Paula Barker MP: speeches

Speeches

• 20 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I am proud to support my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) as a co-sponsor of this Bill. Through her leadership, compassion and dignity, she has been a beacon of hope for so many. I thank the many hundreds of constituents who have written to me or had face-to-face appointments with me to discuss this complex and emotive issue. There are strongly held beliefs on both sides of the debate both inside and outside the House. I absolutely respect those with views different from mine, and hope that they will respect my views. After all, it is possible for all of us in this place to disagree well. People on both sides of the debate have accepted that we can and must do better for dying people and their loved ones—that has been clear throughout this debate. Too many of us have witnessed the devastation caused when we are denied choice at the end of life. Until the law changes, dying people in Britain will continue to suffer unbearably in their final weeks and days, with many trying to scrape together the funds for an assisted death abroad or taking their own lives behind closed doors. I urge right hon. and hon. Members to keep such experiences in the front of their minds when they go through the Lobby later. At the heart of it, this Bill is about choice: those who wish to exercise their choice can do so, and those who do not wish to do so simply do not have to. The Bill introduces practical measures to assess eligibility, guard against coercion, and ensure rigorous medical oversight and robust monitoring of the process. Dying people have none of those protections under the current law. The status quo is failing people each and every day. I pay tribute to colleagues from across the House who served on the Public Bill Committee, regardless of what side of the debate they were on. They strengthened the Bill by accepting key amendments, including the establishment of a judge-led multidisciplinary panel to oversee every application, with oversight from psychiatrists, social workers and lawyers; the requirement that assisted dying can only be discussed with patients in the context of all their end-of-life care and treatment options; mandatory training for doctors and panel members on detecting coercion; and the creation of a disability programme board. The Bill requires that patients be informed about all care options to ensure that everyone has access to the best possible pain relief, emotional support and hospice care. This will ensure that choosing an assisted death is never a result of ignorance or lack of care I am pleased that the Bill has brought about a long-overdue discussion about palliative care. If we are honest, very few people in this place and outside were shouting about it from the rooftops beforehand. I sincerely hope that after the passage of this Bill, we will continue to discuss how we can improve palliative care, because it should not be an either/or. By having robust palliative care and the option of assisted dying, we will truly have options that will meet individual needs and the values of each patient. Finally, the momentum for law change is spreading across the British Isles and beyond. Last month, MSPs voted by a clear majority to pass Liam McArthur’s assisted dying Bill. The Isle of Man’s Bill is awaiting Royal Assent, and will potentially be available for terminally ill residents from 2027. The direction of travel is to give dying people true choice at the end of life. We cannot leave dying people in England and Wales behind.

• 20 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend give way?

• 13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way?

• 10 Jun 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for coming to the House to make the statement and for the strong action that the Government are taking to make it clear that we hold no truck with extremists who care nothing for peace, but we must go further. He will know the strength of feeling on the Labour Benches on this issue, particularly on recognition of a Palestinian state. I reimpress that on him and hope that he will be here in a fortnight’s time as the Minister who recognised Palestine. Will he advise the House on what discussions he is having about the appalling interception of the British-flagged yacht Madleen, yet again preventing much-needed aid from reaching the Palestinian people?

• 4 Jun 2025 · Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his statement, but we have been here countless times before. Last week, Israel approved 22 further settlements in the west bank. Israeli Defence Minister Katz claimed it was “a strategic move that prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state”. What more evidence do we need to call this exactly what it is: a deliberate policy of annexation and genocide? Will the Government now take the long overdue steps that we have all been calling for for years—namely, the recognition of Palestine, sanctions on extremist Israeli Government Ministers, suspension of all arms sales and suspension of all trade? If we want to see a Palestinian state, we must do something now to prevent its erasure. The history books will not be kind to this Government unless we use every form of leverage at our disposal, and our grandchildren will ask why we effectively stood by while a people were eradicated by bombs, bullets, starvation and, no doubt, the further ethnic cleansing that is still to come. This should shame us all.

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way?

• 16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Lady give way?

• 14 May 2025 · Gaza: UK Assessment · Hansard source

  More

  Given the genocide we are witnessing unfold before our eyes every single day, will the Government drop the 2030 road map for UK-Israel bilateral relations and impose economic and diplomatic sanctions to apply pressure on Israel to abide by its obligations under international law?

• 24 Apr 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Dozens of families across Merseyside, including my constituents Gemma and Paul Lucas, have been left financially and emotionally devastated by the actions of a home improvement company, Celsius Home Improvements Ltd, and its director Frank Deary. Customers had to pay 60% of costs up front to Mr Deary, but have been left with homes that are uninhabitable and, in some cases, dangerous. The Liverpool Echo has reported that it has seen documents showing that Mr Deary’s companies were providing quotes post 2022 with Celsius branding, but were trading as Clearmetric Ltd. A winding-up order was made against Clearmetric Ltd in the Manchester district registry on 7 January this year, more than three years after Celsius Home Improvements was dissolved in February 2022. What can the Government do to prevent individuals like Mr Deary and his associate Liam McGrath from liquidating one company, which owes more than £1 million to customers, and going on to scam others by setting up other companies, one of which I am led to believe is called Merseyside Construction Ltd? Most importantly, what can be done to get justice and a full refund for my constituents Gemma and Paul?

• 2 Apr 2025 · Gaza: Israeli Military Operations · Hansard source

  More

  More than 300 Palestinian children have been killed since Israel’s new offensive began. What worries me about the Government is that they do not seem to have any red lines that Israel must not cross. We need robust action, not words. The two-state solution, which is on its knees, is not a by-product of peace; it is the route to peace. If the time for recognition is not now, then when is it? What will the Government’s response be when Israel permanently occupies part of Gaza, as its Defence Minister seems to be insinuating it will?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Domestic Violence Court Cases: Backlog · Hansard source

  More

  8. What steps her Department plans to take to reduce the backlog of domestic violence cases.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Domestic Violence Court Cases: Backlog · Hansard source

  More

  The backlog in the court system harms efforts to instil confidence in women persisting with domestic violence charges against their abusers. Violence against women and girls is a national scandal, and femicide is ongoing, with countless women losing their lives to male violence. Sadly, my region of Merseyside is now the second highest region in the country for femicide. Does the Department agree that any moves to fast-track cases via the criminal or civil courts to remove abusers from our streets must involve appropriately severe sentences, irrespective of the prison places crisis?

• 11 Mar 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T8. A significant proportion of those who experience homelessness are ex-offenders. I have previously raised concerns that the drive to alleviate the prison places crisis must not add to the homelessness emergency. The Deputy Prime Minister is in the process of establishing an inter-ministerial group on tackling homelessness. Will my right hon. Friend’s Department play a full and active role in that inter-ministerial group, and ensure that Ministers and officials from the Ministry of Justice are adequately represented?

• 5 Feb 2025 · Southport Attack · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his statement. It makes me deeply angry to listen to the litany of errors by different agencies across the public sector, not just in failing to realise the level of threat that Rudakubana posed in each instance of encountering him, but in failing to join the dots and realise the common pattern they were all seeing—not least because in 2020, my constituents Jan and Gary Furlong lost their wonderful son, James, in the Forbury Gardens attack. As in the Southport attack, there were systematic failings in the system. The perpetrator had four Prevent referrals and was known to mental health services, and nobody joined the dots. Will the Security Minister ensure that whatever else the inquiry into these tragic and preventable deaths examines, it looks closely at how the agencies talk to each other and assess threats together? Agencies and Departments can no longer be allowed to work in silos. Given the Minister’s statement that the Government will take steps to publish the findings of other independent Prevent learning reviews where there has been an incident of national significance, may I ask whether that will be extended to the Forbury Gardens attack?

• 3 Feb 2025 · AstraZeneca · Hansard source

  More

  Friday’s announcement was deeply disappointing. The Liverpool city region is home to one of Europe’s largest pharma clusters. The Government were prepared to put millions into the project with AstraZeneca, which it has now walked away from. Is that money still on the table for other viable life science projects in our region? Will the Government commit to meet our metro mayor, Steve Rotheram, to discuss that further?

• 3 Feb 2025 · Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making a passionate speech, and he talks about benefit fraud on an industrial scale. Does he really believe that just over 2.5% is an industrial scale?

• 3 Feb 2025 · Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I recognise that fraud exists across the public sector and that it is wholly right for any Government to track down the fraudsters, the criminal gangs and those who cheat the system at the bottom as well as the top—we have heard about the VIP fast lane—but I hold deep reservations about the unintended consequences of the Bill in its present form. We have heard some very constructive contributions this evening from Members across the House. I thank my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, who is always accessible and has been willing to listen to my concerns and those of my many constituents who have got in touch to express their views. Although she has allayed some of my fears, I did let her know that I would raise my concerns in the Chamber today. First, the Bill needs to make a greater distinction between fraud and error. We cannot accept a situation in which our constituents are being accused of fraud on the back of genuine personal errors. I know at first hand from my experience as a constituency MP that the Department is more than capable of making glaring errors of its own, and people suffer greatly as a result. The welfare system is not an easy one to navigate; people should be supported when problems arise, rather than there being a natural presumption towards guilt. Many organisations that have been in touch with hon. Members share this fear, so it is essential that the Government address the point head on. Other aspects of the Bill sit very uneasy with me. The Government already have the powers, under existing legislation, to investigate those who are suspected of fraud. That raises the question why the Bill is needed. It feels like a hammer to crack a nut. After the second world war, the Attlee Government set about establishing a welfare state as a safety net for those who were genuinely in need. The Attlee Government took responsibility for looking after the wellbeing of all their citizens from the cradle to the grave. Worryingly, there now seems to be a determination to transform the British welfare state into a system of mass surveillance. I will be grateful if the Minister responds to the following points. First, although I acknowledge that the Secretary of State spoke about this at the Dispatch Box, what provisions are being made in respect of proper oversight of these proposed new powers? How would any financial institution navigate data protection conflicts between the Government and its customers? How would data security risks be mitigated? During an iteration of the Bill introduced by the last Government, the Equality and Human Rights Commission called for it to be scrapped. A legal opinion from Dan Squires KC and Aidan Wills found that the powers in the previous iteration were likely to breach UK article 8 privacy rights protected in the Human Rights Act. Can the Minister tell us what legal advice the Government have received on the proposals in the Bill? I have serious concerns that assertions and decisions on individual cases, if automated, could lead to Horizon-style injustices if the necessary steps are not taken to put the right safeguards in place, alongside measures to guarantee some level of transparency and accountability when mistakes arise. We are looking at a hugely significant change to our welfare system, at a time when the Department is responsible for record underpayments. Surely that should be a Government priority, rather than further upheaval of a system that threatens to further stigmatise those who legitimately rely on the welfare state. There are low levels of fraud in the benefits system. The latest Government figures put it at 2.8% of total benefit expenditure, which translates to overpayments due to fraud recorded at 3.7% in the financial year 2023-24. Although it is right and proper to look at ways to reduce that figure, politicians in this place have a responsibility to make it clear at every opportunity that any such move, especially one as far-reaching as this, is intended to target a small minority of criminals. The constituents I support often tell me that the services they interact with, and by extension the Department, tend to view them with suspicion and lack of empathy. The Bill must not be used to entrench such attitudes. For the British public, whether they are in work or out of work, life is getting harder. Rampant inequality has broken our economic model, while the 1% continue to squeeze the rest. I very much hope that the Bill will not end up punishing the wrong people, making those inequalities even worse. I look forward to Government Front Benchers engaging with those who express legitimate concerns today and during the Bill’s parliamentary journey. I will not oppose its Second Reading, but I will work constructively with colleagues across the House to table amendments in Committee that alleviate my concerns and those of right hon. and hon. Members.

• 22 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Money) · Hansard source

  More

  I will come to that point shortly. My hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley has sought every opportunity to be inclusive, and has sought a wide range of views, because she knows the value of all voices being heard. If the resolution does not pass today, the Bill cannot progress. I remind right hon. and hon. Members that that is not what the House voted for in November, and it is certainly not what our constituents want. Three full days of oral evidence from 50 witnesses will begin next week. That will be followed by at least eight full days of scrutiny. None of that will proceed if the resolution is voted down today. I appeal to Members across this place, regardless of their views, to let us have the long overdue, open and transparent debate that will enable Members to formulate a final opinion on the Bill, irrespective of what that may be. To stifle it would be to stifle democracy. We must remember that democracy is a slow process of stumbling to the right decision, instead of going straight to the wrong one.

• 22 Jan 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Money) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) has led this important debate with openness and transparency at all times, and has treated all views with dignity and respect. She is acutely aware of the strongly held beliefs on both sides of this debate. Many right hon. and hon. Members expressed the concern that there was not enough time to debate the Bill. It is important to ensure the maximum amount of debate on this important Bill, and to ensure that all views are heard. The public wish to hear a considered view from all parliamentarians in this place, and we owe it to them to ensure that the debate continues, while treating each other with dignity and respect, just as we did last November, when we saw this place as its very best. A money resolution is standard for any Bill put forward by the Government or an MP. The wording is identical to any other money resolution for any other Bill. It is important that all Members are clear that this debate is not about the merits or otherwise of the Bill, and it would be incredibly disappointing if any Member sought to use it as such.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Southport Attack · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my right hon. Friend for her statement. My thoughts and prayers are with everyone involved. Acts of terror devastate the families of victims who are left to pick up the pieces, having their closest loved ones robbed from them in the cruellest way. As with the Forbury Gardens terrorist attack in 2020, which saw my constituents Gary and Jan Furlong lose their beloved son James, these acts often take place after multiple agency failings. The Forbury Gardens perpetrator had been referred to Prevent four times and was known to mental health services. It will be important to those families in Southport that lessons are learned and acted on in a timely way. Will the Government engage with me and Survivors Against Terror on its calls for a survivors’ charter, which would extend rights to survivors and the families of victims?

• 20 Jan 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T9. Tomorrow, it will be 1,000 days since the repeal of the Vagrancy Act 1824 was given Royal Assent, yet that outdated, vindictive and utterly ineffective Act is still driving people away from the support they need and into an already overloaded courts system. There is no need for a replacement as existing antisocial behaviour laws are sufficient. May I urge the Minister to please drop the peculiar and cautious civil service group-think? We are 201 years on. Will she advise when the commencement of the repeal will happen?

• 17 Jan 2025 · Fireworks Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making a wonderful start to her speech. I congratulate her on a second bite of the cherry, as this is her second time with this private Member’s Bill. She talks about education and loudness. Does she agree that there is a particularly bad and detrimental impact on those suffering from neurodiverse conditions?

• 17 Jan 2025 · Absent Voting (Elections in Scotland and Wales) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) for bringing this Bill before the House. Does my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson) agree that the online service provides a vital resource for people with accessibility requirements—for those who are perhaps blind or partially sighted?

• 17 Jan 2025 · Prayers · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That the House sit in private. Question put forthwith (Standing Order No. 163) and negatived.

• 16 Jan 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  It has been a long and painful road to get to this point, but today’s welcome news of a ceasefire deal is finally a sliver of hope. It has always been clear that the release of hostages and a ceasefire were necessary steps to pull the middle east from this abyss, which has cruelly taken so many lives. I will touch on the point that the Foreign Secretary just made about another generation of politicians, including younger politicians in this House, debating the two-state solution in 25 years’ time. I have said to him many times that the recognition of a Palestinian state is not a by-product but the route to a resolution. Will he be brave, will he be bold, and will he, so that we are not here in 25 years’ time debating the two state-solution, recognise the state of Palestine much quicker than that?