. After all, we are dealing with countries who might choose to cause us harm. and nations that have, particularly in China’s case, torn The backdrop of this was of course the lively debate, up much of the book on co-operation and diplomacy. which I have referred to, over Huawei. Perhaps that was Let me raise a final point before I conclude. My hon. a wake-up call on just how powerful and tech savvy Friend the Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) China has become. The Minister and the Secretary of has gone, but he mentioned Australia. One of our Five State have made it very clear that this is not just about Eyes partners, Australia, had the temerity to ask for an China—other non-state and state actors are now developing inquiry into the covid outbreak. Since then, the Chinese capabilities to interfere with our online world—but I have attempted, in essence, massively to beat up Australia make it very clear indeed that what we are discussing today in a very undiplomatic and aggressive manner. It started exposes the wider uncomfortable reality of the gradual with abuse of the individuals who asked for an inquiry geopolitical shift in global power from west to east. 101 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 102

In our lifetimes, China is on course to become more Ultimately, we must recognise that Huawei, ZTE and powerful economically, technologically and militarily others are so powerful because they are state funded. than the United States of America, and how we handle Perhaps it is time for an Apollo moment: when the this so-called Thucydides trap is yet to be reckoned United States knew it was losing the space race, a with. This is a usually disruptive transition of influence combination of state aid and the commercial sector from one ruling power base to a rising power with allowed it not only to catch up with but to overtake the eventually more dominance—a transition that history Soviet Union. We need the same penny to drop here and suggests is rarely peaceful. The only example of a to recognise what China is all about. peaceful transition is that from the British empire to the It is good to hear growing talk of the D5 trusted alliance American superpower. If we are honest, this Bill is of nations. It has been mentioned as an advancement of about exactly that. This is the starting point of a bigger the Five Eyes community and I very much welcome conversation about how we manage such a transition. that. We need to provide an alternative to the cheap We are placing protections on our country against solutions that the Chinese are rolling out, which continue China, which we privately no longer trust, but I have to to be peddled across the road. They are high-tech versions say that, publicly, we may be in denial about what we of the one belt, one road programme. Only with greater need to discuss. western resolve can we design and build the secure We should finally come to terms with the fact that foundations for the profound new technological world China has not matured into the responsible global we are about to experience. citizen that, a decade ago, we hoped it would be. Instead, I will underline the elephant in the room: what do we China offers a competing authoritarian ideology,leveraging do about China? Unless we in the UK and collectively its colossal economic growth to undercut western in the west address China’s conduct, there will be a competition and ensnare dozens of countries into geopolitical clash. That is inevitable and will slide us infrastructure projects and high-tech plans on terms towards another cold war. that they can ill afford. Our growing dependence on the We should make it clear that the UK has huge respect online world has created a new virtual theatre of war. for the Chinese people. Our histories are intertwined, The actual character of conflict has been changing in perhaps more than many of us appreciate. The opium front of us: it is less about terrain, and now more about wars, the ceding of Hong Kong, the Boxer rebellion, the data. We are becoming increasingly vulnerable, with century of humiliation—perhaps Britain glosses over cyber-attacks, disinformation campaigns, interference many of those historical footnotes, but for those in in elections, manipulation of social media, data theft, China, they influence their thinking and their attitude online espionage and sabotage. These are the new towards the west today. battlegrounds that we must prepare for and defend against. Our international rules-based order was crafted However, today, the west is recalibrating its view of in the pre-digital age. A major cyber-attack, for example, China. China’s conduct in the pandemic, from its initial could cause more damage than a dirty bomb, but would efforts to hide the outbreak to rejecting any independent not technically trip a NATO article 5 response.International investigation, has exposed a dangerous agenda that we law must catch up, and this legislation is a small line of can no longer ignore. During China’s incredible economic defence in a far wider geopolitical battle that we need to ascent, western policy focused on deepening engagement embrace. in the hope that China would evolve into a responsible global citizen that embraced hard-fought principles of Britain is rightly seeking to remain on the cutting liberty, democracy and open trade. It is clear that the edge of this fast-developing digital world, but this can Chinese Communist party has something very different only be achieved with greater protection and, indeed, in mind. As it has increased its economic power, Beijing investment in our critical national infrastructure. Our has deliberately shunned international accountability 5G capability must leave no virtual backdoors left open. and rules. It may be gaining superpower status, but it Consequently, phasing out high-risk vendors, such as avoids any sense of duty to uphold core values of Huawei, from our 5G programme is the right call. freedom and the rule of law. Knowing that its conduct However, we have to ask the question: why is it that a repudiates those values, it now pursues a geopolitical decade ago there were 12 vendors that can provide this authoritarian agenda, as illustrated in the crackdown in support, yet today there are only six? There are two in Hong Kong, the terrible treatment of the Uyghur minority Europe, with Ericsson and Nokia, two in the far east, and its manipulation of the digital world, which mimics with NEC and Samsung, and then of course two in its one belt, one road initiative. China—Huawei and ZTE—and there the question lies. With countries becoming locked into long-term What we need to do about it is to make sure we have commitments with reduced autonomy and little prospect that capability to move forward in a secure environment. of withdrawal, more and more countries are becoming We must accept that Huawei has grafted its way into ensnared in China’s authoritarian sphere of influence. our telecoms network partly because the UK vendor The US now publicly confirms that China is a strategic market is not diverse enough. Regaining the secure and geopolitical threat to the west, while here in the UK technological capability on which our new digital world we have yet to say so, though I am pleased that the will depend requires more than just legislation to block Secretary of State pointed out concerns about China. high-risk vendors from entry; it needs the advancement I hope that the full publication of the Government’s of our own technological capabilities. Open RAN has integrated review will confirm that China now is a been mentioned, but it is still a long way off. OneWeb geopolitical threat. We require a turning point—another has been purchased as a possible capability for Sputnik moment, where we no longer pretend and we communications.Wehave yet to hear what the Government do not just legislate on high-risk vendors, but hold the plan to do with that. regime behind the state-owned companies to account. 103 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 104

[Mr Tobias Ellwood] Clauses 1 to 14 introduce a stronger telecoms security framework. The Bill amends the Communications Act I hope that, with the changing of the guard in 2003 by placing strengthened telecoms security duties Washington, there will be a rejuvenation of the west’s on public telecoms providers. I am thankful that the Bill collective resolve about what we stand for, what we purports to enable more specific security requirements believe in and what we are willing to defend. The next to be set out in secondary legislation, underpinned by decade will be very bumpy indeed. If we are to avoid the codes of practice providing guidance on the security another cold war, protecting our telecoms infrastructure measures to be taken to meet those requirements. I am must be the first step of many. given to understand that the Bill gives the telecoms regulator,Ofcom, powers to monitor and enforce industry 8.28 pm compliance with the duties and specific security requirements. placing new obligations on public telecoms Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): It is a pleasure to providers to share information with Ofcom that is necessary follow the right hon. Member for Bournemouth East to assess the security of their networks. (Mr Ellwood), with his vast knowledge, and other right hon. and hon. Members who have spoken. I thank them The UK is part of the Five Eyes, along with Canada, for their speeches. I am pleased to have the opportunity Australia, New Zealand and the USA. We cannot ignore to speak on this issue. I spoke about it back in March, that influence, and the sanctions that the US imposed when I stated my fear of reliance on Huawei. on Huawei. The US first placed it on the entity list on Let me quote what I said at that time: 16 May 2019, citing national security concerns. This “I am only one of 650 Members of this House, and I absolutely sanctioned the company’s access to important US believe in the tenets of democracy, but I will not stay silent. I do technology for design and production use. While not believe that what the Government are doing is in the best acknowledging the potential impacts this might have on security interests of this nation, and if steps can be taken to pare the reliability of Huawei’s products, the Government, it back, those steps must be taken. We have been known as on advice of the National Cyber Security Centre, security giants, and I do not like the idea that we are now standing determined this to be a manageable risk. The restrictions on the shoulders of Chinese giants. We have stood alone, and can to network access imposed on high-risk vendors in do so again, but it is always best that we stand with our allies. The January 2020, alongside pre-existing oversight measures, Chinese may hopefully be strong trading partners post Brexit”— were considered sufficient mitigation strategies. we will wait to see whether or not that will be the case— “but by no stretch of the imagination can they ever be considered So the USA clearly saw what the problems and risks our allies; their human rights abuses cannot be ignored. This issue were, and took a stand early on, and I am pleased that is concerning, and we must not leave it here.”—[Official Report, we are now doing the same. Chinese influence, across 4 March 2020; Vol. 672, c. 288WH.] the whole of the world, always has a condition, as we The right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford see in many countries in Africa and further afield where Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) referred to the Uyghur it is trying to increase its influence. It has an insatiable Muslims and the human rights abuses they are going demand for every country’s resources, but along with through—the fact that their right to worship has been that come the conditions and the influence they have on abused and that they are subjected to violence, both digital and cyber-security. I am deeply concerned about physical and psychological. As others have mentioned, that, as are others. there is also the question as to whether they are involved It is my belief that while not perfect, this Bill puts in in some of the slave labour in Huawei and what it does. place an emphasis on our nation’s cyber-security that is We have heard and read the stories in the press about essential. Volkswagen, which refused even to acknowledge the fact that perhaps some Uyghur Muslims had been being During the lockdown, our increasing reliance on the used as slave labour. I chair the all-party group on internet has been made abundantly clear. It is phenomenal international freedom of religion or belief, and I feel that where we have been precluded from meeting to strongly about this issue. It is close to my heart, so I worship, our pastors and praise teams have been able to wanted to speak out. I know it is not directly what this livestream church services, it has been wonderful to carry Bill is about, but we have those concerns on human out certain MP duties online where applicable, and it rights issues for the Uyghur Muslims, the Christians has been a life-saver for some businesses to carry on their and the Falun Gong. We know all about the issue of the work at home. This has highlighted the reach of the forced organ harnessing that takes place, and all those internet into our lives and the absolutely essential nature three religious groups are part of that. of its being secure from cyber warfare and attacks. The Government have said that such an attack is highly So I am thankful for the steps taken by the Prime likely and would have a high impact. I had a discussion Minister. We all knew that when these steps were taken, with a gentleman from Northern Ireland who is involved there would be the detrimental knock-on effect of narrowing in the Royal Air Force, and he said that the greatest the UK telecommunications market and possibly driving threat that it felt was cyber warfare. This Bill will be a up infrastructure costs, but I still believe this to have very strong way of addressing that. been the right decision. I am thankful for the steps that the Minister announced today, and for the support We can all sit in this place and say that something there seems to be across this Chamber for them. This is needs greater funding. Every aspect of our budget about building supply chain resilience, with support could do with enhanced funding. My grandchildren— available for supporting incumbent suppliers. The security indeed, probably my great-grandchildren—will be paying of this nation is undoubtedly a red-line issue, and we off the coronavirus outgoings their entire lives. We need must protect it at all costs. Everyone has said that, and to take what we have and do the best we can with it. My we mean it, and we want to see that being delivered belief is that on this one, the Government have taken though this Bill. the steps to address my grave security concerns, and 105 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 106 while the Bill is not all I would like to see, as others have It is therefore obvious that alternative suppliers need said, I find myself much more content today than I was to be developed, not only because of the risks we are in this place in March of this year. considering but because of the unprecedented demand for equipment needed to deliver the connectivity that 8.36 pm will be called for. There is significant value in this—in the research and development, in the intellectual property Alun Cairns (Vale of Glamorgan) (Con): It is a and in the manufacturing opportunities, all of which privilege to speak in support of this Bill and to have the need to be exploited. A fundamental turning point for opportunity to support many of the calls that colleagues me was during the summer, when the Government have made. announced their intention to adopt open standards Only just over a week ago, the Minister and I were in such as open RAN. This signalled that the Government Westminster Hall debating an allied subject to this Bill understand the challenges, and the need to encourage when we discussed the challenges and opportunities more investment and innovation in this space. This was that came from excluding Huawei from our 5G network. a hugely welcome step, and will be pivotal to diversification I do not want to repeat all the points that were made in in the marketplace. Furthermore, today’s neutrORAN that debate,but in the short time since then, the Government pilot project shows that the Government are determined have taken significant, welcome steps—something the to be at the forefront of the technological advances. Minister hinted at—in developing policies associated with the Bill. Today’s publication of the 5G supply chain I would add that we need to ensure these pilots are diversification strategy sees a welcome plan that contributes particularly open—very open—to UK businesses. In last to the solution that Huawei brought about, as does the week’s debate, I went into detail to highlight the many neutrORAN pilot that was announced earlier today. individual companies that show the UK has exceptional expertise in specific areas, such as radio frequency and As a backdrop, it is worth recalling that it was the satellite communications, base station capability,backhaul lack of diversity in the supply chain of this specialised and cyber-resilience. I went through a whole list of area of technology that created a tension between the organisations in last week’s Westminster Hall debate; I desire to roll out 5G as quickly as possible and the will not go through them again, but I will just highlight potential exposure of our national security to high-risk a few. vendors. Among a whole range of factors, we were being forced to weigh up, or were tempted by, the Many right hon. and hon. Members have referred to economic and social benefits that 5G could bring within cyber risk, but south-east Wales and the western a relatively short timescale against the risks of being gateway have among the greatest cyber-resilience expertise exposed to largely one company with its umbilical cord anywhere,certainly in Europe: Thales,Airbus,and quantum attached to one nation and the potential security risks technology at the University of Bristol, along with GCHQ. associated with that country—obviously, China. It also happens to coincide with the disproportionate The Government ultimately, and rightly, decided that strength that south-east Wales has in compound the concern for the latter outweighed the former, and this semiconductors, which I will come on to in a moment, Bill is the result. That is welcome, but simply passing and the satellite and radio frequency expertise that the Bill will not necessarily reduce the risks if we exists in north-east England, highlighting that this coincides continue to be exposed to a limited number of vendors. with the levelling-up agenda that the Government also That is whythe diversification strategy and the neutrORAN want to pursue. Today’s Bill will lead to new economic pilot are also important. It is worth highlighting that in opportunities in different parts of the country. any vital supply chain, diversity is key, but a few Enabling the technology through all these elements is organisations in the commercial world allow supply a great economic opportunity. 5G will only work with chains to become too constrained. The commercial the compound semiconductor technology that I mentioned risks, let alone the security risks, are far too great. earlier—high-capacity chips that enable more data to be It is worth recognising that the reach and influence of managed effectively. I said last week that if a silicon 5G will be far greater than any previous generation of chip is a country lane, compound semi-conductors are communications. Its capacity to carry much larger volumes great big highways: that is the volume of data that will of data at very high speeds well beyond 400 Gbps be carried by the 5G network. The world’s largest capacity means that our connected lives will be taken to cluster for compound semiconductor technology is in a whole new level. Some have mentioned the internet of south-east Wales, part of the western gateway economic things, connected vehicles, smart cities and even smart region. Companies such as IQE, SPTS Technologies, energy networks, and many more areas that we have not Newport Wafer Fab and others work with the Compound even thought of will become connected in an ever Semiconductor Applications Catapult, as well as universities greater, independent way, highlighting the risks that we from Cardiff and Swansea to Cambridge and Bristol. could have faced if this Bill had not been brought It is worth noting that the UK has great expertise in forward. However, all these innovations lead to an silicon chip design, but we do not manufacture such exponential growth in connectivity and pressures on chips any longer. In contrast, we design and fabricate spectrum that has its natural limits, which also need to compound semi-conductor chips, so supporting and be overcome. Smart cell technology is likely to be part encouraging further investment in this sector can maintain of the solution, meaning that more apparatus than ever manufacturing capacity as well. Their energy efficiency before will need to be adopted, along with a greater is also a key benefit, particularly with technology consuming dependence on the fibre networks that will take it from 2% to 3% of global energy demand. the small cells. However, this also highlights the need for quantum encryption—something I will come to Finally, I mentioned quantum encryption earlier. So later, because it is not included in the strategy plan that much more use will be made of fibre technology as part the Minister published earlier today. of the small cell element of the 5G roll-out. Quantum 107 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 108

[Alun Cairns] for Totnes (Anthony Mangnall)—for their very informed and helpful, insightful contributions to this debate. I encryption is vital if we are going to maintain our would like to say an enormous thank you to all of them defences against the cyber threat that so many colleagues for what they have contributed in increasing my own have talked about. understanding of this matter. It is a privilege to support this Bill. There are so many We see in many fields, though, that in the future of elements that must coincide and go along with it, and I the market, particularly in this area, it is key that the am glad that the Minister is taking large leaps in the private sector is involved. We see that where there are right direction. foreign powers at play, they can disrupt this market, and we must make sure that that does not continue to 8.45 pm happen. The new technology also of course has a vital Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge and Malling) (Con): This role to play in dealing with some of the many connectivity is one of those unusual moments when almost everything issues that we experience here in the UK today. As the I wanted to say has been said, so I will be exceptionally Member for West Dorset, I like to speak sometimes for brief. wider Dorset and my neighbouring colleagues who also The Minister has done a very good job in listening. experience the many difficulties that are associated with There was a time earlier this year when many of us lack of connectivity, both in terms of broadband and thought that this could become a very difficult issue for mobiles. It is not only my mission to make sure that we the Government. I have to say that the Minister and his make that better, but—I believe, after the debate this entire Department have done a fantastic job in listening, evening—it is also the mission of this Government to not just to those of us on the Government side of the make sure that that is done better and safer, and that the House but to those on the Opposition side, and making digital security not just of individuals but of the nation sure that the points we have raised have been addressed— and the Government is absolutely at its priority. and, if I may say so after the statement today, much Finally, I thank very much the Minister for all the sooner than I think many of us expected. work that he has done, both on this Bill and others. I I would also like to say thank you to the Minister for look forward to working with him still further to make the effort he has put into reaching out not just to sure we deal with some of those connectivity issues closer companies around the world—Nokia, Ericsson, Fujitsu, to home in West Dorset. I thank him very much indeed. Samsung and a few others—to replace Huawei, but to UK companies to make sure that, at some point, we will 8.50 pm be talking not about foreign companies supplying UK Anthony Mangnall (Totnes) (Con): It is a pleasure to markets but about UK companies supplying foreign be able to speak in this debate and to follow my hon. markets. On that, I will merely say thank you and sit Friend the Member for West Dorset (Chris Loder), who down. was so kind about me it almost makes me think he has set me up for a fall. It is also very good to be able to 8.46 pm follow my right hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Chris Loder (West Dorset) (Con): It is a privilege to Glamorgan (Alun Cairns) who we might think, having follow my hon. Friend the Member for Tonbridge and listened to his speech, has every single high-tech industry Malling (Tom Tugendhat). Like him, I will keep my in his constituency. If that is the case, I am sure he will comments short because of the many contributions we be willing to share some of it with the south-west. have had this evening so far. My was made during consideration I welcome this Bill very much. I truly believe it has of the Telecommunications Infrastructure (Leasehold security at its heart. Many of us in this Chamber this Property) Bill, and the shadow Minister was good enough evening were here debating this matter and related matters, to attend. After that, I have taken a keen interest in this if memory serves me correctly, on 10 March. We had topic and the issues of national security that surround very heated exchanges and very important points were it. The Minister has consistently met me, members of made. It was a great concern of ours that high-risk vendors the inter-parliamentary alliance on China and those and others could access our infrastructure systems. I think who had concerns about Huawei, and I thank him for it is clear—crystal clear,in fact—that the Government have doing so. The result that we have got today is a real listened to our concerns, both mine and those of many of progression and benefit to our national security network, my hon. Friends and colleagues from across the House. and also an example of what we can do when the House The critical national infrastructure that we have should works together in a consensual way. be, and I think increasingly is, a national priority, and I We know that the international landscape is now far believe that this Bill will ensure this. Indeed, the Act more varied and dangerous, and that it seeks to exploit that it seeks to amend, the Communications Act 2003, I domestic networks.A recent example of this was highlighted am sure will do so too. These powers protect us from in a Bloomberg article that cited Nortel, a Canadian threats both now and in the future. As hon. Friends company that was so badly hacked—reportedly—by have pointed out in this debate, it is clear that the speed Huawei in 2000 that it led to the collapse of the company of digital infrastructure, digital services and so on is over a period of 10 years. Some 5,000 employees were progressing so fast that we need the powers that we are working in my constituency in the early 2000s. That shows debating this evening to keep up the pace. that a company supported by the Chinese state can have I would like particularly to commend my colleagues a dangerous impact on companies around the world, as here this evening—my hon. Friend the Member for well as on our own state infrastructure. Tonbridge and Malling, my right hon. Friend the Member The steps in the Bill are very welcome. Not only will for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood) and my hon. they check the dominance of international companies Friends the Members for Isle of Wight (Bob Seely) and such as Huawei, but they will identify potential future 109 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 110 threats. As right hon. and hon. Members have said, this We have righted a wrong. We have addressed an issue is not an anti-China Bill or an anti-Huawei Bill; it is on which we have been seen as out of kilter with our about national security and identifying future threats international allies. Now, we have the opportunity to go that we may face. It is also an opportunity to focus on further and to pass this fantastic piece of legislation. our domestic market and what we can do to create new We can harness the international community and, as businesses and opportunities and use our homegrown with the Augean stables, clear up the mess. We can make talent. As the Secretary of State mentioned, the £250 million sure that, in future, we have a robust and secure national telecommunications lab will be a perfect telecommunications infrastructure network that is the opportunity to cultivate and innovate new technologies pride of Britain. and encourage new people to go into the sector. My 8.56 pm hon. Friend the Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard) was kind enough to suggest that it should be based in James Sunderland (Bracknell) (Con): It is a great his constituency, but I might also suggest that it comes pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for down to the south-west and Paignton in my constituency, Totnes (Anthony Mangnall). I am delighted to speak in which has the high-tech EPIC centre focused on photonics. the debate, for two key reasons. First, it shows that the I will put that in there, and I hope to meet the Minister Government do listen to Back Benchers. Wehave provided to discuss how we might make that happen. feedback all the way through this process, and some of us have some background on this topic. I am therefore As we know, how far we can go with this depends on greatly reassured that the Minister is here and is listening how our willpower is positioned and our determination to what we are saying. to cultivate British talent, skills and innovation. The I also commend the Bill for what it is. I am very diversification point has been made several times, and reassured that the conclusions of the telecoms supply much has been said, but we also have to be conscious of chain review in 2019 are being met. As the world the need to create the environment that will see new recovers and recalibrates after covid, the UK has a great entrants into the marketplace. Relying on Ericsson and opportunity to take the initiative and to become a world Nokia is all very well, but we can and will be able to leader on another piece of vital technology, and I will develop new companies with our Five Eyes colleagues—the be firmly supporting the Government on the Bill. same point was made by the US Secretary of State earlier this year, looking at opportunities to build new As our defence and national security move ever more companies together. Where diversification is limited, online, it has never been more important to secure our there are correct measures to guide and limit high-risk lines of communication. With £16.5 billion extra in the vendors in our telecommunications network, and those Ministry of Defence budget alone, it is really important are contained in the Bill, notably in clauses 15 and 23. that the defence sector takes advantage of that, not least in the cyber-sphere. We have heard today of the strategic I also take the point that the right hon. Member for independence imperative, and I firmly welcome that. North Durham (Mr Jones) made about parliamentary The Bill will do three things. It will allow for better oversight. I hope the Chair of the Intelligence and Security security, which is absolutely important. It will placate Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for New our allies, notably in the Five Eyes community, and why Forest East (Dr Lewis), will forgive me for suggesting not Japan as well? There is a neat link there with the that if the Government are unwilling to bring forward NEC trial that is coming up in Wales. It will also open proposals for parliamentary oversight, they could go to the door for other 5G providers. I therefore support the that Committee so that it could scrutinise them. I UK’s diversification strategy. apologise for adding to his workload, and I hope he does not think that that is a poor suggestion. As we have heard, clauses 1 to 14 introduce a more robust telecoms security framework. The Bill enables My right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and more specific security prerequisites to be set out in Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) mentioned secondary legislation. It also gives the telecoms operators’ convention rights, including human rights. One of the regulator Ofcom more power to monitor and enforce biggest grievances many of us have had in terms of industry compliance. Clauses 15 to 23 give new national Huawei’s role in our telecommunications infrastructure security powers for the Government to manage the risks network relates to China’s violations of human rights. posed by high-risk vendors, and we have heard much The Minister might say that this is not the right time or about that today.The Bill therefore gives the Government the right Bill to look at human rights, and if it is not the new powers, and rightly so. right Bill, I hope he will say in his closing remarks when On 14 July, the Secretary of State announced that, the right time to address this point is. I know there are from the end of this year, telecoms operators must not other opportunities, alongside the National Security buy any 5G equipment from Huawei, with a timetable and Investment Bill, but I would be keen to hear at for removing all Huawei equipment from our 5G network which point we might address human rights. by 2027. September 2021 has also been announced as the new cut-off date for new Huawei equipment in Sir Iain Duncan Smith: I am listening carefully to my the UK. hon. Friend’s excellent speech. The Minister will note, What about the wider requirements of the Bill? This as I pointed out to him, that this Bill is signed off on the is really important, so I urge the Minister to take note. basis of the application of rights, including human Industry must be given sufficient time to comply with rights. Every Bill has the right to be amended. telecoms security requirements, and deadlines must be realistic. The Government, as we have heard, have settled Anthony Mangnall: I thank my right hon. Friend for on 2027 as the date by which high-risk vendor equipment his experience and knowledge in guiding me on that point. is to be removed and this timeframe must be left as it is. Of course, I accept that he is right on that matter. In It reflects the complexity of the task and slippage will that case, how might we address the issue I have raised? not be welcomed. 111 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 112

[James Sunderland] eight minutes that Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton) had previously asked people to take—I should I also support the Government’s initial commitment point out most unusually to the right hon. Gentleman to promote diversification and resilience in the supply who currently has the Floor that, as four of his colleagues chain backed by the initial £250 million from the spending who have immediately preceded him have spoken incredibly review. That is probably just the start and it may need —I mean incredibly—briefly, the exhortation to take more funding. I welcome, as I mentioned, the forthcoming only eight minutes no longer applies, though I would trial in Wales with NEC and our Japanese friends. not recommend taking no more than about 12 minutes. I will mention Vodafone very quickly. Vodafone has called for greater investment in Open RAN and, of Sir John Hayes: Not only is that typical of your course, Vodafone has been a key contributor to Open generosity, Madam Deputy Speaker, but for me it is RAN. This would reduce UK reliance on mobile network what amounts to nirvana, and for the House, something vendors and allow the UK to develop domestic vendors similar I hope. at scale and benefit consumers through greater price All of those aspects of risk are mitigated by market competition. That is to be welcomed. Again, it is clear diversification, but as we have heard from many speakers that the more 5G providers there are, the better it is for during this debate, this market is anything but diversified. everyone. As we have heard, the most sensitive core parts The concentration of provision has exacerbated the of our 5G network must be free of Huawei equipment very risk that this Bill seeks to deal with. It is vital that, and must remain so. as well as the taskforce, which we have heard the Minister Lastly, upgrading the UK’s mobile infrastructure to has established, a strategy emerges on exactly how we 5G could be worth as much as £158 billion over the next are going to diversify this market, because competition 10 years. It will also keep us safe. Surely this is worth not only counters dependence, but competitive pressure investing in, so the telecoms bill is absolutely a step in drives up innovation and quality. The telecoms supply the right direction and I support it. chain review judged that, should the UK become dependent on a single vendor of telecoms equipment—particularly 9.1 pm a high-risk vendor—it would pose a range of risks to the security and resilience of UK telecoms networks. Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con): The Government have acknowledged the need to The issue of national dependence goes beyond high-risk protect critical communication infrastructure and that vendors, however. The number of suppliers in the UK is welcome, particularly so as it comes on the heels of telecoms market—as we have heard repeatedly, currently the National Security and Investment Bill. Telecoms Huawei, Ericsson and Nokia—is already critically low. provision is more important than ever. We have always While the security of the network can be improved by lived in a data-rich world, but what has changed is how removing Huawei equipment, the wider problem of readily we access that data as the way in which we potential dependence will be exacerbated by the power gather, exchange and distribute information has changed. to designate vendors and introduce directions unless I am left wondering whether T.S. Eliot was not right there are new entrants to the market. We really need to that wisdom is lost in information. Nevertheless, it is hear from the Minister either in his wind-up or later, if the world in which we live and that world means that he does not have time tonight, precisely when the the way in which we control or, if necessary, prohibit diversification strategy will be brought to the House for provision of that data, by which I mean the technology, consideration and what legislation will be necessary. I the networks and those that supply and manage them, understand that a Bill may be forthcoming, following is critical to our security. To that end, this Bill is indeed, this one, to give life to that strategy. as the Intelligence and Security Committee was told, an My right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest important first step, but only that. We do need to look East (Dr Lewis) emphasised that diversification is by at other factors, to which I will draw the House’s far the best way to secure UK telecoms. The Government attention in my brief contribution this evening. judged in their assessment that there is a global market Of course the main purpose of the Bill is to raise failure in the telecoms market. While the Government telecommunications security standards across the board will intervene to take the measures necessary and facilitated by means of a new and more rigorous telecoms by the Bill, unless we grapple with that global failure, security framework, but the Bill also gives the Secretary we will, I fear, come back to this House time and again of State particular powers to designate vendors of and need to do more. As I said when we spoke a week or telecommunications equipment as a risk to national a two ago about the Bill that I just mentioned, I suspect security. All dependence is, by definition, a risk, for that security considerations will increasingly feature in dependence creates risk. Over-dependence means Government strategy and policy and that this House unsustainable risks and, in terms of national security will need to debate security issues with much greater and national interest, there are three kinds of risks: regularity than it has historically, given the dynamism monopoly or near-monopoly provision; malevolence; that we now face. and corporate failure. I have spoken about market failure and the need for diversification. Let us speak about malevolence, because Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Eleanor Laing): Order. much has been said, of China in particular, and Russia I hesitate to interrupt the right hon. Gentleman, and it has been mentioned too. There is no doubt that, as the is for a very unusual reason. I just feel that I ought to Government have acknowledged, there are malevolent point out to the House that, having exhorted the right powers who seek by a variety of means to disrupt the hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Alun Cairns) to lawful activities of this country and so endanger its be rather more brief than he was going to be—though I citizenry by whatever method they deem most appropriate. have to say that he took only one minute longer than the We should not be naive about this and, frankly, for too 113 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 114 long successive Governments were. This Bill is welcome the Bill and congratulate the Government on it. It is a but again, as my right hon. Friend mentioned, it has good Bill, and credit should go to the ministerial team for been a long time coming, given the warnings that were that. Credit should also go to my Back-Bench colleagues issued from the ISC and others. who have made important contributions this year. There Let me re-emphasise to the Government that we are plenty of them, but in particular, my hon. Friend certainly need a diversification strategy urgently. We the Member for Tonbridge and Malling (Tom Tugendhat), need the legislation that supports it but there are other my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and matters, too, that I want to conclude with, Madam Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) and my hon. Deputy Speaker, despite your invitation to speak at Friend the Member for Isle of Wight (Bob Seely) have appropriate—I will not say “excessive”— length. These helped us to get to a better Bill. questions are critical but not, in my judgment, designed This comes a couple of weeks after Second Reading in any way not to recognise the achievement of the of the National Security and Investment Bill, which I Minister and the progress made by the Government. also spoke in support of. As with that Bill, it is right that When will the strategy come forward? I would like to we devise a new regime for the risks that we think we hear about that as soon as possible. Given that the ISC face at this time, and we should not be too prescriptive. raised this matter 18 months ago, I think we need a firm Our focus in 2020 is Huawei, but we have to leave this timeline and an assurance that there will be no more open to new threats that we might encounter, so I am prevarication. My right hon. Friend the Member for comfortable with Huawei’s name not being on the face New Forest East is right that national security must be of the Bill. an overriding consideration in this field of work. In I support Ofcom being given the powers to ensure being deployed, the powers conferred by the Bill must, that providers adhere to the new security measures that at heart, always gauge national security as predominant. we want them to take. I also support the Government How will that be determined? Threats are subtle and bringing forward the deadline for buying new equipment dynamic, and yet the means and methods by which the from Huawei to September 2021 and the removal of all Department will both define national security and apply its equipment by 2027. Of course, I would like that date that definition through the provisions of the Bill to to be earlier, and I maintain that there is a distinction differing circumstances have not been made crystal between what the providers want to do and what is clear. I am mindful that this is a Department for sport genuinely impossible for them to do, but I accept the and culture without a security role apart from this one— Government’s judgment. I accept that, like any businesses perhaps more skiing than spying, and more existentialism making an investment decision, providers require certainty. than espionage. What specific processes, structures and They need to know that that is the year it is happening, procedures will the Department use to access the expertise and we need to stick to that. I also accept—perhaps the of the National Cyber Security Centre and the wider Minister could comment on this—that providers have intelligence community in designating vendors? an understandable concern that the decisions made by Weheard earlier about the expertise, skills and resources local authorities about masts and so on may further of Ofcom, but given that the Bill gives new powers to delay the roll-out, and perhaps we can support them in Ofcom, how will it be held to account? I know that my those decisions. right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East As this debate went on in 2020, I found some of the would share my view—I have not discussed this with contributions—not necessarily from this House but from him so I am making that assumption—that Ofcom outside it—frustrating. One in particular was the suggestion ought to be scrutinised by the Intelligence and Security that there are no risk-free vendors. I accept that, but Committee, given the particular nature of its new when we are dealing with companies such as Nokia and responsibilities: to proactively assess the security practices Ericsson, we know that we are dealing with fundamentally of larger telecoms providers; to take action where security different entities from companies such as Huawei. We is, or is at risk of, being compromised; and to make are not concerned that Nokia and Ericsson will collaborate information available to and provide annual security with intelligence agencies on spurious national security reports to the Government. grounds, and we are not concerned that there might be back-door vulnerabilities in the equipment, as Vodafone Finally, will the Minister say more about related found a decade ago; even though it was assured that telecommunications challenges such as Russian involvement they had been taken out, that was not the case. It is also with undersea cables that carry comms data and the fair to say that we are not concerned about malicious future security and resilience of satellite technology? cyber-attacks being directed at us from the Governments The covid crisis emphasises the need to build resilience of Finland and Sweden. I accept that no provider can to risk. It can be done by making more of what we be without any risk at all, on the basis that I accept that consume, and by recognising that in the fragility and no system is completely foolproof, but we are dealing imperfectability of our socioeconomic order, the market with very different companies in those respects, compared is no guarantor of wellbeing, so it must be shaped, with those where we have concerns about the world guided and, where necessary, constrained by people view of the country they are headquartered in. with power for whom communal interest is the defining purpose. Those people with power are the Minister and Yet we need more competition and more diversity of others who govern and we here in this House who hold providers. We would need that, by the way, even if there them to account. were no security considerations whatsoever, because competition improves quality,choice and price. I therefore very much support the Government’s investment of 9.11 pm £250 million. I represent a largely rural constituency, so David Johnston (Wantage) (Con): It is always a pleasure I entirely understand the importance of connectivity to follow my right hon. Friend the Member for South generally, and of 5G for the country as a whole and for Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes). I welcome my constituency. It has been suggested that it will be 115 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 116

[David Johnston] Bob Seely: It was very concerning that those who govern us were calling a part and parcel of the Chinese worth £170 billion to our GDP in the next decade. I state a private firm, which it clearly was not. know that the decisions being made through the Bill The Government claimed that Huawei could be safely will delay the roll-out and increase the cost, yet they are limited to the periphery of the network. That is a entirely the right decisions to take because they are dubious argument that is still being debated and is not about our national security.In July 2019, the Government’s believed by many experts in many other countries. Were own supply chain review found that successive policy there espionage issues with Huawei? Well, as my hon. decisions had meant that, although we might have Friend the Member for Wantage said, we do not expect achieved good commercial outcomes, we had poor cyber- a state threat to come from Sweden or Finland. But we security.It is therefore entirely right that the Government do expect a potential threat to come from one-party should now reverse that order of priority, even if it is totalitarian states such as China, Russia, Iran and North going to cost more and take more time, and I wholly Korea. China is clearly one of those. So the Nortel support their aspiration to have one of the toughest example was a good one. security regimes in the world. As we know, China has a dreadful reputation for 9.17 pm intellectual property theft and cyber-attacks, so there were many reasons to be deeply concerned about what Bob Seely (Isle of Wight) (Con): It is a pleasure to was happening in our relationship with Huawei. Yet at follow my hon. Friend the Member for Wantage (David the same time it became incredibly powerful in this Johnston). I noticed that he was speaking without notes, country. Why? Because it had a very aggressive lobbying which was very impressive. Sadly, I still rely on mine. I network. It was throwing money at lobbyists and senior thank the Minister for bringing forward the Bill, and I people who used to be at the heart of Government, at thank the ministerial team for talking to us and engaging very senior levels. This really concerns me about the with so many colleagues. It would be great if other state of our democracy, and it is one reason that I Departments could do that. What can I say? Hint, hint! would like to bring in a foreign lobbying Act. We need When the and I produced our to have a much clearer idea of what those companies or “Defending our Data”document back in May 2019, many oligarchs—those who act on behalf of other people and Members had yet to form an opinion on Huawei. I am states—are up to in this country. We did not really therefore grateful to the 60-odd members of the know the extent of the Huawei lobbying operation. Huawei interest group who took an interest in this subject, and to the 36 people who voted to show their Sir John Hayes: My hon. Friend is painting a picture concern to the Government back in early March on the of a strategic view of China and other powers that has Telecommunications Infrastructure (Leasehold Property) prevailed under successive Governments. It is born of a Bill. I am aware that that Bill was not necessarily the kind of determinism: “We can’t stop them, so we’ll have right place to express those concerns, but with hindsight to live with them”. There is a predetermined inevitability I think it sent an important message to the Government about the domination of these states, and that is a from those 36 Members—plus two tellers, of whom I was misconception that needs to be challenged fundamentally, one. The United States moving its position in subsequent in the way in which he is doing so tonight. months was also important. I think the change would have happened anyway, regardless of whether there was Bob Seely: I look forward to being as eloquent and a Republican or a Democrat Administration. A well dressed as my right hon. Friend one day. Before I combination of Back-Bench concern, quite rightly, and come to the point that he mentioned on the need for a the United States’ understanding of the geopolitics consistent approach and better understanding, let me being perhaps a little ahead of that of the United say one more thing about Huawei. Kingdom and on a par with that of Australia helped to A few other Members have touched on this matter: shape Ministers’ understanding of the problems. China’s human rights issues. The excellent Australian I am slightly concerned that the situation came to this Strategic Policy Institute has presented credible evidence in the first place, because there were so many warning of significant human rights forced labour issues, with lights about Huawei’s deepening relationship with BT. people from Xinjiang province being used not only by My hon. Friend the Member for Totnes (Anthony Huawei, but by other significant Chinese firms, or by Mangnall) spoke about Nortel. We must remember that firms producing goods for western consumer markets Huawei had a supply contract with Nortel, during and western branded goods. This point brings us to the which time it hacked its way into Nortel’s systems and National Security and Investment Bill—although I know stole everything, like a parasite within a body. Nortel that we are not talking about that at the moment—and was one of the great, spectacular Canadian bankruptcies the need for a definition not only of national security, of the early 21st century. Why? Because it went into but of national interest as well. Do we really think it is partnership with a business that deliberately collapsed in our national interest for us to be accepting slave it after stealing its IP. If that is not a lesson for us, it is labour products in this country,whether through Huawei— difficult to know what is. Huawei never was and never allegedly—or other firms, including well-known branded will be a private firm. It is 99% owned by the Chinese names? That human rights aspect is well worth playing up. state via trade unions. When I heard Ministers—not It seems clear that the China that we had all hoped for this Minister, but others—using the line about Huawei —indeed, the golden era that we were meant to welcome being a private company, I felt that it was a deeply naive under David Cameron and George Osborne—is not the thing for the Department to say. China that we are getting. We need to be realistic. When it comes to international relations, in the west we are Dr Julian Lewis: Just for the record, a former Prime effectively liberal internationalists. Wetake a positive view Minister said that as well, repeatedly. of humanity—maybe a liberal, rather than a conservative 117 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 118 one, if one is being philosophical about these things, put that first. The point was made strongly by a number but a benign view of humanity. That is not necessarily of Members, including the right hon. Members for New shared by the hard-nosed realism school of thought Forest East (Dr Lewis) and for Chingford and Woodford that we see in Russia and China, which is much more of Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith). a zero-sum game: we win, you lose. China plays that Given where we are, we support the aims of the Bill. more subtly than Russia, but there are enough similarities National security should be the priority of anyGovernment, between the two that it should be of concern to us. We and our telecommunications infrastructure is clearly critical need a clearer understand that some people out there to our defence, our security and our economic prosperity. with whom we do business do not necessarily wish us That point was made by a number of Members, including well and do not wish our values well. Finally on that, we the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard). are stumbling towards that understanding, but we need a more consistent approach to how we deal with China, We must make sure that we do not find ourselves in a along the same lines of how we deal with Russia. They similar position again and that our telecoms network are not the same—they are very different—but we have been and supply chain are resilient and protected in future, forced to take a more consistent understanding of the even, critically, as the geopolitical environment evolves. Russian threat, and we need to do the same with China. Our telecoms infrastructure lacks security and resilience. Wehave taken no steps to maintain or develop a sovereign I congratulate the Minister on his work on the Bill. communications capability, and the Government’s The “no new install” date is the key now, and that is why broadband strategy, if we can call it that, has far more everyone is on side with the Bill. We need that September U-turns, dither and delay than meaningful policies. We date, because it shuts down any alternatives for Huawei want to work with the Government to get issues of in the short term. Weneed a consistent approach, whether national security right, but the Bill is far from perfect. it is the Huawei Bill or the National Security and Investment Bill, across Government. This is one of the Members have raised many issues, and I will focus on very small number of truly significant policy packages just three: cost, resource and diversification. I have that we will have to get right in this country for the found telecoms operators to be extremely responsive to 21st century. the need to take action on the issue of, and in the cause There are two choices for humanity this century. We of, national security and to replace high-risk vendors, can go down our route of open, broadly tolerant societies but six months since the decision to strip out Huawei where people control their Governments—that free open was finally made, we still do not know how the Government model—or there is the closed model of totalitarian or plan to achieve this. They seem to have decided that that one-party states, which are building up, with Huawei’s is for the private sector to sort out. help, this Orwellian state, where the state knows what The impact assessments, of which there are two, you are thinking before you do. That is not a good admit that the Government cannot figure out what the avenue for humanity to go down and, without being impact will be. They have chosen not to give operators antagonistic and too hostile to other people, we need to any legal protection on existing contracts, but have defend our version of the future of humanity with a again not quantified that impact. The Government are little more resolve. apparently happy to pass on the costs of their mistakes, indecision and poor planning to the operators, stating 9.26 pm that the costs of removing Huawei are Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central) (Lab): I “commercial decisions that are for the mobile operators to make.” start by thanking Members from all parts of the House Yet clearly there was a failure Government here, as 5G for a well-informed debate with many impressive security was not sufficiently safeguarded, in the ways contributions. My first job as a hardware engineer was that the right hon. Member for South Holland and The with Nortel, which has been mentioned by a number of Deepings (Sir John Hayes) set out so clearly. Will there Members. Having spent 23 years in the sector before be a delay in 5G roll-out? Again, we are not clear, and entering the Commons, I am thrilled that the main depending on what is factored in, various research projects debating chamber of our parliamentary democracy should have found the costs to be anything from £6 billion to spend so many hours dedicated to our telecommunications £18 billion. If the Government plan to leave this entirely infrastructure. I regret that Members who wanted to to the mercy of the market, I would say that all the take part in this debate, particularly from the Opposition information-gathering skills Ofcom has will not give us Benches, and who could have done so remotely, were an accurate integrated view of progress and effectiveness. not able to do so because of an arbitrary decision by the There is no mention of working with local authorities Leader of the House. to ease this or to make it quicker, cheaper or more However good the debate is, it cannot make up for effective. the wasted decade under this Government. Successive I joined Ofcom in 2004, just a few weeks after it was Tory Governments have squandered the world-leading born, when it was to be a light-touch regulator, small legacy position on broadband infrastructure left by the and nimble. Over the years, it has acquired responsibility last Labour Government. Since then, we have seen for critical national infrastructure; the BBC; the Post delays in the roll-out of networks and the development Office; soon, we understand, the entirety of online of a dependency on high-risk vendors. The UK’ssovereign harms; and now, it would appear, national security as telecoms capabilities and our national security have well. As Members have pointed out, this Bill refers only been neglected, resulting in the Huawei debacle and to the Secretary of State and Ofcom when it comes to ultimately this Bill. making these key decisions. Of the two, I have to say My hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff Central that I would have more confidence in Ofcom, but the (Jo Stevens) put it so eloquently: national security is the Bill says very little about the resources or the skills that first duty of any Government, and Labour will always will be provided. This is a huge job, an issue that my 119 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 120

[Chi Onwurah] much-needed high-skilled jobs. The hon. Members for Totnes (Anthony Mangnall), for Strangford (Jim Shannon) right hon. Friend the Member for North Durham and for Bracknell (James Sunderland) all agreed about (Mr Jones) set out so clearly in what was a truly excellent the importance of diversification, but all the diversification contribution. One still has to ask: is it sufficiently well strategy says about developing UK technology, jobs scoped? It is a huge job, but is it actually scoped? Is it and capability is that it will be part of the industrial the role of Ofcom to consider the security of our strategy, which we have yet to see. Clearly, we do not current networks,or should it be forward-looking? Members have a diversification strategy. have set out what kind of a challenge that would be. Members also touched on the importance of human Mr Kevan Jones: Does my hon. Friend agree the Bill rights with regard to China’s record. How is that to play will have to dovetail closely with the National Security on national security decisions? and Investment Bill? If new developments were taken over by foreign entities, that could be a security risk as Sir John Hayes: The real point about Ofcom is whether well. However,as we were told last week, the responsibility it acquires those skills or what the processes will be for for that lies with the Department for Business, Energy it to access them from the intelligence community and and Industrial Strategy, not DCMS. the National Cyber Security Centre, which would seem Chi Onwurah: My right hon. Friend makes an excellent to be a much more straightforward way of quickly point. He is absolutely right. The question of how the tooling up to do the job the hon. Member describes. diversification strategy delivers home-grown capability and protects that as it grows and strengthens has been Chi Onwurah: I thank the right hon. Member for that avoided. intervention, and indeed for his contribution to the As the shadow Secretary of State said, it is important debate. I agree with him, although I think that is something that everyone can benefit from 5G,both in our technological we need to work out and probe in Committee, because capability and in using it. There is a digital divide in this currently there is no reference to that, or no plan to do country: 11 million adults lack one or more basic digital that. I think we should certainly be taking into account skills and 10% of households do not have internet and using our existing resources, and we all know that access. 5G has the potential to increase digital inclusion, these kinds of resources and skills are both expensive providing greater access to broadband. As the hon. and hard to find at the moment. The right hon. Member Members for West Dorset (Chris Loder) and for Caithness, makes an important point. Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) highlighted, On 14 July, the Secretary of State, who is not in his digital technology can be a great leveller, but we need to place, said in this House that he had ensure that the infrastructure and skills base exist for “set out a clear and ambitious diversification strategy.”—[Official everyone to take advantage of the opportunities it provides. Report, 14 July 2020; Vol. 678, c. 1377.] Digital inclusion requires political will, urgent action I asked him repeatedly over the summer when he would and a Government who understand the importance of publish this clear strategy that he had already set out. universal digital suffrage. Government interventions on Answer came there none, and I could only conclude that have been brief—not quite as brief as the intervention that he had misspoken. However, I did think that today of the hon. Member for Tonbridge and Malling (Tom we would get that strategy, but unfortunately not. Yes, Tugendhat) in the debate, but far less eloquent. there is actually a diversification strategy, which has As a chartered engineer, I want to finish by celebrating been published, but it is neither clear nor ambitious. It the potential of 5G, which can truly transform our is far more concerned with bringing new vendors into businesses, our industries and our daily lives. It will not the UK than with developing our sovereign technological only vastly improve our connectivity and browsing capability.Indeed, as it diversifies opportunities for Nokia experience but support new enabling technologies, from and Ericsson, we could call it an effective Scandinavian the internet of things to artificial intelligence. If the first industrial strategy. Apart from a vague commitment to industrial revolution was powered by engines, the fourth link the scale of home-grown suppliers to the Government’s will be powered by data. As hon. Members have observed, broader growth and productivity agenda, there is no clear 5G is essential for innovations from driverless cars to plan—no plan at all—to build UK sovereign capabilities, smart cities, and to addressing the climate emergency which the right hon. Members for Vale of Glamorgan through monitoring and improving our energy efficiency. (Alun Cairns) and for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood) Some estimates predict that 5G could mean productivity emphasised as being important. savings for the UK of up to £6 billion a year on top of Just today, Mobile UK, the mobile operators industrial energy and waste reductions that internet of things body, emphasised that the Bill and the 5G diversification devices could enable. strategy are intrinsically linked but not, it would appear, We must get this right. As we all agree, our national by the Government. The diversification strategy also security is priceless, but until we see a detailed plan, a does not refer to fibre, although the Bill applies to our proper impact assessment and an industrial strategy, fibre networks too and may impact the Government’s the Opposition will remain deeply concerned that the constantly shifting roll-out targets. Government are not prepared to make the interventions Network operators need to be confident in the maturity, necessary to ensure that our national security is safeguarded. performance, integration and security credentials of new vendors and technologies before they are deployed 9.39 pm in their main networks. We agree with the Secretary of The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Digital, State that the Government can help accelerate that Culture, Media and Sport (Matt Warman): I thank all process, and in doing so there is potential to create Members for a well-informed and important debate. We opportunities for the UK to take the lead, as well as have heard across the House that all Members believe 121 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 122 that this Government should be putting national security Sir Iain Duncan Smith: I hear what my hon. Friend at the very top of our agenda. That is what we are doing says, but surely he would concede that, as this Bill deals tonight. We are also putting forward a strategy that will specifically with vendors and the vendors are themselves allow the UK to derive all the benefits that we possibly located, originally, in countries that may have been can from all the enhanced digital reliance that we have guilty of these abuses of whatever nature, should those seen across the country over the course of this pandemic companies be found to be using slave labour—such as and, of course, before it. some that are already referenced in this Bill—that would Wehave all heard this evening just how much connectivity be a reason not to have them. Would he not think that matters and just how much our national security matters. they were high-risk vendors for the very simple reason We heard upwards of 20 speeches, which clearly that they abused those human rights? demonstrated the critical importance of the security of our telecoms networks, especially as we move into the Matt Warman: As I said earlier, we would want to next phase of digital connectivity. As the Secretary of apply those standards not just to telecoms companies State has said, this Bill will raise the security bar across but to the garment industry and in a host of other areas the board. It will provide us with the capabilities that we where we know that there is the potential for similar need to protect ourselves from a range of threats, both abuses. I absolutely hear what my right hon. Friend now and in the future. I am pleased that the Bill has says, but Britain can do better than focus simply on the support across the House. It is clear that we are all keen relatively narrow aspect of telecoms. to put the UK’s national security interests first. Bob Seely: I hear what the Minister is saying, but I I hope that Members are reassured that the Government wish to follow up the point made by my right hon. are taking these issues seriously. A number of Members Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green referred to the Huawei interest group. Much as I have (Sir Iain Duncan Smith). If the debate on this Bill is not enjoyed being the subject of the Huawei interest group’s the place to discuss human rights, I get that, but we are interest, I am glad that we have come to a position that also told that the debates on the National Security and has been welcomed across the House. The Government Investment Bill are not the place to discuss human rights. have taken steps today both to lay out our diversification I may get that as well, but the Government need to say strategy—an important £250 million commitment that where significant national interest concerns that are is detailed and has real potential to see British companies outside national security can be addressed. We talk the grow in the way that my right hon. Friend the Member talk on human rights an awful lot in this country and for Vale of Glamorgan (Alun Cairns) identified—and this Parliament, but we have to put some trousers on to publish illustrative designations and directions that, I think. demonstrating the transparency that many Members across the House have asked for. Through that, I think Matt Warman: I am not going to engage too heavily we have demonstrated our commitment to dealing with with my hon. Friend’s trousers, but I will say to him that, the risks to our networks and the national security as I said a minute ago, we are committed to taking forward threats that come from high-risk vendors. an ambitious package of changes to strengthen and I turn to some of the points that have been raised in future-proof the Modern Slavery Act 2015, and that is the course of the debate. The first, which was raised one of several significant avenues that are open to him. across the House, is the important matter of human On the important matter of diversification, the telecoms rights. We want respect for human rights to be at the supply chain review asked how we can create sustainable centre of all business that takes place in this country. diversity in our telecoms supply chain. That question is These are vital issues that go much wider than telecoms. addressed by the new diversification strategy that we A number of Members rightly pointed out that the published today, which is crucial to ensuring that we are Telecommunications (Security) Bill will be focused on never again in a situation in which we are dependent on matters related to telecommunications and security, but just a handful of vendors who supply the networks on of course we have serious concerns about the human which so many of us have come to depend. I wish to rights situation in Xinjiang, including the extrajudicial spend a little time on this issue. The Government have detention of over 1 million Uyghur Muslims and other been working at pace to develop the 5G supply chain minorities in political re-education camps, systematic diversification strategy, which sets out a clear vision for restrictions on Uyghur culture and the practice of Islam, a healthy, competitive and diverse supply market for and extensive invasive surveillance targeting minorities. telecoms and the set of principles that we want operators and suppliers to follow. Where China is not meeting its obligations under international law, the UK Government will continue to The strategy is built around three key strands: first, speak out publicly. Indeed, the 30 June formal statement securing incumbents; secondly, attracting new suppliers; that the UK read out on behalf of 28 countries at the and thirdly, accelerating the development and adoption UN Human Rights Council highlighted arbitrary detention, of open and interoperable technologies across the market. widespread surveillance and restrictions targeting ethnic That is why, in the diversification strategy that we minorities. The Government published their response published today, we commit to exploring commercial to the consultation on transparency in supply chains in incentives for new market entrants as we level the playing September, and we are committed to taking forward an field; to setting out a road map to end the provision of ambitious package of changes to strengthen and future- older legacy technologies that create obstacles for new proof the transparency provisions in the Modern Slavery suppliers; and to investing in R&D to grow a vibrant Act 2015. While, as many have said, issues of human and thriving telecoms ecosystem here in the UK. rights are not matters directly for this Bill, they are I say gently to the hon. Member for Newcastle upon acutely important, and Britain will continue to take Tyne Central (Chi Onwurah) that we have directly that leading role. addressed a number of the issues that she raised in 123 Telecommunications (Security) Bill30 NOVEMBER 2020 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 124

[Matt Warman] that have been made by companies over a number of years.Wehave already seen, as a result of the Government’s Westminster Hall last week. I look forward to engaging approach over the past few months, significant changes with her more on the strategy because it is important to decisions. I welcome the neutrORAN project that my that we should work together to try to make sure that right hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan we all derive the benefits of a serious £250 million mentioned, as well as a number of others that have been Government commitment that will drive early progress taken by networks that already see important changes and ensure that our 5G diversification strategy not only to how they procure their networks. bolsters the resilience and security of our digital infrastructure but creates opportunities for competition, Mr Kevan Jones: The Minister has introduced the innovation and prosperity. September 2021 date after which no new Huawei or high- risk vendor equipment can go into the networks. What Sir John Hayes: It is wonderful that the strategy has will happen to those companies that perhaps have stock emerged, but will my hon. Friend be just as clear about of Huawei equipment or entered into contracts thinking legislative change associated with that strategy? I understand that they could implement them before September 2021 that a further Bill may come forward; given the urgency and will now have to be told that they cannot? Would of this issue and the concentration that his Department they actually lose a lot of money? is applying to the strategy, when can we expect that legislation? Matt Warman: Those decisions, as I said, were taken in the context of the environment that people were Matt Warman: We do not anticipate legislation as a already well aware of, and they are taken at a degree of direct result of the diversification strategy, but of course commercial risk. However, we have worked closely with there are other important avenues to explore as part of the networks to ensure that there will be no additional the broader industrial strategy. A lot of what is in the delays as a result of this decision. I think it is the right diversification strategy does not need to be delayed by thing that puts national security at the absolute heart of the legislative programme, and I think my right hon. our programme, but it also does that in the context of Friend would welcome that. not jeopardising the clear economic benefits and the A number of Members raised the role of Ofcom. clear practical benefits of improving connectivity across Ofcom will monitor, assess and enforce compliance the country that we would all like to see. with the new telecoms security framework that will be On the emergency services network, we anticipate established by the Bill. It will report on compliance to that these announcements concerning Huawei will have the Secretary of State alongside publishing the annual a very low impact on the emergency services network. reports that he mentioned on the state of the telecoms We do not anticipate any impact on the programme security sector. I want to be absolutely clear: we have schedules. There is some Huawei equipment in the EE had productive conversations with Ofcom already.Ofcom part of the emergency services dedicated core network will continue to have the resources it needs. We appreciate that EE is already working towards removing. that those needs will be affected by the changes that we are bringing in today, and we will agree their precise Let me cover one other aspect raised by the Chair of nature with Ofcom. We will make sure that Ofcom has the Intelligence and Security Committee, my right hon. all the security clearance that it needs to do the job, and Friend the Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis). I all the resources, external or otherwise, to do the job, look forward—maybe that is not quite the right phrase—to because this is an important new power. appearing before the ISC in the next few days. We will Ofcom may also play a role in gathering and providing always co-operate with it, and I am very happy to work information relevant to the Secretary of State’s assessment with it on the best way to balance the obvious requirement of a provider’s compliance with a designated vendor between transparency and national security, although direction, and it may also be directed to gather further we would always seek to be as transparent as we possibly information to comply with the requirements specified can be within those important bounds. in a direction. The Bill already enables Ofcom to require information from providers and, in some circumstances, Dr Julian Lewis: I did ask a few questions. If the to carry out inspection of the provider’s premises or to Minister cannot answer them now, by all means he view relevant documents. Ofcom’s annual budget, as I should write to me. However, I am concerned about a say, will be adjusted to take account of the increased situation where, for example, a former leader of the costs it will incur due to its enhanced security role. Conservative party and former Prime Minister has a major role in the China belt and road funding operation. Let me turn to a couple of issues raised by the hon. How secure will Government be against lobbying of Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central. We will of people with that sort of connection and prominence? course be working with local authorities and with networks to minimise any disruption, but we do not anticipate that the decisions that we have made over the past few Matt Warman: I will simply say that the Government months will have a direct impact on existing commercial will always put our national security interests first, and decisions. As the Secretary of State said, we do not of course we are always alive to the commercial interests expect the two to three-year delay to be extended by of the companies that seek to engage with us in this what we have said today, but we will keep in close matter or any other. I look forward to further engaging contact with the networks and continue to make sure with my right hon. Friend and his Committee. that we do everything we can to remove the barriers to To conclude, this Bill does not simply produce a the roll-out of the networks as far as we possibly can. I framework that will address one particular company or do, however, expect companies to do as much as they even one particular country. It sets up the futureproof can to minimise the effects. These are commercial decisions regime that will allow us to deal with the company that 125 Telecommunications (Security) Bill 30 NOVEMBER 2020 126 we have spoken about so much this evening and also its That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the successors in successor networks. The intention of this Telecommunications (Security) Bill, it is expedient to authorise legislation is to persist well beyond the current challenges provision requiring public communications providers to pay certain that we face. I am glad that it commands the support we costsincurredbytheOfficeof Communications.—(DavidT.C.Davies.) have seen across the House. I am immensely grateful for Question agreed to. what has been a genuinely well-informed debate and one that I look forward to carrying on in Committee. The Telecommunications (Security) Bill will create one TELECOMMUNICATIONS (SECURITY) BILL of the toughest telecoms security regimes in the world. (CARRY-OVER) It will enable us to protect our national telecoms Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing infrastructure, and it is also a chance for the UK to Order No. 80A(1)(a)), become the world leader in the development of new 5G That if, at the conclusion of this Session of Parliament, proceedings technology that we all know we can be. on the Telecommunications (Security) Bill have not been completed, Question put and agreed to. they shall be resumed in the next Session.—(David T. C. Davies.) Bill accordingly read a Second time. Question agreed to.

Business without Debate TELECOMMUNICATIONS (SECURITY) BILL (PROGRAMME) Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing DELEGATED LEGISLATION Order No. 83A(7)), Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing That the following provisions shall apply to the Telecommunications Order No. 118(6)), (Security) Bill: Committal (1) The Bill shall be committed to a Public Bill Committee. EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION (DATA PROTECTION) That the draft Data Protection, Privacy and Electronic Proceedings in Public Bill Committee Communications (Amendments etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, (2) Proceedings in the Public Bill Committee shall (so far as which were laid before this House on 14 October, be approved. not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion on Tuesday 19 January 2021. (3) The Public Bill Committee shall have leave to sit twice on EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION (FOOD) the first day on which it meets. That the draft Food (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, Proceedings on Consideration and up to and including Third Reading which were laid before this House on 8 October, be approved. (4) Proceedings on Consideration and any proceedings in legislative grand committee shall (so far as not previously concluded) EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION (AGRICULTURE) be brought to a conclusion one hour before the moment of That the draft Agricultural Products,Food and Drink (Amendment interruption on the day on which proceedings on Consideration etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, which were laid before this are commenced. House on 22 October, be approved.—(David T. C. Davies.) (5) Proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the moment of interruption Question agreed to. on that day. Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing (6) Standing Order No. 83B (Programming committees) shall Order No. 118(6)), not apply to proceedings on Consideration and up to and including Third Reading. EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION (AGRICULTURE) Other proceedings That the draft Aquatic Animal Health and Alien Species in (7) Any other proceedings on the Bill may be programmed.— Aquaculture,Animals,and Marketing of Seed, Plant and Propagating (David T. C. Davies.) Material (Legislative Functions and Miscellaneous Provisions) Question agreed to. (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, which were laid before this House on 2 November, be approved.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS (SECURITY) BILL EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION (MEDICINES) (MONEY) That the draft Human Medicines (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Queen’s recommendation signified. Regulations 2020, which were laid before this House on 20 October, Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing be approved. Order No. 52(1)(a)), That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION (CONSUMER Telecommunications (Security) Bill, it is expedient to authorise PROTECTION) any increase attributable to the Act in the sums payable under any That the draft Medical Devices (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) other Act out of money so provided.—(David T. C. Davies.) Regulations 2020, which were laid before this House on 10 November, Question agreed to. be approved.

EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION TELECOMMUNICATIONS (SECURITY) BILL That the draft Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland (Democratic (WAYS AND MEANS) Consent Process) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020, which were laid Motion made, and Question put forthwith (Standing beforethisHouseon2November,beapproved.—(DavidT.C.Davies.) Order No. 52(1)(a)), Question agreed to. 127 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: 128 Loss of Family Member Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: being allowed enough time off and not being pressured Loss of Family Member to return to work before they were ready as key actions their employer took. This debate is timely, since the Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House global health pandemic—which has touched us all in do now adjourn.—(David T. C. Davies.) various ways—has sharply reminded us about the fragility of life, and the profound and cruelly random nature of 9.59 pm loss and bereavement. Patricia Gibson (North Ayrshire and Arran) (SNP): I Jonathan Edwards (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) am delighted to have secured this Adjournment debate (Ind): I congratulate the hon. Lady on bringing this issue to highlight the need for statutory paid bereavement before the House this evening, and on her work on leave for all employees upon the sad loss of a close parental bereavement leave. Does she agree that the real family member or partner. In recent years, I was privileged issue we have at the moment is the ambiguity in the to be one of a number of MPs who worked cross-party law? Essentially, it says that employers must offer a to secure paid bereavement leave for parents on the loss reasonable amount of time for employees to grieve. of a child up to the age of 18 years old. That effort There are some examples of very good employers— showed this place at its best when, finally, that right was Morrisons, I understand, gives two weeks’paid leave—and enshrined in law as of April this year. As that work was other employers give less time, but it is the ambiguity going on, I said in this very Chamber that groundbreaking that creates the problem for employees at the moment. as that achievement was, it simply did not go far enough, and that I would immediately begin working to extend a Patricia Gibson: The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent similar two-week statutory right for paid bereavement point. It is that ambiguity—that discretion—over something leave to others. This debate is part of that effort. life-changing like a bereavement that is simply unfair. It is true that the only two certainties in life are death People deserve a level playing field; after all, death is the and taxes, and while most of us are happy—comfortable, great leveller. even—to talk about taxes, there remains a reticence to Across the UK, during this health pandemic, we have speak openly and honestly about death. I believe that is experienced bereavement on a distressing scale, and it why the measures this House has already supported on has touched us all. That is why there has been such parental bereavement leave for the loss of a child are public support for the measures to try to control this only in their infancy, and why the measures under virus: each of us has lost, or is in fear of losing, a loved discussion tonight have not yet been adopted: we are one. This has had a significant impact on our workforce, too reticent to talk about death. Bereavement is a fact of as 7.9 million people in employment—24% of all employees life, and if only a fraction of the costs associated with it —have experienced a bereavement in the past 12 months. could be mitigated with better support at the right time, It is estimated that for every death, six people experience we could boost our economy and have a healthier intense grief. Taking into account the number of deaths society with a greater sense of wellbeing at its heart. Instead, in the UK each year and employment rates, we can say we have the terrible situation where, in our society and, that bereavement causes nearly 2 million working people as a consequence, in our workplaces, people who are to suffer from intense grief each year. Such a profoundly bereaved suffer in silence as they are expected to just get life-changing experience brings with it potential long-term on with things. That is not healthy. consequences for a person’s mental and physical health, Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): I congratulate the and in some cases can trigger mental health conditions hon. Lady on having brought this issue forward. I am such as depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress very aware of what she has said, and support it. I have disorders, as well as being linked to an increased likelihood long supported the idea of paid bereavement leave for of heart attacks, diabetes and increased mortality. The families in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and impacts of grief on society are huge, and cannot and Northern Ireland. Does the hon. Lady agree that for must not be left to the discretion of employers to some, getting back to work is a useful part of their manage in the workplace. grieving process; for others, they need time to work out As the hon. Member for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr how their world works without their loved one, and (Jonathan Edwards) mentioned, we all know that many paid leave may well give someone the ability to take a employers are supportive and understanding when an breath without having to go to the doctor? It could be a employee suffers a close bereavement, but we also know way forward for their wellbeing and mental health. that many employers are not perhaps as supportive as they could be. Sometimes those who are grieving are Patricia Gibson: The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent pressured to return to work when they are still in the point, and it is something I will return to in just a midst of the initial shock and trauma of loss. Without moment, if he will permit me. any statutory rights for employees to paid bereavement According to research commissioned by the charity leave, the time and space to grieve for too many people Sue Ryder, a third of employees who experienced a is determined by the good will of their employer. That bereavement in the past year did not receive any cannot be right, and it is counterproductive in a number communication from managers or the leadership of of ways. their organisation about bereavement. Only 32% of Typically, UK employers offer three to five days’ employees are aware of whether their employer has a compassionate leave for the death of a close relative, but bereavement policy, despite the fact that we are in the the discretionary nature of this leave means potentially middle of a global health pandemic, with covid-19 that thousands of employees are unable to take leave linked to over 56,000 deaths across the UK since the without fearing that it could undermine their job security. end of March. Of those who felt well supported by their In addition, we know that those in less well-paid jobs employer after experiencing a bereavement, 60% cited are far less likely to receive any discretionary time off 129 Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: 130 Loss of Family Member Loss of Family Member with pay when they suffer a bereavement or have any leave for family emergencies carry no statutory obligation compassionate leave at all, and that is grossly unfair. that such leave should be paid—and it very often is not. Death is the great leveller in society, so the time and The Minister will know that, in its consideration of the space to grieve without worrying about loss of pay or Parental Bereavement (Leave and Pay) Bill, a Department pressure to return to work too soon should be available for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy impact to all. Those on low pay are much less able to absorb the assessment conceded that there appear losses associated with unpaid leave and the immediate “to be large differences in what is currently offered to employees financial burden of bereavement. They are also at greater when they suffer a bereavement with the situation tending to be risk of being dismissed from work for taking time off or managed at the discretion of the employer and line managers.” not being able to focus on their work due to the fog of We can all agree that that is not satisfactory, which is grief. All of this increases the pressure and financial why it is important that we put an end to what the stress on employees who are trying their best to cope report called the “large differences”between what employees with the loss of a close family member. There is also are offered at the discretion of employers and what they some evidence to suggest that those in more challenged should be entitled to. socioeconomic circumstances are more likely to experience complicated or persistent grief, because they are likely We need to put bereavement leave for all who lose a to face more difficulties accessing appropriate services close relative or partner on a statutory footing. That and information to help them cope with their feelings of can be done if the political will is there to do it, and that loss and grief. political will certainly exists in our society. I suggest to the Minister that the vehicle for doing this could be the As well as humane and compassionate reasons for employment Bill, since the proposals put forward this statutory bereavement leave, there are also economic evening indirectly relate to some of the Bill’s expected reasons for this change. Research commissioned by Sue provisions. Ryder shows that grief experienced by employees who I urge the Minister to study these proposals carefully have lost a loved one costs the UK economy £23 billion for the sake of the wellbeing of our workforce and our per year and costs the Treasury nearly £8 billion per economy. I urge him to support these progressive and year. However, these costs could potentially reach as compassionate measures, which would give the profound high as £49 billion to the economy and £18 billion to the effects of bereavement the statutory recognition they Treasury. Most of the considerable economic impact need and deserve. If he were to do so, or to commit that arises from grieving employees being unable to work at the Government intend to seriously investigate doing their normal levels of productivity while they deal with so, while we are in the midst of this global health the emotional, practical and financial aspects of coping pandemic, that would send a signal that he and the with the loss of a close relative. That, in turn, leads to a Government are aware that we are all in this together cost to the Treasury in lost tax revenues and the fallout and that we should come through this together. We of reliance on NHS support, such as mental health and need to look after each other, and this Parliament and social care needs that can often follow. So although this Government should take the opportunity to lead statutory bereavement leave for all those who lose a the way. close family member will involve costs, this is actually preventive expenditure, as it will lead to a significant saving for the UK economy and the Treasury, a more 10.12 pm productive and resilient workforce, and reduced staff The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, absence. Such support will mean less cause to rely on Energy and Industrial Strategy (Paul Scully): First, I NHS support, or perhaps even social security support, congratulate the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and in the case of those employees who drop out of the Arran (Patricia Gibson) on securing a debate on this workforce altogether following a close bereavement. So important issue. I am grateful to her for bringing it to of course there are costs attached to statutory paid the attention of Parliament. bereavement leave, but there are also significant costs to We have heard today about the impact of bereavement not doing this. It is in our interests as a society, and it is on individuals and their wider families, and about the in the Treasury’s interests, to take full cognisance of the experience of losing someone whom we love or who has profound, debilitating effect grief can have on those played a special role in our lives. That is deeply upsetting, who lose a loved one, and statutory paid bereavement and I sympathise with anybody who has been in that leave is a progressive and enlightened thing for any position. We will all experience bereavement at some society to have in place. point in our lives, but the fact that death is an inevitable When an individual is suffering from grief, it not only part of our experience of life does not detract from the has implications and consequences for the individual, sense of loss that most of us will feel or from the fact although it undoubtedly does, it also has wider societal that, for some of us, that sense of loss will at times feel and economic consequences for all of us. Clearly, there overwhelming. are individuals who are pressured into returning to work I found the hon. Member’saccount particularly poignant before they are ready to do so. It is not in the employer’s because I know she speaks from personal experience. interest, and it is not in our economy’s interest, to She has spoken with passion and compassion. I am simply insist on presenteeism in the workplace.Presenteeism grateful to her for her candour and for raising awareness has significant impacts on employer revenue, employee of this issue and of the impact of stillbirths and baby income, tax revenues and total gross value added. loss generally on individuals and their wider families, Statutory bereavement leave for the loss of a close both today and on many other occasions in this Chamber. relative is something that people across the UK support. All of us have been touched in some way by covid-19, In fact, 62% of people across the UK believe it is the whether as a result losing someone who has played a right thing to do. The current arrangements allowing part in our lives or simply as a result of reading the 131 Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: 132 Loss of Family Member Loss of Family Member [Paul Scully] Grieving is a natural process that we should not attempt to stifle, and most of us are able to cope with our loss with virus’s mortality rates in the press. I have lost two uncles support from our family,friends, colleagues and employer, myself during lockdown, one of whose funeral I could but I recognise that bereavement is a risk factor for not take part in. physical and mental health issues. Where a bereavement In April this year, as the hon. Member said, we is particularly debilitating or likely to have a longer-term introduced parental bereavement leave and payfor employed impact on an individual’s mental or physical health, parents who lose a child under the age of 18 or who suffer they have access to our excellent . stillbirth from 24 weeks of pregnancy.That new entitlement In May this year the Government announced additional recognises that the death of a child is particularly tragic. funding of £4.2 million to support mental health charities Prior to April, employed parents had a statutory right and charities providing bereavement support. That was to take time off work following the birth or adoption of part of a £750 million package of support for the their child, but they did not have a specific right to time voluntary sector announced by the Chancellor in April. off work in the event of their child’s death. Parents who Where a bereavement does affect someone’s mental are in that dreadful position are now able to take up to or physical health, they also have the option of taking two weeks’ leave in the 56-week period following their sick leave. They may be eligible for statutory sick pay. child’s death. Where they qualify for pay, parents will Clearly, statutory sick leave is a means to an end, but receive the lower of 90% of their average weekly earnings bereavement in itself is not a sickness. Employees can, or the statutory flat rate, which is currently £151.20 a however, self-certify as sick for the first seven days that week. Like all entitlements to paid time off work, the they are off work. After that time, a fit note is required statutory scheme provides a floor, not a ceiling. and their employer can request medical evidence if they wish. Individuals who are not eligible for statutory sick The Government are mindful of placing additional pay and those who require additional support may be burdens on business in the current economic climate, eligible for universal credit and the new-style employment but we strongly encourage employers, as we have heard, and support allowance. to go beyond the statutory minimum if they can afford to. This could involve giving parents additional weeks The hon. Lady talked about covid and its effect on of leave and pay, or paying them at an earnings-related families. I was fortunate enough, at the funeral of one rate when they are off work on parental bereavement of my uncles, to join close family members to pay my leave. final respects, and indeed to do so for my mother, who died just before lockdown, but not everybody has been This debate has raised the question of whether the fortunate. We talk about the death rates in this country, right to paid leave for parents should be extended to all so this is clearly not just personal to me; tens of thousands those who lose a close family member. As we have heard, of people across the country have been through similar grief is a very personal experience, which affects different experiences. So I am acutely aware of the fact that people in different ways.While some people understandably covid-19 has robbed so many of us of the opportunity want to take time off work following a bereavement, others to see our loved ones before they died and to say may prefer to work through their grief. We believe that goodbye in the way we would all want. individuals are best placed to understand their own No two people’s experiences of a bereavement are the specific needs. Employers should, and usually do, respond same; we all have our coping strategies. Our experience to these needs in an appropriate and sensitive way, even will, however, to a large extent be influenced by how the in the absence of a legal requirement to time off work. people around us respond to us and our loss. As the While I of course recognise the pain that can accompany hon. Lady said, far too many people suffer their loss in bereavement—as I have mentioned, I am speaking from silence and this can lead to them feeling isolated and recent personal experience of this—extending entitlements alone. While no one should feel obliged to talk about their to bereavement leave and pay would come at a significant personal experiences, they should also not be afraid to cost to the public purse. It would also place additional do so. burdens on business at a time when many employers are We have given employers the tools they need to struggling to keep their businesses afloat. We cannot approach what might otherwise be a difficult conversation ignore this fact, and while we are sympathetic to everyone with a bereaved employee. In 2014, the Government who has lost a close family member, whether through commissioned ACAS to provide guidance on managing covid-19 or otherwise, the Government have no plans to a bereavement in the workplace. The guidance was extend entitlement to bereavement leave and pay at this developed in conjunction with key stakeholders, including time. Cruse Bereavement Care, Jack’s Rainbow and other I remind hon. Members, however, that employees bereavement charities. The guidance has been well received who want to take time off work are already entitled to and was updated in 2020 to provide more accessible take up to 5.6 weeks of annual leave a year. All employees webpage content for users and to take account of the also have a day one right to take time off work to deal new right of parental bereavement leave. The guidance with an emergency involving a dependant, and in the can be found on ACAS’s website. Use of the guidance case of a bereavement the right to time off for dependants continues to grow and has increased since the start of can be used to make necessary practical arrangements, the pandemic. There was a total of 82,000 visits to the including registering the death and arranging and attending guidance between 1 April and 23 November. ACAS is the funeral of the person who has died. working on further revisions, including revised case The hon. Lady talked about the cost of bereavement. studies to offer more detailed support to employers and I am unable to comment on the figures today, but my employees at this difficult time. officials have had an initial meeting with representatives Where an individual loses their spouse or civil partner, from the Sue Ryder charity, who have agreed to share they may be eligible for a bereavement support payment. their analysis with us when the report is finalised. This consists of an initial lump sum payment of £2,500 133 Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: 134 Loss of Family Member Loss of Family Member and up to 18 monthly instalments of £100, with higher Patricia Gibson: I want to press the Minister on one amounts being paid to those individuals who have children. point and ask for his view on it. If those who are The initial payment for individuals who have children is earning a comfortable salary feel that they need to take £3,500. Bereavement support payments are intended to additional time off, unpaid, they are free to do that, and meet the additional costs of bereavement rather than they are obviously able to absorb that cost. There is a providing an ongoing income replacement to bereaved concern about the people in low-paid jobs who cannot spouses and partners. take unpaid leave and therefore do not have the choice As the hon. Member mentioned, the Government to take additional time, unless, of course, it is in statute. will bring forward an employment Bill to implement a range of manifesto and other commitments, and we will Paul Scully: It is essentially about getting the balance publish our detailed proposals for that Bill in due right. I talked about eligibility for statutory sick pay, course. While the Government are not minded at this which I know is not suitable for long periods of time, time to introduce a new right to time off work for and access to universal credit. There is annual leave of people who have lost a close relative, we do understand 5.6 weeks per year. It is about getting the balance right how difficult this can be for people in bereavement. between what may suit employees suffering different types of bereavement or having different reactions to bereavement, and employers, especially as we have seen Jonathan Edwards: I thank the Minister for giving the pressure on them at this moment in time. They may way and for the way he has approached the debate. I am be at risk in relation to the future viability of the slightly disappointed that the Government will not even business. It is getting that balance right, which is why we look at the proposals, because this seems to be a very continue to try to understand the modern-day employer simple reform. All the Government need to do is define and the things that we might include in the employment what they mean by “reasonable”. The eligibility criteria Bill as we reflect on the effect of covid. are already there. All these different employers have a different idea of what “reasonable”means, so my question There is a range of Government support for people would be: what does “reasonable” mean to him as the who suffer from a bereavement. Employers can, and do, Minister? provide significant support to employees without being legally required to do so. We encourage employers to respond with flexibility and compassion. One of the Paul Scully: I have been an employer in the past, and cornerstones of the employment Bill will be to ensure the biggest asset of any business is the employees. Any flexible working by default. That will hopefully provide business owner invests time in training and developing some succour or support to people who, although not people, and they make up the business. In terms of necessarily taking full time off, will be able to arrange reasonable time, I have talked about the fact that their working time around their particular current bereavement is different for different people, and I think circumstances. that they just need to work together with employees. As I thank the hon. Lady and the other hon. Members I said, I am not minded to put it on a statutory footing, who contributed to the debate. I also thank everybody but we will continue to work with Members across the who has worked hard to raise awareness of the impact House in the employment Bill and with Sue Ryder in of death on the people left behind. understanding their background. I am looking forward to introducing that Bill to this House, when we can talk Question put and agreed to. about a whole range of issues to support employees through the aftermath of this pandemic and put workers’ 10.25 pm rights on a long footing beyond now. House adjourned.

1WH 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 2WH

to address the growing problems. Something went terribly Westminster Hall wrong with the NHS Mental Health Services provided to my son. Monday 30 November 2020 There really is no way that public concern can be allayed, short of an Inquiry. All investigations to date, including police and inquest proceedings, have been based on a Trust Serious Incident [GRAHAM STRINGER in the Chair] Investigation. A four and half year Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman Report has now concluded that this investigation Deaths in Mental Health Care was not adequate and lacks credibility. 4.30 pm There has been an inadequacy of investigation. A human rights violation. New evidence has been uncovered and I request a Graham Stringer (in the Chair): Before we start, I statutory inquiry, that compels witnesses to give evidence on remind hon. Members of the new rules in Westminster oath. Hall. They should be getting used to them now, but Matthew is not alone. Many others have died”— some have not been in a Westminster Hall debate. I ask Members to sanitise their microphones using the cleaning in the same institution— materials provided before they use them, and dispose of “whilst ‘In The Care Of The State’.” the materials as they leave the Chamber. Members are The petition ends with a link to a press report dated also expected to honour the one-way system, which November 2018 detailing how a two-year police means going round clockwise, coming in by the left investigation sparked by Matthew’s death six years earlier, entrance and leaving by the other entrance. Members into the corporate manslaughter of 24 further patients, can intervene only if they are on the call list. If you are was dropped, leaving families without “accountability on the call list, you are expected to be here at the start of or recourse”, for their loved ones’ deaths. debate but, unlike the position prior to covid, it is quite In opening the debate on behalf of the Petitions permissible to leave after having spoken. Committee I want to begin with some background. On Before I call the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mike 15 November 2012, Melanie, Matthew’s mother, received Hill), I need to advise hon. Members that I have been the call that no parent wants to receive: “Matthew has informed that there are active Health and Safety Executive been found hanging and it’s not looking good,” was the criminal legal proceedings against Essex Partnership quote. It came to light that Matthew had already been University NHS Foundation Trust relating to deaths in dead for more than an hour when that call was made. mental health care facilities between October 2004 and Melanie described it to me as the first lie of many more April 2015. I have further been informed that the trust that she would uncover after his death. I will share the has pleaded guilty in those proceedings to failures of background of Matthew’s short life, how he ended up in care relating to the deaths of 11 patients.Active proceedings the care of the Essex mental health system, what went are sub judice until sentencing or discontinuance under wrong, the journey that his mother has been on since the House’s resolution. Therefore, Members should be his death to get to any form of truth or accountability, mindful of matters still before the court—in particular, and her continued fight for truth, justice, accountability the judgment and sentencing in this case. and change for others. I have received a letter from the right hon. Member for Harlow (Robert Halfon) in 4.32 pm support of the case. He has had a case of someone Mike Hill (Hartlepool) (Lab): I beg to move, dying in similar circumstances in the same place. That this House has considered e-petition 255823, relating to deaths in Mental Health care. The account is quite long, but that is understandable as Melanie’s fight has taken eight years to date, and has It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, encompassed many trials in getting to this point. I have Mr Stringer. I, too, received that advice not long ago, a statement from Melanie that she would like to have and sought advice on behalf of the petitioner in regard been able to read herself. Obviously that is not allowed to anything that I have to say. I will navigate through my in this place, so I will read it for her: speech, bearing in mind that legal statement. I apologise in advance if I stray into such territory, simply because “I write these words not just to represent my son, but to to do justice to this petition I have for the most part represent the multitude of lives that have been affected by the inadequate care offered by mental health services across our chosen to reflect the words of the petitioner. That is nation.” only right and just. More than 100,000 people have signed the petition. It is a very personal case, and it is Mr Stringer, almost within the last 10 minutes I received personal for other families whose relatives have died in a statement from families, who asked for it to be read such horrendous circumstances. out. I do not have time to do that, but I ask the Minister to accept it if I forward it to her . The petition attracted 105,580 UK signatories in support, despite the fact that it was curtailed by the The Minister for Patient Safety, Mental Health and Government closure of Westminster Hall last November Suicide Prevention (Ms Nadine Dorries) indicated assent. due to covid. I will read the text of the petition to put it on the record and inform hon. Members fully. I have The Minister for Patient Safety, Mental Health and spoken to the petitioner, Melanie Leahy, on a number Suicide Prevention (Ms Nadine Dorries) indicated assent. of occasions, and I pay tribute to her for starting the petition. She wrote: Mike Hill: The statement reads: “I request a full public inquiry into death of my son, Matthew “I am mum to Matthew James Leahy, born December 1991. Leahy. (20 yrs.) He was a beautiful soul. He understood compassion and he cared Matthew was taken to ‘a place of safety’, and died for others. He was generous, he was kind, he was smart. He was 7 days later. 24 others died by the same means, dating funny and in his younger years he wanted to be a comedian. He back to the year 2000. An indicator that little was done was quite shy in large groups, and was a loyal friend. He was never 3WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 4WH

[Mike Hill] of mental health documents as a crime. I thought, ‘At last, they are listening to me.’ Then the bomb dropped. ‘We won’t be one to encourage a fight but he would stand up for himself and prosecuting, as it’s not in the public interest.’ the ones he loved. And I’m proud to say my son was honest, not a The Trust has failed to take steps to protect patients in their liar, not like some I’ve come across on this journey. care. The question remains why no individual has been held to He loved the outdoors, loved anything water sports related and account and why some staff involved in failing my son and other was a fantastic skier. Having left , where he patients have actually been promoted to high-ranking positions excelled in mathematics and computer science, he set up his own within the NHS. computer business, travelling between clients on his motorbike The Coroner called for a Public Inquiry after the inquest in and was doing really well. He had a natural talent for swimming. 2015. There have also been multiple calls from various MPs in the He actually saved two ladies from drowning and when 18 he last five years. The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman became a qualified life guard. went on national television after ‘The Missed Opportunities Aged 19 Matthew was having trouble sleeping and complaining Report’ was published to say that if he had the power to, he would of pains in his stomach and having stomach cramps. He was also call a Public Inquiry. hallucinating. When Matthew became poorly we turned to so called professionals for help, to help us to understand what was In October last year,the Public Administration and Constitutional happening with our son. He was sectioned for care and treatment. Affairs Committee held an evidence session on the Ombudsman’s This sectioning and the failings in care at that time, although Report into the failed care of Matthew and of Ben Morris. (Ben noted briefly in the inquest verdicts, have never been investigated. died in the Linden Centre in 2008 aged 20 years). After Matthew’s death medical records showed that the first During the session, the Minister for Patient Safety, Mental psychiatrist involved in his care picked up a B12 and folate Health and Suicide Prevention explained, ‘that Public Inquiries deficiency and possible coeliac disease, combined with a thyroid do not happen for individual cases. In this case, a Public Inquiry is issue. However, these discoveries were never addressed, as a new not an appropriate response because we are talking about two cases’. psychiatrist took over Matthew’s care and put him straight on to I have now been joined in this fight calling for a Statutory anti-psychotic medication. Any further physical checks were minimal. Public Inquiry into Essex Mental Health Services by multiple On 7 November 2012, Matthew was placed under section 3 of bereaved and failed families. (55 families and growing). How the Mental Health Act and admitted to the Linden Centre in multiple deaths can have gone on unchallenged for so many years Chelmsford, Essex. By 15 November, some seven days in the ‘care and so many people in official positions, not involved with this of the state’, my son was dead. The last days of his life in a place scandal, have entrapped themselves by collaboration the moment he called ‘Hell’. And I now believe it truly was a hell on earth. they came across it has baffled me. How the system did not Alone, malnourished, over-medicated, scared, bleeding, bruised, prevent these deaths or at the very least detect the failings/changes reportedly raped, injected multiple times, ignored, and frightened. needed earlier I’m sure is a question in many failed families’ No records of any staff in those last seven days of his life offering minds, not just mine. him any comfort. I had been advised not to visit and to give him Where is the Government’s anger? Its thirst for Truth and time to settle on the ward. I will live with the guilt for the rest of Justice? Its commitment to getting answers and ensuring it never my life that I listened to so-called professionals and I was not happens again? there when my son needed me the most. An inquest into my son’s death was held in January 2015. An Many families are losing loved ones while under the care of open narrative verdict was reached, which concluded that my son, state mental health system. Whether that be due to mental illness, ‘Matthew James Leahy was subject to a series of multiple failings additional vulnerabilities such as autistic and/or learning disabled and missed opportunities over a prolonged period of time by individuals, those misdiagnosed, or dementia...it does not those entrusted with his care. The jury found that relevant policies discriminate.” and procedures were not adhered to, impacting on Matthew’s The Government are now officially, in Melanie’s words, overall care and wellbeing leading up to his death.’ “on notice of…Gross and systemic Neglect (resulting in multiple How the inquest concluded I will never know. Staff were not … interviewed by police after Matthew’sdeath. An internal investigation avoidable deaths) Physical, sexual, and emotional abuse and was carried out, which the Parliamentary and Health Service exploitation of the vulnerable—most of them young, historical ombudsman has deemed flawed and not fit for purpose. This and sadly, ongoing. flawed investigation formed the basis of every investigation actioned The right people in Government need to understand after Matthew’s death. the full extent of the Essex Trust’s Failures and I have The ligature was destroyed, the defibrillator was destroyed. every faith that once the Government commits to a Full Door logs were not downloaded. CCTV was hidden for over Statutory Public Inquiry into Essex Mental Health, the seven-plus years, and parts of it either not retained or deleted. So, fundamental truth of what and still is going wrong will so many more issues exist. be revealed. I have not been able to determine or control any of this— investigations, reviews, reports etc—all processes that have happened Through that knowledge I hope justice and accountability are around me, with me being entitled to some information and some afforded and that necessary change is made for others who, like I explanation, but little voice, little influence and little power. and many others did, look to services when they need safe, I did think that the system would be open and honest, would compassionate care for their loved ones.” explain what went wrong, hold to account those responsible for I have to echo that point in respect of some horrendous any failings and afford justice for failing my most precious son. cases in the Tees Valley, my own patch. However, I have discovered a deeply troubling mismatch between what I expected and what I found. In any other walk of life, if I will conclude with the following words: there had been failings, heads would roll. This has never happened, despite criminal offences being proved. “I offered the Government Matthew’s sad death to be a catalyst of learning and change months ago. Please call a Public Inquiry If the tragedy of losing Matthew hasn’t been bad enough, to into Essex Mental Health Services without further delay. Make not know the full circumstance that led to his death ‘whilst in the the changes in Essex and send the learning across the country. I care of the state’ is unforgiveable. I still do not have full disclosure hope then that I can start to grieve the loss of my son and and have never seen internal statements. ‘Duty of Candour’ went Matthew will be able to then rest in peace.” out of the window the moment Matthew died. It came to light after Matthew died that paperwork had been I know I have kept my speech narrow, but I felt it falsified, backdated and slipped into his files. It took me four-plus appropriate to reflect the true voice of the petitioners. years to finally persuade Essex Police to register this falsification Thank you, Mr Stringer, for allowing me to do that. 5WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 6WH

Graham Stringer (in the Chair): There are a number At the end of my Adjournment debate my hon. of people on the list who wish to speak. I will start with Friend the Minister, who was being covered for at the a time limit of four minutes, and call . time because she was isolating, announced an independent review into the deaths at the Linden Centre. I was very grateful for that, because I know she has taken huge 4.48 pm interest in the matter and very sincerely so. I hope that James Cartlidge (South Suffolk) (Con): Thank you, that can be a full, robust, independent inquiry, like the Mr Stringer; it is a great pleasure to serve under your one we had last week into the Dixon case, which can chairmanship, and to follow the hon. Member for uncover the truth and can go into places that other Hartlepool (Mike Hill) who introduced the debate on mechanisms cannot. behalf of the Petitions Committee. He spoke of the case of Matthew Leahy. It is a terrible tragedy, and I pay a Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con): These huge tribute to his mother, who has campaigned for are terribly tragic cases; sometimes they cannot be years through the pain, which is without limit. avoided, of course, but at times they are due to the performance of the trust and perhaps of the management Weall sympathise, I am sure, but as the hon. Gentleman of that trust. Where that is the case, does my hon. said the case of Leahy is not the only one at the Linden Friend agree that the leadership of those organisations Centre, Chelmsford. There have been several others, all must be held to account for their performance? tragic, including my constituent Richard Wade. I held an Adjournment debate on the case of Richard Wade in James Cartlidge: My hon. Friend makes an excellent October. At the start of that debate, because the HSE point, echoing the concluding remark from the hon. case was live, a much stricter sub judice ruling was Member for Hartlepool, and he is absolutely right that given, which meant there were things I could not say in there must be accountability. However, when we go into the Adjournment debate that I feel able to say today. an independent inquiry, there is a danger of saying, I have a very short period of time and I do not have “Well, it must be a statutory public inquiry,” and getting time to give the full details of Richard Wade’s case. The into the semantics of the mechanism we use. key point is that, on the day he was found hanging in I think what my constituents the Wades want is the the Linden Centre in Chelmsford, there is strong evidence truth. They simply want to know the truth about what that his parents have seen—not just documentary evidence, happened to their son. We now have a tangible offer but other evidence that has come to them, including from the Department of Health of a mechanism that all from people who have worked at the Linden Centre—that the families can use to get involved, to shape the terms when his body was first discovered hanging, still alive, of reference and to help us to deliver something in the the clinicians who found it either panicked, or for some public interest—as, again, the petitioners seek—to the other inexplicable reason left it hanging, locked the benefit of the whole country in terms of wider mental door and allowed some minutes to pass before he was health. Above all, that will bring some sense of discovered a second time, this time with his parents accountability to all the families who have suffered so nearby. At that point he was given resuscitation and tragically at the Linden Centre in Chelmsford, including urgent medical treatment. We do not know the impact the Wades and the Leahys. I believe that the Minister of those crucial minutes on his eventual fate several will now act and I give her all my support in doing so. days later, when he passed away. Essentially, his is a life that I believe could have been saved and a death that 4.54 pm could have been avoided. Barbara Keeley (Worsley and Eccles South) (Lab): It I will not repeat all the points I made about Richard is a pleasure to speak in this debate with you in the Wade’s case in my Adjournment debate, other than to Chair, Mr Stringer. I thank the Petitions Committee for say that although he died in May 2015—in fact, I met granting this important debate and my hon. Friend the him going to vote in Great Cornard in May 2015, a few Member for Hartlepool (Mike Hill) for opening it, and days before I had the great privilege of being elected for I congratulate Melanie Leahy on the strength of her the first time, and he was dead several days later—in campaigning to get us to this debate. February 2015 another man, who I believe was called As we have heard, Matthew’s case is a tragic one, with Beecroft, also died by ligature in the Linden Centre in a catalogue of failures that culminated in his death. I Chelmsford, in the very same bathroom where Richard know that nobody here can fail to be moved by what Wade hanged himself that May. The extraordinary Matthew and his family went through—the hon. Member thing is that, when the trust reported on Richard Wade’s for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), who has just spoken, death in December that year, it never mentioned that certainly was. Melanie has been fighting for answers there had been a hanging in the same bathroom three and justice for her son for eight years now; I pay tribute months earlier—as if it were a common occurrence or to the work she has done, but I also say it should not something. It is quite extraordinary. have been necessary. When the Care Quality Commission came to investigate, Matthew was in the Linden Centre for only a few because of course, by April 2015, it had taken over from days. In that time, he reported a sexual assault to the HSE, I am afraid it did not handle the case well. The police, but they took no follow-up action on his report. CQC did not investigate it initially, because, in the words Staff claimed that he lacked mental capacity, despite no of the report it issued to the Wades in July, the inspectors assessment being carried out. He was heavily medicated effectively did not realise that they had taken over with anti-psychotics and tranquillisers, despite him telling statutory responsibility from HSE. It is a catalogue of staff that he would attempt to kill himself if he was failures; the Wade case alone would merit an independent given injections. As we have heard, only a week after inquiry, but there are also Beecroft, Leahy, Morris and being admitted, he was found hanging in his room and potentially other cases. he died. 7WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 8WH

[Barbara Keeley] Both public officials who have investigated Matthew’s death, the coroner and the ombudsman, have said that That catalogue of failures would be shocking in itself, they would support a public inquiry. I ask the Minister, but it ended with a young man dying. In cases such as on behalf of Melanie Leahy, to set up a public inquiry. Matthew’s, we have a duty to learn the lessons and Only a public inquiry will have the transparency and ensure that others in mental health care do not end up broad participation needed to rebuild trust in the services. dying preventable deaths. The Minister will know that that is the only way that witnesses can be compelled to give evidence without Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): I sympathise greatly seeking to apportion blame, and evidence must be given with the hon. Lady and the story that she is telling and on oath. that other hon. Members have told. Does she agree that As Melanie has said, when it comes to helping people who have mental and “Since Matthew’s death I have been on a mission to get to the psychiatric issues, who need help more than anyone, it is truth of what happened to Matthew and to get justice for him. On important that facilities are modern? They need in-patient my journey I have not only found that many other families are in care and they need the staff to be trained and able to the same position as me, but also individuals who have the respond. If those things were improved, does she think survived the quotes ‘care’ that they received.” that would be a step in the right direction to try to help In this most tragic case, inadequate and neglectful care people and prevent such tragedies from happening? led to the death of a young man like Matthew. His mother has had to take on a fight over many years to get to the truth. I thank all the families and parents such Barbara Keeley: There is much that needs to change, as Melanie Leahy who have put so much of themselves but the hon. Member is right that that is one aspect of into their campaign. I return to what she said to me: it. The mental health estate is known for being run down and out of date. “To say the current situation is not good enough is a massive understatement. We know what has to change and we have The learning of lessons has not happened in the known for decades. What will make the Government take real Linden Centre or in mental health services in Essex. action? How many times do we need to hear the same information The charity INQUEST has worked on more than 28 cases and recommendations? How many more Matthews have to die?” involving deaths in mental health settings in Essex since 2013, yet despite the many investigations, reports and 4.59 pm inquests that have highlighted failures, preventable deaths have continued. At the Linden Centre, INQUEST is Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): It is a pleasure aware of six in-patients found hanging between 2004 to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I and 2019. Despite repeated inspections and visits by the congratulate the hon. Member for Hartlepool on the Care Quality Commission, people have continued to die wonderful way in which he opened the debate and the in those services. two preceding speakers on their powerful contributions. I rise to speak on behalf of my constituent, Mrs Marian The ombudsman’sreport found clear signs of a cover-up Coles, who was alerted to the debate and contacted me. at the Linden Centre. As Melanie told me: I want my speech simply to be what she has written to “Matthew had no key worker. Records of observation levels me, to place her concerns on the record. Mrs Coles said: and when he had been observed were changed. His care plan was falsified after he died. His claims of rape were ignored. Lots of “I am writing regarding the Westminster Hall debate concerning documents were missing and a whole catalogue of policy failings deaths in mental health care which calls for independent investigations were uncovered.” into deaths in mental health settings. As a family that has been personally affected by this after our son took his own life whilst That speaks of a culture that is less interested in learning a mental health inpatient in Kettering in May 2017, we would ask from failings than in avoiding the blame for Matthew’s if you would represent us at this debate. This was the second death. suicide at this facility 7 months apart. Staff failings were admitted at the inquest and 3 nurses were disciplined but they refused to The only way to restore trust in our mental health give us the details. It has taken us 3 years for the NHS to settle this services is to publicly demonstrate that all those issues, case. including the one that the hon. Member for Strangford We were involved with the serious incident report that took (Jim Shannon) mentioned, are considered and addressed. place but strongly support an independent inquiry being held Melanie Leahy has suggested that the only way to do after such deaths as is allowed in other organisations. Why should that is through a full public inquiry. At the inquest into an organisation investigate itself over a death that may have Matthew’s death, the coroner asked the NHS trust to been caused or contributed to by failures of its own staff or consider commissioning an independent inquiry. systems? The lack of an independent inquiry hampers the ability to root out issues of system neglect or misconduct and also The ombudsman, in his recommendation, said that jeopardises the welfare of future patients by failing to address the review due to be held by NHS Improvement, such concerns. There is overwhelming evidence that the current system for investigating deaths in mental health settings is not fit “should consider whether the broader evidence it sees suggests for purpose. that a public inquiry is necessary.” “We very much hope that you will be able to take part in the In an interview on ITV, the ombudsman went further debate and offer your support”— on the failings, including about Matthew’s care plan I do— being altered after he died and his claim of rape not being investigated. He described them as “for an independent inquiry for families that may be affected by these tragedies. I am deeply traumatised by the death of my son, “a catalogue of failings which are entirely unacceptable.” as is all of my family and we have to live with this every day of our He also said that he would fully support a public lives”. inquiry if one was recommended, and that he would like It is a privilege for me, as the local MP, to place to have investigated further if he had had the powers. Mrs Marian Coles’s concerns on the record. 9WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 10WH

5.2 pm I declare my interest as a patron of Mind in Haringey. Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab): It is a pleasure to I want to put on record my thanks to Deborah Coles, serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. The the chief executive of INQUEST,who wrote this important circumstances of the debate are truly heartbreaking. I briefing paper and represents, sadly, hundreds of families begin by extending my condolences to the family of the who face a similar case to Melanie Leahy. They are late Matthew Leahy and all families who have lost loved desperate. They want to know the reasons and what ones with mental illness at the hands of those who were happened prior to losing their child. I hope that at the supposed to protect them and care for them. end we will have a positive statement from the Minister For many decades, mental health has not received about a proper inquiry and recommendations to be enough attention or funding in comparison with physical followed as a result of it. illness. I draw attention to the mental health unit in The Minister may well remember Seni’s law, which Lewisham, which has already been viewed as not being was introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for fit for purpose—it was not built for people who have Croydon North (Steve Reed), as a result of his campaign mental health problems—yet funding has never materialised with Seni’s family. Seni died as a result of police restraint for the changes needed to make it suitable for people due to his having a very serious mental health problem with mental health problems. With the pressures of the but not getting the correct care under the mental health pandemic, medical professionals are reporting more services. This Friday I have a constituency meeting with and more that people are suffering with mental illness a constituent who has tragically lost her son in similar due to economic hardship or loneliness, so it is clear circumstances. This is not an isolated incident and it is there will be greater demand for mental health services wonderful to have this debate. over the next few years. It is imperative that we have I want to focus on the findings from INQUEST and well-functioning and well-funded mental health services some of the other experts who have looked carefully at to prevent needless deaths of the most vulnerable who the similarities in these cases. We know that between are in need of those services. Medical professionals, the 2013 and 2016 there were 71 deaths similar to the one police and everybody around them also need support to that we are talking about today. Despite several be able to care for people with mental health illnesses. recommendations made by the coroner following each They need training, supervision and, most of all, not to one of these to prevent further deaths in similar be overworked. They also need to be able to debrief circumstances, as the hon. Member for South Suffolk when they find things difficult. (James Cartlidge) said, the lessons simply are not being I would like to raise the case of the late Kevin Clarke, learned. Are we doing a read across from similar conditions from my constituency of Lewisham East, who sadly died in the prison service, where, I think, the deaths have following a mental health relapse. My condolences go come down and the lessons have been learned to some out to his family, who are still bereft from the loss degree? I wonder if there can be shared learning across of Kevin, who, despite not posing an immediate threat different services. to anyone,was handcuffed and placed in a leg restraint while We know that in November 2020, INQUEST, the telling the police that he could not breathe. In October, an voluntary sector organisation that helps families, looked inquest concluded that the officer’srestraint and supervision into 20 recent cases of deaths in adult in-patient mental towards Kevin were excessive and sadly contributed to health settings and found the same issues repeated: lack his death. However, the police were not the only of staff training, poor record keeping, a failure to professionals involved in his care. Other professionals involve the family in the care of the patient, a lack of were also in contact with him prior to this tragic incident. local specialist units and staff shortages. A strategy of care needs to be in place for all mental We know that as a result of covid-19, as other hon. health patients, one in which patients are listened to and Members mentioned, we have an opportunity to do family members are involved, so that loved ones can talk things differently. We know that we can do much better about preventative measures and their concerns, as well in terms of accessible data on the number of deaths and as contribute to the care plans that are needed. Mental how people have died. We know that we can do much health doctors, mental health nurses, social workers and better in training our mental health professionals. At care staff all need to work collaboratively with all Care Quality Commission level, we could do much professionals involved in keeping the most vulnerable better in terms of inspections, so that this appalling people safe and secure, and to prevent these fatal, awful area is cleaned up once and for all. incidents of suicide or types of restraints leading to We also know that there is failure of communication death. Change needs to happen. at crucial times, so that for months and months the family are left not knowing what is the next step and Graham Stringer (in the Chair): Hon. Members have what will happen as a result. That is why it is crucial, as either not turned up or taken less time than expected, we have all said today, that we have the correct oversight so, unusually, I will increase the time limit for the last at the national level to monitor the learning and speakers to five minutes. implementation, but also that we have a statutory public inquiry. It can be into Essex mental health services, but 5.6 pm what matters is that whatever it is, it is generalised Catherine West (Hornsey and Wood Green) (Lab): It across every single mental health setting. is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer, In the context of covid, where we know there will be and to have the extra few minutes, which allows me to at least 20% more people suffering from mental health speak about a constituency case. I want to put on conditions—including more young people, who are record how moving the speech by my hon. Friend the disproportionately affected by covid—there is a real Member for Hartlepool (Mike Hill) was, and how many urgency to this work. I hope that we as Members can wonderful speeches there have been today, to give this put more pressure on the Department of Health and desperate situation the attention it deserves. Social Care to tackle the problem once and for all. 11WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 12WH

5.10 pm join all hon. Members in everything they have said so far, and I echo their expression of sympathies and Kim Johnson (Liverpool, Riverside) (Lab): It is a prayers for the family of Matthew Leahy. I pay tribute privilege to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. to Mrs Leahy for her efforts. Matthew Leahy had his whole life ahead of him. He Sadly, we are all too aware that Matthew’s case is not was just 20 years old when he was detained in November alone. The death of a child is something that no parent 2012 under the Mental Health Act and transported to should have to experience. From my family circumstances, the Linden Centre, a secure mental health unit in I know that the impact for the parent lasts a lifetime. Chelmsford. Three days after his admission to what his Through several close family connections, I know that mother, Melanie, believed was a place of safety, Matthew the anguish of a parent whose child is lost to suicide is reported that he had been drugged and raped. Four even more painful. days later, he was found hanged in his room. In 2019, 195 people died in mental health care across Over the ensuing years, multiple inquests and inquiries the UK. One of those deaths occurred in my constituency into the conditions surrounding Matthew’s death have at West Park Hospital in May 2019. That sad death, and uncovered evidence of serious care failings, including indeed all those tragic deaths, serve to tell us that we the fact that Matthew’s paperwork was incomplete or need to do more. As politicians, we must always be missing and that no key worker had been assigned to looking to do more to support the mental health care him. It was revealed that Matthew had no care plan sector, improve outcomes and avoid deaths. We must do and that staff had falsified one after his death and all we can to support the staff in our mental health care backdated it. sector. Every one of those tragic deaths will have had a I welcome the petition and this debate, and I want to profound impact on the staff in those facilities. take the opportunity to pay tribute to Matthew’s parents In 2018-19, the Government increased spending on and all those who have campaigned so hard to get the mental health to a record £12.5 billion, and the NHS truth, justice and accountability. I also welcome last long-term plan for mental health increases spending month’s announcement by the Minister for Health, the each year by a further £2.3 billion, but we all know that hon. Member for Charnwood (Edward Argar), that the it is not just about the cash; it is about the leadership, Government will launch the management, the culture and the care. I welcome “an independent review into the serious questions raised by a the recent CQC report, “Out of sight”, which acknowledges series of tragic deaths of patients at the Linden Centre between the shortcomings of some of our mental health facilities, 2008 and 2015.”—[Official Report, 16 October 2020; Vol. 682, the challenges they face with patients—particularly those c. 733.] who suffer with autism—and the sense that those places, It is absolutely right that we commit to uncover the which are designed for care, are not therapeutic. I hope truth about the significant failings in the care and that its recommendations are followed through. That treatment of vulnerable patients, and that the mantra of will address some of the shortcomings, and hopefully “learning lessons”is not merely a soundbite accompanied we will see fewer deaths. by endless toothless reviews but results in substantive I listened to the hon. Member for Hartlepool, and I and tangible change. firmly believe that it is vital to embed a culture of No mother should ever have to go through the dreadful learning, safety and improvement across the mental loss and devastation faced by Melanie Leahy and so health care sector. I look forward to hearing about the many other people, who made difficult decisions in steps that the Minister and her Department are taking impossible circumstances to hand over their children to to tackle this issue and embed a better culture throughout the care of others, where they believed their children the sector so that it can do all it can to prevent all deaths would be safe. No family should have to campaign for in mental health care. The Minister will have heard the years to forcibly expose the negligence and incompetence calls for independent investigations and inquiries, and I of a system that contributed to the death of their loved add my voice to them. one. We know that black people are overrepresented in 5.17 pm mental health services and are disproportionately subject Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP): I thank all those to the use of Taser on wards, and it needs to stop. I who set the scene and the Petitions Committee for what congratulate Mary Seacole House, a mental health charity it did. in my constituency, on the work that it has done over many years to support patients with mental health Our hearts go out to our constituents. Hon. Members problems, and on shining a light on injustices. have spoken on behalf of them, and I thank them for that. I admire the determination that each and every My question to the Minister is: how can we challenge one of them has shown. A breakdown in care took place, and improve the process and culture of attaining inquiries, and we must not see another family in that situation. so that families bereaved by state neglect and wrongdoing are placed at the very heart of conversations about I want to take a slightly different approach to the accountability and change, and are not blocked, bullied, issue of mental health and talk about how we can help stigmatised or cast aside with accusations of being a within the system. Ultimately, that is what the Minister nuisance or a problem in their quest for truth and justice? will set out in her response. I have seen too many of my constituents broken, in need of support and let down by the system. I remember one young man, Michael, who 5.14 pm came to my office when he was on the edge. He was a Peter Gibson (Darlington) (Con): It is a pleasure to young fellow and was homeless and distraught, and the serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stinger, and I girls in my office were able to reach out and tell him in a congratulate my Tees valley colleague, the hon. Member helpful, compassionate way, “Your life is important and for Hartlepool (Mike Hill), on opening the debate. I we will help you.” He broke down in tears. 13WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 14WH

We were able to help that young fellow get to raise this issue here in Parliament. I am incredibly accommodation through the Northern Ireland Housing grateful to the 185 people in South who Executive. We also got him some help from the local signed this petition. Many of them have also been in food bank, which is always there to help, and were able touch with my office over the last few days to raise their to sort out his benefits. What happened was that that concerns about deaths in mental health care. young fellow had just disappeared off the grid. He There is an unsatisfactory gap in the ability of regulators clearly had mental health issues and was not able to to enforce sanctions in serious cases and, in particular, cope. He got the psychological help that he needed and those that involve death or serious harm to individuals he got his benefits renewed, so the pressure on him where catastrophic deficiencies in standards of care became less of a difficulty because of those who helped—the were involved. Aware of this debate, I heard over the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, the local benefits weekend from Richard Evans, who lives in Appleton in office, the food bank, the local churches. All those my constituency and whose daughter Hannah tragically people came together. took her own life five years ago. It is my sincere belief—I believe this in my heart—that At the time of her death, Hannah was a detained if Michael had not come to my office, he may not have patient on Sheridan ward at Hollins Park Hospital in survived. We all believe that, including the girls in the Warrington. Hannah, a 22-year-old young lady, had office and those we spoke to. Every Government body spent a short amount of time in a number of different was exceptionally helpful, and we thank them for that. settings as a detained patient and had also been cared That is the foundation for mental health. Ours is not for in the community by her family. Despite there being to question how or why people have got to the stage that awareness of the fact that Hannah was a complex they find themselves it; we must only see how we can patient with an extensive history of tying life-threatening help them where they are. The overhaul of the facilities ligatures and an intense fear of change, she was given that I spoke about when I intervened on the hon. just two and a half hours’ notice of her transfer that day Member for Worsley and Eccles South (Barbara Keeley) to a different hospital by those who were caring for her. is about updating them, so that the in-patient help gives When the decision was discussed with her parents, they people hope to reach out. We are desperate to see an did not object. Critically, though, they did not know upgrade of facilities that are sometimes not fit for purpose. that Hannah had been involved in nine ligature attempts Sometimes there is no privacy. Sometimes people while in an intensive care unit. They are in no doubt need a wee bit of privacy where they are, but they also that, had they been aware of the history, they would need to be able to reach out and have someone help have attempted to block that movement in order to them at when they need that. Some of the protect and care for their daughter. A fundamental lack wards that I am aware of are mixed-gender wards, of communication between ward staff, management where a lack of privacy is obviously even more of a and the family—the next of kin—led to a decision that problem. When it comes to people being allowed to ultimately resulted in Hannah’s tragic loss of life. visit, they get one hour each, once a week. I do not feel The inquest on Hannah’s case highlights a series of that that is enough; more time should be allocated for failings on that ward, but also a national problem visitors. regarding the lack of provision in place to properly I am always very aware of the great work that support vulnerable young adults diagnosed with personality occupational therapists do. They have a brilliant team, disorders and, more widely, the significant number of with fantastic ideas. They have allocated some rooms people in this country who suffer from mental health for activities. I think that it is important to have some conditions. sort of organised activities, so that those who are under I welcome plans to establish a new Health Service pressure psychologically, mentally and socially have Safety Investigations Body, a new executive non- somewhere where they can look outwards. The OTs in departmental public body, but it must have the powers the area that I represent have come up with a therapy to conduct investigations into incidents that occur during garden. These things can be done in-house and in a way the provision of services and have strong implications that can really help. There are gardening classes. Again, for the safety of patients. Critically, that body must also it is a question of designating an area for people and improve the quality and effectiveness of local investigations ensuring that they have it. by developing standards and providing advice, guidance and training to organisations. To conclude, it is little wonder that patients and those who are in homes remain uninspired and unhopeful if I am keen to see stronger steps taken with prosecutions, that is how they view a place designed to provide the holding those who lead care settings to account. The help and support that they are crying out for. It is clear Care Quality Commission currently has relatively limited that we must make massive changes, and if the first step powers to prosecute, in part because of reservations to doing that is an inquiry, that is where we must begin. about the value of criminal enforcements in healthcare. My heart goes out to all the families who grieve and feel Legalities aside, speaking to Richard Evans, Hannah’s let down. I believe that we can do better, but not only father, the key issue with many of these sad cases seems that—we should do better and must do better. to be a basic lack of communication: firstly between local NHS trusts and services, and then a dialogue with families when deaths sadly occur. That is something 5.21 pm that can, and must, be addressed. Andy Carter (Warrington South) (Con): It is a pleasure It is important that we take a zero-suicide policy to to contribute to this important debate under your prevent unnecessary harm on individuals and their chairmanship, Mr Stringer. May I start by paying tribute families in the future, and lessons need to be learned to the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mike Hill)? I from the past. It is time to review the legislation to thought that he opened the debate incredibly well. I also improve care, in what should be a place of safety for pay tribute to Matthew Leahy’smother for her campaigning those who are at their most vulnerable. 15WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 16WH

5.26 pm the leadership of the trust in question, and other trusts, has been held to account for the maladministration. Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con): It is a Kevan Taylor was the CEO at the time, and the accountable pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. officer. He has now left and a new chief executive has I pay tribute to all the speakers today; they have spoken taken over. I would really like to know whether he left very movingly,particularly the hon. Member for Hartlepool with a payment, and without any blemish on his track (Mike Hill) and even more particularly Ms Leahy, who record, or whether he has been held to account or sounds like an incredible person. All that she is dedicating sacked for his underperformance. Demonstrably, for her life to now is trying to make sure that lessons are years there has been underperformance by the leadership learned and changes are made, and that individuals of the trust. Unless we start to make sure that the responsible for mismanagement or maladministration individuals who run trusts are held to account if they are held to account. get things wrong—many do a fine job, of course—such The case I allude to is one with which the Minister is tragic cases will continue to happen. familiar. One of my constituents, Andrew Bellerby, was under the care of the Sheffield Health and Social Care 5.31 pm NHS Foundation Trust, so these issues do not just pertain to places like the Linden Centre, which sounds Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (Tooting) (Lab): It is a real horrendous. He presented himself there one evening, pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer, having been referred there by his GP. He had a history and an honour to respond on behalf of the Opposition of suicide attempts. He was seen by untrained nurses in this profoundly moving and powerful debate. I thank who used a triage assessment tool that was designed by my hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mike Hill) the Sheffield trust. These nurses were not trained to use for securing the debate, but it goes without saying that it. Through that tool, they rated him as presenting no every contribution today has been extremely powerful. risk of suicide. He was then released back into the Everyone who has spoken has stood up for their constituents community, and sadly that evening took his own life. and represented the issues very well. The points have been made clearly and concisely, and hon. Members Mr and Mrs Bellerby, his parents, have championed have done Melanie Leahy and the other families very the cause of trying to find truth and justice, and have proud. been prevented at every turn by Sheffield Health and Social Care NHS Foundation Trust. The communications We are here today because of a mother’s love for her have been terrible. It has been denial after denial, lie son and her desire to receive some answers about his after lie. Eventually, an inquest proved that the Bellerbys tragic and untimely death. It is fitting, then, that the were right and that Andrew Bellerby’s suicide was debate should take place ahead of National Grief preventable. Awareness Week. Matthew Leahy was just 20 years old when he was admitted to the Linden Centre in November All that Mr and Mrs Bellerby wanted was an apology 2012 after being detained under the Mental Health and an admission of the trust’sfailure and mismanagement. Act 1983. While in the care of North Essex Partnership Instead, there was denial and obfuscation. It cost in the University Trust at the Linden Centre, Matthew phoned order of £100,000 in legal costs, much of which fell to his parents on numerous occasions to express his the taxpayer, although the actual compensation bill at unhappiness at being detained there. I know that I am the end was only £9,000. Incredibly, even after all that speaking again of things that have already been mentioned, time and it having been demonstrated that Mr and but it is important to give the details as many times as Mrs Bellerby were right that their son had been poorly possible, to get what happened across as powerfully as is treated by the trust, there was no compassion, remorse necessary to see the change we want. or proper apology. It is simply unthinkable. Two days after being admitted, Matthew phoned his That was back in 2015. The CQC gave the trust a father to tell him that he had been drugged and raped damning rating in 2016, and did another assessment in on the ward. Following a 999 call made by Matthew, the 2019. The most recent assessment showed that there Linden Centre staff gave assurances to the family that were 47 breaches of the trust’s legal requirements. It he was indeed safe in their care. Just days later, Matthew was rated inadequate, and it is now in special measures. was found unresponsive and hanged, in his room. He One of the things that runs through the report is was transferred to Broomfield Hospital, where he was constant reference to a lack of training. What had been pronounced dead. Matthew was in the Linden Centre learned in that four year period? Instead of the trust for just seven days. holding up its hands and saying, “Yes, we got this As a mother myself, I cannot comprehend what Melanie wrong. Yes, we are going to put it right,” which is what has had to contend with over the last eight years. Sadly the Bellerbys wanted in the first place—I am sure that is for Melanie and the family, the struggle is not over. An what Ms Leahy wants too—the trust was in total denial. inquest concluded with an open narrative verdict that Mr and Mrs Bellerby want to make sure that the Matthew was subject to multiple failings and missed assessment tools are prohibited and not used by the health opportunities over a prolonged period of time, by those service. They have stopped being used in the Sheffield entrusted with his care. Multiple investigations and trust, I am pleased to say, but there are 32 other trusts reviews were carried out into the North Essex Partnership that may still be using them. The Minister has been University NHS Foundation Trust, and into Matthew’s great with this family and has met them personally, with care, and they raised even more questions about the me, and he is championing the cause of trying to care that he received and the nature of his death. I want improve best practice in this area. Questions remain to raise some of the concerns that were found in the about whether those lessons have been learned in other various reviews so that everyone here can get further trusts around the country. Key to the matter, as hon. understanding of the scale of the challenge that Melanie Members have alluded to in speeches today, is whether and her family have faced for the past eight years. 17WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 18WH

At post-mortem, traces of the drug GHB were found I will take this moment to read a few words from in Matthew’s system. He had bruises just above both Melanie about why a statutory public inquiry is so ankles and four to five unexplained needle wounds in important to her: his groin. Matthew’s paperwork was incomplete and a “To come this far and then get fobbed off with a review or key worker was not assigned to him. Staff at the Linden general inquiry…would simply take…us all back to square one.” Centre had not issued Matthew with a care plan, but She goes on to ask that the Minister do something real after his death they falsified one and backdated it. A and meaningful that paves the way for truth, justice, number of ligature points in the Linden Centre previously accountability and change. There is an opportunity identified for removal were still there. Essex police here for the Minister to commit to providing a grieving dropped a corporate manslaughter investigation into mother with answers about her son’s death, and to the deaths of 25 patients who were in the care of the learning lessons so that other families do not suffer in North Essex partnership trust at nine separate this way. We cannot, and must not, delay any further. establishments since 2000. The ombudsman investigated, and agreed that Matthew had not been responded to Graham Stringer (in the Chair): We have plenty of appropriately after reporting a rape, as well as that the time, but I ask the Minister to leave enough time for the Essex partnership’s investigation of Matthew’s death wind-up at the end. was inadequate. All this in eight years—the toll it has taken on this family. That is before we consider the 5.38 pm prosecution of the Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust by the Health and Safety Executive The Minister for Patient Safety, Mental Health and following the deaths of 11 patients in its care between Suicide Prevention (Ms Nadine Dorries): It is a pleasure 2004 and 2015. to serve under your chairmanship once again, Mr Stringer. The loss of multiple lives and the tearing apart of I congratulate the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mike families were devastating and, most tragically, utterly Hill) on securing such an important debate on the preventable. We have to learn from those tragic losses so e-petition calling for a full public inquiry into the tragic that no other families are affected. I ask the Minister if circumstances surrounding the death of Matthew Leahy, she will please work with Melanie Leahy on this matter and the wider issue of deaths in mental health in-patient directly, as her predecessor promised to do. I had the settings. honour of speaking to Melanie ahead of the debate. I thank all hon. Members present for making such This is her day, Matthew’s day and a day for all who are valuable and powerful speeches on such an important still seeking answers about their loved ones’ deaths. issue. I am going to make quite an important The strength it takes to continue this fight after eight announcement. Therefore, if anybody feels the need to long years is commendable. My heart goes out to Melanie’s intervene, could they wait until I have finished so that family and to all who have lost loved ones in similar there is no ambiguity on the part of the relatives who circumstances, not just at the Linden Centre but in care may be listening, and so that they fully understand what settings across the country where they were meant to be I am saying and the reasons why I am saying it? In this safe. Many of those people have been mentioned in case, that is quite important, particularly for Mrs Leahy today’s debate, and I thank Members again for their and the relatives. contributions. Matthew Leahy took his own life while he was in the 1 A system is not working properly if it takes so long to care of the NHS. His death was avoidable, as were the investigate such a tragedy, and yet answers are still not deaths of a number of other people in the same facility. forthcoming. A grieving mother should not have to While nothing that I or any of us can say today can ease plead with people to sign a petition to get answers the pain of their families and friends, I am determined that we learn the lessons of these tragic events. surrounding her son’s death. There should be no barriers to the truth. Inquiries and investigations should not be Barbara Keeley: I should like to raise a question with reserved for the most privileged and those who are most the Minister. She said that Matthew took his own life. familiar with the system. Melanie Leahy does not accept that, and I think it On the point about time, I highlight that it has taken would be easier if we used the words “he was found over a year to have this debate following Melanie’s hanging”. The inquest recorded an open verdict, so I do successful petition. We all understand the mitigating not think it is appropriate in this debate to say that he factors that this year has brought, but I would like took his own life. everyone to consider how every step of the process has been slow. Barriers have been put in place for the family Ms Dorries: Until we have proceeded a bit further, at every single turn. there is a form of words that I have to use at the moment, and that is the form of words. There is absolutely James Cartlidge: Does the hon. Lady agree that, that no contention about how Matthew died or the appalling being so, it would be very much in the interests of all circumstances in which he was found, but I have to use a stakeholders if the inquiry took place, ideally, as soon particular form of words at this point. as possible? As I said, nothing can ease Melanie’s pain, or that of Dr Allin-Khan: Yes, of course it would be in everyone’s the relatives of others who were found in similar best interests for the inquiry to take place as soon as circumstances in the Linden Centre. Matthew died in possible. After all this time, Melanie deserves some November 2012 while he was in the Linden Centre, a answers. I support her call for a statutory public inquiry mental health facility in the former North Essex Partnership into Essex mental health services and for the appointment University NHS Foundation Trust. I understand the of an independent chair. It is crucial that lessons are devastating impact that that has had on Matthew’s learned from Matthew’s case. family, especially Melanie, whom I have spoken to 1.[Official Report, 3 December 2020, Vol. 685, c. 3MC.] 19WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 20WH

[Ms Dorries] and they are being investigated. It is not the case that if someone in a professional capacity refuses to give evidence twice. My heartfelt condolences go out to them now, as to an independent inquiry, they are not held accountable. was the case when I spoke to them and will continue to That is patently demonstrated by the case of the doctors be so. who are being investigated by the GMC. The petition we are debating today calls for a public With the timeframes that we originally set, I had inquiry into the death of Matthew Leahy on the grounds hoped that the inquiry might report within 18 months. that past investigations have been inadequate. I first met As I have today extended its scope to cover a 20-year Melanie last year and I was deeply moved by her story. I span from 2000 to 2020, it will take longer, but I hope took that story away and have continued to work since I that it will report its findings within two years. I hope to first spoke to her. I have since met her again and I have announce the chair and outline the terms of reference met some of the other families whose loved ones have in a written ministerial statement— died at the Linden Centre, and my thoughts are equally with them. Barbara Keeley: Will the Minister give way? As a result of what I have heard from both Melanie Ms Dorries: I will. and other relatives, I can confirm today that there will be an independent inquiry into the events at the Linden Barbara Keeley: I think it would be easier if the Centre, covering the period from 2000 to the present Minister just let me ask the question. It was clear from day, as requested in Mrs Leahy’s petition. This will what my hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mike mean that all the tragic events are given the attention Hill) said that Melanie Leahy is not necessarily happy they deserve to ensure that lessons are learned. The with an independent inquiry. We should be clear about scope will not go earlier than 2000 or later than 2020, in that. There is the question of compelling witnesses to order to keep the inquiry focused and to have it report attend. in a timely manner. I consider that 20 years is a more The Minister is talking about appointing the chair. It than adequate timeframe to enable us to understand is important that, for complete independence, any inquiry what happened at the Linden Centre and to learn has the support of families such as Matthew’s. Can she from it. tell us whether she will consider having the position of I am in the process of appointing an independent chair approved by an independent body or, for instance, chair,and I am considering half a dozen leading candidates the Health and Social Care Committee? I do not think at present. They will need to be robustly independent people will be comfortable with her appointing the and command the confidence of the families. I have chair. As other hon. Members have said, there has been chosen to go down the route of an independent inquiry too much of people appointing other people, and saying, rather than a public statutory inquiry so that we can “You review me and I review you.” That is an important move quickly. To inform its findings, the inquiry will be point. able to call witnesses and undertake a close examination of what actually happened to patients who died at the Ms Dorries: I would like to get the inquiry going. As trust. I will also appoint a barrister—a QC—to assist in all other inquiries, I believe it is the case—I will come the chair in their investigations, along with a full secretariat. back to the hon. Lady with the reasons why—that The inquiry will be independent and will consult families ministerial responsibility has to be taken. on the specific terms of reference. As an independent As I was about to say, I want to get the inquiry under inquiry, it can determine how it wishes to work with the way before Christmas. I would like to make a written families so that they are able to give their accounts. ministerial statement to the House before the Christmas I will not pull any punches. Hon. Members will be recess to set out the terms of reference of the inquiry aware of the report of the inquiry into the life and death and to name the chair, with the provision that the of baby Elizabeth Dixon, published last week, which set inquiry will commence in the second week of February. out the details behind what it described as a “20-year Barbara Keeley: The point has been made that Melanie cover-up”. I can cite two more inquiries: the Morecambe Leahy has campaigned on this for eight years and has Bay investigation and the Paterson inquiry, both of done a wonderful job. I understand the reasons for which were independent inquiries commissioned by my trying to do this quickly, but it is too hasty for the Department. They left no stone unturned and were Minister to move ahead and appoint a chair unless she frank in their criticisms. is clear that the families, and particularly Melanie Leahy, I expect witnesses to come forward irrespective of the are happy with that. The chair has to be seen to be type of inquiry. While public inquiries can compel independent. I am not sure that I am particularly happy witnesses to appear and give evidence under oath, with what the Minister is outlining. importantly, they do not have to give evidence that would incriminate them. However, it is incumbent on Ms Dorries: We will go through the processes that we all holders of public office, and on health professionals, have been through within the Department of Health to demonstrate their fitness by voluntarily co-operating and Social Care. They are set in law and abided by with independent inquiries that seek to protect future during every inquiry; that has included all the past patients and offer closure to families. inquiries such as the Dixon inquiry, the Paterson inquiry and the Morecambe Bay inquiry. The same protocols Barbara Keeley: Will the Minister give way? and the same process will be adhered to.1 Ms Dorries: I will when I have finished this point. James Cartlidge: I am grateful for what the Minister The independent Paterson inquiry—this is an important has said. I know that she has battled to get this through point—referred to the General Medical Council two because she sincerely believes in the cause and in bringing doctors who had refused to give evidence to the inquiry, justice. In my view, it is important that it happens 1.[Official Report, 3 December 2020, Vol. 685, c. 4MC.] 21WH Deaths in Mental Health Care30 NOVEMBER 2020 Deaths in Mental Health Care 22WH quickly, as I said earlier. My worry is that a statutory bereaved family. We would hope that the circumstances inquiry would take months and months to set up. For surrounding a death are already improved by the medical my constituents the Wades, the key thing is time. The examiner system, which incorporates learning too. semantics do not matter, as long as what we do finds the It has been some considerable time since there has truth and probes further. That is exactly what happened been any kind of inquiry into a mental health setting, so with the Dixon inquiry. it is important that we have an inquiry in order to have a 20-year window. We can take those examples, look at Ms Dorries: My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the report and take away the learning. If that can be no stone was left unturned in the Dixon inquiry. It took introduced in an interim report that we can take away, 20 years to conclude, and the summary was devastating that would be excellent. I cannot guarantee that, however, in terms of what happened. A nurse can no longer because we do not know what the chair or secretariat practise in this country, and it was revealed that the will find once the inquiry begins. trust, doctors and medical staff had engaged in a cover-up I did not finish replying to an earlier intervention. I for 20 years. It took 20 years of probing, but the inquiry hope the inquiry will commence in the second week of happened. It might be thought that a public inquiry February, but the chair and secretariat will be appointed would find out more, but one of the advantages of an before the December recess. independent inquiry is that it can work much more closely with families and take their considerations into Kevin Hollinrake: Assuming that the independent account by talking to them and involving them, whereas inquiry finds that somebody is culpable within the that would not happen with a public inquiry. As has management, will the Minister set out what sanctions been demonstrated by each one that has been conducted, might be available to her or to the inquiry to hold those an independent inquiry benefits from the relationship people to account? built with families and the information that families have been able to input. It is important that families’ Ms Dorries: As a Minister, it is not my role to issue stories are heard, because some of them are complex, sanctions, but if the chair discovered anything even painful and detailed. remotely untoward during the inquiry, it would be Extending the inquiry from 2000 to 2020, as I have referred to the police. The inquiry does not cover up done this morning, incorporates both the former trust criminal activity—that is the case for any inquiry, not and the existing trust. A situation occurred recently just this one. There would be accountability. within the new trust, and we are able to incorporate both trusts and even more families. Barbara Keeley: I want to touch on inquests. Given the new evidence in Matthew’s case and many others, Catherine West: The Minister is being generous in does the Minister think it would be appropriate to giving way. The people running the inquest certainly say revisit inquests that returned open or narrative verdicts? that they think a statutory inquiry would be best. Over That can be important to the families. a 20-year period, many of us have received emails from constituents whose children are now in social care—for Ms Dorries: I cannot comment because, as the hon. example, a young woman who spent time in 11 different Member knows, inquests and coroners are under the hospitals first went in when she was 14. She is still there jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice. Coroners are at the age of 22, at a cost of £700,000 per annum. What almost in the vein of judges, so that is a legal question learning is there at an interim level? Will the inquiry for the MOJ to answer; it is not within the jurisdiction allow for learning as we go, rather than our waiting five of the Department of Health and Social Care. Our job years for the report? In those five years, we could lose is to launch an inquiry, ensure that it has a robust, another 10 or 15 patients each year, so what are the independent chair, that it is fully funded and staffed, interim milestones that could give us support? that it establishes terms of reference in consultation with as many families as possible as soon as possible, Ms Dorries: The hon. Lady is absolutely right, and and that it commences as soon as possible. we would hope for an interim report, but it would As hon. Members will be aware, the Health and depend on the chair. Once we have appointed a chair Safety Executive has investigated how the trust managed and secretariat and have the ability to appoint a QC, as environmental risks from fixed potential ligature points required for interviewing witnesses, we will have as a in in-patient wards between 25 October 2004 and 31 March Department, as Ministers and as MPs—independent 2015. As a result of the investigation, the Health and means independent. Nobody can have any influence on Safety Executive has brought a prosecution against the the inquiry, but we would ask for an interim report, Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust, particularly if there were findings. However, we have to which was formed following the merger of the North be aware that findings could prejudice something that Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust might come as a result of the inquiry. Learning is with the South Essex Partnership University NHS absolutely the key, which is why we have established the Foundation Trust. I am sure hon. Members will understand Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch. that I cannot go into the details of those proceedings as This is an important point at which to mention they are before the courts. medical examiners. In April 2019, we introduced medical I could say quite a bit about the petition and the examiners into hospitals. If there is a death of a patient cases, but I will conclude to let the hon. Member for today, a medical examiner will examine the death Hartlepool have the final say. I thank Melanie Leahy for certificate—the hon. Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) her years of campaigning. I hope she will understand will know this, as she is a practising doctor—look into that a robustly independent inquiry that is unafraid to the circumstances of the death and liaise with the turn over stones and work with the families, calling 23WH Deaths in Mental Health Care 30 NOVEMBER 2020 24WH

[Ms Dorries] Transport for London: Funding those it sees fit to give evidence, is a way to discover what has happened at the Linden Centre over the past 20 years, including what culture developed, what practices [SIR DAVID AMESS in the Chair] were in place and what happened to those young boys who died there. As my hon. Friend the Member for 6.3 pm South Suffolk (James Cartlidge) said, what is important (Carshalton and Wallington) (Con): I is that we get to the truth. It does not matter what the beg to move, framework or structure is; what matters is the truth, That this House has considered e-petition 331453, relating to knowing how those young boys died, what happened funding for Transport for London. and what we can learn from those dreadful mistakes. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir David. I thank all right hon. and hon. Members for 5.57 pm taking part in the debate. There are quite a lot of Members on the call list, so I will speak as quickly as I Mike Hill: I thank the Petitions Committee and its can to fit everyone in. I hope hon. Members will forgive staff for their hard work in the background for all me for not taking any interventions, so everyone can Members in the Chamber, who in representing the get in. interests of their constituents have conducted themselves in dignity and with passion. I also thank my hon. On behalf of the Petitions Committee, I thank the Friend the Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) and over 170,000 people who have signed this petition, the Minister for their contributions. I cannot say whether including 1,272 people from Carshalton and Wallington. Melanie will be happy with that, but she clearly called I appreciate that there might be questions as to why we for a statutory inquiry. are having this discussion, given that the second Transport for London bail-out protected free transport for under-18s, Question put and agreed to. but I think this is a live issue that will return, so it is Resolved, right that we take the time to discuss it this afternoon. That this House has considered e-petition 255823, relating to I might be showing my age, but I can remember the deaths in mental health care. introduction of the Oyster card scheme and free travel for under-18s. From the days of keeping loose change 5.58 pm by the front door to get the bus to school, we changed Sitting suspended. to the Oyster card system when I was in high school. I have some personal experience of the impact that removing free transport for under-18s could have, having been on both sides of the introduction. I pay tribute to the team at the Petitions Committee, which has conducted a survey among those who signed the petition to find out a bit more about their views. We have had over 3,000 responses to that survey. I would like to run through the key findings of the survey. Participants were asked how important zip cards, or other forms of concessionary travel, were for young people, and the impact that their removal might have. A zip card, or other form of concessionary travel, was reported to be “very important” to access school or college by 93% of respondents. It was also considered to be “very important” by 80% of people for accessing services, including medical appointments, 79% for work, 72% for training placements, 60% for accessing leisure and extra-curricular activities, 65% for socialising and 62% for meeting family and friends. If the 16-plus zip card scheme were suspended, 71% of respondents said they would find it “extremely difficult” to access school or college, 57% said it would make it “extremely difficult” to access work and 61% said it would make it “extremely difficult”to access services,including medical appointments. The survey went on to ask the respondents what impact the removal would have on their travel habits. Almost five times as many young people said they would use taxis “very frequently”, with the number of people who would use private car “frequently” or “very frequently” more than doubling. The number of respondents who indicated they would cycle increased by 82%, but there was no significant change indicated by those who said they would walk. The survey also found that 60% said they would use the tube, DLR, London Overground or TfL Rail less, and 56% said they would use a bus or a tram less. 25WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 26WH

It is clear that petitioners feel that the change would That long-term package must address the huge wastage have a great impact on their lives. Therefore, it is only that I have outlined and not punish Londoners for the right that we look at the heart of TfL’s financial situation. cost of the pre-pandemic mismanagement of TfL’sfinances. It would be easy to say that coronavirus and the subsequent However, ultimately this comes down to the political drop in passenger numbers is responsible for TfL’s choices of the Mayor,and in May next year the petitioners financial woes. Indeed, the onset of covid-19 has resulted will have a choice to make: four more years of waste in significant reductions in passenger demand, not just and higher costs with the current Mayor, or getting in London but across the country. For most of March TfL’s finances under control and delivering a better deal and April, daily tube usage was around 5% of normal for Londoners with Shaun Bailey. levels and daily bus usage was only 18% of normal levels. While we have seen a rise in passenger numbers Sir David Amess (in the Chair): Colleagues, some over the past few months, they have remained stubbornly people have withdrawn from the call list; others are not far below normal pre-pandemic levels, and the recent here, but they may turn up. As a best guess, if everyone re-imposition of an England-wide lockdown has also speaks for five or six minutes at the most, everyone will had an effect on TfL’s finances. be called. However, I want to talk about the state that TfL’s finances were in before the pandemic hit. It is clear to 6.10 pm me that Londoners were, and are, being let down by a Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab): It is a real Mayor whose mismanagement of the capital’s transport pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir David. network has cost TfL billions of pounds in lost revenue, Five minutes is quite a generous allocation compared waste and bail-outs, as well as the pursuit of transport with many other occasions, so I thank you very much policies that he knew TfL could not afford. There are for that, and I thank the Petitions Committee for facilitating countless of examples of this, and I will run through a this debate. few. I also thank the hon. Member for Carshalton and At least £640 million in revenue was lost by freezing Wallington (Elliot Colburn) for opening the debate, but pay-as-you-go fares that essentially benefit tourists, but I must say that his speech was disappointing. It crudely not Londoners, who saw the cost of their travel cards politicised the issue, and we know why—because there rise. Crossrail has been delayed by nearly four years, is a mayoral election next year and the Conservative despite being on time and on budget when this Mayor party has a pretty duff candidate. I know as much took office. It was due to open in December 2018, but because he ran against me in Hammersmith in 2010. He after multiple delays it is now not expected to open until is 20% behind in the polls, so there we have it. And now mid-2022. The delay has cost TfL £3.9 billion in bailouts I am making a political speech, but that is what happens. and £1.35 billion in lost fares revenue. These issues, whether they affect our individual TfL’s debt has rocketed to a record £11.7 billion. constituencies or London as a whole, are ones on which Some 21 major transport projects have been delayed or we should be able to reach agreement. TfL’s revenue fell cancelled. The bill for TfL staff on duties by 90% as a consequence of covid, so to go around has almost doubled. TfL’snominee passes, which essentially pretending that it is something to do with this or that let the housemate or lodger of anyone working for TfL decision by the Mayor is, frankly, ridiculous, and makes ride for free on the tube network, cost an estimated the public think we are ridiculous. When such points are £44 million in lost fares. The amount TfL spends on made in a debate in this place, we have to rebut them, executive pay has ballooned. The number of staff on meaning that we then go around in ever-decreasing over £100,000 a year has risen by nearly 100 in the last circles and end up where we are. I am sorry that the hon. four years. Gentleman chose to take that position. TfL’s performance-related pay bonus has gone up by Catherine West (Hornsey and Wood Green) (Lab): nearly a third, from £8.3 million in 2017 to £11.8 million Will my hon. Friend accept an intervention on that in 2019. Fare dodging is estimated to cost £400 million. point? £12.3 million has been wasted on the Rotherhithe crossing and £20 million on Woolwich ferries, and Andy Slaughter: I will accept one intervention; I can the list goes on. never refuse my hon. Friend. As pointed out by our excellent candidate for Croydon and Sutton on the , Neil Garratt, that Catherine West: Does my hon. Friend find it curious has had an effect on boroughs like mine, in Sutton. In a that the introductory speech failed to mention the London Assembly report released last year, it was shown expenditure on the garden bridge? that Sutton was dead last for investment from City Hall out of all the London Boroughs, and that was pre- Andy Slaughter: Again, this is where we are going: I pandemic. That means that the future of transport hope the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington projects, such as the Tramlink extension to Sutton, is now shamefacedly regretting making his opening which our London Assembly member Steve O’Connell speech in that way. has been championing for a long time, is in jeopardy. If I may be indulged, I will speak for a couple of It is fair to say that we are going to be living with the minutes on the general issue and then a couple of effects of the pandemic for some time, and that includes minutes on something very dear to my heart and to transport in London. The Government expect TfL to those of many other hon. Members in south-west prepare proposals for achieving financial sustainability London—namely, Hammersmith bridge. by 11 January 2021, in advance of a long-term solution The figures show that the current Mayor managed for TfL’s finances being announced before the second TfL’s finances immeasurably better than his predecessor, bailout expires in March 2021. and indeed in a very efficient way. The operating deficit 27WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 28WH

[Andy Slaughter] at that point. That work was done by the local authority, working with the private sector. It still needs funding, was reduced by more than 70%, the cash balance increased and unless we have that funding quickly, my constituents by 30%, and the fares freeze was wonderful for London, and many others across London will continue to suffer as opposed to the 42% rise in fares overseen by the not for weeks or months but years without the basic previous Mayor. If we had not had the fares freeze, facility that that provides. there would be a bigger gap to fill now, so even basic This is an extraordinary dereliction of duty by the maths seems to escape Government Members when Government, for patently party political reasons. The they talk about these issues. Secretary of State and the Conservative mayoral candidate A bail-out was necessary—does any hon. Member announce every five minutes, “Don’t worry. Just vote present deny that a bail-out was necessary or appropriate? for us and you can have the money.” I am afraid that —but we have to have six-month bail-outs. We cannot does not cut any ice. My constituents and others want have a longer-term one to allow better planning, because the bridge repaired. They do not want silly party political of course the Government want to keep this story squabbles and game-playing. Let us have a response to running and have another artificial row, with a 17 minutes that. If we can get it from the Minister today, that to midnight, last-minute piece of blackmail just when would be most helpful. the election is coming up. It really is that transparent, and the way in which the Government are dealing with this issue is, frankly, not worthy. I wish they would stop 6.17 pm politicking in this obvious way, because the only people (Orpington) (Con): It is a pleasure to who suffer are our constituents. serve under your chairmanship, Sir David. At the outset, The Government have targeted TfL’sprogressive policies, it is important to say that Transport for London is such as the under-18s travel card, the over-60s travelcard— critical to the functioning of the city. It is vital for the perhaps I should declare an interest as of about a economic and social wellbeing of London. These days, month ago—and the congestion charge. I remember the although it is unfashionable to say so, London is the huge fuss about the congestion charge extension and economic motor of the UK economy. If TfL does not the calls to withdraw it, but suddenly the Government function, London does not function, and the knock-on want it to be extended to the north and south circular effect on the country is inestimable, so it is right that the roads— which, by the way, would virtually bring London Government have stepped in. to a halt. It is worth pointing out that neither Transport for Please can we just have a little bit of common sense? London nor the Government are responsible for the Nowhere is that needed more than on the issue of health crisis that we are in. It is true that, as my hon. Hammersmith bridge—a major strategic river crossing. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington It is a concern not just to me as the Member for (Elliot Colburn) and the hon. Member for Hammersmith Hammersmith, but to the hon. Member for Richmond (Andy Slaughter) pointed out, the pandemic has devastated Park (Sarah Olney), my hon. Friend the Member for Transport for London’s finances. That is a fact and is Putney (Fleur Anderson)—we will hear from her later—and not open for debate. It is right that the Government my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth have stepped in twice over a six-month period, to the (Ruth Cadbury), who will be here, if possible. It affects tune of £3.3 billion, and that cost is borne by the UK a whole swathe of London and the south-east. I had a taxpayer collectively. debate on that subject in March and I thought that we There has been much comment that certain benefits were making some progress, but it is always groundhog enjoyed by Londoners before the pandemic are not day. covered by the bail-out agreements. It is important to TfL and Hammersmith and Fulham Council were note that at pre-pandemic levels, there was more than making progress in drawing up a full schedule of repairs £1billionwithinTransportforLondon’stransportprovision. for the bridge, but the taskforce set up by the Government More than £700 million of that went into buses, and has brought everything shuddering to a halt, as there were £330 million of other concessions. The taskforces so often do. It is a national, if not international, Government’s position in both bail-out agreements is embarrassment that we cannot repair a major river crossing. that it would be inequitable to taxpayers across the It will cost a lot of money—more than £150 million—but country to pay for subsidised travel that is not enjoyed every day I look at the bridges Minister’s feed, elsewhere. Why should taxpayers in Liverpool, Manchester she announces another £100 million here and there for and Birmingham pay for a benefit that Londoners road and bridge schemes around the country.On average, enjoy but they do not? about 85% to 90% of that is paid by central Government, but apparently that does not go for Hammersmith London’s deputy Mayor for transport, speaking on bridge. I hope all London Members will support me in behalf of the Mayor, has pushed back on that. She said saying that it is about time that the Government set an that that amounts to levelling down, and that Londoners example on a major piece of London infrastructure, are more dependent on public transport. I think there is which can be funded only through central Government. something in that argument, but the financial management TfL, Hammersmith and Fulham Council, and Richmond at City Hall over the past four years leaves a lot to be Council do not have the means to do it. It needs to be desired. funded now. The hon. Member for Hammersmith criticised my Last week, the leader of Hammersmith and Fulham hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington Council announced a proposal by Sir John Ritblat and when he said that he had crudely politicised this issue. Norman Foster for a very innovative scheme to put a Has he ever met Sadiq Khan? I cannot imagine a temporary crossing in place that would, in a relatively politician in this country alive today who misses an short period, allow traffic to go over and under the river opportunity to crudely politicise any issue at all. 29WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 30WH

There are other facts, which were laid out at some interventions, if they go to the full extent announced by length by my hon. Friend. There is the fares freeze—or my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer partial fares freeze, as it should be called, because it is last week, will amount to £280 billion, and they are not a complete fares freeze. I am sure that much will be very, very extensive. made by Labour Members, when they come to speak, In London, the Government have demonstrated their of the withdrawal of the revenue grant from Transport commitment to maintaining the core functions of Transport for London’s budget. They will not acknowledge that for London by injecting £3.3 billion of UK taxpayers’ much of that is replaced by business rates, but they will money to keep Transport for London afloat. I do not harp on about the £700 million. They are right to draw think that anybody in this Chamber will argue with attention to that withdrawal, because it has harmed that, but in the circumstances, given the fact that the Transport for London’s finances, but it did not happen benefits in question are not enjoyed outside London in one year or overnight; it was phased in over a and that City Hall under Sadiq Khan has been so three-year period. The first year of it was under the wasteful with public money, it is hardly surprising that previous Mayor, so candidate Khan, before he became the Government should expect City Hall to fund the Mayor Khan, knew about it. He knew that that money retention of such benefits. was going to disappear and he still, recklessly, pledged a fares freeze, a partial fares freeze, for the next four years Sir David Amess (in the Chair): I now have to impose in order to help garner votes to get himself elected. a formal time limit of five minutes. Transport for London’s costing of that at that time was £1.9 billion. Then, a few weeks later, it watered that down, because the commissioner was desperate to keep 6.24 pm his job, to £640 million, and that is the figure that it is Catherine West (Hornsey and Wood Green) (Lab): It sticking at for the moment. is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Sir On top of that, we have, as my hon. Friend the David, but not an honour and not pleasant to hear that Member for Carshalton and Wallington said, the massive my time has been cut back by a minute. However, I am delay to Crossrail. It is nearly £4 billion over budget and very happy to speak in the debate and to hear hon. is four years late, and that will cost more than £1.6 billion Members. It is quite fun to have a little bit of old-fashioned in unachieved fares revenue. These things do not help, political banter after what has been a pretty heavy six and they have happened. months on coronavirus and everything else—it is quite Labour Members will say, and the Mayor has been fun to be talking about bridges and things. [HON.MEMBERS: saying ad nauseam, “Well, of course, this is a co-sponsored “Hear, hear.”] project between the Department for Transport and Many transport authorities across the world are trying Transport for London.” That is true, but Transport for to shift us all out of our cars and on to trains and buses London is, and always was, the delivery arm for the and into cycling and walking. That is having a bit of a project, because Crossrail Ltd, which the Mayor likes to hiccup at the moment because of coronavirus, but I blame, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Transport for know that we all agree about the importance of clean London. And who chairs Transport for London? The air. Many hon. Members will have read the tragic story Mayor of London. Crossrail’s delay can be laid squarely of nine-year-old Ella Kissi-Debrah, who tragically died at the feet of Sadiq Khan. of asthma. Her family have been given an opportunity We have heard about the 21 capital projects that have to take further legal action, to make us learn more been delayed. We have heard about some of the fringe about how we can make an impact on clean air in benefits—the TFL nominee pass scheme. Wehave heard— London. well, we had not heard about this—that trade union I am really pleased that we are no longer at loggerheads facility time at Transport for London has more than about how transport will be paid for. I was panicking a doubled under Sadiq Khan. There are now 81 people. couple of weeks back about the congestion charge and The number of people who spend more than half of under-18s travel. The Child Poverty Action Group made their time working solely on trade union facility activities the point that the zip card is incredibly important for has more than doubled. That is more than for the whole young Londoners. As we know, young people have been of the civil service put together. so badly affected by coronavirus; it would be awful if We have seen other examples of Sadiq Khan’s wasteful they were doubly affected through the removal of zip approach to management. Staff costs at City Hall have cards. gone up by 82% in four years. Does anybody believe In areas such as mine, the London Borough of Haringey, that London is 82% better governed now than it was in there has been a 182% increase in unemployment, including 2016? Anyone at all? Of course not. The Mayor’s press a huge whack of youth unemployment. Anything we office costs have increased by 33% since Sadiq Khan can do to help young people use transport to get to job took office. There have been other really good headline- interviews, an apprenticeship, college or sixth form, grabbing things, such as £800,000 spent on beach parties would help enormously. London MPs do not get that in 2018. And in 2019, £10 million was spent by the many opportunities to gather together in this Chamber—it to put every police officer over the is quite fun—but when we talk about levelling up, we rank of sergeant through a personality test to assign a need to recognise that many people in our city live on colour to their personality. Apparently, that was critical. extremely low incomes. Ten million pounds was spent on that by this Mayor of While we have an enormous amount of sympathy for London. people in Liverpool and Manchester, there massive We are living in extraordinary times. The Government deprivation in London. More people live in deprivation are dealing with an unprecedented health crisis. There in London than outside it. I completely agree with the is no manual for how to do this. The Government levelling up agenda, but I also think it should apply to 31WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 32WH

[Catherine West] people are now feeling the effects of the Mayor’s inability to invest in infrastructure. I might add that people in London boroughs. Our boroughs, TfL and all our Pimlico desperately need the tube to be upgraded, because London government arrangements do a fantastic job, of the terrible noise that they have to deal with. The given that they often run off the smell of an oily rag. Mayor and his deputy have made personal promises to In the coming six months, all our residents will have the people of Pimlico that now cannot be kept. to pay more tax. The Chancellor’s announcement last One of the big issues that has really affected my week will mean every London borough will have to put constituency is the extension of the congestion charge. up tax and the Mayor of London will probably have to A number of constituents and businesses have come to put up the precept. That is a terrible pity.The International me because they are concerned about the extension to Monetary Fund and other groups have said that we 10 pm from Monday to Friday, and about the extension should not be levying more money from citizens, because to Saturdays and Sundays. Many people now describe it it is such a tough time for people with businesses and as a two-tier system, because at the same time as extending those struggling with their jobs. And now we know the congestion charge, the Mayor stopped the resident there will be a public sector pay freeze. This is not the discount from 1 August. That applies no matter how time to put council tax up. It is very regressive. It is a long someone has been living within the congestion typical wheeze from central Government to make local charge zone. Their circumstances might change: they governments impose more tax. That is a real pity. will get older and might become frail, or they might The housing market is quite buoyant at the moment, have infirm children who need to be transported in a so I would like to see us work together as London MPs car. Such people can no longer benefit from the 90% on how we can make developers share a bit more of the reduction, which is a massive issue. transport burden. I know there is a big change with I have had doctors, pharmacists, foster carers, charity the community infrastructure levy going into other workers and market traders all say to me that the arrangements and so on, but, given the buoyancy of our extension of the congestion charge and the ending of housing market, it would be useful to look at the the discount is having a detrimental effect on their lives. transport element and how much more can be done. One doctor who lives in Westminster has now been There is much more we could do, given that a lot of the posted to the Surrey border. He wanted to use his car developers go home with huge bonuses at the end of the because of the times of his shifts, so he now drives, annual financial year, while so many of our residents which adds £15 extra to his daily commute. A market struggle on tiny incomes. There must be a way of trader in Covent Garden told me that she works at her getting them to pay for more of the transport improvements small business two days a week, on Saturday and Sunday. required for the clean air and standard of living we The congestion charge on Saturdays and Sundays has desperately need, as well as the cohesive communities now added £1,500 to her bottom line. At a time when we all seek. we are trying to have an economic recovery, the charge is another blow to small businesses. 6.28 pm Why can the Mayor not consider the gross over- expenditure that he has introduced? TfL employees now Nickie Aiken (Cities of London and Westminster) have a 31% pension contribution from their employer, (Con): It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, compared with 13% for doctors, nurses, police officers, Sir David. I welcome this debate, brought by my hon. firemen and teachers. Why should TfL employees benefit Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington from that? Why has there been an increase of nearly (Elliot Colburn). Before I start, I have an interest to 100 people who earn £100,000 a year working for TfL? declare: I have two teenagers who enjoy the free travel All this fat could be cut, so that TfL can keep free travel for under-18s. for under-18s and the over-60s. It has to change, and the I recognise the detrimental effect covid-19 has had on Mayor has to be held to account on this issue. TfL’s finances. Anyone using the tube or bus will know of the dramatic fall in passenger numbers. I travelled here on the tube. The stations and carriages are empty. 6.34 pm But we must accept that the rot in TfL’s finances had set in way before covid-19. Much of the blame for TfL Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon) (Con): It is a great being in such an awful mess can be laid at Mayor honour to serve under your chairmanship, Sir David, Khan’s door. Yes, the Government’s decision to phase and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for out the operating revenue element of the TfL grant had Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn) on securing some effect—losing £700 million a year would have the debate. It pains me to agree with the hon. Member been difficult to absorb—but the Mayor knew that for Hammersmith (Andy Slaughter), which I do rarely, before he stood for election and introduced his fare although this is the second time in a London debate freeze. There was no strategic thinking about what that I have done so. He is right that we would look could happen in City Hall once he was elected. ridiculous if we tried to say in this debate that there has The Mayor introduced a major fare freeze across the not been a fall in passenger numbers and that there has network despite advice from his transport commissioner not been a financial consequence for TFL. We are not to do so, which he ignored. That led to an extra loss clearly saying that is the case, and nobody is saying of £640 million on top of the £700 million, which meant anything different. the Mayor had a loss of more than £1 billion before he As so many hon. Members have already pointed out, had even finished his first year. This issue has also led to the Government have put in funding packages twice, a fall in passenger numbers at the same time—a triple with £1.7 billion earlier this month and a previous whammy, even before covid struck. In my constituency, package of £1.6 billion, making £3.3 billion. Ridership 33WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 34WH has dropped across whole networks, but that is not what proudly a trade union officer dealing with Transport for we are discussing. We are discussing whether the Mayor’s London at the time of the previous Conservative Mayor, decisions had an impact on TfL’s finances prior to seeing at first hand the insane obsession with £400,000 covid, and the answer to that question, whether one buses and failing schemes such as the garden bridge that likes it or not, is a resounding yes. cost an eye-watering amount of money and did not The hon. Member for Hammersmith spoke about even build a bridge over the Thames. To take lectures how the Mayor has improved various positions, but from Conservative Members about that poppycock none of that was a surprise to the Mayor, because back —to use one of the Prime Minister’s terms—is simply in 2014 TfL’s debt position was set out, along with how unbelievable. They are right, however, that the root sustainable funding would need to be put in place. It cause of the problem goes back beyond covid-19 to the was also recognised prior to the 2016 mayoral election cutting of the operating grant. that, rather than receiving other financial resources, For a long time, London’s transport system has been £16 billion of savings would have to be made by 2022. the jewel in the crown of this country’s transport Of that, £12 billion had been found prior to the Mayor infrastructure; every major railway line stops here to taking office, so the idea that he has been hugely successful serve the rest of our nation as the economic engine. Yet in finding any of those savings is complete nonsense. we are the only country in western Europe to have The agreement that the Mayor has signed alongside pulled nearly £1 billion of the main subsidy from that this funding package recognises explicitly that he has transport system, which moves millions of people in not done enough during his term of office to find any and out of London every single day. That is the root more of those savings or benefits. I will not reiterate the cause of the problem. I have seen at first hand how the remarks of my hon. Friends the Members for Cities of previous Mayor and the current Mayor have had to London and Westminster (Nickie Aiken) and for Orpington suffer the consequences of that decision. (Gareth Bacon) about the numerous failings of Crossrail In all honesty, there needs to be a settlement—a real and the fact that the pay-as-you-go freeze has not one that is actually sustainable for Londoners. As hon. benefited Londoners—something on travelcards might Members on both sides of the House have said, London have done more—and £640 million has been lost in is an economic driver. Although many people are having revenue. to work at home at the moment, which may be a The fact of the matter is that the agreement the fundamental change, the reality is that TfL will not be Mayor signed with the Government for the funding able to wash its face when 70% of its fares have gone package explicitly recognises that his financial management completely. has not been good enough. That is why a major section of the agreement points out that he has failed to find a Let us give the Mayor of London credit where credit further range of operating efficiencies and that an is due. He successfully forced the Government to give assessment of capital efficiencies and a review of the up their plans to scrap free travel for older and younger long-term capital plan needs to be put in place. That is Londoners, alongside their ill-conceived attempt, which being done only because it is a condition of the package. almost caused a riot, to extend the congestion charge to my constituency of Ilford South on the border of the Finally, it is extraordinary that the Mayor has not A406. That was a nakedly political move to hit the proceeded with the plans produced under the previous Mayor of London, and I believe it would be as deeply Mayor and commissioner at TfL and gone through unpopular in east London as in many west London non-operational assets not generating any revenue that constituencies. Clearly, it was thrown straight out the could be either used or sold off. That has a direct impact window when constituents made their voices heard. on the free travel for under-18s and over-60s that we are talking about—it is good that the Government’s package Again, those negotiations went down to the wire. The recognises its importance and ensures that it will continue— funding deal was agreed by the Government only 17 minutes but there are also direct consequences for my constituents. before the deadline. That is not the way to run a system The previous Mayor knew the value of infrastructure that supports millions of people travelling to work, and invested in new trains for the District line. As a even during the covid-19 crisis. The deal also came with result of the delay or, indeed, cancellation of 21 infra- huge strings, including £160 million of additional savings structure projects, part of the upgrade to the District this financial year. On the facility time for trade unions, line, which is key to the livelihoods of so many of my under Sadiq, relationships have been far better than constituents,has not happened. That is a direct consequence they were under the Prime Minister, who would not of the Mayor’s financial mismanagement. even pick up the phone to me or any of my colleagues If the conditions that the agreement imposes on the for four years. Megaphone diplomacy through the pages Mayor were not in place, free travel for under-18s and of the Evening Standard is not the way to run our over-60s, which is now protected, would be at risk. That capital city’s transport system. is what we are talking about this evening—not what Despite what was written in black and white in a covid has caused but what was happening prior to that. letter from the Transport Secretary to the Mayor, the Government and, of course,Shaun Bailey,the Conservative 6.39 pm candidate, are pretending that Sadiq chose to impose those conditions on Londoners. Londoners will not be Sam Tarry (Ilford South) (Lab): It is an honour to taken for fools; they know that the Prime Minister serve under your chairmanship, Sir David. I thank the wrongly said on the Floor of the House that the Mayor hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot had bankrupted TfL before the pandemic. Touse another Colburn) and the Petitions Committee for the debate. I of his phrases, that is simply balderdash. There is no draw Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of possible way that radical change would not have been Members’ Financial Interests and declare that I was needed when 90% of footfall disappeared almost overnight. 35WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 36WH

[Sam Tarry] cannot afford to play politics with people’s lives, which is why the Government must accept that the suspension The knock-on impact of the financial crisis is that of free travel for under-18s will have devastating young people in my constituency, which is one of the consequences for my constituents, and ensure that the most diverse in London, now face having their zip card Mayor is not forced into that position again next year. taken away from them. That is what allows them to As I mentioned, this summer I spoke to young people travel across London and, when we are out of covid-19, about how covid-19 has impacted them. One of the to visit museums and the local library to study. As the main issues that was raised was the fear of not being Child Poverty Action Group has said, those are the able to afford to go to school following that decision. A children whose parents will have to decide whether to young person in my constituency said: “As a young put food on the table because they suddenly have to pay person from a family whose income has been affected for their child to travel to school. Let us not have a by the covid-19 pandemic, this will change and hurt my north-south divide. Why not level up the north, rather family’s finances by paying for travel when we were than level down London? barely able to afford it before. I, like many under-18s, rely on public transport every day to get to and from 6.44 pm school. By doing this, many children from low-income Abena Oppong-Asare (Erith and Thamesmead) (Lab): families will not be able to afford to go back to school It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, or go back home. Please stop this.” Sir David. I thank the hon. Member for Carshalton and The Government are supposed to work to protect Wallington (Elliot Colburn) for bringing forward this people and ensure that everyone can have equal debate, which is an important one for us to have across opportunities and life chances, yet they continue to put the political parties. the economic burden of covid-19 on the most disadvantaged Many of my constituents signed the petitions to in society. Thousands of households in Erith and scrap the removal of free transport for under-18s. I Thamesmead have seen their incomes slashed during received so many emails from constituents who were covid-19. I am pleased that the Mayor has been able to concerned about the issue. I also met so many young reverse this appalling decision and secure free travel for people. The impact on them would be devastating were under-18s until March 2021, but the uncertainty beyond this to continue. I know that this decision will have an that, combined with the added uncertainty of job losses impact on so many of their lives, and their families’ and business closures, is causing so much stress for lives, as it has during the summer. families across London. Young people should not have I will share with Members the issues impacting my to pay for covid-19. They have the right to education, constituents shortly, but I must begin by setting the culture and safety,and I sincerely hope that the Government record straight on why we are in this situation right will take the time to ensure that cuts to free travel for now. Despite the appalling circumstances that TfL was under-18s will not be forced on the Mayor in 2021. under when forced to suspend free travel for under-18s, the Government are pretending that the Mayor of London 6.49 pm chose to implement those decisions. In fact, the Mayor was forced to accept the devastating bail-out at the last David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) minute, which really punishes Londoners for doing the (Con): We have heard many sensible contributions from right thing by following the covid-19 restrictions. Members across the issues tonight. I would like to focus The Prime Minister has oh so wrongly said on the in particular on those that we experience in my constituency Floor of the House that the Mayor bankrupted TfL and many other parts of London towards the outer before the pandemic. In the four years Sadiq Khan has edge of the suburbs, in zone 6. been Mayor, he has fixed the financial mess that he For those who have not had the pleasure of visiting inherited on TfL from the previous Mayor. He has Harefield, in my constituency, I should say that it is well reduced the operational deficit of TfL by 71% and known as the largest village in London to the north-west. increased cash reserves by 13%. With the delay of Getting there means travelling through proper English Crossrail in Abbey Wood, the Government have said countryside surrounded by fields, with grazing livestock that London should cover the projected funding gaps and woods. It certainly does not feel like a part of our that the Crossrail project faces, despite its being a capital, and although it is served by a small number of jointly sponsored project with the Government that bus routes laid on by TfL, we must recognise that for brings economic benefits across Erith and Thamesmead the residents there, and in many other parts of the outer and beyond. suburbs, the subsidy provided for travel only helps if During the covid-19 lockdown, TfL funding from they can access the transport network reliably. For fares dropped by 90%. Due to the dodgy deal struck many places that simply do not have access to trains between the current Prime Minister and George Osborne and tubes, that means a restriction on the benefit that in 2015, removing TfL’s Government grant, London they see. For many of my constituents, in a place that is has been the only major city in western Europe that has much more dependent on the car than most of London not received direct Government funding to run day-to-day and also home to many cabbies and minicab drivers, the transport services in the last few years, meaning that it services that TfL operates to keep our traffic moving are relies heavily on funding from passengers’ fares. also enormously significant, although afforded rather Instead of working with the Mayor to ensure that less attention under what feels very much like a zone 1 transport in London could continue to operate for Mayor than we have seen historically. people as we come out of lockdown, the Government We need to recognise that all Londoners need to have forced the Mayor to accept a bad deal that has benefit from the services provided by TfL. Although my since been used as a political campaigning tool. We children and I are particularly huge fans of it—there is 37WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 38WH no greater pleasure than standing on the bridge and told me that it gives young people a social life and a watching the tube trains come in and out, and working chance of independence, which is really important for out which of the bus routes go where—we need to young people’s mental health, especially during the ensure that we provide value for money for all Londoners pandemic. in how TfL carries out its operations. Other members of the Youth Parliament told me that At the heart of tonight’s debate is the impact on they need free travel to get to and from school and children and young people of the changes that are college, to provide care and support to family members, taking place and that will take place in the future. to get to work, to travel for cultural, community and London’s local authorities have for a long time had religious activities, and to socialise with friends. One programmes such as the safer routes to school scheme thing that was very clear from their responses was how to encourage children to walk or cycle to their local much they valued this one small benefit that they have. school. There is the home-to-school transport legislation, The Child Poverty Action Group found that 37% of which sets out a framework of distance around those London’s children live in relative poverty, and free travel routes. Of course, in planning the new schools that have for under-18s is a lifeline for many teenagers. been required to meet the rising numbers of children in How did we get to a situation where the Government London, local authorities have always been cognisant are ordering the removal of free travel for under-18s in of distance to ensure that as far as possible, every mum London? Back in March, during the first lockdown, the and dad and every child has access to a good local instruction from the Government was, “Work at home school. if you can,” and the overwhelming majority of people It is therefore a reasonable challenge to TfL to recognise did just that. In the early months of the pandemic, that a very significant proportion of the journeys underground and rail passenger usage plummeted; undertaken by children are those going to school and according to the DFT’s own statistics, that drop was are well under the statutory distances. It is a reasonable more than 90%. For bus travel, the drop was more challenge that transport commissioners need to look at, than 80%. and they need to ask how, given the difficult times we During those early days, there was worrying news of face and the need to ensure proper social distancing on committed transport workers who had contracted covid-19 public transport, we manage that challenge as effectively during their ordinary daily work routine, and the sad as possible. reality was that for some of them the illness ended Ultimately, the debate is not about the niceties of the in death. People were rightly frightened to use public bail-out package. A Mayor of whichever political party transport. As bus and train usage plummeted, so did needs to show that the fate of London is genuinely in the income from passenger numbers everywhere. Both his hands, and that he is willing to take ownership of Transport for London and the national train operators the challenges that present—whether that is covid, as it sought help from the Government. We do not know is today, or one of the many other challenges our city what, if any, conditions were attached to the £5 billion has faced in the past. The response that comes out of bail-out for the national train operators, because the City Hall must command the confidence of all Londoners. Government have not released the details of that even The challenge we face at present is that Sadiq Khan to the Transport Committee, but I am pretty sure that comes across as a nice, quite affable chap—he is clearly those conditions did not remove any perks or benefits very good at PR—but he is just not very competent at from their passengers. managing the services and finances in our capital city: What we do know is that conditions were attached to not just in respect of TfL, but in so many other regards, TfL’s bail-out and we know that, in his letter to the such as with the police. Mayor of London on 14 May 2020, the Secretary of We need to ensure that we bring about a change that State made a number of demands as conditions of the ensures that my constituents have a sense that they have bail-out. One of those demands was to bring forward a leader in City Hall who can command their confidence, proposals “as soon as practicable” for the suspension of and who understands and is interested in the issues that free travel for under-18s, concern them in the suburbs. That is why we need a “subject to discussions…about how it is to be operationalised”. change from the mayoral elections when they come up next year. The rationale for that decision was to optimise the use of the available safe transport capacity, but we know from the Government’s own statistics that on the day 6.53 pm the letter was written, underground usage was only 6% Bambos Charalambous (Enfield, Southgate) (Lab): It and bus usage in London was only 13%, so the demands is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir in the letter seem to make little logical sense. David. For the purposes of the debate, I shall focus on It seems to me that the conditions contained in the the e-petition, which was about the removal of free letter were ill conceived and poorly thought out. Some travel for under-18s. people might say that those demands were set out in The threatened removal of free travel for under-18s order to score political points against Sadiq Khan in the caused deep anger and concern not just among young forthcoming mayoral elections—I am happy to have people but across the wider community. It is testament that row another time, and there are plenty of months to their campaigning and determination that the ahead for us to have that contest. But either way, the Government have backtracked on the demand. When Department for Transport has failed to understand the the Government made the demand, I do not think they reasons why young people use the under-18s travel card. understood what free travel meant to under-18s. I asked What would happen? We would end up punishing Enfield’s Youth Parliament what free travel meant to young people who have already had to endure the them. Tara Larkin, a member of the Youth Parliament, Government’s exams and free school meals fiascos, and 39WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 40WH

[Bambos Charalambous] There was talk of scrapping travel for under-18s to pay for the bail-out. Much has been said about that and whose mental health is already suffering due to all the there were some excellent contributions from fellow uncertainty surrounding their futures. With negotiations Members. I want to pick up on the point that the hon. due in the months ahead for a further extension of the Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn) Government bail-out of TfL, I say to the Minister, made in his opening remarks about a potential doubling “The kids have suffered enough. Don’t mess around in car usage. In my constituency of Richmond Park, we with their free travel. Let the kids have their freedom.” do not want to see a doubling in car usage. Car usage is already a major scourge on our roads. The congestion and the impact on air pollution is terrible, as is the way 6.58 pm it cuts people off from their local town centres. Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD): It is a pleasure My particular concern for young people is the impact to serve under your chairmanship, Sir David. It has on their safety. If there is an increase in the number of been quite amusing to listen to my fellow MPs talking cars because they are being driven to school instead of about whether the current or the previous Mayor is catching the bus, then there is a knock-on impact on more to blame for the current state of TfL’s finances, road safety. I worry for the safety of those who cannot but there is no doubt at all that whatever decisions have afford to be driven to school and have to walk long been made by either Mayor in the past, they were made distances, potentially in the dark, as well as the knock-on in a pre-pandemic phase. The situation we are in now impact that might have on our policing budget. There could not have been anticipated by anybody. are many budget implications for local authorities if we take away free travel for under-18s, which need to be TfL’s income is almost unique in the world for a considered alongside any potential savings for TfL. capital city, in that 80% of it comes from fare income. That is quite unprecedented among capital cities, most It would be remiss of me not to use this opportunity of which enjoy a far greater level of Government subsidy. to talk about Hammersmith bridge. I am talking to the There is no doubt, therefore, that when something such Department for Transport about its long-term plans for as the pandemic comes along and the instruction is travel in London, but please can we get some movement given to Londoners to stay home and not to use public on this? It is imperative, and it has been obvious from transport, there will be a big impact on finances.Londoners the start, that there needs to be a substantial contribution did exactly what they were supposed to do. They stopped from the Department for Transport. The sooner it can using the tube and the buses: the subsequent impact on commit to that, the earlier stabilisation works can be income has nothing to do with the mayoral policies of undertaken. The sooner we can get pedestrians and either the current Mayor or any previous one. The cyclists back over the bridge, to connect my Barnes situation could not have been predicted. residents to all the services, shops and transport links on the other side of the Thames, the better. The situation that we are in now is that TfL, not surprisingly, has required a bail-out in order to maintain its services. We need to look forward, not back at which 7.3 pm Mayor was responsible for previous finances. What is the plan now for keeping our public transport going in Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab): It is an honour to London? In the comprehensive spending review last serve under your chairship, Sir David. I thank the hon. week, I was disturbed to see that the Government have Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn) not budgeted anything in the next financial year for any and the Petitions Committee for bringing this important further bail-outs for TfL. debate before us, as London MPs. As I said last week, I am encouraged by the implication I thank the 170,000 people who signed the petition that the vaccine roll-out means that we will be back to against the scrapping of free travel for under-18s and full capacity on our tubes and buses in May next year, the 1,156 people from Putney who signed it, showing but I am little sceptical about it. I think it is a mistake their support for the issue and for young people. It is for the Government not to plan further investment into rare for the voices of young people to be heard, but that London’s transport network, because we know that the is the focus of the debate today. I also thank all the TfL drivers of the London economy are our cultural industries, workers who have worked throughout the pandemic to our financial services and our retail sector. They have keep us safe as we travel in London. all seen a big hit from coronavirus and, potentially, a big The plans to remove free transport for under-18s as hit from Brexit. They need investment from central part of the Transport for London bail-out package Government to get them back up and running, and to should never have been on the table in the first place, get London running again at full speed, as it was before. and must now be scrapped forever. We never want to see That investment needs to go into our public transport those coming back. Free travel is essential for enabling network. young people from disadvantaged backgrounds to travel The point was made by an earlier speaker that the to school; they cannot just change schools midway issue is not just about Londoners, but about travellers because of this policy change. They are already locked from abroad. If London is to get back up and running into having to travel across London. I declare an interest again, it needs to welcome travellers from abroad and it as the mother of a 14-year-old who uses the free travel needs the public transport network. I am disappointed to go across London to school every day. to hear from the Government that they plan to finance Free travel can be essential for travelling to work or TfL through tax rises and charges on Londoners. That apprenticeships, or to get to places for sport and leisure. is what we were told: council tax increases and an To cut off the best of London for the most disadvantaged increase in the congestion charge. but not for others is very unfair. 41WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 42WH

Just before half term, when we were not sure whether 7.8 pm free travel would be scrapped, one mother came to me Matt Rodda (Reading East) (Lab): It is a pleasure to and said that she did now know whether she would be serve under your chairmanship, Sir David. I thank the able to keep sending her son to school. Her income had hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot gone down as a result of covid, and she had very tight Colburn) for opening the debate and all Members who bills. Like so many other families, she had to choose have taken part in this evening’s discussions. between food, rent and sending her children to school. For children who are disinclined to go to school—those A number of excellent points have been made about we most want to get back to school—free travel is the unfair way in which the Government are treating absolutely essential. There is no point spending money London. I want to draw the debate back to one particular on a catch-up fund for education on the one hand and aspect of that unfairness: the central issue of the risk to then cutting the money for getting to school on the young people’s travel. The issue of funding for free other. transport for under-18s is incredibly important, demonstrated not least by the number of signatories to I found the Government’s response to the petition the petition that led to the debate—more than 170,000 very disappointing. I do not know whether other Members people, the last time it was checked. That is a truly saw it, but it was: incredible outpouring of support for the “Don’t Zap “The suspension of free travel for 11-17 year olds will help the Zip” campaign, which has taken social media by reduce demand for public transport at peak times”. storm over the past few months. Londoners past and present have shared their experiences of the scheme, Well, children have to travel on public transport at peak and it is clear that thousands of young people rely on times; that is when school starts and finishes. They affordable travel in a way that is hard to imagine in cannot stay at home and choose when to travel during some other parts of the country. the day. That cannot be part of Government policy. Although the scheme demonstrably helps all young I absolutely support Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, Londoners, the reality is that the proposal to suspend who is right to champion the continuation of free travel free travel for under-18s will hit the poorest hardest. for under-18s. He successfully forced the Government That is especially true in the context of the coronavirus to give up their plans to scrap free travel for older and crisis, as many family finances are very stretched. We younger Londoners, and their absolutely unworkable should all think deeply about that. plans to extend the congestion charge to the south Londoners have far less access to a car than most circular, which I hope never come back to the table. All people living elsewhere in the country. Indeed, the most rail services have been hit by the pandemic. The Government deprived households in London are almost five times immediately bailed out private rail companies with few less likely to own a car than the least deprived, meaning strings attached, and the same should have happened that affordable public transport plays an especially for Transport for London. All MPs must work together important part in levelling the playing field and helping to understand the needs of young Londoners and ensure all Londoners to get around. A YouGov survey bears that free travel remains. that out: 74% of children with a zip card use it to get to The very extended closure of Hammersmith suspension school or college, while a further 26% of those surveyed, bridge—a fantastic heritage structure—is also affecting and more than 36% from low-income families, were young people travelling in London. Young people travelling concerned that ending the scheme would restrict their to schools in my constituency and out to neighbouring access to school, apprenticeship and training options. I constituencies across the river and across London are am sure we all agree that access to those important affected by the misery caused by the closure of services for young people’s development should not be Hammersmith bridge. TfL was poised to fund it just restricted in any way; indeed, it should be encouraged. before the pandemic and there were discussions. Transport Furthermore, the same survey found that 33% of children for London funding is very important, but now that would feel less safe if they were priced out of bus travel, TfL clearly cannot fund it, the Government must step while 38% worried about being late,which is also important. up and do so urgently. The news that Putney boat race Free travel is not only about ensuring that children will not be happening in Putney, which was announced can get to school or training on time and safely; more just a few days ago, was very disappointing and a huge than half of young people who use the scheme would blow for local businesses. have relied on it to visit cultural and other activities in The closure of the bridge also compounds pollution central London, and to visit friends and family—all across Putney. It clogs up our roads and makes trips to important parts of our shared life in the capital city and school, work and hospitals so much longer. The taskforce around the country. Indeed, if we want families and has been meeting for 10 weeks without very much task friends to see one another and reduce social isolation, or force. I would really like the Minister to announce a which is obviously increasingly important during the change on that. Hammersmith and Fulham Council pandemic and our recovery from it, we should encourage has done its best. It has put together a plan, started the young people to be able to get around in the coming restoration and looked into the danger that the bridge is months, as the restrictions are eased. We should also causing, but the issue is becoming a political football. It not forget the truly important objective of promoting is very disappointing to see the candidate for the mayoral the use of public transport to reduce air pollution and election announcing funding for the bridge left, right carbon dioxide emissions, as several Members quite and centre, but it does not appear; it is clearly just hot rightly said with reference to their constituencies. Surely, air. Will the Minister make a lot of people across in that context alone, this is a very important scheme. south-west London very happy and bring an end to the I have major concerns that Government decisions misery of the Hammersmith bridge closure by announcing around TfL funding, including regarding the scheme the funding of the restoration? and for London more generally, are being politicised in 43WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 44WH

[Matt Rodda] Green (Catherine West), for Ilford South (Sam Tarry), for Erith and Thamesmead (Abena Oppong-Asare), for a rather sad and unfortunate way, as we have heard. I Enfield, Southgate (Bambos Charalambous), for Richmond urge the Minister—she is a thoughtful Minister—to Park (Sarah Olney) and for Putney (Fleur Anderson), have a word with some of her colleagues about reconsidering and from my hon. Friends the Members for Orpington their approach, particularly as we recover from the (Gareth Bacon), for Cities of London and Westminster pandemic, when we should be paying tribute to transport (Nickie Aiken), for Wimbledon (Stephen Hammond) workers and their contribution, and about trying to and for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds). take this whole issue a little bit more seriously. It sounds like a tube map, but everyone made excellent We should also reconsider—I hope that the Minister points, and it is a pleasure to respond to them all. will take this back to her colleagues—the effect of the First, it must be recognised that free travel for under-18s spending review on Londoners. So far as I can see, is unique to London compared with the rest of England. the review did very little for London at a time when the This should not be a debate about the merits of free capital city is under huge pressure. It reconfirmed the travel. The Government recognise the merits of free Government’s thin commitment to funding Crossrail. I travel for the most disadvantaged under-18s, which is should declare something of an interest, to put it mildly, why it is enshrined in the Education Act 1996 and as a Member for one of those seats that will be a children will continue to receive it. terminus for Crossrail. There is huge potential for Crossrail Today, we are talking about those benefits that are to be an engine not only for the London economy, but different in London, and are not available to people in across southern England and out as far away as Oxford, the rest of the country, no matter how disadvantaged which could benefit the western side, and Kent and they may be. It is important to get that point on record Essex as well. I am sure that your constituency would at the outset. Taxpayers all over the rest of the country—in benefit from it, Sir David. I hope that the Minister will Birmingham, Manchester, my Redditch constituency look at this again. and other places where the need is just as great—do not Sadly, the Government have been taking the Crossrail enjoy this special benefit. They will rightly ask, “Why project down to the wire, with the investment authority does London receive this?” dangerously close to running out of resources. The Mayor has put forward London’s case, but the Treasury Andy Slaughter: So much for levelling up. does not appear to have listened. Indeed, the Mayor had to fight tooth and nail for weeks against Government It is dispiriting to hear a Government Minister, Ministers who wished to impose punishing, damaging particularly when addressing a group of London MPs, conditions, as we have heard. I hope that the Government once again using divide-and-rule tactics, trying to set will stop playing politics with London during the pandemic other parts of the country against London. Will the and its aftermath, and that Ministers will think again Minister address the issues that have come up in this about their overall approach. debate and Members’ serious concerns about our constituents? I make three requests to the Minister—I hope that she will take them on board and bring them to the attention of her colleagues. First, the Government should Rachel Maclean: Of course I will address those concerns. recognise the importance of free travel to under-18s, I am about to do that, but I am highlighting the facts at particularly in supporting education and training, but the outset. also on a whole range of fronts—the social and family benefits are significant as well. Secondly, I hope that she Sarah Olney: Will the Minister give way? will concede that promoting the use of public transport in major cities can play a huge part in tackling environmental problems, as we heard earlier. Finally, as Rachel Maclean: With respect, I do not think I can we have all said before, I hope that she will urge her give way. I want to address the substantive points, but I colleagues to rethink their over-political approach to will be happy to talk to hon. Members on another some of these issues and work together for the benefit occasion. of London. My hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington highlighted in his opening speech the shocking 7.14 pm extent of the Mayor of London’sfinancial mismanagement of Transport for London. We all know that coronavirus The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport has cost £1.6 billion in lost fare revenue, but Mayor (Rachel Maclean): It is a great pleasure to serve under Sadiq Khan’s mismanagement of Transport for London’s your chairmanship, Sir David, and to respond to the finances has cost £9.56 billion in the round, and we debate. Before I get into the substance of the debate, I heard many examples from hon. Members during the want to echo the tributes that have been paid to Transport debate. for London workers who have kept services running We can all agree that the transport network is key in throughout the pandemic. I travel on the tube regularly, supporting a safe and sustainable recovery for London. so I have seen the great way in which they provide those That was why, on 31 October, the Government agreed a services. second extraordinary funding and financing package I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton with TfL for up to £1.7 billion, on top of the £1.6 billion and Wallington (Elliot Colburn) for introducing the funding package agreed with TfL in May. That is debate and all Members who have contributed. We proof of the Government’s commitment to supporting have heard contributions from the hon. Members for transport services in London while remaining fair to Hammersmith (Andy Slaughter), for Hornsey and Wood national taxpayers. 45WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 46WH

The May funding agreement with TfL contained a leading a taskforce. TfL has been given £4 million and a series of measures to manage demand and to facilitate further £2.3 million for immediate mitigation, and a lot safe travel, including a temporary suspension of free of detailed work is ongoing to sort the problem out. travel for under-18s. I stress that that was agreed by the Turning to TfL’s financial situation, the Government Government, the Mayor of London and the deputy did agree a second package that will provide financial mayor for transport. However, the suspension was not support until March 2021. The Government will make operationalised at the time. No one doubts the importance up the fare revenue that TfL has lost due to covid-19. of free travel. It was always the case that children The deal runs until 31 March, and the Government will eligible for free home-to-school travel would continue continue to monitor TfL’s financial health and work to receive it, with families on low incomes—those most closely with it to ensure that it continues to operate disadvantaged children—continuing to receive that free essential services and supports our recovery from the travel. It is right to say that the rationale was demand pandemic. management, as before the covid-19 crisis, around a I would also like to put on record the fact that the third of journeys were made by young people travelling Government are not forcing the Mayor of London to to school. raise council tax. If he does so, it will be his decision and his alone. The Department works closely with him Sarah Olney: Will the Minister give way? and constructive discussions are ongoing. Of course, I remind the Opposition that the Mayor of London is a Rachel Maclean: Very briefly, because I have several politician, but nevertheless there are constructive discussions points to make. going on, as we have seen from the deals that have been agreed, which benefit Londoners and the transport Sarah Olney: I pointed out in my speech that in network on which they rely. normal, pre-pandemic times, TfL raised about 80% of its own revenue. It was not primarily subsidised by As hon. Members have pointed out, the financial taxpayers, so it is not by and large taxpayers who pay package agreed itself recognises that the Mayor of for free travel for young Londoners—or, indeed, for London has not done enough to find savings. His elderly Londoners. financial management has not been good enough, and further efficiencies must be found. Opposition Members have highlighted the impact on young people, so I must Rachel Maclean: I remind the hon. Lady that central be clear: it is for the Mayor of London to explain to Government have agreed billions of pounds of support those young people why he has made the choices that for Transport for London. will have those devastating consequences that Members The initial reason for bringing in the suspension, or are setting out. The Government have stood behind discussing it, was because it was seen as necessary to Transport for London to the tune of £2.3 billion. I ensure that capacity was available on buses for those suggest it is now time for the Mayor of London to take who needed to use it, including some schoolchildren, responsibility and show genuine leadership, instead of given social distancing requirements. At this point, I seeking to lay all his problems at the door of central would like to refer to the Government’s commitment to Government. support cycling and walking, or active travel. People should walk and cycle wherever possible, and that is why the Government have made £2 billion available to 7.23 pm support it. According to TfL’s own statistics, the average Elliot Colburn: Thank you, Sir David, for giving me journey to school in London is less than 1 km, so it is quite a lot of time to sum up the debate. Hon. Members not unreasonable to suggest that some of those journeys will be happy to know that I do not intend to drag this could be made by active travel. out. As part of the latest £1.7 billion of extraordinary I will begin by thanking all right hon. and hon. funding agreed by the Government and TfL on 31 October, Members who have taken part in this Petitions Committee national taxpayers will continue to fund free travel debate. Petitions are proving to be a very effective way concessions to standard English levels, and free travel to for people to get in touch with and involved in the issues school for children who qualify under legislation. If the that matter most to them. I have led a couple of Petitions Mayor wishes to maintain concessions for Londoners Committee debates, and they are an excellent opportunity above the English level, he will raise the money to pay for us to put our constituents’ concerns on record. I for that. That represents a fair position for the whole thank everyone for turning out to support the petitioners country and brings London in line with the rest of today. England. I also thank the petitioners for giving us the opportunity, In agreeing the recent extraordinary funding and as the hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green financing package, the Mayor proposed that he could (Catherine West) said, to discuss something about London. pay for those concessions by retaining the central London It does not seem that we get an opportunity to do so congestion charge at its current level and increasing the very often. This has been a rare chance for London existing TfL element of the Greater London Authority’s MPs to get together to discuss issues relating to the council tax precept. He must make his final choice by capital, and I am grateful to the petitioners for giving January 2021. It is the Mayor who has decided what the that to us. increase to the congestion charge should be and what Wehave heard about the impact that scrapping under-18 the coverage is. concessions would have on people in our capital city Several hon. Members raised the question of and its effect on some of the most vulnerable in our Hammersmith bridge.They will know that my noble Friend various communities. We hope that the Mayor can Baroness Vere of Norbiton is working on that and show the leadership that we need from him, put aside 47WH Transport for London: Funding30 NOVEMBER 2020 Transport for London: Funding 48WH

[Elliot Colburn] Question put and agreed to. Resolved, his game-playing—the Minister and, indeed, my hon. That this House has considered e-petition 331453, relating to Friend the Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon) funding for Transport for London. described that well—and come forward to the Government with sensible suggestions by 11 January so that, when further discussions take place in March, we will not be 7.25 pm back here with the same complaints. Sitting adjourned. 1WS Written Statements 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Written Statements 2WS

These findings have made it clear that our current Written Statements market structure is no longer fit for purpose and that without Government intervention, it is highly likely Monday 30 November 2020 that the current market structure will persist. Therefore, it is essential that we take action to address this issue.Today’sstrategy will deliver lasting and meaningful change in the 5G supply chain and pave the way for a DIGITAL, CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT vibrant and dynamic market. A market where competition and innovation bring forward new, open deployment models; where our networks are flexible, made up of an Telecoms: 5G Diversification Strategy array of suppliers; and where all operators and suppliers adopt the security standards that will ensure that our networks are robust and resilient. The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and To realise this ambition, we need to strike a balance Sport (Oliver Dowden): I wish to inform the House between fundamentally shifting the market structure that the Government have today published their 5G towards our long-term vision and ensuring that we can diversification strategy, which sets out the Government’s also guarantee the reliability of supply to our networks approach to building a resilient, open and sustainable in the near term. 5G supply chain. We have therefore set out a balanced approach to Digital connectivity is now a core part of the diversification which will see targeted measures introduced everyday lives of millions of people across the UK. It is across three separate strands of activity; fundamentally changing the way we live, work and Supporting incumbent suppliers; spend time together. Attracting new suppliers into the UK market; and Throughout the covid-19 pandemic, connectivity has Accelerating open-interface solutions and deployment allowed us to stay in touch with family and friends, and The decision to commit to the removal of Huawei to stay plugged in while working remotely and access equipment from our 5G networks was the right decision the content and services we need. for the UK’s telecoms networks, for our national security With more and more activity happening online, ensuring and our economy—both now and in the long term. security in the networks which provide our connectivity However, it brings with it a resilience risk as we become is of paramount importance to this Government. more dependent on the remaining suppliers for our telecoms networks. This strategy means that we can Looking forward, we are now developing world-class mitigate that resilience risk as we approach the complete next generation technologies, such as 5G and full fibre, removal of Huawei from our 5G networks in 2027. which will promote greater connection, drive growth and provide us with the services of the future. But to However, this strategy is about more than that. It is fully realise the benefits of these technological advances, about implementing measures across these strands to we need to have confidence in the security and resilience facilitate a competitive, diverse and open supply market, of the infrastructure on which they are built. which will support economic growth and innovation as the UK adopts next-generation technologies. That is why we conducted the telecoms supply chain We recognise that there is a sharp need to work at review to look at the long-term security of our 5G and pace to make early progress on diversification. As a first full fibre networks. It is why in January we announced step towards delivering our long-term vision, the our decision to exclude high-risk vendors from the core Government have committed an initial investment of of the network, exclude high-risk vendors from sensitive up to £250 million, to kick off work to deliver our key sites, and limit their overall presence in the access priorities. network to 35%. It is also why we took the decision in July to set out a clear path to the complete removal of This will allow us to take forward specific measures Huawei equipment from our 5G network. as an absolute priority, such as the establishment of a world-class national telecoms lab, increasing UK influence Through the Telecommunications (Security) Bill, we in telecoms standards setting and beginning to dismantle have introduced legislation that will place these decisions the key barriers to diversification. on a statutory footing and set out a new, robust security framework for the UK telecoms sector. This will establish These measures will be partnered by immediate the UK as one of the toughest regimes in the world for steps we are taking to accelerate the development of telecoms security and resilience. open-interface solutions. The Government will be funding the NEC NeutORAN project as part of the wider 5G But looking to the future, there is more that we can testbeds and trials programme, which will showcase the do. The findings of the telecoms supply chain review latest innovations in the radio access network space. We highlighted the need for the Government to intervene in are also partnering with Ofcom and Digital Catapult to the market to create a more diverse and competitive fund the SmartRAN Open Network Innovation Centre supply chain in the longer term. (SONIC), an industry-facing testing facility for interoperable The review underscored the fact that a pronounced solutions. lack of supplier diversity has developed in the access Alongside this, the Government recognise that this is network supply chain. This lack of competition has a global issue which affects many of our international restricted choice in the sector and will continue to pose allies. As such, we will be seeking to lead a global a risk to the security and resilience of our networks if coalition like-minded partners to mount a co-ordinated not addressed. international approach to diversification. 3WS Written Statements 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Written Statements 4WS

These next phases of work will be led by the recently Therefore, this issue requires balancing of risk and established Telecoms Diversification Taskforce, an expert harms, including the health risks to children and staff panel chaired by Lord Ian Livingston. The taskforce from covid-19; impacts on community transmission; will be advising Government as we design and develop and the direct risks to children’s mental health, wellbeing, targeted measures across the three strands of our strategy. development and attainment from missing education. It will also support us in our work to look beyond 5G The chief medical officer has reinforced recently that and address diversity in the full fibre and wider telecoms the balance of risks is firmly in favour of keeping supply chain going forward. schools open. For the vast majority of children, the benefits of attending school far outweigh the low risk As the taskforce does so, the Government will be from coronavirus—covid-19— and schools can take working closely with players across the telecoms industry action to reduce risks further through the system of to explore opportunities to establish homegrown capability controls set out in our guidance. within the wider UK tech industry through R&D investment and fostering key skills. Covid-19 contingency framework for education and childcare settings This strategy presents a significant opportunity to position the UK as a growing power in telecoms and set The education and childcare settings tiers and the use the UK’s telecoms industry apart, by securing a position of rotas in schools was removed from the contain at the forefront of new, cutting-edge mobile technologies. framework and has been replaced by a stronger contingency By acting now, we are in a position to lead the global plan which continues to prioritise vulnerable children telecoms industry towards a more open, competitive and young people, children of critical workers, students and innovative standard—with UK companies setting in exam cohorts and children in childcare or primary an example across the sector. schools. Attachmentscanbeviewedonlineat:http://www.parliament. This framework is not directly linked to policy on uk/business/publications/written-questionsanswers- local tiers of restriction. This framework is designed to statements/written-statement/Commons/2020-11-30/ set out how restrictions should be implemented in education HCWS610/ . and childcare settings as a containment measure for the [HCWS610] rare circumstances in which they are required to address community transmission in any area. This guidance for local authorities, childcare and education settings—excluding higher education—was EDUCATION published on 27 November and covers contingency plans for: early years and primary schools; secondary schools; further education colleges, alternative provision Covid-19 Contingency Framework and Workforce Fund and special schools. As part of their contingency planning, settings should consider how they would operate in the event that these The Secretary of State for Education (Gavin Williamson): restrictions become necessary in their local area, including The Prime Minister has announced the exit from national how they would ensure that every child, pupil or student restrictions on 2 December and set out our return to a receives the quantity and quality of education and care regional tiered approach. The strengthened tiering approach to which they are normally entitled. takes into account advice from Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) and should prevent the need Any restrictions on education should only be as a last to introduce stricter national measures and allow for resort and should only be instituted on the recommendation education and childcare settings to remain open across of central Government. The Government will do everything all tiers. possible to avoid triggering those contingency measures at any stage. On 13 November, SAGE published papers relating to the latest evidence of incidence and transmission of An educational or childcare setting should not move coronavirus—covid-19—in schools. The science is clear to implement restrictive measures of the kind set out in that children and young people are typically at very low the contingency framework without the explicit agreement risk from coronavirus—covid-19. The disease is much of the DfE. DfE will work with other Government less severe for children, even if they do catch coronavirus— Departments,the chief medical officer,the Joint Biosecurity covid-19. Centre (JBC), Public Health England (PHE) and relevant local authorities to ensure the decision is informed by The SAGE papers provide clear evidence regarding the available evidence and viewed in conjunction with the risks from pupils not being in school. The documents the wider local interventions in place and under are clear that school closures put educational outcomes consideration. at risk, especially for disadvantaged students. Transmission Covid-19 workforce fund to and from children and young people can occur in household, community and educational settings. SAGE Keeping education settings open remains a national also noted that that there are significant educational, priority. We recognise that schools and colleges have developmental and mental health harms from schools faced significant challenges during the pandemic as being closed, particularly for younger children, and they have sought to maintain high-quality education for vulnerable children where learning at home is likely to their pupils and students. Tosupport schools and colleges reinforce inequalities—with high confidence. This impact with these ongoing challenges, we have announced a can affect both current levels of education and children’s new covid-19 workforce fund targeted at those with the future ability to learn. highest staff absences that are also facing significant 5WS Written Statements 30 NOVEMBER 2020 Written Statements 6WS financial pressures. This will help schools and colleges Wehave been working closely with senior representatives to meet the cost of absences experienced during the from the retail sector, local authorities, the Department period from the beginning of November until the end of for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and Public this term, where they meet specific criteria relating to Health England to plan for a safe and successful reopening their absence rates and finances: of non-essential retail on 2 December. To ensure the reopening of shops is safe and in line with social distancing Mainstream schools and colleges must be experiencing a short-term teacher absence rate at or above 20%, and or rules given the high volume of shoppers expected before a lower long-term—15 days or more—teacher absence rate Christmas and the subsequent sales in January, the at or above 10%—costs can only be claimed for the costs Government want to see retailers given the option to incurred above this rate. extend their daily opening hours from Monday to Saturday. Special schools and alternative provision schools must be This will help to spread footfall, ease transport pressures experiencing a short-term teacher absence rate at or above and make shopping in a socially distanced way easier by 15%, and or a lower long-term—15 days or more— teacher giving shoppers greater flexibility to choose when they absence rate at or above 10%, to be eligible—costs can only shop and avoid peak times. be claimed for the costs incurred above this rate. Restrictions on shop opening hours on weekday and Claims for support staff absences will be on an exceptional Saturdays were removed by section 23 of the Deregulation only basis, where necessary in keeping schools and colleges open. In special schools and alternative provision, there will and Contracting Out Act 1994. However, many retailers be greater flexibility for claims for these staff. are subject to local controls through planning conditions Before claiming support, schools will first need to use any which restrict opening times, particularly in the early existing financial reserves, as we would typically expect when morning, evening and at night, to make the development facing unforeseen costs. They will be eligible for this additional acceptable to local residents who might otherwise suffer funding once they have used these reserves down to a level at from noise and other local amenity issues. 4% of their annual income. For colleges, eligibility will be Given the exceptional circumstances as a result of the based on their cash position set out in the November financial return. coronavirus, the purpose of this written ministerial statement, which comes into effect from 2 December, is This fund comes on top of our funding for schools to make clear that, as a matter of urgency, local planning facing exceptional costs during the summer months, the authorities should take a positive approach to their £1 billion covid-19 catch up fund to help all children engagement with retailers to ensure planning controls make up for lost education, as well as the core funding are not a barrier to the temporary extension of retail that all schools and colleges continue to receive, and the opening times in December and January. core school funding that is seeing the biggest increase in a decade. The Department for Education will publish In particular, local planning authorities, having regard detailed guidance, including conditions for eligibility, to their legal obligations, should not seek to undertake shortly. planning enforcement action which would result in the unnecessary restriction of retail hours during this period. [HCWS611] The national planning policy framework already emphasises that planning enforcement is a discretionary activity, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control. HOUSING, COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL Where appropriate, local planning authorities should GOVERNMENT also highlight this temporary relaxation to retailers in their area so that they can take advantage of longer opening hours if they wish to do so. Retail Opening Hours: Christmas and Covid-19 The Government recognise that longer retail opening hours could have a temporary impact on local residents, but this needs to be balanced by the significant public The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and interest in ensuring there is a safe retail environment Local Government (Robert Jenrick): I wish to update the during this busy period; in helping local residents undertake House on relaxing local restrictions to enable retail Christmas shopping given many shops have been closed opening hours to be extended in England for Christmas. over the last month; and in supporting the commercial On Monday 23 November, the Government published viability of local shops in England’s high streets and their covid-19 winter plan which will see the return to a town centres during this challenging period. regional tier approach to restrictions in England from This written ministerial statement also confirms that 2 December. In all tiers, shops will be allowed to reopen, my previous statement to the House of 13 March 2020 giving people the opportunity to shop for gifts for about planning enforcement and the delivery of food family and friends in the run up to Christmas. The and other essential goods to retailers during the coronavirus Government recognise the efforts and investment that pandemic will remain in place until 31 March 2021 retailers have made to ensure their premises are covid-secure; because continued flexibility is necessary to ensure access this has been reflected by the fact that the best available to food and essential goods in light of ongoing impacts Public Health England and NHS Track and Trace data of coronavirus. The statement made on 13 March 2020 shows there is at present no evidence of significant is withdrawn with effect from the beginning of 1 April increased risk of virus transmission in retail premises. 2021, unless circumstances justify its further extension, Government asked non-essential retailers to close as part in which case a further statement would be made to the of wider restrictions to limit social mixing in November, House. once those restrictions have been lifted consumers and [HCWS609] retail staff can have confidence to return to our high streets.

1MC Ministerial Corrections30 NOVEMBER 2020 Ministerial Corrections 2MC

taxpayers’ money on those who need it. With only Ministerial Correction 11% of users unemployed, Unionlearn simply is not the solution. Monday 30 November 2020 [Official Report, 23 November 2020, Vol. 684, c. 592.] Letter of correction from the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Chichester (Gillian Keegan). EDUCATION An error has been identified in the response I gave to the hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins). Union Learning Fund The correct response should have been: The following is an extract from Education questions Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab): The recent on 23 November 2020. Westminster Hall debate on Unionlearn was as illuminating for what was not said as for what was. There was no Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab): The recent attempt by the Government to pretend that there had Westminster Hall debate on Unionlearn was as illuminating been a serious consultation with employers or educators for what was not said as for what was. There was no before ceasing funding, nor was there a single Conservative attempt by the Government to pretend that there had Back-Bench MP willing to turn up to that debate to been a serious consultation with employers or educators speak in favour of this cut. Does the Minister realise before ceasing funding, nor was there a single Conservative that no one will believe that the Government are serious Back-Bench MP willing to turn up to that debate to about levelling up while they are cutting access to level 2 speak in favour of this cut. Does the Minister realise skills for the lowest paid workers? that no one will believe that the Government are serious about levelling up while they are cutting access to level 2 Gillian Keegan: This Government are committed to skills for the lowest paid workers? substantial investment in further education, with priority given to qualifications aligned with our economic need, Gillian Keegan: This Government are committed to but, as I said during that debate, we need to focus substantial investment in further education, with priority taxpayers’ money on those who need it. With only given to qualifications aligned with our economic need, 2% of users unemployed, Unionlearn simply is not the but, as I said during that debate, we need to focus solution.

ORAL ANSWERS

Monday 30 November 2020

Col. No. Col. No. WORK AND PENSIONS...... 1 WORK AND PENSIONS—continued Access to Work Scheme ...... 14 Statutory Sick Pay: Covid-19 ...... 10 Benefit Cap: Families with Children ...... 1 Topical Questions ...... 17 Employment: Young People...... 12 Unemployment: Covid-19...... 15 Housing Benefit: Supported Exempt Unemployment Trends...... 16 Accommodation ...... 3 Universal Credit and Working Tax Credit Kickstart Scheme: Business Participation ...... 3 Reductions...... 16 Plan for Jobs 2020...... 14 Universal Credit Claimants: Covid-19 Support...... 11 Self-Employed Universal Credit Claimants: Vulnerable Families: Winter Support ...... 6 Covid-19 ...... 13 Work Coaches: Recruitment ...... 12 Spending Review 2020...... 7 WRITTEN STATEMENTS

Monday 30 November 2020

Col. No. Col. No. DIGITAL, CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT...... 1WS HOUSING, COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL Telecoms: 5G Diversification Strategy ...... 1WS GOVERNMENT...... 5WS Retail Opening Hours: Christmas and Covid-19.... 5WS EDUCATION...... 3WS Covid-19 Contingency Framework and Workforce Fund ...... 3WS MINISTERIAL CORRECTION

Monday 30 November 2020

Col. No. EDUCATION...... 1MC Union Learning Fund...... 1MC No proofs can be supplied. Corrections that Members suggest for the Bound Volume should be clearly marked on a copy of the daily Hansard - not telephoned - and must be received in the Editor’s Room, House of Commons,

not later than Monday 7 December 2020

STRICT ADHERENCE TO THIS ARRANGEMENT GREATLY FACILITATES THE PROMPT PUBLICATION OF BOUND VOLUMES

Members may obtain excerpts of their speeches from the Official Report (within one month from the date of publication), by applying to the Editor of the Official Report, House of Commons. Volume 685 Monday No. 143 30 November 2020

CONTENTS

Monday 30 November 2020

List of Government and Principal Officers of the House

Oral Answers to Questions [Col. 1] [see index inside back page] Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Scheduled Mass Deportation: Jamaica [Col. 23] Answer to urgent question—(Chris Philp)

Agricultural Transition Plan [Col. 38] Statement—(George Eustice)

Patrick Finucane: Supreme Court Judgment [Col. 54] Statement—(Brandon Lewis)

Telecommunications (Security) Bill [Col. 70] Motion for Second Reading—(Oliver Dowden)—agreed to

Statutory Paid Bereavement Leave: Loss of Family Member [Col. 127] Debate on motion for Adjournment

Westminster Hall Deaths in Mental Health Care [Col. 1WH] Transport for London: Funding [Col. 24WH] e-petition debates

Written Statements [Col. 1WS]

Ministerial Correction [Col. 1MC]

Written Answers to Questions [The written answers can now be found at http://www.parliament.uk/writtenanswers]