url
stringlengths 57
101
| date_str
stringdate 2023-04-03 00:00:00
2025-06-30 00:00:00
| title
stringlengths 0
212
⌀ | speaker
stringlengths 0
249
| data
stringlengths 0
1.26M
| chamber
stringclasses 6
values | country
stringclasses 3
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Anneliese Dodds
|
Increasing access to employment opportunities for disabled people and improving the retention of disabled workers were urgent before, and they are even more urgent now. My right hon. Friend did not mention the Mayfield review, although she has just mentioned it in response to a question. Can I please push her on that review? First, can she expedite it; secondly, can it include disabled people more meaningfully than it has until now; and thirdly, will it indicate how the Government will implement our manifesto commitment to increase access to reasonable adjustments?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
The Mayfield review will be reporting before the Budget. Sir Charlie Mayfield wants to work closely with disabled people and the organisations that represent them. He has seen inspiring examples of what good employers are doing and good things that other countries are doing, and that will provide some insightful lessons. The Minister for Social Security and Disability has already said that we are looking at whether we should put in place a timeframe within which employers need to respond to requests for reasonable adjustments. We want to make sure that those adjustments are made as quickly as possible, so that more disabled people can get work and stay in work.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Helen Maguire
|
Why are the proposed PIP cuts still being applied to new claimants, many of whose needs are as urgent and severe as those of existing claimants?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
The reason we are protecting existing claimants and beginning to focus PIP on those with higher needs in future is because we want a system that is sustainable and lasts. I do not believe it is sustainable to have a doubling of the number of PIP claims every decade, adding 1,000 people a day. The rate is rising faster than the increase in prevalence of disabled people in this country. The truth is that the parts of the country that have the highest disability benefit claims and incapacity benefit claims are the places that were decimated by the Tories in the '80s and '90s, when whole industries closed. Those places are yet to have the investment they need to create jobs and have not had the investment in the NHS. I have always believed in the social model of disability. We have to put these things right urgently, because disabled people deserve a better life than they had under the Conservatives.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Darren Paffey
|
I thank my right hon. Friend for her work on this issue and for making the statement today, although I share hon. Members' concerns that making changes before a review is putting the cart before the horse. I must just press her on this. While I welcome the changes that bring immediate security and protection for existing claimants, can she please confirm whether, if an existing claimant or someone on a legacy benefit is reassessed, the new measures or the existing ones will apply? On carers, future applicants will face increased eligibility criteria. Will carers be included in the co-production review carried out by the Minister for Social Security and Disability?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
Absolutely. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Social Security and Disability and I met carers' organisations and many other disability organisations the day after we published the Green Paper. I want to be crystal clear: people who are currently on PIP and are on PIP by the time these changes come in--November 2026 --will remain on that benefit under those old rules.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Jim Allister
|
In the first lines of her statement, the Secretary of State affirmed that this Government believe in equality. Where is the equality in evaluating one person's eligibility for the daily living component of PIP on the practical consequences of their disability, and evaluating another on the date of their application?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
This is a really common issue in the benefit system. If we could never change it, we could not undertake reforms to make it sustainable for the future. Existing claimants will remain on the current rules, even if and when they are reassessed. Changes will come in for new claimants from November 2026, but our review will look, as I have said many times, at the different activities and descriptors, and the points that they will get, because we need to make sure that this vital benefit is sustainable for the future.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Ruth Jones
|
I thank the Secretary of State for coming this afternoon. I welcome her announcement that the Timms review of the PIP process will be undertaken in partnership with people with disabilities; that is critical, because in more than 70% of appeals, PIP outcomes are overturned in favour of the claimant. We need to get the assessment right first time and every time for all applicants. Does she agree?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
Yes.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Josh Babarinde
|
I decided to go into politics because I believed that luck played too great a role in shaping people's course and their quality of life, but unfortunately the system that has been announced today leaves the fate of many disabled people down to luck--to whether they applied before November 2026, or after. I hope that the Secretary of State will reverse her decision and drop the Bill tomorrow, but in case she will not, may I ask her to commit to engaging with Kathy, a disabled person in my constituency who runs a Facebook group of 44,000 people advising on PIP and disability-related matters, to ensure that their voices are at the centre of the plans?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
I will absolutely commit to ensuring that those views and voices are heard, and I am sure that, as a strong champion for his constituency, the hon. Gentleman will do so as well. However, I do not believe that this is about luck; I believe that certain parts of the country, and different types of people, have been repeatedly neglected and denied opportunities and support. There is nothing about luck here. This is about people and places that have been written off and denied opportunities for too long. Governments, if they are determined, can make a difference, and that is what we intend to do.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Tonia Antoniazzi
|
I have conducted a survey of my constituents on the subject of welfare reform, and I submitted the findings to the consultation. I have also met disability groups across Swansea and disabled constituents to hear their concerns. The problems that I have found to be the most prevalent in Gower are the incompetence of Capita and the inconsistencies of Department for Work and Pensions decision makers. That is why I genuinely welcome the announcement of the Timms review, but what reassurances can the Secretary of State give that the review will address this matter and give people confidence in the decision-making process?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
My hon. Friend should, 100%, send me the details of those findings and concerns. One of the reasons we are not only bringing back face-to-face assessments but recording them as standard is our wish to get to the bottom of this and make sure that we put it right.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Jim Dickson
|
Over the weekend, I had the privilege of engaging in a number of in-depth conversations with people and families living with disabilities, and I thank Dartford's Kindness Community for arranging that event. One comment that I heard again and again from the people I talked to was about how poor the health service had been at helping disabled people to manage their conditions over many years. How can the DWP and the Department of Health and Social Care work together to ensure that disabled people are properly supported and helped into work?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
My hon. Friend has made an important point. There is far more that the health service can do to help people with long-term sickness and disability to manage their conditions better, because they cannot do it on their own; they need the right help and support. Our joint work and health unit is working on precisely those issues, and I am indeed working closely with my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary, because getting people back to health and back to work is so important. We know that good work is critical to good health, and good health is critical to people getting into work. Those are two sides of the same coin. We must end these false divides and get this sorted out, so that we can help people to fulfil their ambitions and work.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Marsha de Cordova
|
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. It is vital for us to have a social security system that protects the most vulnerable, the ill and the disabled, so will she clarify one provision in the Bill? Will both the standard element and the health element of universal credit rise in line with inflation? If that does not happen, disabled people will be pushed further into poverty and hardship.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
I want to make it very clear that the combined rate of the standard allowance and the health top-up will indeed rise in line with inflation, so that existing claimants are protected in real terms, and the incomes of those with severe lifelong conditions and those at the end of their life are also protected in real terms through the combined universal credit standard allowance top-up.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Andy McDonald
|
The Bill still leaves over PS3.5 billion of cuts falling on disabled people and unpaid carers, with hundreds of thousands of new claimants set to lose thousands of pounds each year. Protections for existing claimants are welcome, but a two-tier system will generate hardship for many and create societal divisions. We are being asked to vote without vital evidence--without the Office for Budget Responsibility impact assessment, or the Timms and Mayfield reviews. Serious questions remain unanswered, and we are without clarity on outcomes and implementation. Will the Secretary of State continue to listen, withdraw this Bill, and co-design welfare reform with disabled people's groups?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
I say to my hon. Friend, for whom I have great respect, that none of this takes into account the biggest ever investment in employment support for sick and disabled people. People have often said, "Wait for the OBR's assessment," but we have published very clear evidence that good employment programmes can help disabled people into work--programmes such as Work Choice, a Labour programme ended by the Tories, which saw 40% more disabled people in work for eight years. That is based not just on economic theory, but on practical reality. That is the difference that this Labour Government want to make.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Nadia Whittome
|
Disabled people's organisations have been clear that even with these concessions, they oppose this Bill. The Government talk of co-production of the PIP review, but it is not co-production if the starting point is delivering cuts, and if the Government are asking disabled people where they would prefer those cuts to be, rather than how we can create a system that truly supports disabled people. Does the Secretary of State not accept that, after months of the Government ignoring disabled people, the only way that meaningful co-production can take place is if the Bill is pulled and they go back to the drawing board?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
I gently say to my hon. Friend that we will protect existing claimants. That is the very purpose of the announcements we have made today. No existing PIP claimants, or people receiving universal credit and the health top-up, will be put into poverty as a result of this Bill--far from it. We are changing the system so that many more sick and disabled people who want to work can actually get work. That is about building a better life in future. This Labour Government believe that if someone can work and wants to work, they should have the chance and choice to do so. Some 200,000 sick and disabled people say that they would work right now with the right help and support. We are not cutting the support for that; we are actually increasing it, because we believe that work is the key to a better life.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Kirsteen Sullivan
|
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and for the recent move to protect existing claimants. I appreciate that the adult disability payment is devolved to the Scottish Government. However, my constituents are really concerned about the potential for different qualifying criteria across the nations, which may result in limited access to passported benefits from November 2026. What assurances can the Secretary of State give my constituents that they will not lose the benefits to which they currently have access, and the vital support on which their households rely? Following the Secretary of State's response to my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes), it is really unclear whether the House is being asked to agree to a four-point assessment without knowing the outcome of the Timms review with regard to descriptors--or could that review result in more fundamental reforms that would rip up the current PIP system?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
On my hon. Friend's first point, she will know that PIP is devolved to Scotland. I believe that the Scottish Government are reviewing the ADP at the minute, including the eligibility criteria. That will be a matter for them, but I want to be clear to the House that the new four-point minimum requirement will come into force in November 2026 for new claims, and existing claimants will be protected. Of course, the Timms review will look at the different descriptors and the points for them in future, but the four-point minimum and the daily living component for new claimants will remain.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Matthew Patrick
|
The Conservative party presided over multiple reforms of welfare, and the results were a disaster. Perhaps cruellest of all was the fact that adults who had an irreversible health condition, and who could never work, were forced to go through reassessment after reassessment, and to jump through hoops. Can my right hon. Friend please confirm that, with these Labour reforms, that cruel legacy will be ended once and for all?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
Yes, I can. I believe that the unnecessary and unacceptable stress that that created was not right, and we will fix that with the reforms in the Bill, because people need to live in dignity and security.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Mark Ferguson
|
The Labour party is defined by work and by the dignity of work, and so is my community in Gateshead and Whickham. People have the belief that they should be able to work to provide for themselves, their family and their community, but too many in my community have been let down by successive Governments of all parties who have not created the jobs we need and by a failed system. Not one person who has spoken today--not one--has defended the existing indefensible system. What will the Secretary of State do to ensure that communities like mine, where work or a lack of work is the problem, receive the support we need?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
My hon. Friend speaks powerfully about Labour's historic mission to help people who can work to do so, and about the fact that his constituents have been denied that support for so long. We want to transform that. With an ageing society in which more of us will be living with a disability or with one, two or more long-term chronic conditions and in which we will be caring for people, we believe that we have to change the welfare state. We have to provide more support to help people work, and the world of work needs to change. That is why not only have we commissioned the Mayfield review, but we are putting in the biggest ever employment support for sick and disabled people, with the additional PS300 million of support I have announced today.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Caroline Nokes
|
Order. I encourage Members to keep their questions short, or they will not all get in.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Harpreet Uppal
|
Having met disabled constituents over the last few months, I have no doubt that the initial proposals caused anxiety, so I do welcome the changes for existing claimants and the Timms review. However, can I urge the Secretary of State to look at the sequencing to make sure that the review happens before we assess new claimants? I have one final point about the assessors themselves. There is no doubt but that the involvement of private companies such as Capita and Maximus has caused problems, as has having assessors who do not understand health conditions. Can we make sure that we look at that properly?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
Yes, we are absolutely committed to looking at that. In fact, we announced in the Green Paper that we are overhauling our entire safeguarding process, including the training of assessors, because we want to get this right. We will not only bring back face-to-face assessments, but record them as standard, which I believe together will make a real difference to the process and ensure we get the decisions right first time.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Ian Byrne
|
These so-called concessions go nowhere near far enough, and tomorrow I will be voting against these cruel cuts, but I want to ask this. Can the Secretary of State name a single disabled person-led organisation that supports this legislation?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
I understand why disability organisations are making the points they are. That is their job; our job is different. Our job is to take the right decisions--ones that we believe are fair--to make sure we have a system that works for the people who need support, but that is also sustainable for the future. That is not easy--that is a statement of the obvious--but I believe we have a fair package. It is a package that protects existing claimants because they have come to rely on that support, as is often the case in the social security system. It begins to tackle the perverse incentive that encourages people to define themselves as incapable of work just to be able to afford to live, and it puts in place employment support to help the hundreds of thousands of disabled people and people with long-term conditions who want to work. That is the right way forward, and I hope that my hon. Friend and his constituents will get involved in the Timms review to ensure future changes make this vital benefit fit for the future.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Rachel Taylor
|
Last week, I spoke to one of my constituents, Mike, a disabled person who speaks on behalf of many disabled constituents across Warwickshire. He is really pleased that he will have the right to try work, and he is also really pleased that disabled people will be treated with dignity and will be part of the co-production of the new proposals. However, he is still fearful that these changes may mean losses and difficult situations for disabled people like him. Can the Secretary of State reassure Mike that one of her Ministers will meet him to discuss these changes? In particular, how will we look at fluctuating conditions such as ME and MS, which my partner suffers from, so that such people do not lose out and so that we make the changes positive for every disabled person up and down the country?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
We want to work with MPs, disabled people, their organisations and other experts, as part of co-producing the Timms review. The point about fluctuating health conditions is really important and something we have to crack for the future, because so many people have those conditions. They may be able to work one day and not another, or to work three days at home but not five days. We must make it fit for the future, because the reality is that we are living longer, more of us have disabilities and more of us have two, three or more long-term conditions. The welfare state in its broadest sense--the NHS, as well as the benefits system--and the world of work have to wake up to that. As we live longer, we will have to work for longer, but we have to make that practical and decent.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Clive Efford
|
This is a relatively small Bill, but one core part of it has now been delegated to the PIP review and that will not report until November 2026. Can my right hon. Friend say just how many disabled groups have indicated they want to participate in the PIP review? She has set out a number of red lines today that I doubt they would agree with. If they were to propose that we do not have a two-tier system, what would be the Government's response?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
The Minister for Social Security and Disability and I have met many disabled organisations. In fact, he has spoken to many already about the review. We will continue to discuss with them precisely how the system of co-production will work, but I want to assure my hon. Friend that it is serious. We want to make sure people's views and voices are heard, and I encourage him, as a Member of Parliament, to get involved in the process too.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Josh Fenton-Glynn
|
As a signatory to the reasoned amendment, I welcome the listening that has gone on, because a lot of people with disabilities will sleep more soundly in their beds knowing that their benefits are protected. However, on a specific point, if someone currently receives PIP but their condition is getting worse and they ask for a reassessment of the level of their PIP, will they be assessed under the current system or under the new one?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
They are an existing claimant and they will be assessed--let me be really clear about this--under the existing rules.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lauren Sullivan
|
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. PIP is, of course, a passport to freedom for many other things such as the carer's allowance, and many local authorities use PIP for blue badges and bus passes. Does the Secretary of State have a plan to mitigate the impact of the potential changes to PIP eligibility on access to blue badges and bus passes for disabled people?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
As I said in my statement, existing PIP claimants will continue to have that benefit. It will not be affected even if they have a reassessment, and neither will all the passported benefits. Carer's allowance is the best known, but all passported benefits will be included in that protection.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Graeme Downie
|
This morning I met Parkinson's UK, which is very concerned about the changes to both PIP and universal credit, and in particular that they will not take account of those with variable conditions. Will the Secretary of State make a commitment that Parkinson's UK will be involved in the co-design of the changes to PIP, universal credit and other welfare benefits, and that any welfare change will fully consider those with Parkinson's and other variable conditions?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
I am absolutely sure that Parkinson's UK will be involved closely in the PIP review.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Alice Macdonald
|
Two weeks ago, I held an in-person consultation on the welfare reforms. Many of my constituents were deeply concerned about the proposals, so I welcome the changes the Secretary of State has announced for existing claimants. I want to ask about employment support. I welcome the additional support being brought forward. When will we get more detail on how that will be allocated to schemes across the country, and will the people who need it most be involved in the co-production of those schemes, so that they work effectively?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
Yes, we already have what we are calling a collaboration committee on the pathways-to-work funding to ensure that it really meets the needs of sick and disabled people. As I have said in the House before, it really is about a pathway to work--for some people, just getting out of the house, or getting out of bed, is a huge achievement; for others, it might be about going along to a group, beginning to speak to other people and getting their confidence back. It really is a pathway to success. We will be setting out precise allocations of the pathways-to-work funding in due course, but I want to reassure Members that it will be available in every single part of the country.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Tom Hayes
|
I grew up caring for two disabled parents. As a kid, I saw at first hand the harms that happen when the British state routinely lets down disabled people. It is why disabled civil rights activists have a phrase, "Nothing about us without us," and it is why I am looking for genuine and meaningful co-production. On Friday, I brought together seven Bournemouth support organisations and people with lived experience, and they wanted me to raise two issues. The first is continuing concern about the eligibility criteria. The second is whether the mental health support that the Government are rolling out will be in place in sufficient quantity to support potential new claimants by November 2026.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
My hon. Friend raises an important point about mental health support. This Government are determined to ensure that there is parity of esteem between physical and mental health. We have already recruited 6,700 of the 8,500 additional mental health workers we promised in our manifesto, and we are putting in place new emergency mental health services and bringing in new Young Futures hubs, which will include mental health support. I know that my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary is determined to ensure that that support is available in every part of the country. I am sure we will hear more in the coming weeks and months.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Chris McDonald
|
I thank the Secretary of State for acknowledging at the Dispatch Box the anxiety of disabled people. I am also grateful for the time of the Disability Minister in listening to my concerns about the PIP assessment process--concerns that I now see reflected in the Timms review. I am sure the Secretary of State will be disappointed to hear that at a recent consultation event in the north-east, some of my constituents found that the venue was not fully disability compliant. Will she assure me that the Government will ensure full accessibility for participation in the Timms review?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
That is unacceptable, and I will sort it.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Neil Duncan-Jordan
|
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. I wonder if she will reflect on whether the Bill before us tomorrow is the best way of making welfare policy. Would it not be better to withdraw the Bill and wait for the Timms review to complete its important work?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
Welfare touches on the lives of millions of people in this country every single day. Making changes to it is never easy--perhaps particularly for a Labour Government, because tackling poverty and inequality is in our DNA. However, I believe that we must begin to make these changes to ensure that those who can work get the support they need, to protect those who cannot and to begin to slow the rate of increase in the number of extra people going on to sickness and disability benefits. I believe that the route to equality and social justice can never come from extra benefit spending alone; it has to come from putting in place good jobs, a decent health service, skills and transport infrastructure--the good world of work that we know is key to bringing about a better life.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Imran Hussain
|
It is clear that the central issues for many on the Government Benches remain. Rushing through legislation without full and meaningful consultation with disability groups is the wrong way round--we do not build policy first and ask questions later. The Government's arbitrary deadline is not a necessity, but a political choice. They are forcing through decisions that risk pushing hundreds of thousands more disabled people into poverty. I therefore say to the Secretary of State with absolute sincerity on behalf of many Members: do the fair thing--and, more importantly, the right thing--and withdraw this Bill and listen to disabled people.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
I believe that we are doing the fair thing and the right thing. We are beginning to make reforms to put our welfare bill on a sustainable footing for generations to come. We are beginning to put in place the employment support that sick and disabled people have been denied for too long. We are making sure that those with severe and lifelong conditions are never again reassessed, and that there is a new right to try. I believe that this is a fair and balanced package. Above all, I believe that it is the right one.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Tom Rutland
|
I welcome my right hon. Friend's statement and the Government's work to ensure that help is there for those who need it now and in future. Many in this House will be worried that progress on closing the disability employment gap stalled under the Conservative party, at 28 percentage points. Will the Secretary of State confirm that that is one of the metrics that the Government are focusing on in the strategy, and that the gap must and will close under this Government?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
We are absolutely determined to achieve that. I do not believe that it is acceptable that in this country the disability employment gap is 28 percentage points. That is one of the widest in all Europe: in France, Germany and Switzerland, I think it is at about 22 to 23 percentage points. We have to tackle that, because if we believe that the rights of disabled people who can work are equal to those of anybody else, we have to start making a difference. I know that this is an issue of deep concern for many Members across the House, but I believe that the package we are putting forward today is a fair one and is the right one. I will continue to listen to Members of this House, but we cannot wait to reform the welfare system. People need us to make changes, and our country demands it.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Jenny Riddell-Carpenter
|
I thank the Secretary of State for listening to the concerns of Back Benchers and for making some real and meaningful improvements based on the concerns that we have been raising privately. I also thank her for confirming explicitly, a moment ago, that my constituents who are reassessed post November 2026 will be reassessed under the current system. May I gently encourage the Secretary of State to go further and to overhaul and radically rethink the role of jobcentres? Far too often, they hold people back rather than breaking down the barriers to people's progress into work.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
Our Minister for Employment is indeed overhauling our jobcentres so that they provide personalised, tailored support for people to get into work, not some sort of endless tick-box process, and so that they are much more linked to the wider system in local areas: to the local NHS, to skills providers and, above all, to employers. I do not think it acceptable that only one employer in six has ever used a jobcentre to recruit. That is why we are overhauling our strategy with single account managers for employers, to fully involve and engage them, because we need their involvement if we are to help more people to get work and get on in work.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Caroline Nokes
|
Order. For the final question, I call Sarah Coombes.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Sarah Coombes
|
My borough, Sandwell, has one of the highest rates in the entire country of young people not in education, employment or training. This generation of young people have been let down by years and years of system failure by the Conservative party. As we go through this necessary piece of reform, we must do it carefully. Will the Secretary of State commit to working with the Department for Education and the Department for Business and Trade? For young people to get the jobs that will transform their life chances, they will need the right qualifications as well as needing the jobs to be available.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Liz Kendall
|
I absolutely agree. Let us be honest: today's economy is brutal for people without skills. We are already setting out our plans to reform the system of apprenticeships. We want to see new foundation apprenticeships. We are bringing in new six-week SWAPs--sector-based work academy programmes--that will give people guaranteed work experience and a guaranteed interview, which I think will make a real difference to young people. There is much more to do, but our commitment to a youth guarantee so that every young person is earning or learning is the key to a better future for young people and for our country as a whole.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the events at Glastonbury over the weekend. Members of Parliament will have seen, as I have, the appalling and unacceptable scenes at Glastonbury on Saturday, where chants of "death to the IDF" and "river to the sea" among others were broadcast to the nation. I have been in touch with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary as to whether there has been any criminal offence committed. The House will know that decisions relating to specific cases are an operational matter for the police. Avon and Somerset police has confirmed that video evidence is being assessed by officers to determine whether any offences may have been committed. It just announced in the last few minutes that that is now taking the form of a criminal investigation. As I hope hon. Members will appreciate, therefore, it would not be appropriate for the Government to comment on an ongoing investigation at this stage, but let me be clear that the Government will not tolerate antisemitism, which has no place in our society. It is a poison and a cancer that must be rooted out, and we will be relentless in our work to do so. The Government work closely with the police and community partners to ensure the safety and security of Jewish communities. We will continue to do so following the enormous impact that these events have had on them over the weekend. Let me turn to the role of the BBC. On Saturday afternoon, just after the broadcast, I called the director general to ask for an explanation and what immediate steps the BBC leadership intended to take. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, it is essential that the BBC explains how these scenes came to be broadcast. The BBC has rightly apologised and took the immediate decision not to put this content on iPlayer. I welcome that. However, key outstanding questions remain, including: why the performance was broadcast live given concerns regarding other acts in the weeks preceding the festival; why the feed was not immediately cut when the chants of "death to the IDF" began; and what due diligence was done prior to the decision to broadcast this particular act to the nation. I expect answers to those questions without delay. I have made that view clear to the BBC leadership, and I will update the House as soon as I can. Over the weekend and this morning, I have also had conversations with members of the Jewish community, including those who were present at Glastonbury. They have raised a number of concerns about imagery and slogans that were on display at the festival over the weekend, which I am told led them to establish their own safe space at the festival. As a Government, we take that incredibly seriously. We are urgently looking into the specifics of those alarming reports and reaching out to the festival organisers. Finally, I want to be clear about the Government's role. As a Government, we strongly support freedom of expression, and as Culture Secretary I will robustly defend the independence of our broadcasters and the right to artistic expression, but we do not accept that incitement to violence, hate speech or antisemitism is art. There is a clear difference between speaking out for Palestine, which is the right of everybody in this House and everybody in our country, and antisemitism, which is not and never will be. When the rights and safety of people and communities are at risk and when our national broadcaster fails to uphold its own standards, we will intervene. In the coming days, I will be having further conversations with the BBC and festival organisers to ensure that lessons are learned and action is taken.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Caroline Nokes
|
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Stuart Andrew
|
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, for advance sight of it and for her tone. I have always been a strong advocate for the BBC, which is a cornerstone of British public life with a proud history of cultural contribution. The events of the weekend, however, have made that incredibly difficult. During coverage of the festival, as we have heard, the artist whose real name is Pascal Robinson-Foster led the crowd in a chant of "death to the IDF", a moment that, extraordinarily, was transmitted by the BBC. Let me be clear: a national broadcaster funded by licence payers must adhere to the highest standards of impartiality, responsibility, and commitment to social cohesion. I hope we can all agree that in this instance it has failed profoundly. Free speech and political activism are the sign of a healthy democracy--they are essential to it--but when someone crosses the line to incitement to violence, there must be a consequence. Broadcasting is not a passive act. Every second of broadcast transmitted is an active choice. Airing Robinson-Foster's hateful rhetoric was not just a lapse in editorial judgment; it was a disgraceful affront to the Jewish community and a violation of the BBC's own public charter to entertain without undermining the fundamental values of our society. As the Secretary of State said, let us be clear that hateful rhetoric should never be cloaked as artistic expression. This incident also raises fundamental questions about the BBC's institutional culture. This is a broadcaster that has time and again given airtime to representatives and supporters of Hamas, while refusing to clearly identify the group as what it is: a terrorist organisation. The BBC has repeatedly failed to call out antisemitic rhetoric when it emerges under the guise of political commentary, and has faced serious allegations of minimising attacks on Jewish communities. The BBC's decision to also broadcast material from Kneecap, a group whose members have openly called for Members of Parliament to be killed, is as indefensible as it is shocking. We have already seen the devastating consequences of political violence in this country, with the loss and tragic murder of Jo Cox and Sir David Amess. For the BBC to amplify voices advocating similar violence is grossly irresponsible. Even more troubling is that a leading member of the group is currently facing a terrorism charge. That fact alone should have prompted an immediate editorial intervention. Instead, the BBC gave the group a platform on a publicly funded service. I welcome the fact that the Secretary of State has spoken to the director general, and I am grateful to her for coming to the House to report on that exchange; however, I would like to press her further to ensure that the gravity of this matter is fully recognised. Is she satisfied with the BBC's explanation that it originally decided that streaming the performance was in line with its editorial guidelines, and has now decided that "we will look at our guidance around live events so we can be sure teams are clear on when it is acceptable to keep output on air." Does she think that the BBC's editorial guidelines were not clear enough, or that the BBC misinterpreted them in the first place, and does she think that that sort of weak response will be of cold comfort to the Jewish community? I welcome the fact that the Secretary of State has spoken to the Home Secretary. I wonder whether she could also assess whether the BBC's actions constituted a breach of section 22 of the Public Order Act 1986. Does she believe that the BBC's current editorial oversight mechanisms are adequate, specifically across the commercial broadcasting arms like BBC Studios, and does she think that it is still right that the BBC gets to mark its own homework in the first instance before Ofcom gets involved, or is an independent inquiry what is needed? In the light of the repeated failings, will the Government commit to a full review of the BBC's impartiality and governance standards as part of the royal charter renewal, and can she provide an update to the House on why the charter renewal framework and Green Paper have not yet been published? I thank the Secretary of State for her work so far. She will have the support of the Opposition, and I welcome her commitment to come back to the House to update us.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
All those involved in the events of this weekend will hear the very strong feelings on both sides of the House, so I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that. I share his view about the importance of the BBC. Those of us who believe in the importance of our national broadcaster are probably more angry than anybody about what has happened over the last few days. It is precisely because we understand the importance of the BBC that we know the BBC has to do better. He asked whether I am satisfied with the explanation that I have had so far. I am not. I have been very clear with the BBC leadership about that, and clear that I expect to get a full explanation immediately, without delay. The right hon. Gentleman asked about the possibility of an independent inquiry. I would say to all Members of this House that I am not sure that we need an inquiry to establish that it should have been foreseeable that there would be problems with broadcasts this weekend, that the decision to broadcast live without any delay should have been reviewed, and that the live feed should have been pulled immediately when the chants of "death, death to the IDF" began. What I want to see from the BBC--I know the right hon. Gentleman shares this--is rapid action to ensure that this cannot happen again. I promise to update the House on these developments but I should also say that I am still expecting a response from the BBC about an earlier decision to broadcast a documentary about Gaza, which it was then discovered fell short of the BBC's own editorial standards. I expect a response swiftly, and I expect action as well. Finally, can I thank the right hon. Gentleman for mentioning the Jewish community? Having spoken to friends and colleagues across the Jewish community over the weekend, I cannot describe how much this has impacted on them, particularly those members of the Jewish community who were at Glastonbury. I was extremely distressed to hear that there were organisations that are about to be proscribed by the Government whose logo was emblazoned very visibly on T-shirts and banners. I was concerned to hear reports that there were images associated with Hamas and others, as well as Nazi imagery. Most people who go to Glastonbury, I think, go for exactly the reasons that I have been in the past, and I suspect the right hon. Gentleman has as well. It is because music festivals are an incredible way to bring people together, to show support and solidarity, to bind a nation and to showcase great British talent. It is our job, collectively, to ensure that those festivals become again, and remain, a place where everybody in our country is welcome.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Gareth Snell
|
As well as the despicable chants, the monologue that preceded them by the artist in question clearly drew on the influence of Jewish power in music, an age-old antisemitic trope. Could the Secretary of State say a bit more about what conversations she will have with the BBC, not just on what it broadcasts but on what was allowed to happen at Glastonbury? Does she also agree that those age-old antisemitic tropes, whether they are in Parliament, on stage or in public life, should be a red line for all of us?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
Yes. My hon. Friend has a long history of standing up to antisemitism, including when it stained and sullied our own party, and I am grateful to him for his leadership on this. Those questions about what happens at Glastonbury are not for the BBC. There are serious questions for the BBC about what it broadcast and the decisions that it took, but there are also wider questions about the sorts of things that we want to see in our country. As the Secretary of State, I have been very clear that it is not for the Government to try to determine what can be seen and what can be heard, but I also have a view about this as an individual: I do not want to see that sort of thing, I do not want to hear it, and I take great exception to it. The Prime Minister was very clear on that point as well. It causes harm to people in the real world, and I have felt that very strongly this weekend. That is why this Government are determined that, wherever we see that form of antisemitism--including the appalling comments that my hon. Friend referenced that were targeted towards an individual in the music industry simply because they were Jewish--we will always stand up to it and not hesitate to take action.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Caroline Nokes
|
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Max Wilkinson
|
We welcome the Secretary of State's statement. Sadly, rather than devoting our attention today to how this House can push for a just and sustainable resolution to the horrors of the conflict in the middle east, we are talking about something else. On this occasion--there have been past occasions, too--it is the deeply inappropriate language used by a shock jock, attention-seeking musician and a public service broadcaster's apparent failure to fulfil its responsibility to uphold its own editorial standards. Bob Vylan's chants at Glastonbury this weekend were absolutely appalling. We can never accept hate-filled chants calling for death to anyone in our society, at a music festival or anywhere else, whatever the subject. It is right that there has been widespread condemnation, including from the organisers of Glastonbury festival, and I associate myself and my party with those words. Of course the UK must push much harder for a ceasefire; of course we must put pressure on Netanyahu's Government to roll back their military campaign and build a sustainable two-state solution; and of course Liberal Democrats believe that cultural events must be a place for debate. But there can simply be no place for hate speech, antisemitism and incitement to violence, at Glastonbury or anywhere else. It seems that an editorial failing took place in the BBC's coverage. The decision to proceed with broadcasting this act is particularly hard to understand given the BBC's correct decision to take a more cautious, but ultimately fruitless, approach to the broadcasting of Kneecap. A cursory look through the social media of Bob Vylan raises the question, "How exactly was this not foreseen?" Of course, we also know that Kneecap has in the past called for the death of Members of this House. The failure to use delayed coverage effectively and to remove the coverage in a timely manner is baffling. Will the Secretary of State tell us whether, when she asked the BBC about this issue, the subject of charter renewal was raised? Can she give us concrete reassurance that change will happen and we will never have to put up with this dreadful antisemitism appearing on our screens again?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
I thank the hon. Member for his comments and the tone in which he made them. It is the responsibility of all of us always to stand up to antisemitism. It is sadly a battle that is never won. The lesson of history is that it falls to every generation to fight antisemitism and fight it again, and certainly I can promise that this Government will always do that. Let me turn to the specific question about the BBC and charter renewal--with apologies to the right hon. Member for Daventry (Stuart Andrew) for not answering his question on this earlier. I have not discussed charter renewal in the context of Kneecap and the other acts broadcast from Glastonbury this weekend. We have, of course, discussed charter renewal, and it is absolutely right to say that editorial standards must be part of that discussion. When we release the terms of reference, which we are due to do shortly, everyone in this House will see a clear commitment to that as part of the ongoing conversation we will have about charter renewal. Finally, I welcome the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) saying that chants of death must not be made to anyone. Chants of death--to anyone--are not welcome in our society. There was something particularly pernicious about chanting, "Death, death to the IDF". Many colleagues will know that in Israel, there is a conscription model. Every young person is required to serve in the IDF, which means that chanting "death to the IDF" is equivalent to calling for the death of every single Israeli Jew. That is one of the many reasons why we take this so seriously and why it cannot be argued that this did not cross a very dangerous line.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Johanna Baxter
|
I thank my right hon. Friend for her statement. I share her concern that although freedom of expression must be protected, this incident raises serious concerns about the editorial standards and judgments exercised. As a long-standing supporter of the BBC, I am deeply disappointed in it. What conversations the Secretary of State having with the editorial team to ensure that a serious incident like this can never happen again?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
As well as speaking to the director general of the BBC on Saturday, a number of officials have been in touch with the BBC's senior leadership team. We have put to them a series of specific questions that we expect immediate answers on, and we will continue to press hard to ensure that they are forthcoming. I will of course update the House at the earliest opportunity, and I expect to speak to the chairman of the BBC in the coming days.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Caroline Nokes
|
I call the Chair of the Select Committee.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Caroline Dinenage
|
I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members' Financial Interests. I thank the Secretary of State for that strong and welcome statement. The BBC editorial guidelines on livestreaming are actually quite clear. They say, "The level of monitoring should be appropriate for the likely content. A producer should normally be in a position to cut the feed from a live stream if it becomes necessary." What explanation has the BBC given for why the livestream was not cut? It cannot be for lack of staff on the ground; the BBC took a reported 400 people to Glastonbury at the weekend--what were they all doing? For such a vast operation with multi simultaneous live shows going out across various different parts of the site, has the Secretary of State had the opportunity to ask the BBC who has the final say on which bands are deemed suitable for live broadcast and why on earth it chose this one, and who makes the final decision when it becomes necessary to cut a livestream?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
The hon. Lady asks a series of typically important and relevant questions, some of which I have put to the BBC directly, but I will make sure that I ask it all those questions, with a response expected as soon as possible. She is right to raise the number of staff who were present at Glastonbury festival or working on the broadcast and to ask what they were doing, but this also raises very serious questions at the highest levels of the BBC about operational oversight and the way in which editorial standards are understood and reflected in the decisions of individual staff. I have already had that conversation with the BBC board in relation to a Gaza documentary, but I expect to have it again in the coming weeks.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Tom Rutland
|
I refer to my entry in the Register of Members' Financial Interests, as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for the BBC and a former employee of the Prospect and Bectu unions, which represent BBC staff. I welcome my right hon. Friend's statement and the BBC's own statement today, which makes it clear that the performer's antisemitic sentiments were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves, and that the BBC will examine its guidance on live events to ensure that teams are clear on when it is acceptable to keep output on air. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is possible to express concern about the appalling suffering in Gaza without using language that risks fuelling hatred and division or inciting violence?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
My hon. Friend makes an incredibly important point. As somebody who has been associated with the Palestinian cause for nearly two decades and has consistently spoken out about the Israeli Government's treatment of people not just in Gaza but in the west bank, I know that it is entirely possible to stand up for the Palestinians and never, ever to stray into antisemitism. Many Members of this House have managed to do precisely that over many years. Nobody is objecting to the comments that said, "free Palestine". What everybody is objecting to is the comments that were clearly antisemitic, incited hatred and caused real-world harm to people in the Jewish community in our country. I could not agree more with my hon. Friend and I support him on that. For those who say that this is a freedom of speech issue, I say that it is nothing of the kind. This is about standing up against hatred, discrimination and racism in all its forms, but particularly antisemitism, of which we have seen an enormous rise in our country in recent years. Every single one of us needs to be vigilant to make sure that it is never allowed to spread.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Jim Allister
|
What we saw was an appalling pro-terrorist broadcast on our national broadcaster. Those who chant "kill the IDF" are endorsing those who kill them--and those who kill them are Hamas. It was an endorsement of the terrorism of Hamas, yet the BBC deliberately chose not to cut the broadcast. Therefore, perhaps it is time for the Government to consider cutting the licence fee.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
This Government's view of Hamas is clear: they are a terrorist organisation. They are banned in the UK and there is a good reason for that. We will continue to be outspoken about that and robust in relation to them. I was very concerned to hear that there may have been imagery, symbols and graffiti in support of Hamas at the festival this weekend. We will not hesitate to ensure that we deal with and get to the bottom of that in order to stand with our Jewish communities and with everybody in this country who stands against Hamas and is at risk from them. On the licence fee, the hon. and learned Gentleman will know that this Government support the BBC. We believe that it is an important institution. That is why we are so disappointed that this has happened and have been so exasperated with the lack of account from the leadership not just about this, but about a previous Gaza documentary and a number of other issues. The BBC is one of the most important institutions in our country and that is why it is held to the highest of standards. It is essential that we hold it to the highest of standards as we seek to start the charter renewal process, which should not just safeguard the future of the BBC for the next 10 years but put it on a solid footing for decades to come. These are questions that we, as a Government--collectively with the BBC and all Members of this House--are determined to grip.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Peter Prinsley
|
I thank the Secretary of State for her excellent statement. The murder of hundreds of Jews at the Nova music festival in October 2023 sparked this war, and the irony of broadcast antisemitism at Glastonbury here in the UK is not lost on any of us. How are Jews in this country, such as myself, to be reassured about editorial processes at the BBC, and who on earth will be held accountable for this error?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
My hon. Friend makes an extremely important point about accountability. That is not lost on me as the Secretary of State, and it is something that I have impressed upon the BBC's leadership. When there is one editorial failure, it is something that must be gripped; where there are several, it becomes a problem of leadership. I very much take his point about that. He raised a point about the strength of feeling that people have about this issue, given that this was a music festival, and it was at a music festival on 7 October that so many young people lost their lives, with others kidnapped, never to return to their families, and some are still being held hostage. At that moment, it would have been the perfect place to express support, love and solidarity with those who are still suffering. I know there were those at the festival who were doing precisely that, but they were hindered by some of the appalling scenes that we have seen. That is why we are determined to grip this and ensure that music festivals are a safe and inclusive space for everybody. The Government are reaching out to other music festivals, and to Glastonbury, to see what more can be done to express solidarity with those who are still suffering as a consequence of the appalling events of 7 October, and to see what we can do to support those efforts.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
John Glen
|
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement--I agree with practically everything she has said. When I heard these reports, I thought of the Mayor of Wilton, Councillor Alexandra Boyd, who is Jewish, and about what it would have felt like for her to have watched that with her family. We in this place all understand the fine editorial judgments that BBC staff have to make, but this is of a completely different order. When people are losing faith in the great institutions of this country, I urge the Secretary of State in her follow-up conversations to ensure that the BBC identifies accountability to individuals. My hon. Friend the Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage) set out clearly the guidance that exists. Somebody did not follow that guidance, and I think the country expects people to be held individually to account for why they failed to do their job properly.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
People do expect people to be held to account for the way they do their job, be that on the frontline or at senior levels. That is a point I have made to the BBC, and it will have heard what the right hon. Gentleman and my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) said about accountability. It is a point that I will continue to press.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Dr Caroline Johnson
|
The Secretary of State has spoken about responsibility at the BBC, and of those who said those dreadful words. What responsibility do those who were organising the festival have both legally and morally to be held responsible and accountable, and to ensure that this does not happen again?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
I deliberately included some words about the festival itself in my statement, because I agree with the hon. Lady: we all have a responsibility to uphold the highest standards, and to ensure that people are safe, welcome and included at our shared national events. The reports I have had over the weekend, and this morning, are incredibly alarming, and they suggest that that was not the case this weekend. We are reaching out to festival organisers and investigating those reports, to ensure that this cannot happen again.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Richard Tice
|
Another week, another month, and once again the BBC has got it horribly wrong, in its Glastonbury broadcast, with regard to Hamas and to antisemitism, and once again there has been another grovelling apology. I ask the Secretary of State: how long must this go on before, regrettably, many in the Jewish community and millions of British people conclude that the BBC is institutionally antisemitic?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
The hon. Gentleman's views about the BBC are very clear, but those of us who support the BBC and believe it is an incredibly important institution will know that it should and does, in some instances, play an important role for all communities to be heard and to feel valued as part of our public life. That is the standard that we expect the BBC to be held to, and this Government will hold it to that standard. We will not hesitate to take the necessary actions to ensure that it rises to meet those standards.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Andrew Murrison
|
I congratulate the Secretary of State on her statement. History tells us that normalising, condoning and tolerating the kind of things that we saw at Glastonbury over the weekend never ends well--it ends extremely badly. As a neighbouring MP, I have written twice to Worthy Farm with my concerns about Kneecap, following reports about one of its members advocating the killing of MPs. There was no reply--and none is expected. Instead, the festival scheduled Bob Vylan, who, as we heard, also advocates killing people--this time Jews. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is no good for Glastonbury's very wealthy organisers to be banging on about their festival being a safe space for everyone while it continues to facilitate operations like that?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
I share the right hon. Gentleman's concern about how this was able to happen, and I am sorry to hear that he has had no response to very serious concerns, which were raised in his capacity as a democratically elected Member of Parliament for people in the area who deserve answers. I am happy to follow that up on his behalf, and with him after the statement. I share his view that festivals, and particularly music festivals, must be safe, inclusive and welcoming spaces, and I fear that we fell way short on this occasion. I have visited Glastonbury before and know that it provides an incredible showcase for a lot of up-and-coming British artists, not just those at the top of their game. However, as the organisers rightly acknowledge, a line was crossed at the weekend, and that must not be allowed to happen again.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Gregory Campbell
|
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and the sentiments contained therein, but would she agree that in the run-up to the festival it was clear to many of us, given the track record of some of the participants, that this, or something like it, was going to happen? The Government were aware that something was going to happen, as was the BBC, yet still it happened. Where does the sanction lie, who is going to implement the sanction, and when are we going to know what it is?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
I agree with the hon. Gentleman's sentiment that much of this was foreseeable; none of us could know precisely who was going to say what, but even a cursory glance at Google would show that this particular artist has a history of provoking extreme statements and behaviour, particularly in relation to events in the middle east. So it would not have been too difficult to foresee that, and there are therefore serious questions to answer about livestreaming, due diligence and other factors. I expect a response from the BBC on those questions and about the action that it will take to ensure that this does not happen again. If those answers are not forthcoming, I have various levers with which I can hold the BBC to account, and I want to be clear with the hon. Gentleman and with the House that I will not hesitate to use them, if I need to do so.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Jack Rankin
|
Had those chants called for the deaths of people of any other nationality or ethnicity, there is no question in my mind that the live feed would have been pulled straightaway. I welcome the Secretary of State's robust statement, but does she agree that this problem is systemic, and that there has been a decades-long, deep-rooted bias against Israel at the corporation, which seems unwilling to deal with it, or incapable of doing so?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
I feel the strength of feeling, anger and emotion behind what the hon. Gentleman says. I felt that from the Jewish community over the weekend, and from all of us, including myself, who feel very strongly that this should not have been allowed to happen, and it certainly should not be allowed continually and repeatedly to happen. He asks whether there is in-built bias at the BBC, but I think that what has happened is a serious failing of editorial standards, leadership and oversight, which I need to ensure we address. The hon. Gentleman said that if the chants had been about any other group, the live feed would probably have been pulled straightaway, but I am not sure that we can say that with any confidence. As the Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, the hon. Member for Gosport (Dame Caroline Dinenage), made clear, there were hundreds of BBC staff involved in the production, and the BBC was represented at Glastonbury at the most senior levels, yet the feed was not pulled and the standards were not upheld. Regardless of which community it affects, it is my job to ensure that those standards are upheld. I give him my word that I will use every lever at my disposal to ensure that happens.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Ayoub Khan
|
I wish we lived in a world where there was no chanting of death. Any form of racism is vile, be that Islamophobia, antisemitism or any other kind. The Secretary of State will recall that only last November, Israeli football fans were chanting, "Death to all Arabs" and, perhaps more sickeningly, "There are no schools in Gaza, because there are no children." That kind of speech and chanting must equally be condemned. What is sad is that although we have had a ministerial statement today, we had no ministerial statement when that chanting happened--it is the hypocrisy that is causing an outrage in the British public. Does the Secretary of State not agree that that is what is happening out there in the community?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
I could not disagree more. I and every Member of the House utterly condemn chants of "Death to all Arabs" as disgusting and disgraceful, as a principle by which we hold ourselves--there is no hesitation from anybody in this House to do that. The reason I have brought a statement to the House today is because our national broadcaster, funded by the licence fee that is paid by the public, has broadcast something that is deeply offensive to a community in this country, and that has made many, many people feel unsafe, and may actually have made them unsafe. That is extremely serious and rightly a question for Government, which is why I did not hesitate to bring the statement to the House today. If the BBC had broadcast the chant that the hon. Gentleman described, he would be hearing the same statement from this Dispatch Box and the same response from other hon. Members. Let me also say to the hon. Gentleman that I have stood up for the Palestinian cause in this House for the best part of two decades, especially when it was hard and unpopular. That cost me friends and colleagues, but I stood alongside many Members of the House to highlight the plight of the Palestinian people. So as a long-standing supporter of justice for the Palestinians, I say to him that he does nothing for the Palestinian cause by aligning himself with antisemites.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
John Cooper
|
A blind man on a horse could see that there were going to be difficulties broadcasting a band called Kneecap, named after a terrorist punishment, who had called for the death of people in this House. We should take a moment to reflect that Airey Neave and Ian Gow were both killed by republican murderers. Given the events of the weekend and previous incidents, is there not a pattern emerging? Will the Secretary of State at least test the idea that the BBC has a fundamental problem with Israel?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
Let me first recognise that the BBC has been criticised by all sides in the conflict for bias, which shows the difficult editorial line that it has to walk, but let me also be clear that, in relation to what happened at the weekend, as the BBC itself has rightly acknowledged, the coverage, the standards and the enforcement of those standards fell well short of what was expected. I acknowledge that it is not the first time in recent months that that has happened. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government take this incredibly seriously. We are having discussions with the BBC at the most senior levels to ensure that this is gripped. As I said previously to other colleagues, I have levers at my disposal and will not hesitate to use them, should I need to.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Sammy Wilson
|
Anyone who witnessed the disgusting images of young, middle-class, educated morons chanting "Death to the IDF" at the weekend can only be alarmed that we have stooped to this level in our society. Even worse, the state broadcaster broadcast those images across the nation. I welcome what the Secretary of State said, and the way in which she said it. She has called the director and asked for immediate explanations, and expects answers, but given that the BBC has already ignored calls from this House to explain its bias, does she really expect to get any satisfactory answers from an institution that I believe is antisemitic at its very core? Does she have any confidence in any police investigation, given that the police have already decided not to prosecute the member of Kneecap who called for the killing of Tory MPs?
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Lisa Nandy
|
In the last few minutes before we came into the Chamber for this statement, the police announced that there is an ongoing criminal investigation, and it is important that we allow the police to do their work. Of course, I would not hesitate to call the director general of the BBC and ask for an explanation. I expect that explanation to be forthcoming and satisfactory, by which I do not mean that I expect excuses about what has or has not been done in this instance. I expect a full and honest explanation of what has clearly gone wrong on this occasion, and a full explanation of what will be done, not through another review, with months and months of delays, or by spending public money on trying to get the bottom of what has gone wrong, but immediately to ensure that this cannot happen again.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Ayoub Khan
|
On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. Towards the end of the Secretary of State's answer to my question, she said that I did no favours to the Palestinian cause by aligning myself with antisemites. At no stage did I say in my question that I was aligning myself with anyone at the Glastonbury event. Will the Secretary of State clarify what she meant? If she did not mean that, I apologise, but I would like some clarity.
|
GBR
|
||
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/pwdata/scrapedxml/debates/debates2025-06-30b.xml
|
2025-06-30
|
Caroline Nokes
|
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his point of order, which was in fact not a point of order. I do not intend to allow the debate to continue via points of order.
|
GBR
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.