Scotch Whisky: Protected Status
10. What assessment she made of the potential impact of the definition of single malt included in the English whisky geographical indication on Scotch whisky’s protected status.
Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,832 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
- Hansard source
- Hansard source
Scotch Whisky: Protected Status
The Department has recently confirmed that English producers who do not comply with the English whisky GI can still call their products single malt, leading to the possibility of three single malts, with three differing production processes, being on the shelves as a result of that decision. How does that align with the Minister’s previous statement, asserting that the definition of single malt whisky will not be watered down?
- Hansard source
Places of Worship Renewal Fund: Second Application Round
9. What recent discussions the commissioners have had with the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport on the second round of applications for the places of worship renewal Fund.
- Hansard source
Places of Worship Renewal Fund: Second Application Round
Can the Church Commissioners confirm with the Secretary of State for Scotland how much money has flowed to the Scottish Government in Barnett consequentials as a result of the new places of worship renewal fund and, now that we are on the second round, how much is anticipated will be passed to Scotland over the four years to reflect the £92 million total allocation to the renewal fund in England?
- Hansard source
Black History Month
indicated assent.
- Hansard source
Black History Month
The hon. Member has mentioned my constituency a couple of times, and I thank her for all she has said and the tributes she has paid to my constituents. Will she join me in congratulating Councillor Faduma Mohamed, who has been elected Mayor of Ealing for this year? She is a councillor in Southall West ward, and she is the first Somali-born hijab-wearing woman to hold that position.
- Hansard source
Black History Month
I thank the Minister for her powerful opening remarks. It is a pleasure to follow my near neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler). As we have heard, the theme of this year’s Black History Month is “Honouring Our Communities”. It is all about ordinary Black British people who have done the rarely celebrated work of building this nation: of working in our factories, in the NHS, and in so many other jobs that helped this country to grow. It is about how they stood up to everyday racism, often on a daily basis, and yet pushed on for their children and their grandchildren to be able to succeed. I would love to tell that story today: of the black parents in Ealing Southall who refused to accept racism in schools and so sent their kids to supplementary schools to give them a fair chance in life; of the black workers who joined trade unions to fight racism at work; and of the black tenants who campaigned for fair access to housing. But, Madam Deputy Speaker, on 26 January this year we lost my constituent Eric Huntley, a giant of the black community, so it is only right that I pay tribute to him today. Eric is not quite an unsung hero. In fact, there is a special Nubian Jak Community Trust blue plaque above his home at 141 Coldershaw Road, which he would proudly show me whenever I passed. But he is not sung about anywhere near enough, and I hope to help rectify that today. Eric and his wife Jessica, who died in 2013, were lifelong activists and educators. Eric came here from Guyana in 1957, and Jessica followed in 1962 when they had saved enough to pay for her passage over. In 1968, they founded one of the UK’s first black-led publishing companies, Bogle-L’Ouverture Publications, from a printing press in their front room on Coldershaw Road. In 1975, they opened a bookshop specialising in black literature at 5A Chignell Place in West Ealing. Eric described it as “an oasis in the desert of west London” for the black community. With few other community spaces, it became an important cultural and academic hub, providing a drop-in centre for parents, students and teachers. The bookshop also offered career advice and help with job applications. It became known globally, with visits from black authors and artists from around the world. The bookshop, however, also came under attack from the National Front, with racist graffiti, smashed windows and excrement pushed through the letter box. Jessica told the story of how the Ku Klux Klan made threatening phone calls in which they were told they had seven days to pack up the shop and leave, and were left in no doubt about the consequences if they did not. But Eric and Jessica would not be intimidated. With other bookshop owners, the Huntleys founded Bookshop Joint Action, and campaigned against racist threats in Ealing and across London, drawing national press coverage and forcing the police to safeguard the bookshop. Eric and Jessica were key figures in the Caribbean Education and Community Workers Association, which was set up in response to the racist labelling of large numbers of black children as “educationally subnormal”. They were involved in the supplementary school system, which was almost a parallel education system that black communities were forced to set up to stop their children’s life chances being damaged by racism in the school system. They were also part of the Black Parents Movement, which campaigned against laws that allowed police to stop, search and arrest people on suspicion of intent to commit a crime, which were used disproportionately against young black people in the ’70s and ’80s. The last time I saw Eric was at a poetry event last year run by CACE—the Caribbean and African cultural centre in West Ealing that is very much a part of his legacy. He was as full of life and opinions as ever, and I know he would have lots to say about our new Prime Minister if he were still around. Eric’s death in January, at the age of 96, is truly the end of an era, but his and Jessica’s work in building a community for black people across west London will never be forgotten—from the blue plaque on the house on Coldershaw Road where they started out, to murals of them both on the windows of West Ealing community library. Most importantly, their spirit lives on in every young black Briton in Ealing Southall today who says, “I refuse to shut up. I refuse to go away. I refuse to accept things as they are.” I hope that this House will join me in honouring not just our communities but Eric Huntley, a true west London legend whose warmth, activism and determination continue to shape the lives of black Britons today.
- Hansard source
Black History Month
Does my hon. Friend agree that Nubian Jak does an amazing job in ensuring that black pioneers are recognised all around the country with blue plaques?
- Hansard source
Black History Month
Professor Arday has touched so many of us, and I will also refer to him in my speech. I thank my hon. Friend for ensuring that his name will be remembered in this place in perpetuity.
- Hansard source
Black History Month
Oh, that has made my day, Madam Deputy Speaker, because normally it is only my mum who remembers, so thank you so much. As the first black female MP Minister of this country—I was the first black female MP to stand at the Government Dispatch Box—it makes me really proud to see other black female MPs doing the same, such as the Minister for Homelessness, Democracy, Communities and Faith; I thank for her powerful opening speech. I am as proud today as I was last year when I witnessed the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare) at that Dispatch Box, and the year before when my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry North West (Taiwo Owatemi) was at that Dispatch Box. Watching generations of women coming after me makes me extremely proud. The only thing I would ask the Government to do is to make sure that this debate is scheduled in the diary every year, so that we do not have this merry-go-round of applying to the Backbench Business Committee and then being told that the debate will be held in Government time. Let us just put it in the diary and have a set date, because this debate is becoming more and more fundamental. As was mentioned earlier, we are witnessing the unapologetic rise of the far right, the rise of racism and the rise of white supremacy. When Reform-led St Helens council shamefully announces that it will no longer formally observe Black History Month, we know that the rest of us have to make sure that we observe it, put it in the books and fight to ensure that black history is not erased, because black history is indeed a part of British history. I want to start by acknowledging the man, who was mentioned earlier, who brought Black History Month to the UK—Mr Akyaaba Addai-Sebo. We owe him a great debt of gratitude for his tireless work to ensure that black history, black achievement and black identity are not erased, but celebrated. The theme this year is “Honouring Our Communities.” Recognising the everyday contributions of black people across the whole UK, whose work often goes unseen, is vital. We have lost many of those people over the last year, and I apologise in advance for the many deserving names that I will not mention: Yvonne Brewster, the pioneer who co-founded Talawa Theatre Company; Gerlin Bean, the British black feminist and community organiser; Uriah Rennie, the trailblazing premier league referee; Syd Lawrence, the pioneering black England cricketer; Trevor Toussaint, the British television and theatre actor; and Sonny Blacks, one of the founders of Notting Hill carnival. Some of my personal friends have passed away: one of my closest friends, Kanya King, the British businesswoman and founder of the MOBO—Music of Black Origin—awards, who created that awards ceremony to recognise black music when the major industries did not; Bonnie Greer, the playwright, novelist and critic; Rennick Thomas, affectionately known as Tom, who had a bakery in Forest Gate and on Ridley Road, who was in a bakery war with my dad over who could produce the best hardo bread and bun, and who was my mum’s best friend after my dad died; and, lastly, Professor Jason Arday, who was an exceptional scholar of race and inequality. He joined the faculty of education at the University of Cambridge in 2023, and in August 2026 he was hounded to his death, the hunt started by a self-proclaimed eugenicist and white supremacist. It would be incomplete to honour our communities without acknowledging what has been taken away. Last Saturday, I attended a reparations conference organised by my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (Bell Ribeiro-Addy) and it made me think of something. Madam Deputy Speaker, if I stole your Rolex watch, would it become mine? Of course not. If I gave that Rolex watch to my daughter, would it become hers? Of course not. A gift does not erase a theft. If she passed it to her child, would it suddenly become a family heirloom? Of course not. Time does not turn theft into ownership. Now imagine, Madam Deputy Speaker, that your daughter discovers the truth that your watch was stolen. Would she not have every right to ask for that watch back? Suppose I used that stolen watch as collateral to get a bank loan and bought a house, and passed that wealth on to my children? The benefit of that theft would be in my family for generation after generation. Some will say, “But today’s generation did not commit the wrong.” That would be true, but your daughter did not suffer the theft. Others will say, “But the past is the past. Leave it alone.” But if the benefits of the injustice are still being enjoyed, then the consequences are not in the past at all, but are actually in the present. That is the principle behind reparations. It is about recognising that the passage of time does not transform an injustice into a rightful inheritance. If time alone can turn stolen property into rightful ownership, what we are actually saying is that stealing is okay—we merely have to wait until people die and hope that the truth is not exposed or told. The issue is not about inherited guilt, but about inherited benefit and inherited loss. If we would not accept that argument for a stolen watch, why should we accept it for stolen labour, stolen wealth, stolen land or stolen opportunity? When we look at the world today, we still see the legacy of historic injustice. Across Africa and the Caribbean, the effects of centuries of exploitation remain visible. We can all recognise the iconic Louis Vuitton pattern, but where did it originate from? The Adinkra symbols of the Akan people of Ghana predate many luxury brands by centuries. These are symbols rich in meaning and history. The oldest surviving Adinkra cloth is kept in a place that holds the largest collection of stolen property in the world: the British Museum. Where is the line between appreciation and appropriation? Appreciation acknowledges and credits the source; appropriation too often profits from culture while erasing its origins. Exploiting indigenous cultures for profit should not be normalised or accepted. That is why the theme of honouring our communities is so important. The Maasai Intellectual Property Initiative is so powerful, because it was established to address the unauthorised use of Maasai branding. It enables businesses to work with the Maasai tribe ethically, ensuring that the benefits flow back to the Maasai people. It is so important in this debate, when we are honouring communities, that we give back, especially what is stolen and what is owed. Madam Deputy Speaker, I do not just talk the talk; I walk the walk. I created the Bernie Grant leadership programme, the £1 student fees to get young people engaged in politics, and the parliamentary black caucus, because change will not happen without action. Sometimes this period of time feels extremely overwhelming when we think about the rise of racism and the far right, and all that is thrown at us. The civil rights activist John Lewis said: “Do not get lost in a sea of despair. Be hopeful, be optimistic. Ours is not the struggle of one day, one week or one year. Ours is the struggle of a lifetime, or even many lifetimes, and each one of us, in every generation, must do our part.” So, my question to those of us here and to the country is: have you done your part in this struggle? For me, I want to see the end to racist practices and structures in different institutions all across the world in my lifetime. We should not be afraid to call out wrongdoing. Whether it is violence against women and girls, paedophiles, class war, genocide or racism, we need to call it out so we can end it in our lifetime. John Lewis also said: “Never be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble”. I am known to get in a little bit of trouble from time to time. I may have got into trouble earlier; we will soon see. But I show up. International Women’s Day debates—I show up. International Men’s Day debates—I show up. Debates on white working class boys—I show up. LGBTQI+ debates—I show up. If we are going to beat the racists, we have to show up. We have show up for each other. We have to speak out and show up to protect black and brown people. We have to show up for them when they are being abused and discriminated against online. We have to show up. When we show up and when we unite, we will never be defeated.
- Hansard source
Black History Month
And sons.
- Hansard source
Black History Month
I thank my hon. Friend for her incredible conference last week, which saw thousands of people attend, and the debates we had. One of the signs that resonated for me, in terms of reparations, was “First stop the harm”. Does she agree that that is a fundamental part of reparations?
- Hansard source
Immigration and Asylum Bill (Ninth sitting)
My hon. Friend is giving a powerful speech. It is right that our immigration and asylum system should, first and foremost, be fair to the population of the United Kingdom. Does she agree that, on the question of whether we can remove people who have committed serious crimes, it is also unfair to legitimate asylum seekers, who risk being tarred with the same brush, with their reasons for fleeing often serious and horrible situations in other countries coming under suspicion?
- Hansard source
Immigration and Asylum Bill (Ninth sitting)
Notwithstanding the abject failure of the last Government to manage our immigration system, there are many ways to skin a cat. The hon. Member mentioned Eritrean immigrants or asylum seekers and deportations. He may have noticed that the Government are looking to work with the Eritrean Government to say that there will be no access to visas to the UK for Eritreans unless that Government agree to take people back. There are many ways to address this. Those on the Opposition Benches repeatedly mention the ECHR. We have had a long debate about the part of this Bill that addresses article 8 of the ECHR, which has been problematic, but does he ultimately want to throw the baby out with the bathwater? Do he and his constituents care about article 2, the right to life; article 3, the prohibition of torture; article 4, the prohibition of slavery; article 7, no punishment without law; or article 9—something very close to my heart as the UK special envoy for freedom of religion and belief—the freedom of thought, conscience and religion? Is it not true that the Opposition’s approach is to simply throw the baby out with the bathwater?
- Hansard source
Immigration and Asylum Bill (Ninth sitting)
Not to do my hon. Friend’s work for her, but the hon. Member for Wimbledon asked why anyone else in receipt of benefits should not make a contribution. Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a clear distinction? By definition, if someone coming here to seek asylum has not contributed to the wider economy—and if we can guarantee that historically—that differentiates them from someone who is already here and most likely did, in most cases, make a contribution, through work or otherwise, to the benefits that they receive? As I have already mentioned, before my time in Parliament I ran a homelessness charity, and we often had asylum seekers in our accommodation—which is literally behind where we are sitting right now, in Southwark—who were desperate to make contributions. They repeatedly told us—they made it very clear—that they wanted to make a financial contribution to the country that had given them sanctuary.
- Hansard source
Immigration and Asylum Bill (Ninth sitting)
I am delighted to hear the Opposition spokesman say that this is not a refugee tax. Does he agree, as we approach other issues in the Bill and elsewhere, that redistributions of funding and contributions in other areas are not always a tax?
- Hansard source
Immigration and Asylum Bill (Tenth sitting)
At the danger of reiterating a point from earlier, does my hon. Friend agree that, not only does the contributory principle approach a sense of fairness, but it enables a dignifying process for asylum seekers to show that they actually belong—that they are part of something that we are all part of?
- Hansard source
Black History Month
My hon. Friend reminds me of my grandad, who came here from British Guiana to serve in the second world war, and my great-grandad, who arrived here from Liberia in 1925 and also served this country in the second world war. Today, people of my colour are made by some to feel like we do not belong in this country, but we have built and we have protected this country. Does she agree that people who deploy that rhetoric are wrong and need to start withdrawing from it?
- Hansard source
Black History Month
Last night, I joined the 1987 Committee, set up by the fantastic Fatima Kamara and her team. As hon. Members can tell from its name, it recognises the year—that historic year—in which the Mother of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), entered this House. It aims to help young black people get those opportunities to get involved in politics and in political and public life. Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating the 1987 Committee on the wonderful work it is doing with young black people to get them into the type of arena that we are in?
- Hansard source
Business of the House
It is a tough time for motorists, which is why it is particularly galling that tonight Hillingdon council will meet to decide whether to increase parking charges by more than 70%. It is the second rise in just a year. Does the Leader of the House agree that that is bad for motorists and for businesses? Can we have a debate in this House to discuss what more we can all do to support motorists at this difficult time?
- Hansard source
Sewage Discharges
2. What steps she is taking to help reduce sewage discharges into waterways.
- Hansard source
Sewage Discharges
A recent report by Surfers Against Sewage alleges that water companies across England failed to report more than 50,000 sewage spills within the legally required timeframe in just the first half of this year. Like many residents across Weston, Worle and the villages, I am deeply concerned about the impact of sewage pollution and will always urge the Government to go faster and harder to tackle the crisis. Will the Minister tell us what more the Government will do to hold water companies to account in coastal communities such as mine, so constituencies have confidence that our much-loved waterways and coastlines are protected?
- Hansard source
Business of the House
This week is the Good Things Foundation’s Get Online Week. Thousands across my constituency and millions across the country still struggle to get online, to stay online and to be safe online. Local community groups run by wonderful people, such as Ivi Paduim-Quan, are so often working on a shoestring to deliver digital skills to those most in need. Will the Leader of the House acknowledge the cross-Parliament and cross-Government responsibility for this problem and, if possible, provide time for more parliamentary debate to keep this topic a priority for the House and to get the resources to the places they need to be?
- Hansard source
Digital Government
Thank you so much, Ms Furniss. I am really grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for allocating time for this statement on the Science and Technology Committee’s report entitled “Rewiring the state: Delivering digital government” and to discuss the Government response. I place on the record my thanks to the Committee Clerks and specialists who supported this complex inquiry, as well as to all those who gave evidence, in person or in writing. Both the previous Government and the current one have spoken of their ambition to make the UK a truly digital state, transforming citizens’ experiences of the health service, the education and justice systems, and indeed all public services, increasing productivity and efficiency and reducing costs. I am a tech evangelist; I believe that technology should make the world work better for people, and my Committee welcomes and supports the Government’s ambitions, but our report raised serious concerns about how achievable they are. In our report, we identified four building blocks for successful digital transformation. The first is money. Money always matters, but we found that inadequate data on digital spend prevents the Government from making informed decisions or holding those responsible to account. The second is people. Do we have the right people and skills to deliver digital transformation and cultural change to ensure that skills are valued and embedded in leadership roles? For example, how many permanent secretaries have the digital experience required? The third is information and data security. There are serious data hygiene failures across the public sector. Public bodies hold public data on trust; it needs to meet the highest standards. The fourth is delivery. We need a detailed and measurable plan to ensure the success of the digital transformation agenda. We also identified four barriers to realising the benefits of digital transformation. The first is hype. Both tech companies and the Government are guilty of this. Tech companies hype their solutions, often without reference to the problems, and the Government talk up the impact, such as the supposed £45 billion annual productivity saving from digitalisation. Hype undermines the credibility of the Government’s arguments, confuses and demoralises civil servants, and encourages the belief that over-optimism, rather than achievement and honesty, will be rewarded. The second barrier is legacy systems. Outdated, obsolete or unsupported IT infrastructure, systems, hardware or processes pose an unacceptable level of risk. Our report found that, without a plan to address legacy systems, the Government’s digital ambitions will struggle to be achieved. The third barrier is vendor lock-in. If significant costs or reductions in functionality are associated with changing vendors, we have vendor lock-in, whereby vendors can hold the Government hostage, raise prices, require additional contracts or reduce performance. The public sector depends on a small number of large digital and technology providers—such as Palantir, Microsoft and Amazon Web Services—and the Government appear to be worryingly comfortable with that. The fourth barrier is lack of technology sovereignty. While the over-reliance on a small number of foreign vendors exists, the Government cannot set out to deliver their own sovereign digital agenda for the United Kingdom or fully support a competitive UK tech ecosystem. The Government should set out a public sector definition of sovereignty. Palantir is a case study in three of the four barriers. Palantir’s relationship with the NHS began during the covid-19 pandemic when it was paid a nominal £1 fee to provide what its chief executive Louis Mosley described to us as “aggregating data”. It is now hyped as being uniquely essential to the NHS’s mission to save lives. It is a clear example of growing vendor lock-in as well as an over-reliance on foreign tech giants. Our report called on the Government to commit to exercising the February 2027 break clause in the federated data platform contract. I thank the Government for their response, which came from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, although I understand other Departments were involved, so it is a welcome example of cross-Government working. Some parts of it are excellent, particularly the commitment to develop a strategy within the Government Digital Service to end vendor lock-in. That is a real step forward, as is the commitment to strong central co-ordination to drive progress on fixing legacy systems across the public sector, which is what we recommended. An action plan is promised, as well as a remediation plan, subject to security considerations. The Government also reveal that 36 tech company employees have had access to either the federated data or specific datasets assigned by NHS England when initially Palantir said that none of its employees had access to it. So there is more transparency. Other parts of the response are less encouraging. Significantly, in response to our recommendation that GDS develop and publish a framework to evaluate the performance of digital spend, we are told that they cannot count spend by Department. So as we embark on a complete digital transformation, we do not know how much is being spent and on what. How can we ensure that Ministers make informed decisions and can be held to account? Every single Government Department might be buying the same cloud services from the same vendor, and we will not know or be able to assess our resilience or performance. Despite repeated data breaches, the Government refuse to share which public bodies and Departments meet basic data hygiene practices. That is due to “security considerations”. So we cannot hold Government to account for bad data management because it might alert the Chinese—I fear they know our limitations better than we do. Rolling out AI-driven public services over bad data infrastructure is a recipe for disaster and will require strong, rigorous standards and implementation to address it. On open source, the Government are inconsistent and contradictory. They agree it is an important tool against vendor lock-in, but reject our recommendation that public bodies prioritise open-source tools and technology over proprietary offerings, citing the “essential commercial accountability” offered by suppliers of proprietary software. So is open source a good or a bad thing? The Government did not even engage with our request to provide impact assessments relating to the US CLOUD Act 2018, under which US headquartered companies can in principle be compelled to provide the US Government with access to UK customers’ data held in their UK data centres. The Government accept the need to strengthen sovereign capability and they promise updates, but reject a cross-Government strategy on sovereignty or a definition. They confirm efforts to support UK start-ups and scale-ups through procurement. Two further key issues: we learned for the first time that the digital inter-ministerial group has been replaced by an official-level bimonthly digital executive committee, which sounds like a significant downgrade, just as digital is moved from the centre of Government—the Cabinet Office—to DCMS. Yet there is no commitment to appointing a dedicated Cabinet-level Minister responsible for driving effective digital transformation across the public sector. Yesterday in the Committee hearing with Ministers on the machinery of government changes, the diffuse nature of responsibilities was apparent. Ministers and officials spoke repeatedly about working together effectively, but it does not give confidence that digital transformation will be achieved when there is not one person accountable for it or able to impose digital standards. Finally on Palantir, the Government state that if a decision is taken not to extend Palantir’s contract, then the contract includes measures to support transition and continuity of services. I have since had a letter from the Minister for Health Innovation emphasising the significant costs associated with moving to another vendor while denying that there is vendor lock-in. I am seeking further clarification. The British people deserve a modern, flexible digital state designed to meet their needs, with public services that improve their lives. Trust is essential to achieving that and bad data hygiene, outdated systems, vendor lock-in, hyped solutions and lack of sovereign capability is a recipe for failure. Without clear leadership that can drive and deliver the scale of change needed, we remain very concerned that there will be no successful digital rewiring of the state.
- Hansard source
Digital Government
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his questions, which go to the heart of the matter: the relationship between the public sector and business, and that between the public sector and the people it is meant to serve. On business, the public sector should be able to call on the support of businesses as they themselves adopt digital products and services. It should be able to include many different businesses, from Northern Ireland to the north-east of England and across the country, rather than being reliant on a small number of often monopolistic providers. That is a point that we make very strongly in our report. It is important that the interface between the Government and business be open and competitive and not be monopolised. That is one of the things we think that the Government’s response to our report, in terms of looking to ensure the end of vendor lock-in, should help to promote. On the interface with the public, the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right: the public should not need to be digital experts or super-knowledgeable on AI. The responsibility falls within Government to ensure that people’s data is safe and secure and that the public can trust the Government in handling that data, and to ensure that we have the best digital infrastructure, and transparent providers and suppliers as well.
- Hansard source
Digital Government
I thank my right hon. Friend for her question and the expertise she brings to this debate, particularly with regard to working with our European allies. I very much agree that we should be working with our European allies on this matter. As I have set out, there are concerns about Palantir, specifically with regard to vendor lock-in, hype and sovereign capability, but that underlines a wider desire for effective competition in the supply of technology. That is competition in terms of the companies and organisations but also the countries that offer the technology; we do not want to be dependent on one country. Europe should develop its own capacity, with companies that can deliver world-leading, excellent services. This should be a joint endeavour and ambition, and I was very pleased to meet with the French ambassador yesterday to discuss areas of shared ambition and concern when it comes to technology and its delivery and roll-out. Public trust is dependent on an understanding that the Government share the values of the public, and the public services do as well. Having a European technology offering in open competition with other countries and other offerings is a worthwhile ambition.
- Hansard source
Sustainable Farming Incentive: Application Process
The sustainable farming incentive scheme that we inherited from the Conservatives was complicated and skewed towards the biggest farms. We have made it fairer and more focused, and this year we ran two application windows, received nearly 19,000 applications and allocated £310 million per year for the next three years. We will open SFI27 as early as we can, and we will work with farmers to see what we can do to change it, including considering alternatives to the first come, first served basis.
- Hansard source
Sustainable Farming Incentive: Application Process
Farmers are bearing the costs of extreme weather, which is why we are supporting them with an extra £65 million to tackle drought, protect crops and build resilience, alongside grants for new technology to boost productivity. For as many farms as possible to benefit from the SFI, we gave small farms a priority in window 1 this year and we have allocated £310 million per year—nearly £1 billion for the next three years—for the scheme. The Government will also invest up to £15 million to help farmers and growers build on-farm reservoirs.
- Hansard source
Sustainable Farming Incentive: Application Process
My hon. Friend does a great deal of outreach to the farming community and I commend him for it. We have launched the farming road map, which is the first 25-year plan for farming to give certainty and direction in a very long time. We have set up the Farming and Food Partnership Board, which is looking at how we can improve productivity and profitability, and working on horticulture and poultry growth plans. There will be more to come.
- Hansard source
Sustainable Farming Incentive: Application Process
I argue with the hon. Lady’s characterisation of the “collapse” of the scheme. We should not forget that SFI26 made nearly £1 billion of support available for the next three years for environmentally sustainable farming. We have 70,000 multi-year environment land management agreements in place, which are making sure that we support environmentally friendly farming. I would not characterise that as a collapse. I note that the Tories did not spend the whole farming budget when they were in government, they botched Brexit, which led to a 22% fall in trade, and they concluded an Australian trade deal that Tory Secretaries of State now admit has sold out British farmers.
- Hansard source
Waste Crime
Waste crime is fuelled by serious organised crime, and it is blighting our communities. We are tackling it: since April, we have made 21 arrests and shut down 339 illegal waste sites. Police operations have triggered more than 30 criminal investigations, and we are strengthening enforcement and disrupting those who are profiting from waste crime.
- Hansard source
Waste Crime
I know how tirelessly my hon. Friend and her neighbour, my right hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley, have campaigned on this issue. Waste crime blights local communities, and the Government are committed to tackling it. The Environment Agency continues to investigate activity at Simonswood, and the site will be considered for clearance alongside other illegal waste sites.
- Hansard source
Waste Crime
As a Yorkshirewoman myself, I will not disagree about the beauty of Yorkshire, though it might get me into trouble. I am happy to join the right hon. Member in praising the Wombles of Hambleton. I need him to show me a photograph of them out doing this job next time we bump into each other. Many community-organised litter picks and clean-ups are going on in all our communities, including one at Seacombe in my own constituency a couple of weekends ago. Much litter is picked up, but we have a lot of work to do to persuade people to be more responsible by not dropping it in the first place.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
We have had a difficult summer, with a prolonged period without rain, which has put enormous stress on our landscapes. Our farms and natural resources are under increased pressure due to climate change. The Prime Minister has asked me to ensure that communities have more of a say in how water is managed, which is all the more important given the summer that we have had. The warnings are clear: if we are to be resilient when it comes to water and food security, we have to help farmers farm differently. Resilience is also about ensuring that the poorest in our communities can have access to good, nutritious food.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
I think my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), the Minister for water and flooding, visited last week, so my hon. Friend is obviously trying to get a brace. The Government are backing farm profitability through £11.8 billion for sustainable farming and food production; investment in productivity and innovation; and action to make supply chains fairer. We are also working to open up new trading opportunities. The farming road map sets out how Government will support farmers in cutting costs, accessing markets and building resilient businesses.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
The issues around inheritance tax were dealt with by my predecessor. It was not a humiliating U-turn; it was the result of listening to what people were telling us. If the right hon. Lady wants change but describes a Government change as a humiliating U-turn, I am not quite sure whose side she is on.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
The right hon. Lady has some brass neck to stand up and say that. When she was in the Treasury, food inflation was at 19.1%. We know that some of the pressures on energy and power, which are in turn putting such pressure on everybody, across all aspects of our economy, are due to global instabilities and what is happening in the middle east. I met Cheerful Charlie, and he is a reasonable man. By the way, I did not stand him up three times; there were some holds in the diary that they put in. I spend my time listening to farming communities, and I will not take any lessons from the right hon. Lady.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
There are many legal opinions on that issue. I am more than happy to ensure that the hon. Member gets a meeting, but lawyers have very many different opinions.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
We did simplify the SFI this year, having inherited a scheme that had not only no budget control, but over 140 different actions. I am looking at this issue, and am more than happy to talk to the right hon. Gentleman about the principles he has outlined as we work to introduce a simpler, easier to use scheme in 2027.
- Hansard source
Topical Questions
I presume that if I give the correct answer, the local pubs will be more welcoming than if I do not, but I am happy to be in touch with the right hon. Gentleman about how we proceed from here.