Alison Seabeck

MP for Plymouth, Devonport

What's Happening at Westminster?

For full details of debates and questions visit www. Theyworkforyou.com

 

 

Defence Debate October 15th 2009

Alison Seabeck, the member for Plymouth Devonport, told the Commons that the vessels must be built, and should be central to the UK's defence plans.
The project was essential to the Devonport workforce and to maintaining vital skills in the industry, she said. Once lost, such expertise would be impossible to get back, with implications for the UK being able to produce its own defence equipment.
Ms Seabeck also secured a commitment from Defence Minister Bill Rammell that a decision on moving Royal Marine landing craft units from Turnchapel and Poole in Dorset to Devonport Naval Base, creating 'a centre of amphibious excellence', would not be delayed by the planned far- reaching defence review.
The move would further bolster the city's position as the indisputable home of the elite fighting force.
She also warned that initial options set out in a defence Green Paper expected early next year, ahead of a full review, must not 'undermine confidence or the motivation' of military personnel or the defence industry.
A document that 'had the effect of demoralising them would not be helpful,' she added.
Continuing uncertainty over the aircraft carriers was heightened after Shadow Chancellor George Osborne admitted the Tories would examine the 'break clauses' in contracts for the vessels if they took power next year, casting doubt on the project's future.
Speaking in a parliamentary debate on defence policy, Ms Seabeck insisted the carriers should be central to future military plans.
"We must stop the speculation," she said. "The build has started and we need to go ahead so that at least two carriers are finally built.
"They are vital as a delivery platform for almost any type of expeditionary warfare.
"The continuation of the build programme is also, of course, essential for the workforce in my constituency because of the skills that we in Devonport are able to offer both to support directly the work in Scotland and to tackle the overflow work that will come down from Rosyth once Babcock moves into the main build phase.
"The maintenance of the skills base across this part of the defence industry is something that, by broad agreement, must be maintained if we are to be able to produce and service our defence equipment within the UK," she said.
In a sideswipe at the Conservative Party, Ms Seabeck went on: "There are those who would suggest that we could buy cheaper off the peg from overseas, but doing so regularly would lead to the loss of the skills that we might need in future, more unsettled times when we may not want to rely on foreign companies.
"At a time when we are rebalancing our economy, we would be ill-advised to pursue a defence policy that undermined a highly skilled and very successful sector of our economy.
"Once lost, those skills will be almost impossible to get back, and any Government must seriously consider the implications of that scenario."
Ms Seabeck also sought confirmation of the move to create a 'centre of excellence' for amphibious warfare at Devonport, which she said made 'enormously good sense.'
Responding, Mr Rammell said: "Let me make it clear that the project timescales have not been delayed to wait for a strategic defence review, although of course the SDR will have to consider all defence issues. I hope that gives her some reassurance."
During the debate, Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth did say: "It is our intention to continue with the two aircraft carriers."

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/?keyword=hansard to read the full defence debate speech
 

 

Summer Adjournment Debate July 2009

There are several issues of importance to Plymouth that I could mention today, including how we could speed up the connectivity of broadband; how we respond to the Walker review of water supplies, in view of the high water costs in the south-west region, and how some fairness could be brought into the charging system; or the need for further investment in transport, given our peripherality. However, in the past few weeks, one issue has been raised with me frequently by telephone and letter, and that is the problems with leasehold managing agents.
In 2006-07, according to the English housing survey, more than 1.5 million households were owned leasehold, so about 11 per cent. of the total owner-occupied sector could be subject to management by a managing agent. Most leaseholders lead a problem-free existence and are happy with the way in which their properties are managed and their relationship with their freeholder. However, for a significant minority, this is not the case and most MPs will know from their casework in both the private rented and residential leasehold sector that people's lives can be made a misery.
Typically, where a block of properties is owned leasehold, the freeholder appoints a managing agent to maintain the property, arrange building insurance and look after any communal areas. These managing agents will levy fees on the leaseholders for the provision of these services and should explain these charges—but that does not always happen, as I will explain later.
The managing agent sector is a multi-million pound industry, and one which is at the moment entirely without objective and independent scrutiny and regulation. In the last two months alone, I have had complaints about four separate managing agents. Many of the concerns raised have a common theme, and interestingly many of the properties affected in Plymouth are part of the portfolio that was sold off by the Ministry of Defence. The complex web of sales has been part of the problem for residential leaseholders, who have had difficulty tracking down their landlord and then the managing agent responsible for ensuring that works are carried out.
For example, a company called Novograde bought a tranche of ex-MOD properties from Annington Homes in Barne Barton. Novograde employed a company called Labyrinth Properties Ltd to manage that property. The Shorepoint residents came to me because they were receiving bills from Labyrinth for work which they claimed had never been carried out, and when they tried to contact the managing agent seeking the details of the maintenance being done, nothing was forthcoming. I tried to make contact with Novograde to see if it would put pressure on its agents. I also contacted a company called Galliard Homes whose name cropped up, but whose role was unclear. I contacted Labyrinth, to try to get them to talk to the residents. Sadly, none had the decency to respond to my request for a meeting.
Some progress now appears to have been made. Labyrinth has lost its contract to a company called TMS, and TMS has already been in touch with me and seems to be moving in a more positive direction. It has acknowledged that the area has been poorly managed and that the residents have not had the information to which they were entitled. Clearly the jury is still out, but I have encouraged TMS to engage with the residents and vice versa.
In the case of the Shorepoint properties, one issue of concern was the common areas, including play areas, which were neglected and potentially a health hazard. The problem was that no one was taking responsibility for those areas. Residents are often, and understandably, concerned with their own individual properties and simply expect the private landlord to ensure that the grounds are maintained, as their contracts provide. Common area maintenance is not initially residents' first priority. However, when the exterior becomes overgrown and when residents are being charged for maintenance and nothing is being done, they get more than a little irritated. Some managing agents and freeholders will try to delay action and dispute land ownership to avoid paying out for remedial action. This of course often then puts pressure on the local authority—and the council tax payer—when it has to be called in to inspect areas and serve notices, if appropriate, on the landlord.
Leaseholders are often invoiced for works outside the legal timeframe, and invoices are sent out incorrectly—either too soon or with the urgency of a final demand without prior warning. In Vicarage gardens, St. Budeaux, there is now an active group of residents—lovely people—who are in some cases very frightened because they have received court summons and final demands for sums that they believe they have been incorrectly charged. Pier Management, which oversees these properties, again proved elusive until very recently. It has at last responded to letters I sent on behalf of a resident—an elderly woman—who had been sent a court summons for moneys which, when broken down, she had either paid or were in fact not due for some time. The lady in question has at least been reimbursed and I now understand that progress is being made with other residents.
However, some questions remain unanswered. The residents have not been allowed to see the insurance cover which exists for their buildings. These are a series of mainly maisonettes which have four properties in them and which are wholly free-standing. The residents want to know why they cannot organise their own buildings insurance. The managing agents simply say that all the properties should be insured as a single portfolio. I would welcome the Minister's confirmation that that is in fact the case, and if it is, the issue should be revisited.
In another part of my patch, a company called Solitaire is the managing agent; again, until very recently and following my involvement, its unwillingness to speak to or meet residents has led to a serious breakdown in relations. It has now met residents, and its regional director has taken away their concerns. The residents produced figures showing that the percentage increase in charges was astronomical with no obvious improvement in the service offered. They quite rightly felt that this was unacceptable. I am pleased to say that yet again there has been some progress. Errors have been found in the company's budget figures that make a considerable improvement in the charges levied.
Why is it acceptable for these companies not to provide the service for which leaseholders pay not inconsiderable sums annually? They should not have to engage the support of the local MP. Leaseholders should be able to access their landlord and know where to contact them. The same applies to private tenants, and I am pleased that the Government appear to be making progress towards changes in this regard.
I am not condemning all leasehold managing agents. The professional association is keen to see the sector cleaned up. Finally, I ask Ministers to give serious consideration to any legislative change to the practices of letting and managing agents of residential leasehold properties, because many companies offer both services and the abuses are the same.

 

Reforming financial markets 8th July 2009

Mr Speaker, with permission, I would like to make a statement on the Government’s proposals for reforming financial markets.

The world economy has been hit by a severe financial crisis, resulting in the worst economic downturn for well over 60 years.
Its origins lie in failures in the banking system around the world.
Financial institutions in many countries took on too much risk. They became over-reliant on wholesale funding, too exposed to particular products. And irresponsible pay practices made banks take unnecessary risks.
It is also clear that some financial institutions had little appreciation of what was going on inside their businesses.
But regulators and governments too must learn from the events of the last two years – better understanding the risks that come from rapid globalisation in the financial system.
Mr Speaker, our economy has a clear need for well managed, well functioning banks and financial institutions – to perform a vital set of functions – channelling investment and helping people save and plan for the future.
The financial services industry is also a major employer, of over one million people, and will continue to generate wealth for our country.
Our central objective must be to ensure that – as we come through the downturn – we reform and strengthen our financial system and rebuild it for the future.
With consumers that are better informed, financial institutions that are better managed, and markets that are better regulated.
The proposals I will set out today build on our previous reforms to provide a new settlement that –

• Is open, competitive and effective – able to meet the needs of business and families;

• Inspires trust and confidence on the part of businesses and consumers;

• Ensures robust regulation that reduces the likelihood of failures, without preventing innovation;

• And provides effective mechanisms for dealing with the failure of financial institutions if they do occur.

Mr Speaker, I want to take steps to help consumers make better informed choices.
To ensure they are given access to free impartial financial advice, we will legislate to introduce a national money guidance service and impose a levy on the financial sector to help fund it.
We will also legislate to consolidate existing FSA resources to provide separate independent consumer education, setting up a lead provider of consumer information and personal finance education.
Consumers will also get more protection, along with greater right of redress and access to compensation if things go wrong.
We will also improve arrangements for depositor protection, including legislation to pre-fund and expand the role of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme.
Mr Speaker, because of the events of the last two years, there are currently fewer firms in the market providing financial services.

It is essential we retain competitive markets – as they play a key role in providing consumers with value and choice.
 We want to see greater competition and greater choice for consumers – as well as a bigger role for mutuals and building societies.
So the OFT and the FSA will ensure that we maintain competition in the market for financial services – as we come out of this downturn we need to promote a competitive market than enables new entrants, which may include non-banking institutions, and innovation to benefit consumers and businesses.
This way, we will see better informed consumers, who have greater choices, in a more competitive market.
Mr Speaker, we also need banks and financial institutions that are better managed.
We need a change of culture in the banks and their boardrooms, with pay practices that are focused on long-term stability and not short-term profit.
The FSA now has powers to penalise banks if their pay policies create unnecessary risk, and are not focused on the long-term strength of their institutions.
And from now on, I will require the FSA to report, every year, on how financial institutions are complying with their new Code of Practice for remuneration, and how they will deal with firms that don’t comply.
Bank boards and institutional investors must also become better equipped to do the job and understand their businesses, with more effective risk management and greater independence of non-executives – who must not be afraid to ask searching questions.
And next week Sir David Walker will report on measures that will deliver improved corporate governance at financial institutions – ahead of his final report in the autumn.
Mr Speaker, building on reforms already made, my proposals today will strengthen regulation of the financial system.
They will cover three areas:

• First, new regulatory powers, to allow tougher regulation of individual firms;

• Second, measures to deal with the potential failure of institutions that could have a significant impact on the economy;

• Third, a strengthened framework for financial stability, to deal with system-wide risks in today’s more complex and global markets.

We will continue to work with other countries to deal with what is, at heart, a global problem.
Mr Speaker, I asked Lord Turner to make recommendations, which the FSA are now implementing, to strengthen the regulatory regime and increase the intensity of supervision. They will:

• Strengthen rules to ensure banks hold enough capital as a buffer against losses;

• Introduce a backstop power ensuring banks do not overextend themselves, lending too much when they don’t have the strength to do so;

• And increase the focus on bank liquidity, so they are able to carry out their business at all times.

These measures will help ensure financial firms that are stronger, more resilient, and better able to serve the needs of our economy.
I will also introduce legislation in the autumn, to give the FSA a new statutory objective for financial stability, and extend their powers to ensure they:

• Have the appropriate rules to deal with different risks in individual banks;

• Have tougher powers and penalties against misconduct;

• And take account of new developments in the financial sector – including expanding regulation where necessary – for example systemically important hedge funds.

Mr Speaker, we need to ensure our resolution regime can deal with financial institutions of all sizes, including banks that are very large or complex.
Because these banks are often global, we also need an international mechanism for resolving large multinational banks – and we will be bringing forward proposals to the G20 finance ministers when they meet in London in the autumn.

We want to see greater competition and greater choice for consumers – as well as a bigger role for mutuals and building societies.
So the OFT and the FSA will ensure that we maintain competition in the market for financial services – as we come out of this downturn we need to promote a competitive market than enables new entrants, which may include non-banking institutions, and innovation to benefit consumers and businesses.
This way, we will see better informed consumers, who have greater choices, in a more competitive market.
Mr Speaker, we also need banks and financial institutions that are better managed.
We need a change of culture in the banks and their boardrooms, with pay practices that are focused on long-term stability and not short-term profit.
The FSA now has powers to penalise banks if their pay policies create unnecessary risk, and are not focused on the long-term strength of their institutions.
And from now on, I will require the FSA to report, every year, on how financial institutions are complying with their new Code of Practice for remuneration, and how they will deal with firms that don’t comply.
Bank boards and institutional investors must also become better equipped to do the job and understand their businesses, with more effective risk management and greater independence of non-executives – who must not be afraid to ask searching questions.
And next week Sir David Walker will report on measures that will deliver improved corporate governance at financial institutions – ahead of his final report in the autumn.
Mr Speaker, building on reforms already made, my proposals today will strengthen regulation of the financial system.
They will cover three areas:

• First, new regulatory powers, to allow tougher regulation of individual firms;

• Second, measures to deal with the potential failure of institutions that could have a significant impact on the economy;

• Third, a strengthened framework for financial stability, to deal with system-wide risks in today’s more complex and global markets.

We will continue to work with other countries to deal with what is, at heart, a global problem.
Mr Speaker, I asked Lord Turner to make recommendations, which the FSA are now implementing, to strengthen the regulatory regime and increase the intensity of supervision. They will:

• Strengthen rules to ensure banks hold enough capital as a buffer against losses;

• Introduce a backstop power ensuring banks do not overextend themselves, lending too much when they don’t have the strength to do so;

• And increase the focus on bank liquidity, so they are able to carry out their business at all times.

These measures will help ensure financial firms that are stronger, more resilient, and better able to serve the needs of our economy.
I will also introduce legislation in the autumn, to give the FSA a new statutory objective for financial stability, and extend their powers to ensure they:

• Have the appropriate rules to deal with different risks in individual banks;

• Have tougher powers and penalties against misconduct;

• And take account of new developments in the financial sector – including expanding regulation where necessary – for example systemically important hedge funds.

Mr Speaker, we need to ensure our resolution regime can deal with financial institutions of all sizes, including banks that are very large or complex.
Because these banks are often global, we also need an international mechanism for resolving large multinational banks – and we will be bringing forward proposals to the G20 finance ministers when they meet in London in the autumn.
At home, we can better deal with these risks by ensuring safeguards are in place – for example by making banks hold capital at a higher level that reflects not only the possibility, but also the cost of failure.
By introducing higher standards and transparency, the FSA can also improve the functioning of key markets, such as the derivatives market – so that problems in one institution are less likely to spread through the entire system.
And the FSA and the Bank of England will make institutions put in place practical resolution plans which can be deployed in the event they get into difficulties.
There is, of course, a debate about whether governments should restrict the size of banks or separate different types of banking – as happened in the US in the 1930s.
I believe this is a simplistic solution, and fails to take into account the complexity of today’s financial system.
It is not only large banks, but small ones too, that can threaten financial stability – as in the case of Northern Rock.
Equally, both retail and investment banks, in different parts of the world, have failed in the past year.
And it is not only banks that can affect stability – as we saw with the American insurance company AIG.
In addition, the approach of having one regulator for one category of institution, deemed to be systemically important, and another regulator for the rest, misses the point.
What is systemically important can change rapidly, as we have seen in the last two years.
Rather the regulatory system has to recognise and respond to the complexities of individual institutions – and that is what we are doing.
Mr Speaker, we also need to strengthen the framework for financial stability.
This is not only a question of institutional powers and responsibilities, but also a question of better understanding of what is happening in the markets.
There are no simple fixes, no single institutional reform that could have prevented these problems occurring.
There are different institutional frameworks in countries across the world – but no one model has been successful in insulating a country from the current crisis.
Although regulatory arrangements were not the cause of the current problems, we do need the right institutions to maintain financial stability and also ensure they have the right tools to do the job.
The move here to a single regulator twelve years ago addressed problems with the previous regime of multiple self-regulators, which did not reflect the changing nature of financial markets – and has been adopted by many other countries.
Ten years on and the world has moved on again. Some of the global problems of the past two years went beyond the scope of existing regulation. Others were simply not given sufficient attention by regulators and central banks.
Here the authorities have been able, over the past year, to deal quickly and effectively with a number of financial stability issues – such as Dunfermline and Bradford & Bingley.
But further reform is now needed. So we will legislate to set up a new Council for Financial Stability – which will bring together the Bank of England, the FSA and the Treasury.
This will not just to deal with immediate issues, but also monitor system-wide financial stability and respond to long-term risks as they emerge. This needs to be done on a formal statutory basis.
The Council will draw on the expertise of the FSA and the Bank, who are and will remain independent of Government, by looking at their regular reports – the Financial Stability Report and Financial Risk Outlook – and formally responding to their recommendations.
That way when risks or threats to stability are identified they will be addressed.
It will do this in way that is transparent and accountable – so people can see how and why decisions are made – with regular publication of minutes.
And the Council’s responsibilities will be set out in law, with published terms of reference.
And, in discussion with the Treasury Select Committee and the House, we will consider how to increase accountability through greater Parliamentary scrutiny.
Mr Speaker, we have already taken significant steps to improve the way we monitor and manage risks to the financial system as a whole, for example through more systematic use of stress testing of financial institutions.
And my proposals today will further strengthen our ability to identify and deal with systemic risks, and ensure the authorities can be held to account for their actions.
We also need to consider what further counter-cyclical measures are needed, to allow us to lean against the credit cycle and prevent the build-up of risks that could threaten the stability of the financial system.
The principle of leaning against the cycle is easy to agree. Deciding what action to take, and when, is far more complex.
At the moment there is no clear consensus here or abroad. But I believe that central banks will have an important role to play in this area.
Today’s global market for finance means that new measures can only be effective if implemented on a broad international basis.
So under our presidency of the G20, we will continue to press for measures to strengthen the international regulatory architecture, building on the proposals agreed in April.
And in Europe, too, we will argue for enhanced monitoring of system-wide risks, while retaining the crucial link between national regulators and governments.
By working internationally, our efforts can help us deliver more effective supervision of global banks, stronger international standards, and a more responsible global financial services sector.
Mr Speaker, we intervened to stabilise the banking system, while retaining a clear view that banks are best managed and owned commercially and not by the Government.
We intend to return our stakes in the banks to the private sector, in a way that brings best value to the taxpayer, promotes competition, and maintains stability – and using the proceeds to cut government debt.
Mr Speaker, we are empowering consumers, supporting better corporate governance, and strengthening regulation.
So our financial sector can continue to be engine of prosperity.
And I commend this statement to the House.
 

Westminster Hall Debate on the Future of Regional Aviation
17th June 2009

Alison Seabeck (Plymouth, Devonport) (Lab): It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship for the first time, Mr. Streeter. I also welcome my right hon. Friend the Minister to his new post.
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Sedgefield (Phil Wilson) on securing the debate on an issue of broad interest. As he made clear in his opening remarks, the issue has influence locally, regionally, nationally and internationally. The south-west regional Select Committee, of which I am Chairman, will carry out an inquiry into transport across the region, which will undoubtedly encompass the role of regional airports.
I have a regional airport in my constituency, and I am therefore aware of the concerns expressed by local residents about the use of the airport and the environmental consequences of air travel. I am also aware of the wide support that the airport received, both from constituents and local businesses. I shall endeavour to express a wide range of views from Plymouth without in any way pre-empting the future investigation of the regional Select Committee, which will hopefully happen in about a month’s time.
I shall begin by talking about the issues that directly affect Plymouth before looking at the wider south-west. From Plymouth’s perspective, air services are generally viewed as fundamentally important to the social and economic strength of our city. That view was clearly expressed by my hon. Friend the Member for Sedgefield in relation to his area. The airport is a key element of the city’s growth agenda, and its continued existence and future growth has been factored into assumptions made about our local economy. It provides—as do all regional airports—vital connections into London.

17 Jun 2009 : Column 78WH
Air Southwest is the sole airline operating from Plymouth, and it has slots at Gatwick and, most recently, at London City airport, as well as a range of connections to other major cities. However, it no longer has access to Heathrow. There are concerns across the sector that the trend of regional operators losing access to Heathrow could have a detrimental impact on regional economies, some of which are very fragile at the moment. Such concerns are not new. Indeed, as long ago as 1998, the then Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee concluded that because runway capacity in the south-east was in short supply, pressure would be put on regional airports.
I do not want to revisit the arguments for and against the third runway at Heathrow, but the evidence suggests that, without additional capacity in London, economic growth in the regions could be damaged. Offering Amsterdam Schiphol or Charles de Gaulle as an alternative does not work, because of the enhanced range of destinations offered by Heathrow and across London. Serious consideration needs to be given—again, my hon. Friend made this point—to the need to protect regional links into Heathrow as part of any future plans for a third runway and in relation to general capacity issues. As suggested, there could also be a role for the regulator.
To preclude—indeed, to discourage—regional airlines from having access to Heathrow by making the slots extortionately expensive will not help the UK economy, and it certainly will not help the south-west. Despite the environmental concerns, air travel in the south-west is predicted to continue to grow. In a region where the strategic road and rail networks have historically been underfunded and have inadequacies, air travel, whether it involves Bristol, Exeter, Plymouth or Newquay, is essential.
David Taylor: Is it not the case that, economically and environmentally, a far better alternative to having more slots at Heathrow for regional airports is high-speed, affordable and convenient trains, particularly for cities and regions that are within, for example, 500 km of Heathrow? That would encompass the vast bulk of the population of England. Is that not the way forward, rather than having more slots at Heathrow?
Alison Seabeck: I hear what my hon. Friend is saying, but he clearly does not know the south-west very well. Frankly, the idea of our getting a high-speed rail link all the way down to Cornwall is simply not a runner in the medium term. We may get it as far as Exeter or Bristol, but that does not work for Plymouth or Cornwall. We desperately need those regional air links. Cornwall is, of course, an objective 1 area and is one of the poorest regions in the country. Without regional air links, I am afraid that businesses will not come to the far south-west. I understand the environmental arguments, but this is a very difficult issue for our region.
As I have said, road and rail are alternatives, but those in the business community who want to conduct business in London do not have five hours to spare to travel there either by car or train. It takes me five hours door-to-door to get to London. A high-speed rail link would be fabulous, but in the short and medium term that is not going to happen. I want businesses to feel
17 Jun 2009 : Column 79WH
that they can commute to Plymouth or London for business in a day, without having to rush or be utterly exhausted.
Proposals for a runway extension at Plymouth would allow slightly larger planes to use the airport. That has some very strong support across the city and already much of the land required has been safeguarded. However, I suspect that that proposal is, again, unlikely to go ahead, because the costs run into tens of millions and the pressure on the major funders is likely to make it impossible. Genuine concerns would be raised both by organisations representing residents who live close to the airport—such as the Derriford and Birdcage residents association—and, of course, environmental groups. However, for the reasons that we have heard, regional flying could be less harmful to the environment than mainstream aviation. I am advised that the Dash 8 aircraft currently flying in and out of Plymouth has fuel consumption equivalent to 70 miles per gallon per passenger. Many of those who use that aircraft would otherwise use a car.
Why do we need a vibrant regional airport? Plymouth is one of the drivers of the sub-regional economy and, as I have said, it borders on an objective 1 area. We have unemployment well above the regional level—the most recent figures put it at 5.8 per cent. That is set against the city’s growth agenda, which still has a target of increasing our population by 30,000 in the next 10 to 20 years, as well as increasing employment. To support that growth, there is a determination to encourage inward investment. We have established a city development company which is supported by the regional development agency, and the city council has good links to other local business organisations.
The regional development agency’s strategy in the area is for there to be a developing role for most of the region’s airports, namely Newquay, Plymouth, Bournemouth, Exeter, Staverton airport in Gloucestershire —a much smaller airport—and Bristol. The priority is to address the issue of peripherality, which is why regional airports are so important. The regional development agency also understands the importance of protecting routes into Heathrow and Gatwick by the use of public service orders. Plymouth city council has actively been pursuing the option of trying to get a public service order for Plymouth linking into Heathrow, but, so far, it has failed. My hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton (Linda Gilroy) and I have written to Ministers, and I know that the hon. Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter), who is in the Chair today, has also tried to raise the issue through parliamentary questions and other means. We would very much like to have our route protected in that way.
Mr. Carmichael: Was one of the Ministers to whom the hon. Lady wrote David Jamieson? Was she ever disappointed by the response she got from him as a Minister?
Alison Seabeck: The hon. Gentleman should do his homework. Mr. Jamieson was my predecessor, so it would have been a bit difficult for me to write to him.
I know that a number of hon. Members want to speak, so I shall conclude. If the Government are serious about supporting regional economies, they have
17 Jun 2009 : Column 80WH
to support the infrastructure and links into our regional airports and the regional airports themselves. I look forward to hearing wider evidence on the role of our region’s airports during the Select Committee inquiry and I, obviously, also look forward to hearing the Minister’s response today.
10.7 am

 

 

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-05-05a.25.2&s=speaker%3A11760#g34.0

 

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2009-05-05a.48.0&s=speaker%3A11760#g69.0

 

 

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?id=2009-05-05a.41.1&s=speaker%3A11760#g45.0

 

 

 

 Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill 23rd Feb 2009

Alison Seabeck: My right hon. Friend is talking about widening
opportunities, so will he ensure that all schools support the children's
plan and the vision for young people in their communities? Will he also
ensure that there are opportunities for all young people from a range of
backgrounds to mix when taking up the new diplomas or the other schemes
on offer?

Bill Presented: Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill (23 Feb 2009)
http://www.theyworkforyou.com
Alison Seabeck: I listened to my hon. Friend's story about the woman
whose daughter is NEET. Does my hon. Friend accept that we need some
clarification about how to help young people, whose formal learning
passage has not taken the form that it should have-there have been gaps
in it for a range of reasons-to move into apprenticeships? Perhaps we
can consider that in Committee.

Bill Presented: Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill (23 Feb 2009)
http://www.theyworkforyou.com.
Alison Seabeck: The hon. Gentleman says that he wants apprenticeship
certificates to represent the gold standard. Does he accept that we need
also to address the present gender pay disparity in
apprenticeships-women are generally paid less than men-as part of the
process?
 

Debate Armed Forces Personnel January 29th 2009

(extract from Hansard)
Alison Seabeck (Plymouth, Devonport) (Lab): May I first put on record, as have other hon. Members, our thanks to our armed services for the fantastic job that they do in difficult and dangerous circumstances and to their families and friends who support them from afar and often do not know or cannot be told what their brothers, fathers, sisters, husbands and mates are actually doing for their country? It takes a very special person to join up, but it also takes some very special people at home to cope with the uncertainty and worry that a life linked to the armed forces can bring.
We have seen in the past 10 to 15 years a massive transformation in the role of our armed forces in terms of the type of action that they are required to take, the enemy that they have to deal with, the capability that they have to deliver on the ground and the equipment that they wear and use. We know about their ability to fight, but one of their key roles is in strengthening stability, as they are seeking to do in Afghanistan as well as responding to international emergencies. Our armed forces personnel are among the most flexible in the world, working as they do alongside staff in our Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Department for International Development, NGOs, civilians and of course forces from other nations. I have heard it said repeatedly that, given a choice, it is our Navy, Army and Air Force that others will choose to serve alongside.
For too long, the contribution of our personnel was not fully understood by the wider public outside garrison towns, but that is changing. In Plymouth, to ensure that our lads and lasses are made aware of just how much we value what they do, like in many other towns and cities throughout the country, we will ensure that we welcome them back when they return from active service. Our lord mayor in Plymouth, Councillor Brian Vincent, is working to ensure there is a good civic response, not least because our lady mayoress has two relatives, including her son, who are currently serving.
That is why, from our perspective, the publication of the service personnel Command Paper, which set out 40 commitments for support to our servicemen and women and their families, was so important. I want to focus on some of those commitments, and I know from speaking to service personnel—some on active service in Afghanistan—and their families, who are my constituents, that they have been broadly welcomed. The Royal British Legion—I should declare and interest in that I am a member of the Crownhill branch—which I spoke to some months before the announcement, had been campaigning hard for the changes, as had the British Limbless Ex-Service Men’s Association, which had been working on behalf of local lads who had lost one or more limbs while on active service and was seeking a significant increase in the compensation awards. Both organisations have subsequently expressed how pleased they are that the Government responded so positively.
Mitigating the impact of service life on families is important. People at my local schools tell of the difficulties that the children of service families can face, such as the major upheaval in their lives because of the constant moving from location to location. Schools in Plymouth are very good at offering support in those circumstances, and they respond swiftly and sensitively when we lose one of our own. However, I am sure that they agree that the proposals on the statutory schools admissions code, which should take effect later this year, and the provision for enhanced early years support will help to stabilise families and make children feel more secure.
Plymouth also has high rates of adult illiteracy, and some of that stems from people who leave the armed forces without qualifications and who often find it difficult to secure a job in the civilian sector. In turn, that can lead to street homelessness, as my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Gerrard) has said, and to the risk of committing crime and of triggering mental health problems, which in some cases is certainly compounded by trauma in service—that concern has already been covered at length. We now understand a little better the nature of the mental health problems that service personnel can face. However, where that is linked not to combat stress but to an inability to move back into civilian life, education becomes increasingly important, and the opportunity for people while in service to improve a range of skills, including literacy and numeracy, is vital and makes a difference.
During a recent armed forces parliamentary scheme visit to Camp Bastion and Kandahar, I was extremely interested to meet some of those responsible for in-service training. We were told that there was a great deal of interest among personnel in getting the national vocational qualifications 1 and 2 not only for jobs when they leave the forces, but because the promotion process now requires them to have those basic skills. The additional entitlement to funding for further and higher education, which builds on the enhanced learning credits initiative, will mean that service-leavers with six years service could attain an A-level or equivalent free from tuition fees. Again, that is very welcome.
There are also options that have existed for many years for courses that lead to accreditation in areas of military relevance. We sometimes forget that the Ministry of Defence is Britain’s largest provider of education and training, offering some 7 million days to their men and women across the services and in the wider MOD. The recent announcements build on what was already on offer.
While the importance of upskilling our forces personnel is important, so, too, is ensuring that their needs are met in a range of other areas. Other hon. Members have spoken at length about equipment, and I have to say that the newspaper cuttings about life on board HMS Daring certainly lift the spirits. It is state of the art in terms of its capability, but it has also taken great regard for the needs of service personnel on board, providing a very high quality living and working space. In fact, what we heard in Afghanistan from all ranks—much to the surprise of some members of the armed forces parliamentary scheme, I think—was that, in the main, they feel that the procurement process is working and that it is much more responsive. Indeed, one person told me that they had equipment coming out of their ears. I am sure that is a slight exaggeration, but it is indicative of the fact that people feel that they are now receiving what they need on the ground.
There is always room for improvement, and it is essential to listen to the needs of the front-line soldier, as they are the ones who have to fight in excess heat and cold and have to carry the equipment they use. I am pleased to see the Jackal, which my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton (Linda Gilroy) has mentioned, in service. I recently visited the production line in Plymouth, and, interestingly, the manufacturers are already responding to proposals to change and tweak that particular vehicle, which have come from people who use it on the ground.
There is no doubt that our forces still feel stretched, and that feeds back to the public in the UK. The public and the families respond by wanting to support them by sending food, e-blueys and buddy boxes. In a recent letter to my local paper, a lady suggested that we should all send food parcels to our troops, because she felt that they were undernourished and came back from the theatres in which they were serving looking thin. I would like to tell her, on the record, that the food available in the mess and in the various outlets in which I ate, alongside hundreds of people from across our services and from other nations, in Afghanistan was superb. The range of options was immense, and the food was beautifully prepared. It is probably true that an army marches on its stomach, which is why breakfast ranged from a full English to toast, omelettes, cereals and fruit, and the lunches and dinners were made up of at least two substantial courses. Clearly troops in our forward posts have a more restricted diet, but that is inevitable, as they often have to carry their food supplies with them. I am not surprised, given the heat and the activity in Afghanistan and Iraq, that people return from those theatres looking a little slimmer, but I reassure the letter writer that that is certainly not because they are underfed.
We have to make it clear that our servicemen and women are greatly valued and that we offer them the support they need to carry out the tasks we, as a Government, set them. The Command Paper has reinforced that intention, and I am grateful to have had the opportunity to highlight some of the areas where it will make a difference for my constituents and their families.

 

 

 

 

 

Oral Answers to Questions — Communities and Local Government: Topical Questions (18 Nov 2008)
Alison Seabeck: My right hon. Friend may not be aware of the 68 per cent. vote in favour of a stock transfer that was announced in Plymouth today. However, I know that she is aware of the concerns that have percolated through the media this week about security of tenure. Has she had time to consider and revisit the Law Commission report on a single form of tenancy, which has benefits for all tenants, whether...

Delegated Legislation: Performing Right Society (12 Nov 2008)
David Lammy: I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Alison Seabeck) on securing the debate and on the forensic, reasoned and able way in which she discussed the issues. I found that incredibly helpful. This is, indeed, an opportune moment for us to reflect on the activities of the copyright licensing bodies, and in particular of the Performing Right Society, given that a number...

Oral Answers to Questions — Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Water Metering Charges (6 Nov 2008)
Alison Seabeck: My right hon. Friend will be very aware that the Ofwat chief executive has taken the view that, because of the impact on customers, Sutton and East Surrey Water should not increase its prices. That is very reassuring. Year after year, however, the south-west has experienced very high rises, yet the area has extremely low wages and high levels of deprivation—unlike, I suspect, in Sutton...

 

 

Written Answers — Health: Accident and Emergency Care: South-West (4 Nov 2008)
Alison Seabeck: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of accident and emergency care standards in the South West; and if he will make a statement.

Topical Debate: Defence Policy (30 Oct 2008)
Linda Gilroy: ..., when they come they will, of course, be a source of deep regret and play into the ongoing concerns of my constituents. Earlier this afternoon, my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Alison Seabeck) and I discussed the death by a thousand cuts of Devonport naval base and dockyard with the regional Minister. [Interruption.] I see my right hon. Friend the Minister for the...

Topical Debate: Businesses and the Regions (30 Oct 2008) has video See 1 other result from this debate
Alison Seabeck: I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and for drawing attention to the role of the regional development agencies. He will be aware that marine skills and sciences are important to the south-west, particularly to Plymouth—there is a lot of international expertise. The RDA has been investing heavily in that area and supporting apprenticeships, which are important to small and medium-sized...

Oral Answers to Questions — Prime Minister: Engagements (29 Oct 2008) has video
Alison Seabeck: My right hon. Friend is very aware of the anxiety felt by many small investors in Icesave. We all have constituents with their life savings there. Mine have told me that they are anxious about developments and they are not being told very much, particularly about the structure of the scheme. Can my right hon. Friend confirm please that progress is now being made on the compensation scheme and...

Oral Answers to Questions — Prime Minister: Small Businesses (22 Oct 2008) has video
Alison Seabeck: I welcome the package my hon. Friend has announced, but he will be aware that many small businesses have earmarked for their January 2009 tax bill money that is currently invested in Icelandic banks. While they may get some of that money back under the guarantee scheme, that could take months. Is there any scope for the HMRC to defer payments in the same way as happened when the foot and...

Oral Answers to Questions — Communities and Local Government: South-west Spatial Strategy (14 Oct 2008) has video See 1 other result from this debate
Alison Seabeck: My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew) has sought deletions from the RSS. We are seeking to reinstate something that has been deleted. We are very concerned that the phrase relating to Plymouth specifically as an "economic hub" for growth in the south-west has been removed. That could have serious implications for our growth strategy, and I would welcome my right hon. Friend's...

Business of the House: Defence in the UK (9 Oct 2008) has video See 5 other results from this debate
Kevan Jones: ...are doing everything should look at the stabilisation team working in Lashkagar, because it is a great joined-up effort. I pay tribute to my hon. Friends the Members for Plymouth, Devonport (Alison Seabeck) and for Plymouth, Sutton (Linda Gilroy) for their hard work on behalf of Devonport and the Devonport strategy group. I understand their frustration, but I reiterate the point made by my...
Housing (Plymouth) (7 Oct 2008)
Iain Wright: ...where they want to live. To achieve that, we need first and foremost to increase the supply of all types of housing, including, in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Alison Seabeck), social, market-led or intermediate housing. The National Housing and Planning Advice Unit says that we need to build something like 250,000 additional homes each year to meet the...

Bill Presented: Housing and Regeneration Bill (programme) (no. 2) (21 Jul 2008)
...any Question being put. 3. The proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement. —[Alison Seabeck.] The House proceeded to a Division.

Home Information Packs (16 Jul 2008)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.— [Alison Seabeck.]

Delegated Legislation: Terms and Conditions of Employment (16 Jul 2008) has video
That the draft Maternity and Parental Leave etc. and the Paternity and Adoption Leave (Amendment) Regulations 2008, which were laid before this House on 30th June, be approved. —[Alison Seabeck.] Question agreed to.

business of the House (16 Jul 2008) has video

Michael Lord: ...of proceedings on that Motion; in each case proceedings may continue though opposed after the moment of interruption; and Standing Order No. 41A (Deferred divisions) shall not apply.— [Alison Seabeck.]

Business of the House (16 Jul 2008) has video
...(Exempted business), That, at this day's sitting, Consideration of Lords Amendments to the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed, until any hour. —[Alison Seabeck.] Question agreed to.

[Mr. Mike Hancock in the Chair] — Road Safety (16 Jul 2008)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That the sitting be now adjourned.—[Alison Seabeck.]

Estimates Day — [3rd Allotted Day] — Estimates, 2008-09 — Department for Transport: Public Transport (7 Jul 2008) has video
...a further sum, not exceeding £7,136,325,000, be granted to Her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund to meet the costs as so set out, and (3) limits as so set out be set on appropriations in aid.—[ Alison Seabeck .]

 

 

DEBATE 30TH October 2008 - Business and the South West

 

Alison Seabeck MP
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and for drawing attention to the role of the regional development agencies. He will be aware that marine skills and sciences are important to the south-west, particularly to Plymouth—there is a lot of international expertise. The RDA has been investing heavily in that area and supporting apprenticeships, which are important to small and medium-sized enterprises, of which there are many in the south-west, feeding into that industry. Will my hon. Friend give a commitment to ensure that there is ongoing investment into RDAs to support apprenticeships in the south-west?

 

Oral Answers to Questions — Communities and Local Government: South-west Spatial Strategy (14 Oct 2008)

“My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew) has sought deletions from the RSS. We are seeking to reinstate something that has been deleted. We are very concerned that the phrase relating to Plymouth specifically as an "economic hub" for growth in the south-west has been removed. That could have serious implications for our growth strategy, and I would welcome my right hon. Friend's...”

www.theyworkforyou.com

Business of the House: Defence in the UK (9 Oct 2008)

“I am delighted to be able to participate in this debate following a year of silence as a Government Whip. First, I pay tribute to those service personnel who have lost their lives in the past year, and to those—some of them severely wounded—who are recovering and trying to rebuild their lives. Some of them are my constituents. That is why the recent publication of the Command...”www.theyworkforyou.com

Business of the House: Defence in the UK (9 Oct 2008)

“I thank my hon. Friend. My understanding is that the British Limbless Ex-Service Men's Association has been lobbying hard on specific cases, and I can follow up with that. It was delighted by the Government's announcements generally, but it still has concerns, and would welcome further guidance on the new scheme. I wanted to raise those concerns before proceeding to the main thrust of my...”www.theyworkforyou.com

 

 

Westminster Hall debates
Tuesday, 7 October 2008

Alison was delighted to take part in this debate today

Housing (Plymouth)
 
1:30 pm
 Linda Gilroy (Plymouth, Sutton, Labour)

It is a pleasure, Mr. Key, to serve under your chairmanship, as you are familiar with Plymouth.
Plymouth is the largest city on the south coast of England, with a population of about 250,000. On 1 April 2008 there were nearly 116,000 dwellings in Plymouth, with 77,000 in owner-occupation. That is 5 per cent. below the United Kingdom average. There are some 15,000 homes in the private rented sector, and 22,000 in the social rented sector, of which about 15,000 are owned by registered social landlords.
Plymouth is one of 29 new growth points that are working with the Government to create large-scale sustainable growth in order to take our population up to 300,000 or more. I, of course, welcome the support that comes with that designation. There is a buy-in to the growth agenda across all the key public and private-sector players that, if not unique—I heard the regional spatial strategy debate earlier today while finalising this speech—is certainly unusual.
Plymouth has some award-winning regeneration going on across the waterfront—from Gun Wharf to the Devonport urban village, and from the Mount Wise estate to Millbay and the East End renewal project. Those projects now in progress seem on the whole to be reporting that their plans are set to weather the current global storms in the financial markets, but there is no doubt that plans over the next few years to build on those programmes are already being affected by the current very uncertain and difficult circumstances.
Unemployment in the city has reduced greatly, but it remains the second highest in the region. Average annual earnings are £17,688 and the average house price is £157,000. House prices are more than eight times the average income. Fifty-two per cent. of the working population earn less than £20,000. The income needed for the average priced property is nearly £40,000, and for the cheapest an entry income of £32,000 is needed. With home buying that expensive, it is little wonder that home ownership in the city is 5 per cent. below the national average.
Those circumstances already existed before the profound shocks in the financial system had such a devastating knock-on effect across the world. We are learning how important trust and co-operation are within our systems, and what happens when those values seize up. First-time buyers will, of course, find the drop in house prices welcome; but the truth is that as long as the demand for homes runs ahead of supply, which it will continue to do, the need to build many more homes remains if we are not to return to the huge increases seen particularly in the last few years.
That is very different from the United States, where the housing market is failing for different reasons—a housing surplus, horrendously bad lending practices and the knock-on effects for its financial systems and those of the rest of the world. House prices are falling in the UK because of the global financial crisis, but predictions from the national affordable housing planning unit are that affordability still matters and that the ratio of house price to income in Plymouth will climb to 12 times the average income by 2026—unless, of course, we do something substantial about the problem.
The ambition of the local strategic partnership, Plymouth 2020, is to be recognised as
"one of Europe's finest, most vibrant waterfront cities, where an outstanding quality of life is enjoyed by everyone".
Housing choice, in the rented sector as well as in the property purchase sector, will play an important part in achieving that ambition.
Three pillars support the overarching strategy. There is the vision for the built environment developed by world renowned town planner David Mackay; there is the local development framework of our award-winning planning team; and there is the plan of the City Development Company, led by chief executive Paul Carrol. The development company was launched recently to deliver the growth in jobs—42,000 of them—to match the growth in population from 250,000 to at least 300,000, identified by David Mackay as being the critical mass at which our community would function better in all sorts of ways. The company was confident at the launch that, despite prevailing circumstances, we could ride the storm.
I flag up some concerns about the regional spatial strategy. The city was pleased with the panel's consideration of the original version, which would have added 8,000 houses and which would have seen the cities of Plymouth, Bristol and Swindon acting as the engine houses for the region. That was very much in line with the Government's stated policy. Somehow or other—I hope inadvertently—the Secretary of State seems to have removed that hierarchical approach and restored 21 communities across the region to a position of equal consideration.
We want to help the Government address their agenda of tackling regional disparities and creating sustainable communities and a big enough supply of homes. However, confidence that the necessary levels of support will be focused on growth points such as Plymouth has been undermined. We want to help the Government, but we need clarity to be restored to the spatial strategy if we are to have the self-confidence and the investor confidence to go forward with our ambitious plans, especially in the present economic climate.
Formal submissions on this stage of the strategy are due in later this month, and I will certainly be putting in a formal representation—as, no doubt, will others. However, I take this opportunity to flag up the issue in the hope that it will be reviewed at the earliest possible stage. Nowhere in the country is as positively engaged with the Government's agenda as Plymouth, but we need consistency in the Government's support for our growth point status. Nor should our growth in population and housing be just about numbers; it must also be about getting the right mix of tenure.
My hon. Friend the Minister knows that, last October, I started an inquiry to consider what was happening in the housing market in Plymouth and what could be done about the circumstances that I have outlined. Today, I want to build on the discussions that I have already had with the Minister and his colleagues on the key issue in the report—how to get some important rungs put back on the bottom of the house buyer's ladder. As I say in my report, "Homes for the future: 21st century solutions for Plymouth", those rungs can be restored by improving the supply of houses in the intermediate market.
Whenever shared equity and affordable housing products come on the market, there is great demand for them. However, the part-buy and shared-equity market is small, and in the sort of market that I have described in Plymouth, it plays a limited role in connection with the affordability issue. For example, two executive civil servants aiming to share a home would still be hard-pressed to afford the joint mortgage or rent and service charge on a typical shared-equity property.
That is not to say that those options do not have an important role to play alongside the new initiative that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government launched with the Prime Minister, of rent with an option to buy as part of the welcome £l billion package to support the housing market that was announced on 2 September 2008. As they stand, however, they will not tackle the widening affordability gap, ensuring that the rungs on the bottom of the house-buyers' ladder are within reach of people who would be able to afford to buy in those parts of the country where the ratio of house prices to average earnings is more in kilter.
Difficulties often bring opportunities. Among the dark clouds that presently beset the international financial system, I believe that there is such a window of opportunity—a golden one—to address the issue in Plymouth, much of southern England and perhaps elsewhere. In my report, I sought to bring together the concept of the local housing company and the community land trust. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister for responding to representations from me and from my hon. Friend Mr. Drew to include a definition of a CLT in the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008.
For such a model to work, the land would need to be gifted—or, in DCLG speak, made into an asset transfer to the community. It would be held in trust and, through mutual co-operative ownership, people would own a share in the bricks and mortar. The homes built on it would become the asset in which the individual invests. It is the value of the land that drives up the cost of home ownership, so such a model would provide for sustainable affordable housing; it would put those important rungs back on the bottom of the ladder and back within reach of those with modest incomes. Other models attempt to create sustainable affordable housing, but none that I know of performs the role of keeping those important bottom rungs permanently within the reach of first-time buyers, who would otherwise be blocked from buying and unwillingly trapped in renting—and which would add to pressures on the rented sector.
The Housing and Regeneration Act 2008 has given legal definition to the community land trust. I therefore hope that Plymouth will give serious consideration to combining the concept of the CLT with the development of the local housing company to make best use of the precious little land that we have for building. A CLT would mean that the land never left the ownership of the community—and now is the time to make that happen.
Although I have put forward the case for CLTs in relation to my inquiry and the specific circumstances in Plymouth, I believe that the question of developing a permanently affordable intermediate market in housing should take centre stage nationally, becoming a relevant part of our response to the profound shocks that we are witnessing daily in the international financial markets. In the present circumstances, mortgage loans for standard shared-ownership products could become increasingly difficult if not impossible to obtain. Because of the lack of liquidity in the credit markets, mortgage lenders are likely to seek to lend scarce mortgage funds to prime borrowers on the open market who can afford a deposit of at least 20 per cent. At the same time, pension funds and assurance companies will be looking for debt investment secured on good-quality residential property assets, rather than high-risk, asset-backed securities. Mutual home ownership on land owned by CLTs offers the opportunity of a unique and attractive debt investment, secured through corporate loans on occupied residential property assets, which would generate a guaranteed and attractive yield for pension funds and life assurance companies that are seeking to match yields to liabilities on a low-risk basis. Mutual models of home ownership are attractive partly because they have a good track record of payment compliance, and therefore low default rates.
In the new realities of the financial markets in the UK, restoring trust and co-operation are premium considerations, so I hope that the Government will prioritise an examination of the opportunities offered by the model. As well as restoring those important bottom rungs to the house-buying ladder, it can help the economy in the face of the logjams that the financial crisis has created, draw investor funds back into the market and deliver affordable new homes, because of its low-risk nature. The mortgage and financial mechanisms have been tried and tested in Canada.
I hope that Ministers will be prepared to listen to the few people in this country who have experience of the model and that they will prioritise time to understand the detailed financial analysis, which shows its relevance as part of the response to the challenges that we face. We have lost many checks and balances in the whirlwind of globalisation, and the model is one check that can be put back—the situation is crying out for action now. I hope that the Minister will urge the new Minister for Housing to give her urgent and serious consideration to the matter, and to meet me, my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud and the chief executive of CDS Co-operatives, David Rodgers, to explore it more fully.
Plymouth has an enviable track record of making things work. My report mentions the work of the award-winning East End Development Trust and the Pembroke Estate Management Board. Both have been supported by Government funding, which has ensured that the housing developments are more than simply bricks and mortar.
I was unable to attend the regional Homes and Communities Agency meeting in Exeter, but I sent representatives, and was impressed by the new organisation's plans. It was set up under the 2008 Act, which is another good innovation by this Government. Its idea of setting up a single conversation via the local authority, involving all those who are interested in developing housing, including agencies such as health, is good. I was pleased to find in my inquiry that the private sector's role in providing housing to rent, and the way in which the Government have introduced standards—2004 housing regulations are only now being implemented—are driving up quality.
Click on the platypus!
 
Add your comment
 Alison Seabeck (Plymouth, Devonport, Labour) Link to this | Hansard source
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate. Will the Minister reaffirm the Government's commitment to social rented housing? In the current financial climate, it is essential to my constituents. I should like to place on the record my belief that a vote in support of the stock transfer proposal, which is going ahead at the moment in Plymouth, is vital if tenants' homes are to be improved further and if they are to have a greater say in how their estates are managed. That change, with those outlined by my hon. Friend, are vital for the quality of the housing offer across all tenures in Plymouth.
Add your comment
 Linda Gilroy (Plymouth, Sutton, Labour) Link to this | Hansard source
I agree with my hon. Friend. That is the only way in which to bring quality into that sector of housing in Plymouth, and I support it.
There are some excellent private landlords in the city, and the city council has worked well alongside them to transform the landscape of the traditional private rented sector. Plymouth's award-winning empty homes team have a variety of projects, including the HouseLet programme, and since 2003 they have secured private sector houses for 505 families through a highly successful leasing scheme. That is a model of exceptionally good practice and merits support for growth in the present climate.
I was prompted to look into housing in Plymouth by, among other things, a Saturday morning roving surgery that brought me face to face with a woman who had moved, with her children, five times in five years in the private rented sector. Shorthold tenancies can run counter to the good work that is being done to support families, so I hope that the Government are serious about reviewing them.
Support for voluntary downsizing could also release a lot of family-sized homes. I do not want the forced removal of tenants to smaller homes, and would fight against any such move, but some home owners and tenants who want to live in smaller, lower-cost, better-maintained homes are often prevented from doing so by bureaucracy, petty rules, petty sums of finance, or simply the lack of someone to offer advice and practical help. There are better ways to manage such demand to the benefit of both the tenant who moves and the tenant who is waiting for a larger home. It would be a big help if support services could free up even a third of what I believe to be around 1,000 two to three-bedroomed houses in Plymouth.
The turbulence in the world markets and the credit crunch do not take away the need for more homes in the UK. It is vital that the Government face up to the challenge of maintaining their programme of house building in such difficult circumstances. More than anything, my report brought home to those involved in its drafting that if we do not get things right now, we will condemn a generation to a housing market with limited, and sometimes no, choice. By restoring the rungs on the bottom of the house ownership ladder, we would facilitate both things. By enabling house purchase and shared equity, especially of the CLT variety, the pressure on renting, particularly in the social sector, is relieved.
I know that the Minister will continue to engage with and champion these issues. There is a need for a step change in the pace and urgency with which some things that I have mentioned happen, particularly ensuring that the potential of CLTs is released. I am pleased that the Government stepped up and defined CLTs legally, and now is the time to ensure that they happen, which requires further work and commitment from all of us.
Add your comment
1:46 pm
 Iain Wright (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Hartlepool, Labour) Link to this | Hansard source
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Key, so soon after the bruising debate earlier this morning. I too congratulate my hon. Friend Linda Gilroy on securing this debate. I recall with affection our debate on growth in Plymouth in April. Its scope was ambitious, and showed the huge growth potential in her constituency. That ambition has not changed over the summer—indeed, if anything, the appetite for ambition and growth seems to be stronger than ever. I congratulate her on her excellent report "Homes for the Future: 21st Century Solutions for Plymouth". She is right to focus on the fundamentals and beyond the short-term turbulence to the medium and long-term future, and on what should be done to meet future needs.
As she is aware, the Government's objective is to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to live in a decent home that they can afford, in a community where they want to live. To achieve that, we need first and foremost to increase the supply of all types of housing, including, in response to my hon. Friend Alison Seabeck, social, market-led or intermediate housing. The National Housing and Planning Advice Unit says that we need to build something like 250,000 additional homes each year to meet the imbalance between the demand and supply of housing, which is caused by social change, longer living and the fact that people move around and live differently.
Although the credit crunch has reduced activity in the housing market to a low level—I shall go on to say how it directly affects Plymouth—the Government are determined to mitigate short-term difficulties and to prepare to ensure that housing delivery resumes as quickly as possible, when the inevitable upturn happens, when conditions allow. That includes ensuring sufficient headroom within the planning system to allow for a rapid recovery of housing supply to meet long-term demand. Major, cross-Government packages of measures to meet the current challenges in the housing market have been announced on 16 July and, more recently, on 2 September. They will do three things: first, they will help first-time buyers; secondly, they seek to minimise the risk of repossessions; and thirdly, they offer greater resources and more flexibility for councils and housing associations to build or purchase properties, which will help to reignite and kick-start the construction industry. The measures will also provide confidence and address the long-term challenges of affordable housing.
Largely thanks to the fantastic leadership of my hon. Friends the Members for Plymouth, Sutton and for Plymouth, Devonport, Plymouth has a very strong record of housing delivery and planning for growth in recent years. I am confident that it will be in a position to respond quickly and effectively to an upturn in housing. For example, house building in the city has trebled from about 400 units a year in 2003 to about 1,200 units a year between 2004 and 2007. The local area agreement set a target of 1,000 net additional houses, under national indicator 154, for the next three years. That reflects the submitted regional spatial strategy before the proposed changes were published in July.
Last year, Plymouth was the first large urban authority to adopt a new-style core strategy, which provided for at least 17,250 extra homes by 2021. It subsequently adopted five action plans focusing on key regeneration areas and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton mentioned, it is in partnership with the Government as a new growth point. The partnership, which includes South Hams, was allocated £3.4 million for infrastructure projects in 2008-09 and a further £6.3 million for the period 2009 to 2011.
As I have mentioned, the credit crunch, which is uppermost in our minds at the moment, has had a major impact on construction contracts in both Devonport and Millbay. Sales have come to a halt, as first-time buyers are unable to access mortgages and developers are therefore reluctant to build. In response, the Housing Corporation and English Partnerships are working with registered social landlords, the city council and developers to restore developers' confidence and ensure that such important developments are delivered. To do so, they are considering making use of the £1 billion housing package to which I have referred, particularly to support the renewed emphasis on investment and flexibility and to bring forward resources for up-front infrastructure.
My hon. Friend mentioned the concern that any support arrangements should not undermine mixed and balanced community objectives, and I agree with her. When I read her report, I was struck by recommendation 17, which states:
"It will be important for the Homes and Communities Agency to recognise that funding for community development is essential for the success of mixed tenure schemes, and for developing a sense of ownership and pride. It is essential that, if new models of community ownership are to be successful, a key element of this is the development of independent advice on a level that is accessible to all."
I absolutely agree with that, and the importance of sustainable, mixed communities is at the heart of what the Homes and Communities Agency will be all about.
Short-term options such as the rent to homebuy scheme, announced in the July package, are being examined and will help people into home ownership by allowing them to rent a new build property from an RSL at below market rent while they save for a deposit, with the option to buy a share after a specified period. That is an exciting new model, and as we continue to see relatively high house prices coupled with a lack of available credit and mortgage finance, it will come increasingly to the fore as a choice. My hon. Friend mentioned the importance of choice in helping people to get on the property ladder.
In July, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government proposed changes to the regional spatial strategy for the south-west. You will be pleased to hear, Mr. Key, that I have just returned from hospital after being nursed for the bruises on my back following this morning's debate. My right hon. Friend has proposed raising housing provision in the region as a whole from some 23,000 units a year, as set out in the submitted strategy, to some 29,600, and raising affordable housing targets to at least 35 per cent. of all housing development or 10,000 units a year. In relation to Plymouth, she has proposed raising provision from 1,500 units a year to 2,000 a year.
My hon. Friend mentioned the regional spatial strategy, and I take note of what she said, particularly about the hierarchical approach to the 21 strategically significant cities and towns in the south-west. As she suggested, the proper way to pursue the matter is to make a written representation to the Secretary of State. Given the quasi-judicial role that I mentioned several times in this morning's debate, it would not be right for me to comment at this stage, for fear of prejudicing my right hon. Friend's consideration of the matter. However, I assure my hon. Friend that the Secretary of State will reflect on what she and other parties have to say before a final decision is made.
Add your comment
 Linda Gilroy (Plymouth, Sutton, Labour) Link to this | Hansard source
I appreciate the position that my hon. Friend is in, but given that we are not quite as mob-handed as those in the earlier debate, may I impress upon him how incredibly important the matter is to a city that is ready and willing to build new houses, and needs them to make the city work?
Add your comment
 Iain Wright (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Hartlepool, Labour) Link to this | Hansard source
I appreciate that fully. The passion about the whole topic of the south-west regional spatial strategy was made clear to me this morning. As I said at the start of my remarks, the ambition for growth seems evident in the city's leaders and is exemplified by my hon. Friends the Members for Plymouth, Sutton and for Plymouth, Devonport. It is quite remarkable, and I am keen to capitalise on it as much as possible to ensure that the growth actually happens.
Add your comment
 Linda Gilroy (Plymouth, Sutton, Labour) Link to this | Hansard source
May I stress also that there is cross-party support for that, which is very important to the continuity of our ambitions?
Add your comment
 Iain Wright (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Hartlepool, Labour) Link to this | Hansard source
I do not want to hark back to earlier debates, but in the debate in April on growth in Plymouth I was struck by how much my hon. Friends who represent the city are willing to engage and work closely with political opponents for the good of the city. Being able to put aside partisan difficulties to work together for the good of the people we represent is a first-class example of what elected representatives should do, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friends' ability to do that in Plymouth.
I turn now to the numbers, particularly on social and affordable housing. My hon. Friends will know that we are to invest the unprecedented sum of £8 billion in affordable housing in England in the next three years. That is an increase of £3 billion on the previous three years. I have focused on the long-term fundamentals, and our aspiration is to address the imbalance between the supply of housing and the demand for it. Our aspiration remains to deliver 45,000 homes a year by 2010-11 and 50,000 a year during the next spending review period. That will be funded mainly by the Housing Corporation and, within the next few months, by the new Homes and Communities Agency.
My hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton made an interesting point about the importance of the private rented sector in addressing housing need, about which I agree with her. She mentioned previous legislation on the matter, and I can tell her that the Housing Act 1988 was intended to achieve a balance between the rights of tenants and those of landlords, and to make it easier for landlords to regain possession. One result was that the sector has expanded, with the number of households living in the private rented sector growing from something like 8 per cent. and falling in the mid-1980s to 12 per cent. now. That demonstrates the fact that the changes have had a positive effect.
My hon. Friend will be aware of the Rugg review. The Government commissioned an independent review of the private rented sector from Julie Rugg of the university of York. It will be about how we can better understand the private rented sector and increase the professionalism of landlords across the board. I believe that the Rugg review will be published on about 23 October, and the Government will examine it very closely.
The theme of my hon. Friend's speech seemed to be how we can help people to get a foot on the first rung of the housing ladder. I have mentioned a variety of ways, but one important one is staircasing and the right to staircase up as and when circumstances allow, in which I am very interested. She will be aware of the Government-funded homebuy scheme, which is sufficiently flexible to enable low-cost home ownership properties to be retained when it is essential and, as an important aside, to meet the needs of purchasers with disabilities. Generally, we want shared owners to increase their equity stake when they can afford to do so, and to move to full ownership. Receipts from the sales of shares are reinvested by housing associations to help other households. However, to retain properties when it is essential to do so, newer shared ownership leases under the new build homebuy scheme contain a right of first refusal. It requires purchasers who have increased their equity stake to 100 per cent., and wish to move, to offer the property back to the provider in the first instance.
I conclude by paying tribute to my hon. Friends the Members for Plymouth, Sutton and for Plymouth, Devonport and by mentioning community land trusts. My hon. Friends the Members for Plymouth, Sutton and for Stroud (Mr. Drew) have been invaluable in pushing forward that agenda. As has been acknowledged, we put a definition of community land trusts in the Housing and Regeneration Act 2008 to help to provide lenders with certainty and confidence. I have no doubt that, thanks to the hard work that my hon. Friends have pushed forward, we will go further and the idea of social enterprise and co-operation will be invaluable in meeting the short-term challenges to provide the housing that we need for the long term in Plymouth and elsewhere.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at Two o'clock.

 

17 July 2008

MOD SETS OUT CROSS-GOVERNMENT STRATEGY TO IMPROVE SUPPORT FOR THE ARMED FORCES

The Ministry of Defence has today published the Service Personnel Command Paper which outlines a package of measures to improve the lives of our Service Personnel, their families and our veterans.

This paper - “The Nation’s Commitment: Cross-Government Support to our Armed Forces, their Families and Veterans” - is the first time that such a cross-Government strategy has been issued and it sets the standard for the level and scope of support our Service personnel can expect.

Key changes include:

• The Ministry of Defence doubling Armed Forces Compensation Scheme payments for the most serious injuries from £285,000 to £570,000. All injured personnel will receive an increase of between 10 and 100%;
• The Department of Health improving access to NHS dentists for Service families;
• The Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills offering free A-Level equivalent or first Degree-level education for Service leavers with six years service;
• The Department for Transport offering free bus travel for seriously injured Service Personnel and veterans;
• The Department for Communities and Local Government helping Service leavers get on the property ladder by extending their Key Worker status for 12 months after leaving the Armed Forces; and
• The Department for Children, Schools and Families making it easier for Service families with frequent and short notice postings to get their children into local schools.

Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne, said:

“Our Armed Forces are truly inspiring – every day they risk their lives to keep us safe – and it is a fundamental duty of government to support them and their families. I think this Command Paper presents a package of measures that will make a real difference to the everyday lives of our forces and their families. It will improve their access to public services and for the most seriously injured it will ensure a significant increase in the amount of compensation that they get paid. I think it offers significant progress and we now have to make sure we deliver that change.

Chief of the Defence Staff, Sir Jock Stirrup, said:

“Our Servicemen and women achieve great things on a daily basis in testing conditions all over the world. They, and their families, also face unique demands that make their achievements all the more remarkable. As a nation, we have a duty to make sure that our Armed Forces are treated fairly whether they are home or abroad, and that is why this Service Personnel Command Paper is so important. My fellow Chiefs and I welcome this paper. It will ensure our Armed Forces and their dependants are not disadvantaged by their Service life, and in some cases enjoy special treatment befitting of their daily sacrifice on behalf of us all.”

The Service Personnel Command Paper was commissioned by the Prime Minister in November 2007. Since then Armed Forces Minster Bob Ainsworth has led a team of tri-Service personnel and MoD civil servants to produce the new strategy and the measures. The Service Personnel Command Paper team consulted widely with current and former Service personnel, their families, Service charities, Service Families Federations; and worked with colleagues across Whitehall and in the Devolved Administrations.

Notes to Editors

1. The Service Personnel Command Paper is published on the MoD website at www.mod.uk
2. Key measures in the Service Personnel Command Paper include:

MoD

• Improved payments under the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme
The upfront lump sum payment for injury under the AFCS will be doubled for the most serious injuries. All recipients, according to severity of injury, will have an uplift of between 10 and 100% in their upfront lump sum payments. MOD also intends to confer additional benefits to extend this effect to those who have already made claims under the Scheme. The Guaranteed Income Payment (GIP) will continue to apply in addition to the upfront lump sum compensation payment. The GIP will continue to provide the most seriously injured with a monthly, tax-free income once they leave the Service. For example, a 25-year-old seriously injured soldier may receive a £570,000 lump sum payment plus a GIP of £19,000 per year tax free for life. If he lives to average life expectancy, this is a further million pounds, tax free, on top of the lump sum payment. These changes will be implemented following a short consultation period.

Department for Health (DH)

• Improved access to NHS dentists for Service families
Service mobility and the frequent need to find an NHS dentist in the new location can make access to dentistry difficult for Service families. DH and other health departments will trial various new ways such as making use of facilities on military bases, or provide mobile services in those areas, or make use of spare capacity elsewhere. Trials will begin by December 2008 and complete by December 2009.
DH and other health departments will work with the NHS to ensure that health areas with large Service personnel populations plan with the military communities in their areas to ensure Service families get the dental care they need.
• NHS Waiting List – Retention of Place.
Service mobility can cause repeated loss of place on NHS waiting lists. DH and other health departments will ensure that when patients move across the UK, previous waiting time will be taken into account with the expectation, all things being equal, that treatment will be within national waiting time standards.

The Department for Innovation, University and Skills (DIUS)

• Free education and training for Service leavers

Those joining the Armed Forces often commit to this career path before they can take advantage of opportunities in further or higher education. All Service leavers with over 6 years’ service will have the opportunity to achieve their first Level 3 qualification (A-level or equivalent) free from tuition fees. Alternatively, for those who want to progress to higher levels, we will fund all tuition fees for a first foundation or full degree. This means that a sailor, soldier or airman can join the Armed Forces from school, secure in the knowledge that six or more years’ service will be rewarded with the opportunity of a college or university education without tuition fees. Scottish Ministers and the Welsh Assembly Government have agreed to put in place similar measures.

The Department for Transport (DfT)

• Concessionary Bus Travel.

The statutory bus concession in England will be extended by 1 April 2011 to include seriously injured Service personnel and veterans under the age of 60.

• Automatic entitlement for Blue Badges to severely injured veterans

The Blue Badge Scheme provides a range of parking concessions across the UK for people with severe mobility problems. We will now introduce a scheme so that severely disabled veterans in England will receive automatic entitlement to a Blue Badge without further assessment. Scottish Ministers will also implement this change. The Welsh Assembly Government is consulting on plans for a Reform Strategy for the Blue Badge Scheme in Wales, with this proposal considered as part of the review.

The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)

• Extending Key Worker Status for Service leavers

Servicemen and women in England have Key Worker Status but many do not have the opportunity to purchase a home. DCLG is extending Key Worker Status to enable Service leavers to access Key Worker Living 12 months after discharge.

• High priority for injured troops in applying for adapted social housing

Seriously injured Service personnel can face delays in obtaining suitable adapted social housing where they are not given sufficient priority.
DCLG will give seriously injured personnel in England and Wales high priority for social housing. Statutory guidance will be issued to reinforce this message. Scottish Ministers will remind landlords of the existing high priority that seriously injured personnel in Scotland receive for adapted social housing.
• Housing to prevent homelessness

To help prevent homelessness, DCLG will contribute £400,000 to provide new supported housing for Service leavers in England to enable them to make a successful transition to civilian life. We will work with the Housing Corporation to deliver this initiative which will also be supported by MOD gifting land.

Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF)

• School Place Allocation

Access to schools is more difficult for Service children due to the frequency and short notice postings of their parents. DCSF is seeking Service families’ views on improving admissions, and the Schools Adjudicator is reviewing admissions for 2009 in order to identify any disadvantage for Service families so that it can be removed.

• Priority access and increased provision of State Boarding Schools

Boarding school education can reduce the impact of Service mobility on children’s education. DCSF will prioritise Service children’s access, second only to children in care, for state boarding school places. DCSF will also increase the number of places at state boarding schools by well over 100 over the next 3 years.
Additionally, through the academies programme, 3 new state boarding schools are planned.

 

 

MP WELCOMES HER COMMUNITY HERO TO PARLIAMENT

Alison Seabeck MP nominated Maisie Pullyblank, who yesterday at the House of Commons was awarded a certificate in recognition of her outstanding efforts in the Community.    Maisie has worked tirelessly for over 20 years to keep up the Leigham Community Hall, after it was vacated by the Church in 1982, and voluntarily took on the task of looking after the building.

Alison said “ I was delighted to welcome Maisie and present her with the certificate -  the hall is at the heart of the community with over 400 people using the facilities weekly and despite many setbacks she and her husband have kept this important facility running.     She has won the respect and affection of the community for all that she has done.”

The event is organised by the Experience Corps who invite Members of Parliament to nominate a chosen hero for their services to the Community.     Guests are then served with afternoon tea and meet community heroes from all over the UK, unsung heroes who devote their time and effort voluntarily to make a difference in their community.
Ends

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17th June 2008

Alan Johnson Secretary of State for Health announces Major Review relating to patients who choose to pay for drugs ............

The Review’s objectives are:
 
1. To examine current policy relating to patients who choose to pay privately for drugs that are not funded on the NHS and who, as a result, are required to pay for the care that they would otherwise have received free on the NHS.

2. To make recommendations on whether and how policy or guidance could be clarified or improved.3. In making recommendations, to take into account:
a) the importance of enabling patients to have choice and personal control over their healthcare; and
b) the need to uphold the founding principle of the NHS that treatment is based on clinical need not ability to pay, and to ensure that NHS services are fair to both patients and taxpayers.• The Review will take account of:
o the Government’s wider strategy for improving the quality and effectiveness of NHS services;
o developing policy and practice arising from the NHS Next Stage Review and Constitution.• Prof Mike Richards said:“I welcome the opportunity to lead this review. This is a complex and sensitive issue and I would urge all interested parties, particularly patients, to share their views with me. We want to do everything we can for seriously ill patients who wish to explore every avenue to treat their condition, while upholding the founding principle of the NHS that treatment is based on clinical need not ability to pay”.
 

 

 

Foreign Secretary, David Miliband’s, Commons statement on the Lisbon Treaty
16 June 2008

With permission Mr Speaker I would like to make a statement about the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty held last Thursday.  The 'no' vote on the Treaty in the Referendum is important because of our strong national interest in an effective European Union, and needs to be respected.
The next step is for the Irish government to give their views on how to proceed from here consistent with their aims for Ireland’s role in the EU. They have made clear that they need time to absorb and analyse the result and its implications, and to consult widely at home and abroad.  The Irish Prime Minister has said he is disappointed by the result but wants Ireland to continue to play a full part in the life of the EU. 
I have just returned from a meeting of EU Foreign Ministers in Luxembourg and that message was reiterated by the Irish Foreign Minister.  He emphasised the diverse nature of the Irish debate, and the overlap in the debate between issues affected by the treaty and those not.  He also expressed his appreciation that around Europe leaders had committed themselves to work cooperatively with Ireland.   He committed Ireland to work for a common European approach with Ireland at the heart of Europe.  There will be further discussion among HOSG and Foreign Ministers at the European Council this Thursday and Friday - not to take final decisions but to hear a preliminary report from the Irish government and preliminary thoughts on the next steps.
The rules of the Treaty and the EU are clear.  All 27 member states must ratify the treaty for it to come into force.  There is no question of ignoring the Irish vote or bulldozing Irish opinion. Ireland clearly cannot be bound by changes which it has not ratified.   Equally there is also no appetite for a return to years of institutional negotiation.  The EU as a whole needs to find a way forward for all countries that allows the EU to focus on the big policy issues that confront us. 
18 countries have approved the Lisbon Treaty.  The Irish government have set out clearly their respect for the right of other countries to complete their ratification processes.  My conversations with other Foreign Ministers, representing all shades of political opinion across the EU, shows this to be the very strong view.   The reason for this approach is simple: an Irish vote is determinant of an Irish position but cannot determine the ratification decision of other countries. The British view is for this Parliament to determine.
In this House and the other place there have been 24 days of debate and both houses have voted strongly in favour of the European Union (Amendment) Bill at each stage. The final stage is the Third Reading in the Other Place on Wednesday. The Government believes ratification should proceed as planned. It must be right that every country takes its own view on the Treaty in accordance with its democratic traditions. That is right according to democratic principle.  It is right in terms of our negotiating position in the EU. And it is right in terms of our national interest.
Our national interest is a strong Britain in a strong EU.   The EU now consists of 27 countries and over 490 million people.  Reform of EU institutions and working practices are important to ensure that the EU can function more effectively and cohesively, and also to ensure that the EU embraces an outward looking agenda that tackles in an effective way international issues such as migration, climate change, security and defence policy and counter terrorism.  But treaty change rightly requires unanimity across all countries.  That is why it is right that we take the time to allow the Irish government to make proposals on what to do next; right that we assert Britain's national interest in an effective EU that addresses the problems of the modern world; and right that we work to maintain the cohesion of the EU. 
That is what the Government will be doing in the weeks and months ahead, and I commend this approach to the House.   
Ends

 

 

Alison Seabeck: I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way and the hon. Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter) for securing this timely debate. My concern is that if a statement is forthcoming to finalise and explain exactly what is going on, we want something more than simply, "Your frigates are going to X, Y or Z." We need to understand the evidence behind the decision. At the moment, that is not...

 

Alison Seabeck: Will the hon. Lady clarify something? I understand why she might want a child to communicate on their own with a key worker, but many such children are very small and many of their problems are physical injuries that would require a physical examination. If a third person, other than a parent or carer, did not monitor such communication, would it not leave the key worker open to all sorts of...

speaker:Alison Seabeck : 1 Westminster Hall debate ==================================================

Devonport Naval Base (5 May 2009)

 

 

Alison Seabeck: I welcome this new clause, but does my hon. Friend the Minister not share my concern that some local authorities do not follow up on much of the information they receive, in this case from youth offending teams? There has been clear evidence of that. The man in charge of Wandsworth prison recently told an all-party group that Wandsworth council simply does not respond when adults leave...

Point of Order: New Clause 21 - Further education corporations in England: co-operation and promotion of well-being (5 May 2009)

 

Point of Order: New Clause 14 - Persons detained in youth accommodation: further provision (5 May 2009)

The maintenance of this website if funded by Alison Seabeck

• Alison Seabeck 2010