Bambos Charalambous MP: speeches

Speeches

• 28 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  May I put the same question to Dr Kaan? Dr Kaan: You will know that throughout the United States there are a variety of aid in dying laws, all of them slightly different across jurisdictions. I practise in both the state of Oregon and the state of Washington, so I have to keep track of two slightly different laws. In the state of Washington, where I am the medical director for End of Life Washington, we updated our law in 2023, mostly because we were trying to increase access to it for people who lived in rural communities or for people in underserved communities. Any healthcare system in the world right now has experienced a shortage of physicians, so the requirement for two physicians to do the certification was a barrier for people in those communities that did not have access to two physicians. One of the things we did to increase access in 2023 was to make it so that one of the two providers could be a non-physician: a physician assistant or a nurse practitioner with advanced training. One of the providers still needs to be a qualified physician, but that has increased access for those in rural communities and underserved communities. We are very proud of the fact that we have done that. Additionally, we shortened our waiting period for similar reasons, from 15 days down to seven days. In Oregon, they shortened their waiting period. Well, they still have a 15-day waiting period, which has been stable since the start in 1997, but they also now have a provision whereby, if a patient is expected to die within those 15 days—if they are at the very end of their life and are not expected to be able to survive those 15 days—they can bypass the waiting period. I really like that provision, because there are patients who come very late in their process to this decision. It may not seem like much to us, who are healthy and relatively well, but 15 days for a dying person who is suffering and really wants this option is an incredibly long time.

• 23 Jan 2025 · International Day of Education · Hansard source

  More

  This has been a very positive debate, and it is great that there is cross-party support on this important issue. I thank all Members for their contributions and the Minister for her positive response. I look forward to how that investment from the Government is taken forward to build on the previous Government’s commitment to education. The Minister is obviously a passionate advocate for education, and will want to see the fruits of the investments and steps the Government are taking to achieve SDG4 as soon as possible. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the International Day of Education.

• 23 Jan 2025 · International Day of Education · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. SDG4 should not be seen in isolation. We need to target a number of SDG goals to make sure children receive the education they need. Water and sanitation is clearly one of the top ones that we need to target. I thank my hon. Friend for making such an excellent point. I conclude by saying that education is a beacon of hope in the darkest of times. It is the key to breaking cycles of poverty, fostering peace and building resilient societies. As we mark the UN International Day of Education, let us reaffirm our commitment to ensuring that every child, regardless of their circumstances, has access to quality education. The challenges are immense, but with a collective will and concerted action, we can turn the tide. The UK has both the responsibility and the capacity to lead in this endeavour. Let us seize the moment to make a lasting difference in the lives of millions of children worldwide.

• 23 Jan 2025 · International Day of Education · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the International Day of Education. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. Tomorrow, Friday 24 January, we mark the United Nations International Day of Education. As we do so, we will be reminded of the transformative power of education. It is the cornerstone upon which societies are built, economies are strengthened and individuals are empowered. Education is not merely a privilege; it is a fundamental human right. Article 28 of the UN convention on the rights of the child enshrines that right. However, as we reflect on our global commitments, particularly sustainable development goal 4, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and to promote lifelong learning opportunities for all, we must confront the stark reality that progress has been uneven and significant challenges remain if we are to reach SDG 4 targets. In considering the progress towards some of the SDG 4 targets, I will focus first on target 4.1: “By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.” Since the adoption of the 2030 agenda, strides have been made in expanding access to education, and enrolment rates in primary education have increased globally. According to the UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report 2024, 110 million more children and youths have entered school since SDG 4 was adopted in 2015, and there is a growing recognition of the importance of quality education, with 40 million more young people completing secondary education today than in 2015. However, those achievements mask deep disparities. According to UNESCO, approximately 251 million children and youths are still out of school worldwide, which means that since 2015 the out-of-school population has reduced by only 1%. Some 33% of out-of-school children and youths are from low-income countries, in contrast to only 3% from high-income countries, and over half of all out-of-school children and youths are in sub-Saharan Africa. We have also seen the terrible impact of the policies of the Taliban in Afghanistan, which have deprived girls of their right to education. Urgent action must be taken by the international community to ensure that these regional disparities are urgently addressed if we are to meet the SDG 4.1 target. Crises such as conflicts, natural disasters and public health emergencies pose formidable barriers to education. In 2016, 75 million children did not have access to quality education due to forced displacement, humanitarian crises and climate change events. Nine years later, that figure has trebled to 224 million. Even children who do have access to school are not learning the basics, with over half those children—127 million—not meeting the minimum standards of literacy and numeracy. There has been a regression in meeting both SDG 4.5, which is about eliminating all discrimination in education including for children in vulnerable education settings, and SDG 4.6, which is about ensuring all youths achieve a minimum standard of literacy and numeracy. That is deeply worrying, with UNICEF reporting that 70% of children in low and middle-income countries are unable to read a simple story by the age of 10. The root cause of these crises, which disrupt education, needs to be tackled by the international community. UNICEF estimates that climate change alone disrupts the education of nearly 40 million children every year. In countries affected by emergencies, children lose access to safe drinking water, healthcare and food, alongside their education. Schools, which should be sanctuaries of learning, are often the targets of attacks. Between 2015 and 2019, attacks on education were reported in 93 countries. More recently, in Gaza ongoing conflicts have devastated educational infrastructure and left more than 1 million children in Gaza in dire need of educational support. In Sudan, more than 17 million children are not in education, and schools are often used to house displaced children. In the eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, more than 1.3 million children are out of school because of an escalation of violence, and children also risk being killed, maimed, abducted, abandoned and recruited into armed groups. Closer to home, the impact of the war in Ukraine has also had a devastating effect on children’s education. Organisations such as Education Cannot Wait have been instrumental in addressing those challenges. As the global fund dedicated to education in emergencies, Education Cannot Wait works to ensure that children in crisis settings receive uninterrupted education. Its multi-year resilience programme and emergency first responses have reached millions of children worldwide. Adequate financing is pivotal to achieving SDG4, yet education often receives less than 3% of humanitarian aid. According to research by UNICEF, children-focused overseas development aid fell by 56% from 2016 to 2022; in the UK, it fell from 11% to a shocking 4% over the same period. The International Parliamentary Network for Education estimates that the annual financing gap for achieving SDG4 is £100 billion. The funding gap is exacerbated by the debt burdens of low and middle-income countries; in some cases, the interest owed to private creditors is more than those countries’ entire education budgets. Christian Aid’s report “Between life and debt” found that 25 African countries spend more on repaying debt than they do on their education budgets, including in Kenya, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Zambia and Malawi. Unless there are international structural changes to tackle unsustainable debt, education in low-income countries will never get fixed, and that will hamper efforts to provide quality education, particularly in low-income countries and crisis-affected regions. Education is one of the most underfunded areas of humanitarian law, receiving only approximately 3% of international humanitarian funding. That is clearly not enough. One of the central tenets of achieving SDG4 is teachers. There is a global shortage of teachers: the National Education Union estimates that roughly 44 million additional teachers will be required, 15 million of those in sub-Saharan Africa, to meet sustainable development goals for education. To achieve that ambition, we need a new global teacher strategy to train, recruit and retain qualified teachers in the global south. In many low-income countries, there are huge pressures on teachers, including with regard to working conditions, class sizes and equipment. Teachers are also often the victims of attacks, and in some instances they are denied regular pay. The UN has recognised this as an important issue, especially in low-income countries with fragile economies. A key recommendation of the UN high-level panel on the teaching profession was the creation of a global fund for teachers’ salaries, so that children can continue to receive education during crises. I have a number of questions for the Minister before I conclude. The first relates to international education aid. Will the Government bolster their financial contributions to global education initiatives and ensure that funds are directed towards the most marginalised and crisis-affected children? That would include supporting organisations such as Education Cannot Wait and UNICEF, which are on the frontlines of delivering education in emergencies. Breaking down barriers to opportunity was one of the Labour party’s key missions. Will the Minister confirm that as aid funding for education aligns with that mission, education will receive the priority it deserves? I also want to ask the Minister about advocacy for safe schools. As I mentioned earlier, a significant factor in children’s not receiving education is conflict. Can the Minister advise me whether the Government will champion the protection of educational institutions in conflict zones? By supporting the safe schools declaration and advocating for the adherence to international humanitarian law, we can work towards ending attacks on education. As I mentioned earlier, teachers are the backbone of education systems. Providing them with adequate training, resources and support, especially in emergency contexts, is crucial, as is ensuring they are paid for the work they do in very difficult circumstances. Do the Government support the creation of a global fund for teachers’ salaries to help pay for teachers in conflict areas? Finally, on the promotion of inclusive education, children with disabilities are doubly disadvantaged in receiving education in crises. Can the Minister advise whether the Government will support programmes that target providing education for children with disabilities in crises?

• 13 Jan 2025 · Hospice and Palliative Care · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler) on securing this important and timely debate. The provision of hospices and palliative care is an essential part of our nation’s health service, playing a unique and vital role in our communities and often providing services that the NHS simply cannot cater for. We are very fortunate in north London to be served by two amazing hospices. North London hospice and Noah’s Ark children’s hospice provide extraordinary end of life care, comfort and dignity for individuals and their families in Enfield, Barnet and Haringey. I have had the pleasure of visiting both, and I have seen at first hand the exceptional services they provide. North London hospice supports over 4,000 people each year. Its services range from in-patient care to community-based support that allows people to die at home, if that is their wish. It also provides counselling, support and wellbeing therapies. Its community engagement is excellent, and I had the pleasure of attending its compassionate neighbours event in December. Through the programme, community volunteers befriend and support individuals at the end of their life, providing friendship and help with chores on a regular basis. Similarly, Noah’s Ark children’s hospice, which I visited on Friday, provides a lifeline for children with life-limiting or life-threatening conditions. Its hospice at home service allows children to receive care in familiar surroundings, which is often invaluable for families. I doubt that the services and facilities it provides can be bettered. These organisations are models of good practice, but they are indicative of the challenges faced by hospices in England. Both face financial challenges to keep going, and the extraordinary work done by their fundraising teams should be highly commended. North London hospice has £16 million of running costs every year and could not provide its current services without donations and fundraising. It was an honour to raise funds for that hospice when I ran the London marathon in April last year, as did many other people to raise money. My time was five hours, 51 minutes. Noah’s Ark children’s hospice has to find a staggering £6.5 million a year to keep going and has even talked me into doing some fundraising, although I politely declined the skydiving option, as fun runs are more my choice of activity for fundraising. The additional £100 million of capital investment for hospices announced by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care is very welcome, as is the £26 million for children and young people’s hospices. However, demand for palliative care is expected to rise by 25% over the next 25 years so the funding model for hospices needs to be resolved for the long term. Although the NHS provides some financial support, that typically accounts for only a fraction of their costs. Moreover, the process of accessing public funding through integrated care boards is fraught with challenges. Hospices must navigate a labyrinth of bureaucracy to secure funding that has often already been allocated to them. Delays, inconsistencies and a lack of transparency in decision making can leave hospices in financial limbo. We have all seen the extraordinary fundraising efforts undertaken by hospices, but while those activities are inspiring, they also highlight a stark reality: hospices are being asked to do too much with too little. The current funding model creates a sense of perpetual precarity, where even a slight downturn in donations could have devastating consequences for patients and families. The question we must ask ourselves is this: do we, as a society, truly value the care that hospices provide? If the answer is yes, we must reflect that value in our policies and funding structures. That means increasing NHS funding for hospices so they are not forced to depend so heavily on charity; streamlining the process of accessing funds through ICBs, with clear timelines and accountability; and recognising the unique challenges faced by children’s hospices by providing them with the additional support that they need. In conclusion, hospices such as the North London hospice and Noah’s Ark children’s hospice exemplify the best of what we can achieve as a society. They are places of compassion, expertise and hope, but they cannot continue to operate under the current financial and bureaucratic pressures. We owe it to them—and to the people they serve—to provide the support that they need to thrive. Let us ensure that hospices have the resources they need to continue their vital work—not just today, but for generations to come.

• 9 Jan 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  The year 2025 is a jubilee year, which is a motivation for many Christian organisations and others to campaign to cancel the debts of global south countries and tackle the root causes of the endless debt crisis. More than 3.3 billion people live in countries where more is spent on servicing debt than on health and education combined, so might we have a debate in Government time on debt relief for low-income and debt-distressed countries?

• 9 Jan 2025 · Impact of Conflict on Women and Girls · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this important debate and on her excellent speech. One of the consequences of war and conflict is disruption to education. The educational void is catastrophic, not just for girls themselves but for their families, communities and nations, too. A lack of education for girls also undermines peacebuilding. Studies show that educated women are key to rebuilding post-conflict societies, participating in governance, and preventing the resurgence of violence. Does my hon. Friend agree that the UK must champion the protection of education in conflict zones and hold Governments and militias to account when they attack schools or use them for military purposes?

• 19 Dec 2024 · Syria · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Minister’s statement. Earlier this week I met Alevi, Kurdish and other communities who are deeply concerned about what will happen to minorities in Syria now that HTS has seized power there. The UK has rightly proscribed HTS as a result of its links with al-Qaeda. Can the Minister reassure the House that the Government will use all their powers to prevent HTS and other hostile actors from attacking minorities in Syria?

• 18 Dec 2024 · Creative Arts Education · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Mundell. I thank the hon. Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) for securing this timely debate and for her excellent speech, much of which I agreed with. I declare an interest as chair of the APPG on music education. I will therefore focus on the provision of music education across the country. Since 2010, there has been a steady decline in the provision of music in our schools. According to data from the Independent Society of Musicians, music as a subject has experienced a 30% decline in GCSE entries and a 43% drop in A-level entries since 2010. There has also been a sharp decline in the number of music teachers, which means that in some schools, music is taught by people who are not qualified as music teachers. That is of deep concern. We heard from the hon. Member for Chichester about the economic benefits of creative subjects, but there is also a personal benefit to students. Building confidence, teaching discipline and teamwork, improved health and wellbeing and even academic achievement are some of the benefits of a music education. However, music provision across the country is patchy, although there are examples of excellence in two schools that I recently visited. In the Aldgate school, less than two miles from here, all children in years 4 to 6 learn stringed instruments—I had the pleasure of seeing them perform at their Christmas concert. Similarly, children in years 4 to 6 at Welbourne primary school in Haringey learn the strings. The leadership of those schools has decided to do that, but those schools are the exceptions rather than the rule. The restructuring of music hubs, which are meant to oversee local music provision, involved a lack of oversight, so the quality of music education is inevitably patchy. We need an urgent review of the hubs to ensure that there is a high standard—as is the case in Haringey, from the Haringey music service—across the board. Before the Government came to office, they made a pledge about the need to teach creative subjects in schools. The APPG for music education has fed into that review, as I am sure did many Members here today. What we hope for is a return to creative subjects being taught in schools and given the priority that they deserve. They should be taught by people who are suitably qualified to do so. Music and creative subjects are far too important to be demoted, as has been the case over the last 14 years. We want them to rise up the agenda and to be taught as positively as possible. If anyone has not seen Ken Robinson’s TED talk, I strongly encourage them to watch it because he makes the right points about how creativity is necessary to give us all the skills we need in our society. I hope that the Minister will indicate when the review will report back and when, hopefully, creativity will be taught in our schools. Any other help that she can provide to make that happen will be greatly appreciated.

• 18 Dec 2024 · Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  First, I declare my interest as a member of the UK CPA executive. It has been great to see the swift progress this Bill has made thus far and the cross-party support it has received. It is a short but important Bill that defines the status of the CPA and the ICRC. This is the third time it has been brought before the House, and I am sure, given the cross-party support it has already received, it will pass Third Reading smoothly. The Bill is essential in providing the CPA and the ICRC with the required protections to operate as trusted partners of the UK and continue work in promoting democracy and meeting humanitarian needs. The UK continues proudly to reaffirm the vital role of the Commonwealth family in tackling the issues we face in an ever more uncertain world. I recently met the high commissioners of a few Commonwealth countries, including Zambia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, and Cyprus, who truly value their relationship with the UK. We must continue to foster good relations across the Commonwealth, and we can do so only if leaders and parliamentarians have the opportunity to work together. I fully support the proposals for elevating the CPA and the ICRC status within the UK to stand alongside their vital international partners. This Bill will allow the CPA to operate as an international organisation headquartered in London rather than within limited scope as a UK charity. The CPA does incredible work in engaging parliamentarians across the Commonwealth, fully embodying its mission in promoting the advancement of parliamentary democracy. The threat to democracy and our liberal values has never been greater since the second world war, so this mission is more important than ever. The ability to engage openly with parliamentarians globally, particularly in fragile and conflict-ridden regions, and to exchange knowledge, good practice and an understanding of good democratic governance could make a world of difference. Globally, the CPA operates in over 180 legislatures in 60 nations and encompasses over 18,500 parliamentarians. The cross-parliamentary engagement conferences and the forums allow for fruitful discussion on common values and aspirations. Importantly, this Bill will provide parliamentarians with the credibility and authority to operate fully on the international stage. The status of the CPA as an international organisation will facilitate an active role in global diplomacy in addressing the challenges of our time. Expanding its organisational scope will also bring the ability to sign international conventions and pursue political purposes such as denouncing the political persecution of parliamentarians in several countries. Granting the necessary privileges and legal immunities to the CPA places it on an equal footing with other international organisations, thus ensuring its global influence in promoting parliamentary democracy and good governance. Crucially, the Bill seeks to elevate the status of the ICRC. As an independent humanitarian organisation, the ICRC has a unique mandate to protect victims of armed conflicts, enshrined in the Geneva conventions of 1949. This Bill will provide the necessary mechanisms to enhance the work of the ICRC in a way befitting its mandate in international humanitarian law. Granting the ICRC certain immunities and privileges will bring the UK into line with over 110 states and alleviate many operational challenges under its current status. The ICRC’s efforts to provide humanitarian assistance and rebuild communities need to be protected. It is important to recognise that the ICRC works in many dangerous zones around the world, and that allowing the legal protection of information and testimonies will in turn protect its workers and benefit the people it is helping. Its work in Gaza, Sudan, Congo, Ukraine and in over 90 countries must be protected and must maintain its principles of neutrality, independence and confidentiality. This Bill provides a critical step in ensuring that both the CPA and the ICRC, through their new status as international organisations, are entrusted by the Government to operate fully within the UK. Both organisations will continue to be valued partners in the UK’s central role in global diplomacy, through the promotion of good governance, democracy and the Commonwealth, and in addressing global humanitarian needs. I hope the whole House will support the Bill on Third Reading.

• 9 Dec 2024 · Teacher Recruitment and Retention · Hansard source

  More

  I begin by thanking all the teachers, support staff and senior leaders in my constituency of Southgate and Wood Green, and across the country, for their hard work ensuring that our children receive the high quality education they deserve. Teachers’ pay, their workload and the environment in which they work have been highlighted as reasons why they leave the profession. Can my right hon. Friend tell the House what steps she is taking to address the reasons for teachers quitting the profession?

• 9 Dec 2024 · Teacher Recruitment and Retention · Hansard source

  More

  13. What steps she is taking to improve teacher recruitment and retention.

• 27 Nov 2024 · Budget · Hansard source

  More

  One of the central aspects of the reconciliation process arising from the Good Friday agreement is the need to facilitate and encourage integrated education, so will the Secretary of State join me in welcoming the continued support for integrated education in the autumn Budget?

• 27 Nov 2024 · Budget · Hansard source

  More

  4. What assessment he has made of the impact of the autumn Budget 2024 on Northern Ireland.

• 13 Nov 2024 · Debt Relief (Developing Countries) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision for or in connection with the relief of debts of certain developing countries. Debt remains a huge cause of concern for low-income countries in the wake of the covid pandemic and following rising inflation on food and fuel. Thirty-four African countries spend more on external debt payments than on their entire healthcare and/or education budgets. According to a report from the Send My Friend To School coalition, across low-income countries, debt servicing on net interest payments accounts for 60% of education expenditure. The latest figures for Africa show that the total external debt serviced by all African countries in 2024 was $104 billion. Over 45% of that amount, $47 billion, is owed to private creditors. To put that into perspective, the entire UK aid budget to Africa in 2024 was £993 million, or less than one hundredth of what African countries owe in external debt. To use a specific example, this year the Kenyan Government will spend $5.149 billion on external debts, of which $2.981 billion will go towards external debt payments to commercial creditors. The UK provides Kenya with £45 million in aid, so in effect, UK aid is going towards helping service that debt. At a time when we have seen overseas development aid cut from 0.7% to 0.5% of GNI, we need to have an overview of the contribution that aid makes, rather than seeing aid in isolation. If we are truly serious about ensuring that UK aid goes further, debt relief from private creditors has to be addressed. The G20 has identified debt as a problem for developing countries, and has taken some steps to address it. In November 2020, it created the common framework for debt treatments beyond the debt service suspension initiative. The intention was to allow low-income countries with unsustainable debt to use that framework to obtain debt relief, including from private creditors. Although well intentioned, the common framework has been ineffective, because it has no teeth. Private creditors have been unwilling to participate, and there is no process to ensure their participation. Consequently, while Governments were negotiating debt relief with low-income countries, private creditors were just going through the motions. One example is the in-principle agreement that Zambia made with private creditors, under which they would have been paid a third more than Government creditors, including the UK and China. Needless to say, the Government creditors vetoed that deal on the basis that there was no equal treatment of creditors as required by the common framework, leaving Zambia in limbo. The four countries that requested debt treatment under the common framework experienced lengthy delays and a long, drawn-out process, with very little to show for all the time and effort spent on trying to obtain debt relief. Critics suggest that the failings of the common framework have been due to a lack of enforcement, a lack of a mechanism to co-ordinate creditors, a lack of transparent debt reporting, and an inability to prevent litigation and hold-out behaviour from creditors. The fact that only Chad, Zambia, Ghana and Ethiopia have used the common framework, and that none has seen any debt cancelled from private creditors, has shown how ineffective the common framework is and has put other countries off applying. Despite the G20 Governments and the International Monetary Fund urging private creditors to co-operate, the G20 has not offered low-income countries the tools they need to bring the private creditors to the table to negotiate debt treatment. There is an urgent need for a mechanism that will ensure that Governments and private creditors share the burden equally when restructuring debt with low-income countries, and that is something the UK can help with. The UK can play a big role in overcoming the delays and bureaucracy caused by the common framework and can deliver equal treatment of creditors. In doing so, it will deliver debt justice for low-income countries and do what the G20 intended. How could this be done? Ninety per cent of the debt of the low-income countries eligible to apply to the common framework is governed by English law. This Bill will compel private creditors to actively participate in the debt relief process by preventing them from suing for more than they would get if they accepted debt relief on the same terms as other lenders. Knowing that they could not get more than Government creditors would also have the effect of encouraging private creditors to reach a quicker settlement, rather than drag their heels as they have been doing under the common framework—some might say that in doing so, they are acting in bad faith. If successful, this process could lead to more applications from low-income countries than the paltry four that the common framework has received to date. That could unlock billions for low-income countries to spend on their health and education systems, while not costing the Treasury a penny. For those who are sceptical about whether this can be done, I point to a precedent. In 2010, the UK passed similar legislation, the Debt Relief (Developing Countries) Act, which started off as a private Member’s Bill introduced by my good friend, my hon. Friend the Member for Gorton and Denton (Andrew Gwynne). That Act compelled private creditors to participate in debt relief under the now-outdated heavily indebted poor countries initiative. A subsequent Government review in 2011, led by the coalition Government, found that legislation to have been a success and to have had no adverse impact on the UK economy. My Bill will update the 2010 Act, strengthen certain measures, and make it applicable to the current G20 common framework. This Bill will reduce the burden of debt for the poorest countries and help overcome the ineffectiveness of the G20 common framework. It will also prevent future debt crises by deterring risky lending. There is much more that could be done to strengthen the common framework, such as introducing the legal automatic suspension of payments when a country applies to the common framework, as is the norm when big corporations deal with corporate debt restructurings. However, that is outside the scope of my Bill; perhaps it is something that Ministers can take up directly with the G20. Next year will be the 25th anniversary of the Jubilee 2000 campaign, which sought debt forgiveness for low-income countries and saw over $100 billion of debt cancelled for the 35 poorest countries in the world. We need to repeat that success, so that the savings from debt cancellation can go towards funding health and education programmes in low-income countries. With 3.3 billion people living in countries that spend more on debt servicing than on health or education, the time to act is now. Countries seeking debt relief are also experiencing extreme weather events due to climate change. Last year, Zambia had its most severe flooding for more than 50 years, with over 25,000 households affected. Right now, it is experiencing its worst drought in 40 years, with 50% of this year’s crops lost and with 2024 on track to be the hottest year on record. Zambia is suffering despite only contributing 0.01% of global greenhouse emissions since the industrial revolution. Although Zambia has sought debt relief from its largest private creditor, that creditor has refused to cancel the amount the International Monetary Fund has said is necessary to make the debt sustainable. That is typical of the behaviour of private creditors towards low-income countries. It is everyone’s responsibility to ensure that countries such as Zambia get the debt justice they deserve, and it is imperative that we take action now. Before I conclude, I want to thank the organisations that have provided me with invaluable advice and support in preparing this Bill, which have been championing the cause of debt relief for many years. Those organisations are Christian Aid, the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development, and Debt Justice. I also wish to thank the Send My Friend To School coalition and the House of Commons Library for some of the statistics used in my speech. I hope that this Bill will go some way to securing debt relief for low-income countries, allowing the money saved to be reinvested in health and education systems for those who need that investment most and helping to tackle the effects of climate change, such as in the case of Zambia. Morally, it is the right thing to do; it is the just thing to do; and it is the compassionate thing to do. I hope this Bill will receive the support it deserves and needs. Question put and agreed to . Ordered , That Bambos Charalambous, Sarah Champion, Alice Macdonald, Sam Rushworth, David Taylor, Laura Kyrke-Smith, Gordon McKee, Chris Law, Ellie Chowns, Liz Saville Roberts, Tonia Antoniazzi and Jo Platt present the Bill. Bambos Charalambous accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 14 March 2025, and to be printed (Bill 128 ).

• 13 Nov 2024 · Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I want to make a declaration of interest before we conclude. I was a member of the CPA executive. I believe my hon. Friend the Member for Edmonton and Winchmore Hill also wants to say something. I apologise for my lateness today.

• 30 Oct 2024 · COP29 and International Climate Finance · Hansard source

  More

  For some low-income countries, one of the biggest factors is debt through private creditors, which I think is greater than the other debt that a lot of those countries owe. Does the hon. Lady agree that the matter of debt owed to private creditors must also be addressed to tackle the need for more funding for climate emergencies?

• 29 Oct 2024 · IPP Sentences · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is right. There is a special need for prisoners to receive support. Keeping IPP prisoners incarcerated for longer than they should be is adding further pressure on our already overcrowded prison population. In a recent written response to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Riverside (Kim Johnson), the Minister confirmed that there are still five serving IPP prisoners who were given a minimum term of less than six months but have served more than 16 years. There are a further 15 with a tariff of between six months and a year who have not been released after 16 years. There are in a further 47 in the same position whose tariff was between a year and 18 months. Among the 1,132 IPP prisoners who have never been released is one of my constituents. Ongoing legal proceedings preclude me from naming him, although I can say that in 2006 he was sentenced to serve a minimum of 10 years for robbery under an IPP plan but has now served 19 years. He is now 42 years old and has missed the funeral of his grandfather, along with countless other family occasions. That has had a serious impact on him and his family. The psychological harm experienced by IPP prisoners and their families has been well documented by the British Psychological Society, which refers to the heightened risk of self-harm and suicide that IPP prisoners face as a result of their hopelessness and their perpetual state of anxiety at the prospect of additional years in prison. The deterioration of IPP prisoners’ mental health is illustrated by the Royal College of Psychiatrists case study in which a 17-year-old was given an IPP sentence for street robbery of trainers and given a one-year tariff but spent 10 years in prison, during which time he lost both his living relatives: his mother and grandmother. His mental health deteriorated so badly that he had to be transferred to a secure NHS mental hospital. Having spoken to some of the family members of people currently serving IPP sentences—I met them at lunchtime today, and many are in the Public Gallery—I have heard at first hand about the impact that this unbearable situation has on family members, but the impact on IPP prisoners is far more profound. According to the United Group for Reform of IPP, or UNGRIPP, which is campaigning to bring about change to IPP sentences, 90 IPP prisoners have committed suicide since the sentences were introduced, with nine of those suicides occurring in 2023. Considering that the prison population last year was approximately 87,000 and IPP prisoners were only 3% of that total, it is staggering that IPP prisoners accounted for 10% of all self-inflicted deaths in prison in 2023. One example is the tragic suicide of Scott Rider in 2022. In 2005, he had been sentenced to an IPP sentence, with a minimum tariff of 23 months. Seventeen years later, he was still in prison. He was one of the longest serving IPP prisoners at the time of his death. Following a three-day inquest into his death, the senior coroner for Milton Keynes, Tom Osborne, said in his regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths: “On any consideration of the circumstances of Mr Rider’s death one has to conclude that his treatment was inhumane and indefensible and that if action is not taken to review all prisoners sentenced to IPP then there is a risk of further deaths occurring.” He added: “Mr Rider was one of many IPP prisoners struggling to progress” and, at the time of his death, he had served 17.5 years and had “given up all hope of release.” The loss of hope of ever being released is certainly one of the big factors behind the high levels of suicide and self-harm among IPP prisoners. Even when IPP prisoners have been released on licence, the draconian licence conditions have led to prisoners being recalled for minor breaches of their licence, such as being late or missing an appointment. As I have mentioned, there are currently 1,602 IPP prisoners who have been released on licence but recalled. I am sure that we all agree that the current situation cannot continue, so what is to be done? In September 2022, in its excellent report on IPP sentences, the Justice Committee, chaired by Sir Bob Neill, made several recommendations to remedy the damage done by the sentences. The three main recommendations can be summarised as follows. No. 1 involves a refreshed action plan for IPP sentences, better access to prison programmes to help IPP prisoners to progress and better support for prisoners who are suffering with their mental health because of these sentences. No. 2 involves better training for Parole Board members overseeing IPP prisoners’ parole hearings, more support for IPP prisoners in preparing for parole hearings, a reduction of the qualifying licence period and better support for prison leavers. No. 3 is resentencing. In paragraph 152 of its report, the Justice Committee said: “Our primary recommendation is that the Government brings forward legislation to enable a resentencing exercise in relation to all IPP sentenced individuals…This is the only way to address the unique injustice caused by the IPP sentence and its subsequent administration, and to restore proportionality to the original sentences that were given.” The Committee also noted that there is precedent for resentencing retrospectively, but that it would require primary legislation. Former Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas emphasised his support for this approach. I acknowledge the steps that this Government and the previous Government have taken to tackle some of the problems caused by the licence conditions of IPP sentences. Particularly of note is section 66 of the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024, which creates an automatic termination process for IPP licences in certain circumstances, starting from this Friday, 1 November. At lunchtime, I had the pleasure of meeting a former IPP prisoner who will benefit from this measure, which means that he will no longer be on an IPP licence and will be able to be at large freely. The Act also allows for reviews by the Parole Board in certain circumstances from 1 February 2025. However, resentencing would be the most effective way to deal with the legacy of IPP sentences. I am aware that it is not without its problems, but it is the only just and fair way to deal with this appalling situation, which, if left unresolved, will lead to more IPP prisoners self-harming and taking their own lives. Prior to this debate, some of the IPP reform campaigners met Lord Woodley to discuss his private Member’s Bill on resentencing IPP prisoners, which reflects the Justice Committee’s recommendations on the matter. I hope Ministers will meet Lord Woodley to discuss his proposals, because there needs to be a review of IPP sentences, and all options need to be considered. Will my hon. Friend the Minister advise me on what steps the Government are taking to reduce the number of IPP prisoners in our prisons? What support mechanisms have been put in place to help IPP prisoners who are struggling with their mental health, including those who have been institutionalised, to help them overcome the barriers that may adversely affect their parole hearings and to prepare them for a return to life outside prison? Will the Government reconsider their position on resentencing IPP prisoners? At a stroke, that would rectify this injustice once and for all. Will the Government at least carry out a review to see what the barriers to resentencing are? That is the one thing that all commentators think needs to be done to resolve the injustice caused by IPP sentences. I thank UNGRIPP, the Howard League—which runs an excellent advice line for family members of IPP prisoners —the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the British Psychological Society. I also thank the House of Commons Library for its excellent briefings ahead of the debate. Most important are the family and friends of IPP prisoners who are incarcerated and those who have endured IPP sentences. Finally, there are those who unfortunately bow to the pressure of hopelessness, as there is no end to their sentences in sight, and, sadly, end their lives in prison. I hope that change will come and that IPP sentences will finally be gotten rid of from our prisons and confined to the dustbin of history, where they belong.

• 29 Oct 2024 · IPP Sentences · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered imprisonment for public protection sentences. It is pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz. Imprisonment for public protection sentences, which were introduced in 2005 by the Criminal Justice Act 2003, are cruel, unjust and damaging to those who are still serving them. They were meant to be used to protect the public against criminals who had committed one of 96 offences and who were thought still to be a danger after the minimum term or tariff of the original sentence had expired. No level was set for that tariff by the legislation and the open-ended nature of the sentences led to some catastrophic results. The House of Commons Library, in its excellent briefing paper for this debate, noted one instance where the courts applied an IPP sentence to someone who had served a minimum term of just 28 days. The misapplication of, and erroneous logic behind, IPP sentences resulted in widespread criticism and to the Government being challenged in court over restrictions on ways that IPP prisoners could demonstrate that they were no danger to the public. Following a joint report from His Majesty’s inspectorate of prisons and HM inspectorate of probation that highlighted the low levels of IPP prisoners being released, as well as the unsustainability of IPP prisoners adding to the burgeoning prison population, a ministerial review was carried out. Eventually, after further court cases and public pressure, IPP sentences were abolished on 3 December 2012. By then, more than 6,000 prisoners had received IPP sentences. Fast-forwarding to the present day, according to Ministry of Justice statistics as of June this year there were 1,132 IPP prisoners who had never been released, and a further 1,602 who had been recalled for breaching their licence conditions, making a total of 2,734 IPP prisoners still in our prisons. Criticism of IPP sentences has come from far and wide. In August of this year, Dr Alice Jill Edwards, the UN special rapporteur on torture, said: “IPP sentences are inhuman treatment and, in many cases, amount to psychological torture.” Former Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas described them as “morally wrong” and “inherently unfair”. Even Lord Blunkett, who was Home Secretary when IPP sentences were brought in, described their introduction as “the biggest regret” of his political career, which in some cases had led to injustice.

• 29 Oct 2024 · IPP Sentences · Hansard source

  More

  I also thank colleagues who have taken part in the debate, which has been thorough and thoughtful. There have been great contributions from everybody. I also have an apology from the Justice Committee, which is in its first meeting right now so its members could not be present, but would have liked to attend, so we would have had more voices around this Chamber. I welcome many of the comments made by the Minister, particularly those about the action plan and the dashboard for prisoners. They need to know what is happening, so I welcome that. I also welcome the fact that they need to be in the correct prisons in order to progress and the fact that they will have dedicated time to see support workers and get the right education and training to be released. I look forward to seeing the action plan when it is republished, and I am keen to see what progress it makes, because we want to see progress and ensure that IPP prisoners are no longer suffering and are able to get on with their lives. It impacts not just them, but their families. If this does not work, I certainly think we need to revisit the resentencing option. One point made by numerous Members in the debate was about the recommendations of the Justice Committee, which talked about having an “expert committee”. It is about looking at and resentencing each individual case, which would be very time-consuming, but the right and just thing to do. We will see where we go, and we will monitor the progress made on this by the Government. If progress has not been made, we will come back and seek to look at other alternatives, but I welcome the measures put in place so far. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered imprisonment for public protection sentences.

• 29 Oct 2024 · IPP Sentences · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the right hon. Lady for her intervention. She is right, and one of the biggest impacts of IPP sentences is on the mental health of prisoners. I will come to that later. She makes a good point with which I agree.

• 28 Oct 2024 · International Engagement · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. She touched on IDA. IDA needs a minimum of $27 billion from donor countries to help countries at higher risk of debt distress. Can she further elaborate on the discussions she had with international counterparts on IDA replenishment, ahead of IDA21 in early December this year?

• 22 Oct 2024 · Sentencing Review and Prison Capacity · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Secretary of State’s review of sentencing, but as she may know, people who are neurodivergent are hugely over-represented in the prison population. What steps will she take to ensure that prisoners with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism do not reoffend?

• 22 Oct 2024 · Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to support the Second Reading of this Bill, which is long overdue and, as we have heard, has cross-party support. It has received unwavering support in both this parliamentary Session and the previous Parliament, which is a testament to the importance that Members on both sides of this House place on its intentions. As we have heard, the debate is timely, given that the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting is taking place this week to address global security and the environmental and social challenges affecting us all. The Commonwealth nations are united in their belief in the rule of law and the importance of democracy. Since its birth in 1911, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association has promoted those enduring values as the Commonwealth’s parliamentary arm. With the threat of global conflict more present than ever, the work of the CPA to protect, develop and advance parliamentary democracy is more important than ever before. It is therefore crucial that the CPA, which is currently limited by its status as a UK charity, can participate fully in the international community. I am pleased that this Bill will address that issue, for the following reasons. First, the Bill provides some 18,500 Commonwealth parliamentarians with the credibility and authority that they need to operate on the international stage. By granting similar privileges and immunities to those bestowed on comparable international organisations, the Bill places the CPA on an equal standing at international fora, so that members have the required platform to address global challenges. This also means that the organisation will enjoy a similar legal status to its parliamentary-strengthening counterparts such as the Inter-Parliamentary Union in Switzerland, reinforcing its reliability as a preferred partner for legislatures in capacity building. My second point relates to the organisation’s scope. I welcome the Bill, because it extends the potential breadth of the CPA’s work by treating it like the other international organisations of which the UK is a member. This will allow the CPA to expand its programmes, projects and activities on parliamentary practice and procedure. As a UK charity, the CPA is currently subject to restrictions under UK legislation on the charity sector. For example, it is limited in its ability to sign international conventions and pursue political purposes. The CPA is therefore restricted in its ability to fully promote the values set out in the Commonwealth charter, and to address the priorities of its membership. An example of the CPA’s priorities is found in its recommended benchmarks for democratic legislatures. These are 132 good governance indicators that Commonwealth legislators should measure themselves against, covering minimum standards on financial oversight, engagement with the media, and political petitioning, to name but a few. This Bill gives the CPA greater freedom to promote good governance programmes throughout the Commonwealth nations. Furthermore, this Bill is important for maintaining the UK’s involvement in the CPA and the Commonwealth. The CPA’s past two annual conferences saw its governing body decide to relocate its headquarters to a member state that would provide the recognition that it needs, if this could not be given in the UK. The Bill does not just empower the organisation; it protects the UK’s global influence by keeping the CPA based here, so that our parliamentarians can have an active role in promoting parliamentary democracy and good governance globally. The second organisation on which the Bill focuses, the International Committee of the Red Cross, does vital work to protect victims of violence around the world. With growing conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan and elsewhere, the ICRC’s work as an independent humanitarian organisation is crucial. This Bill seeks to protect that independence. Clause 2 will provide for protected ICRC information to be “exempt from any legal disclosure requirement imposed by a court or tribunal order in civil proceedings, or by a statutory provision or rule of law”, with exemptions for a court order in criminal proceedings. The Bill allows us to give the ICRC the guarantee that any information shared with the UK Government is protected, so that it can continue to do crucial work in assessing victims of armed conflict. The ICRC operates under a long-standing method of confidentiality, which means that it engages mainly in confidential bilateral dialogues with states and other parties, and it expects states to respect the confidentiality of any information shared with them. Were such information to be made public, it would hamper the ICRC’s ability to have confidential dialogue with, and to gain the trust of, conflict groups. The ICRC needs to be perceived as a trustworthy organisation when seeking dialogue with all actors, so that it can have full access to frontlines and contested zones. Indeed, this allows the ICRC to continue to provide humanitarian assistance in conflict areas such as Gaza and Sudan. For example, it has delivered 962 metric tonnes of medical equipment amid the crisis in Gaza, and provided food assistance to over 42,000 people during the conflict in Sudan. In addition, the Bill will recognise the ICRC as an international organisation. Its mandate to act in times of global conflict is based on international humanitarian law under the Geneva conventions of 1949. Over 110 states, including all the permanent members of the UN Security Council, have accorded the ICRC relevant privileges and immunities that are comparable to those of an international organisation. The absence of privileges and immunities provided by the UK has resulted in significant operational challenges for the ICRC, so it is important that the UK follows its international partners. That would allow the ICRC to operate in the UK and to manage its resources in a manner that is most beneficial to affected persons, preserving its principle of neutrality. This Bill is a vital step towards ensuring that the CPA and the ICRC have the full confidence of the UK Government to promote our shared values of democracy and the rule of law, and to provide humanitarian assistance to those who need it. Having recently been elected to the UK executive committee of the CPA, I look forward to working with other Commonwealth parliamentarians to further those values and promote the standards of good governance that are necessary to make democracy work in today’s world. With the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting taking place in Samoa this week, it is important that the UK places itself at the heart of global diplomacy, and the Bill signifies our intention to do so. This Bill is long overdue, and in granting privileges and immunities to the CPA and the ICRC, it further secures their future and shows that the UK is back to play an active and important role on the international stage.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Driving Test Waiting Times · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the fact that the Secretary of State has met the chief executive of the DVSA to discuss urgent solutions to the sky-high driving test waiting times. According to the latest statistics, the waiting time in the Wood Green driving test centre in my constituency was 18.64 weeks. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that this issue is a top priority for the Government, so that my constituents can be reassured that driving test waiting times will be drastically reduced?