Christopher Chope MP: speeches

137 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 13 Nov 2024 · Environmental Protection · Hansard source
    More

    I am not sure that will help much. My hon. Friend refers to the packaging of vapes, but the number of vapes described as refillable or reusable is projected to increase exponentially over the next several years. The question I asked—I did not really get an answer from the Minister—is what the impact will be of all those refillable or reusable vapes on the environment. The same issues to do with what goes into the manufacture of vapes apply to both disposable and reusable vapes. Why would we need to have 2 billion reusable vapes being sold by 2034 if they are not being disposed of? Just because they are described as reusable does not mean that they cannot be disposed of after one use. My hon. Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham made the point that we need to be wary of how the Chinese, who are the leading manufacturers and exporters in this field, may well adapt their products to try to circumvent these regulations. In any event, what they and other manufacturers are producing is a cost on the environment, in the sense that they are using scarce resources. Let us not be naive: the fact that something is reusable does not mean it is a permanent fixture. For example, in my parents’ day, they used to smoke cigarettes through a filter that they held. Even those filters were not permanent. I remember many occasions on which my parents said that they had to get rid of the filter and replace it with another. Do not let us be naive and think that this enormously large number of reusable vape devices that are projected to be sold in 2034 will not end up in landfill.

  • 13 Nov 2024 · Environmental Protection · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson), who has brought a lot of knowledge to the debate. I want to begin by referring to the hon. Member for South Dorset (Lloyd Hatton). The last time I was this close to him was early in July, before polling day, when I was standing in a pub garden overlooking Chesil beach with my good friend Richard Drax. I very much enjoyed listening to his tribute to Richard Drax, who was not only a good friend of mine, but a great servant of democracy. He contributed enormously to the successful campaign to leave the European Union, after which he was a diligent member of the European Scrutiny Committee. He was also extremely active on what was his great love: trying to ensure that we maintain strong defences in our country, and he used his military background to great effect in debates. However, I have to tell the hon. Gentleman that he is lucky to be here. I have every confidence that, had it not been for the previous Government’s intransigence over the Bibby Stockholm, Richard Drax would still have been in this House, so it was with mixed feelings that I listened to what the hon. Gentleman had to say, but I extend a warm welcome to him. I am sure that he and I will do our best to ensure that Dorset continues to improve its provision of good-quality services to all its citizens. Turning to the subject of the debate, it came as a bit of a disappointment that neither the Minister nor my hon. Friend the Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson) referred much to the unintended health consequences of outlawing disposable vapes. There is already a real problem with illegal disposable vapes—it is estimated that probably one third of vapes are illegal. Those are already bad for the environment, but what will the measures do to address that problem? Not very much, I fear. As I said, it is estimated that some 360 million disposable vapes got on to the market in the United Kingdom in 2023. I had a briefing from British American Tobacco, which highlights that 4.5 million illegal vapes were seized at the border by His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs in 2023. The gap between the 4.5 million illegal vapes seized, and the 360 million estimated to be in circulation, highlights the gravity and extent of the problem, particularly when we extrapolate into the future; the number of illegal vapes could be as high as 1 billion by 2030. That is an enormous amount of income for people engaged in black market trade, people smuggling, and other illicit activities.

  • 13 Nov 2024 · Environmental Protection · Hansard source
    More

    The Minister has talked about the environmental impact of disposable vapes, but what does she think about the environmental impact of the reusable vape devices that are being sold? The Government’s own impact assessment suggests that by the year 2034, there will be a total of 2 billion reusable vape devices being sold. What impact does she think that will have on the environment, and how will that differ from the sale of disposable vapes?

  • 13 Nov 2024 · Environmental Protection · Hansard source
    More

    The issue is not just disposable vapes but illegal vapes, of which as many as 120 million may be being sold each year. Should we not concentrate on that? These regulations deal only with legal vapes, but should we not be more concerned about the environmental impact and other health impacts of illegal vapes?

  • 13 Nov 2024 · Environmental Protection · Hansard source
    More

    I am not suggesting that; I am referring to the impact assessment. The Minister, in responding to my intervention earlier, referred to the statement made yesterday to the effect that a new magic pill will be available on the NHS to enable people to be weaned off smoking and, in particular, the nicotine effects of smoking. When bringing that forward, the Government said that the new pill would be as effective as vaping. They did not suggest it would be more effective, but as effective, thereby recognising the important role that vaping has in promoting public health. These regulations are being brought forward on the basis of the environmental benefits that will flow from them, but let us be clear that there is little provision for enforcement. Reference has been made to the additional burden on local authorities. Paragraph 183 of the regulatory impact assessment states: “There will be costs associated with inspection and law enforcement services to support the ban. Trading Standards Authorities (TSAs) would be best placed to enforce the ban, and work will be undertaken with LAs to establish the most effective and efficient way of enforcement.” The impact assessment goes on to calculate that the enforcement costs will be low, because the assumption is “as per Better Regulation guidance to assume 100% compliance by businesses.” If we make that assumption—in my submission, it is a false one—it can lead to the acceptance of figures from the Government that no additional costs will arise from enforcing these new regulations. I think that is a load of nonsense.

  • 13 Nov 2024 · Environmental Protection · Hansard source
    More

    There is already vaping among children. As the hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend (Mary Glindon) said, children cannot buy vapes and should not be using them, but if children are going to choose between vaping and smoking, it is better that they should go for vaping rather than smoking. One of the unintended consequences that may flow from the regulations is that, instead of using vaping products, an increasing number of children will go back to smoking behind the bike sheds, or whatever the modern equivalent is.

  • 12 Nov 2024 · Social Security Advisory Committee: Winter Fuel Payment · Hansard source
    More

    What is the point of having a Social Security Advisory Committee if the Government do not listen to and take its advice? Would it not be better to abolish the committee if the Government are intent on ignoring it?

  • 12 Nov 2024 · National Youth Strategy · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the right hon. Lady for her generous comments about the Thatcher Government’s 1989 Children Act, and for saying that she will dedicate £100 million to youth outcomes over the next four years. Does she therefore share my concern, which I am sure may resonate with many young people, that we now know that more than £100 million has been wasted on the ludicrous High Speed 2 bat tunnel? Does that not show the importance of this House taking control of spending priorities in order to prevent such waste in the future?

  • 6 Nov 2024 · Horticultural Peat (Prohibition of Sale) · Hansard source
    More

    I am not going to oppose the right of the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) to bring in a Bill, because I believe in the right of Members to bring forward whatever Bills they want. Most of them are ill conceived, and I have spent much of my time in this place attacking Bills that would have unintended consequences. I think the hon. Lady’s Bill will fit into the category of Bills that have good intentions, but would have unacceptable unintended consequences. It will not go unnoticed that this Bill is a full-frontal attack on British horticulture, and that it is being promoted by none other than the Liberal Democrats. The hon. Lady referred to the previous Bill, which I spoke against on 16 April. It is a salutary reminder of the work of democrats in this country that none of the 12 Members of this House who supported that Bill is still a Member of the House—the electorate gave their verdict on the ill-conceived support for it. I am delighted to say today that a number of my new and not so new colleagues have said to me, “Why can’t you divide the House and oppose this Bill?” I say to them, including my hon. Friends the Members for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns) and for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), that we should allow the Liberal Democrats to stew in their own juice and bring forward their Bill, so that it can be criticised and never reach the statute book. One would have thought from the remarks of the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton that she was a supporter of the Horticultural Trades Association. Yesterday, the association ran an event in this House, and so many people attended that the free indoor plants on offer were all scooped up about halfway through. If the hon. Lady went to collect her free plants, she obviously missed the opportunity to talk to representatives of the association, who believe that her proposals would completely undermine British horticulture. What is most important—the HTA makes this point—is that we should have a level playing field with European growers. We want to grow more trees. Too few trees are being home-grown, and too many of them are being imported. Likewise, we want to promote garden products, but too many of them are being imported. A very large proportion are being imported from Holland, because, far from having a peat-free environment, Holland is the fastest-growing export market for peat coming into our country. Holland is also one of the largest importers and exporters of peat, and it gets a lot of its peat from Germany, Estonia, Belgium, Latvia and Sweden. The Dutch use peat to make horticultural products, which are then sold into our market because those products are more acceptable to consumers, not least because they tend to last longer, as peat is a substance that enables plants to retain moisture and water a lot longer than products that are peat free, such as coir. Some of the people who promote peat-free products do not seem to realise, when they talk about coir as a substitute, that it is produced mainly in the far east, particularly in Sri Lanka, and that it has to be washed and de-salted before it can be prepared for horticultural use and then has to be transported halfway across the world. That is not an ecologically friendly way of producing a peat substitute. There is another dimension to the issue of peat. What proportion of it is used in horticulture? It is a very small proportion. I am told that about 95% of the peat consumed in the world is used for peat fires. It is put into domestic boilers and mega-incinerators or used as a substitute for coal or even natural gas. By concentrating on just one aspect of the use of peat, in horticulture, we are ignoring the much larger problem of the burning of peat for fuel. I have looked up how easy it is to buy peat for fuel in this country, and the latest information is that I could get a pallet of 10 or so bags of peat delivered to my home for £260. That peat comes from exactly the same source as peat for agriculture. Why are we having a go at the use of peat in horticulture and agriculture when we could be dealing with the much larger issue of the extraction of peat for heating our homes? This is a sensitive, emotional subject, but we need to have some hard-headed realism around it. If you, like me, Madam Deputy Speaker, support British horticulture, you should be very much opposed to this Bill, because it is a full-frontal assault upon the viability of our horticulture industry and will result in less choice for all those who engage in horticulture, whether as amateur or professional gardeners. I urge the hon. Lady to think carefully before she drafts her Bill. If she thinks that it will be mitigated by having a lot of exemptions set out in it, I challenge her to include on the face of her Bill all the exemptions she thinks will be necessary, because only with thousands of exemptions will the Bill be in any way acceptable. That is the challenge to her. That is why I am not going to oppose her bringing forward her Bill. Let us see what it says, but I fear it is going to be absolutely ghastly. I am disappointed, because I thought the Liberal Democrats were the friends of people working in the countryside and in agriculture and horticulture, but this Bill suggests quite the reverse. I strongly oppose it. Question put (Standing Order No. 23) and agreed to. Ordered, That Sarah Dyke, Wera Hobhouse, Tim Farron, Pippa Heylings, Martin Wrigley, Caroline Voaden, Carla Denyer, Layla Moran, Tessa Munt, Richard Foord, Vikki Slade and Steve Darling present the Bill. Sarah Dyke accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 24 January 2025, and to be printed (Bill 122).

  • 29 Oct 2024 · Ministerial Code: Policy Announcements · Hansard source
    More

    A remit of the new Modernisation Committee is to enhance the ability of Members of this House to hold the Government to account. In the light of the failure that has been exhibited over recent days, would the Minister be in favour of referring this issue to the Modernisation Committee?

  • 23 Oct 2024 · Holiday and Second Homes Regulation: Cornwall and Isles of Scilly · Hansard source
    More

    I did not wish to take time out of this short debate, but I remind Members of paragraph 30 of “Rules of behaviour and courtesies in the House of Commons”, which was issued by Mr Speaker: “Men are expected to wear a tie”. Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).

  • 16 Oct 2024 · Points of Order · Hansard source
    More

    On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I was going to raise the issue you have just spoken about as a point of order. My concern is that, for the first time ever in my experience within this House, the list of Members participating in a Division has not been published in the hard copy of Hansard . I ask you to insist that Hansard publishes the list in hard copy, rather than relying upon its being put online. Can I also ask how it came about? This is to do with new technology, and when I inquired about this matter earlier today, the list was still not available at 11.30 this morning. Why was it not?

  • 10 Oct 2024 · Universities: Freedom of Speech · Hansard source
    More

    Is freedom of speech not an absolute freedom and right? Will the Government not do something to bring vice-chancellors to account for their failures to deliver freedom of speech on university campuses? Fifty-five years ago, I was the victim of that when the vice-chancellor of the university that I was attending tried to prevent me, as chairman of the Conservative association, from inviting a then prominent Member of this House of Commons to the university campus. The vice-chancellor was eventually forced to stand down. I wrote what was then a lead letter in The Daily Telegraph , the vice-chancellor was shamed into changing his views and the visit took place. Does that not show that the key to this is having vice-chancellors who really believe in freedom of speech?

  • 9 Oct 2024 · Skills England · Hansard source
    More

    Order. It is helpful if you address your remarks through the Chair, rather than turning away. Apart from anything else, it makes it difficult for Hansard to record what you are saying.

  • 9 Oct 2024 · Sepsis Awareness · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the Front Benchers for sticking to their five minutes, which means the Minister now has 10 minutes; there will hopefully also be a couple of minutes for the proposer to reply.

  • 9 Oct 2024 · Sepsis Awareness · Hansard source
    More

    There are two more speakers and six minutes to go, so that is three minutes each.

  • 9 Oct 2024 · Maternity Services: Gloucestershire · Hansard source
    More

    Order. Interventions should be short. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to make a speech, he can do so later. Let us hear the response to the intervention.

  • 9 Oct 2024 · Maternity Services: Gloucestershire · Hansard source
    More

    I call Max Wilkinson to respond to this very well-informed debate.

  • 3 Sept 2024 · Healthcare Provision: East of England · Hansard source
    More

    Mohammad Yasin, you have one minute.

  • 3 Sept 2024 · Healthcare Provision: East of England · Hansard source
    More

    Order. I am afraid I have to call the hon. Gentleman to order because we have run out of time. I am sorry that a lot of people will not be able to give their speeches. I try to promote self-regulation, but it is worth reminding ourselves that paragraph 7 of the “Rules of behaviour and courtesies in the House of Commons” says that even if time limits are not imposed, Members “should speak with reasonable brevity and be mindful of others. Brevity in debate will give other Members a greater opportunity to speak and increase…chances of being called early”, on the next occasion on which a Member seeks to speak. I read that out as this is the first Westminster Hall debate of this Parliamentary Session. It is important that Members take into account that although I would prefer not to have to impose time limits, people then have to regulate themselves.

  • 3 Sept 2024 · Healthcare Provision: East of England · Hansard source
    More

    Before I call the next speaker, let me say that about 10 people have indicated that they wish to speak. The winding-up speeches will start just before 10.40 am. I believe in self-regulation, so I hope people will contain themselves so that their speeches meet the overall need.

  • 23 Jul 2024 · Immigration and Home Affairs · Hansard source
    More

    I note what the hon. Gentleman has said, but I do not think that would have made any difference to Mr Speaker’s decision about which amendments the House will be voting on later. However, his point is noted. I call Nigel Farage to make his maiden speech.

  • 23 Jul 2024 · Immigration and Home Affairs · Hansard source
    More

    Before calling the next speaker, I have to announce that we will have to reduce the time limit for speeches by all those other than maiden speakers to five minutes.

  • 23 Jul 2024 · Immigration and Home Affairs · Hansard source
    More

    Order. Unfortunately, there will have to be an eight-minute limit on Back-Bench speeches, although those making a maiden speech are exempt from that. I call Debbie Abrahams.

  • 23 Jul 2024 · Immigration and Home Affairs · Hansard source
    More

    I call Mark Ferguson to make his maiden speech.

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →