1-13 of 13 results for subject:Legislation
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.27 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.004 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Legislation
- We searched for
- subject_t:Legislation OR subject_ses:91822
Primary member
X
Cameron of Chipping Norton, Lord
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
Primary member
More
Cameron of Chipping Norton, Lord (13)
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
Publisher
The whole House will have heard the Prime Minister say that he has no plans to change trade union laws. This is the same man who, as Chancellor, said that he had no plans to introduce taxes, and then introduced extra taxes. If he genuinely has no plans to introduce new trade union laws, will he explain why he is going ahead with the Warwick Two process, in which the trade unions and Government Ministers will sit down and discuss policies, including the laws governing industrial action?
The whole House will have heard the Prime Minister say that he has no plans to change trade union laws. This is the same man who, as Chancellor, said that he had no plans to introduce taxes, and then introduced extra taxes. If he genuinely has no plans to introduce new trade union laws, will he explain why he is going ahead with the Warwick Two process, in which the trade unions and Government Ministers will sit down and discuss policies, including the laws governing industrial action?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
25 June 2008
Of course we are going to discuss policies with every section of the community—surely that is what politics is about. I thought that the right hon. Gentleman was quite anxious to talk to the TUC as well.
I come back to this point: is the Conservative party supporting our three-year public sector pay deals? They are unique. They are a barrier against inflation and they give us stability for the future. They are a signal to the rest of the public sector and to the private sector. However, the Conservatives are silent on that, just as they were on the 22 million people benefiting from a low tax rate with the personal allowances coming down. They should tell us whether they support economic stability, low inflation and low interest rates, which is what this will help to achieve.
Subjects
Industrial disputes; Legislation; Trade unions
Date
25 June 2008
Reference
478 c282
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Britain is facing a wave of potential strikes that are threatened by, among others, housing benefit staff, social workers, teaching assistants and refuse collectors. With that in mind, will the Prime Minister rule out categorically any further changes that would weaken in any way the trade union laws introduced by past Conservative Governments?
Britain is facing a wave of potential strikes that are threatened by, among others, housing benefit staff, social workers, teaching assistants and refuse collectors. With that in mind, will the Prime Minister rule out categorically any further changes that would weaken in any way the trade union laws introduced by past Conservative Governments?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
25 June 2008
We have no plans to change employment laws further. Let me say to the right hon. Gentleman that it would be better if he would support us when we are trying to negotiate three-year pay deals with the public sector. We have negotiated them for teachers, nurses, health service workers and civil servants, and they are now in the Department for Work and Pensions and the Inland Revenue. Two million people are covered by public sector pay deals. The shadow Chancellor said on ““Newsnight”” last week:"““I'm not against opening negotiated pay deals.””"
A few hours later, he had to clarify the statement, saying:"““I am against reopening public sector pay deals””."
Perhaps the right hon. Member for Witney (Mr. Cameron) can tell us the position of the Conservative party on supporting stability in the economy.
Subjects
Industrial disputes; Legislation; Public sector; Trade unions
Date
25 June 2008
Reference
478 c282
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Do you know what? If the Prime Minister wants to ask us questions and he has had a year in office, why not call an election? He said that he needed more time to set out his vision. I think that we have had a year; why not bring on the election?
Is the Prime Minister really telling us that his Ministers are going to sit down with the people who provide 92 per cent. of the governing party's income and that there will be no mention of trade union laws? Is it not the case that trade union leaders look at this Prime Minister and see just weakness? Tony Blair—remember him?—said:"““I have not created New Labour to see a Labour government give away power to the unions””."
He also said that"““you can't go back to the situation where 90 per cent. of the funding is provided by trade unions””."
Is not that exactly what has happened? We have a bankrupt Labour party. It is in hock to the unions and a wave of strikes is threatened. As the Prime Minister lurches to the left, should not we all conclude that new Labour is dead and buried?
Do you know what? If the Prime Minister wants to ask us questions and he has had a year in office, why not call an election? He said that he needed more time to set out his vision. I think that we have had a year; why not bring on the election?
Is the Prime Minister really telling us that his Ministers are going to sit down with the people who provide 92 per cent. of the governing party's income and that there will be no mention of trade union laws? Is it not the case that trade union leaders look at this Prime Minister and see just weakness? Tony Blair—remember him?—said:"““I have not created New Labour to see a Labour government give away power to the unions””."
He also said that"““you can't go back to the situation where 90 per cent. of the funding is provided by trade unions””."
Is not that exactly what has happened? We have a bankrupt Labour party. It is in hock to the unions and a wave of strikes is threatened. As the Prime Minister lurches to the left, should not we all conclude that new Labour is dead and buried?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
25 June 2008
The same old Tory party—it cannot even talk to the trade unions. In the past year, we have made the big decisions about the future of the country. Nuclear power: we decided; the Conservatives ducked it. Airport expansion: we are deciding; they have ducked it. Three million houses: we are deciding; they have ducked it. Today, on planning, we are deciding, and once again they are ducking it.
The right hon. Gentleman's year started with the indecision over grammar schools and has ended with him losing his shadow Home Secretary. For him, politics is just show business; it is devoid of substance and is opposition for opposition's sake. You can get by without substance some of the time, but you cannot get by without substance all of the time.
Subjects
Industrial disputes; Legislation; Trade unions
Date
25 June 2008
Reference
478 c282-3
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Finance Bill. New clause 2 (for Report stage) on principles of good practice for retrospective legislation. Debated with new clause 7 and negatived on division (209 votes to 281).
Finance Bill. New clause 2 (for Report stage) on principles of good practice for retrospective legislation. Debated with new clause 7 and negatived on division (209 votes to 281).
Lead member
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
Type
Legislative formal proceedings
Legislation
Finance Bill 2006-07
Subjects
Legislation; Taxation
Date
25 June 2007
Reference
Votes and Proceedings Consideration of Bill 1381
House
House of Commons
Why can we not just have a straight answer? Are we getting a Bill: yes or no? Can the Prime Minister confirm that he is not going to water it down? Will it include the two things that really matter: annual targets and an independent body that can measure and adjust them in the light of circumstances? Can we have a proper climate change Bill, not some watered-down version?
Why can we not just have a straight answer? Are we getting a Bill: yes or no? Can the Prime Minister confirm that he is not going to water it down? Will it include the two things that really matter: annual targets and an independent body that can measure and adjust them in the light of circumstances? Can we have a proper climate change Bill, not some watered-down version?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
25 October 2006
The reason why I cannot give commitments on that is that we have not yet published the Queen’s Speech. I would have thought that the right hon. Gentleman would be aware that it would be in the Queen’s Speech that that would be announced.
Let me go back to the point that he is making. The action that we are taking—huge investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency, and the climate change levy, which has reduced dramatically what would otherwise have been the carbon dioxide and greenhouse emissions—is absolutely vital, but it must also be practical and workable. That is why we will make sure that any proposals that we bring forward will mean that we will be able to ensure that we get the reduction in CO2 emissions that we need—remember, this country will meet and exceed its Kyoto targets and will be one of the very few countries in the world to do so. Such proposals must also be entirely compatible with the interests of business and consumers.
As for the tax proposals that the right hon. Gentleman introduced last week, if I may very quickly—[Interruption.] I am citing this because it is an interesting example of how a Government should not make policy. In the morning, he was saying that green taxes on pollution will rise to pay for reductions. By the afternoon, he was saying, or his shadow Chancellor was—[Hon. Members: ““Ah.””] Well, I assume that they are on the same side, roughly. By the afternoon, the shadow Chancellor was saying:"““some green taxes … are regressive, they fall primarily on the poor in society.””"
By the time that the last edition of the Evening Standard was published, it was saying:"““The Tories hurriedly backed away from slapping higher tax on cheap flights today””."
If that is an example of the right hon. Gentleman’s policy making, we certainly will not follow it.
Subjects
Climate change; Legislation
Date
25 October 2006
Reference
450 c1513-4
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
For almost a year, we have been pushing repeatedly for a climate change Bill. [Interruption.] That is right: if you want to get something to happen in this country, get the Leader of the Opposition to suggest it. In January, the Prime Minister rejected the idea. He even said that it was ““a trifle dodgy.”” Can he confirm today that the Government will have a climate change Bill in the Queen’s Speech?
For almost a year, we have been pushing repeatedly for a climate change Bill. [Interruption.] That is right: if you want to get something to happen in this country, get the Leader of the Opposition to suggest it. In January, the Prime Minister rejected the idea. He even said that it was ““a trifle dodgy.”” Can he confirm today that the Government will have a climate change Bill in the Queen’s Speech?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
25 October 2006
Obviously, I cannot say what will be in the Queen’s speech before it is published, but I can give the reason why I described his proposals as I did—I am surprised that I used the word ““trifle”” because ““dodgy”” would have been the accurate description. First, the right hon. Gentleman is against the climate change levy, but we would never have been able to make the progress that we have without it. Secondly, he is asking for statutory, binding, year-on-year targets, which are very difficult to deliver because the changes that might happen in any one year could render them extremely difficult to achieve.
Subjects
Climate change; Legislation
Date
25 October 2006
Reference
450 c1513
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
I can sum up the Prime Minister’s performance in one word—rattled. If the problem is the system he has inherited rather than the Ministers he has put in place, why did he sack his Home Secretary last week? Whether it is deporting dangerous criminals, sorting out the mess of the Human Rights Act, or dealing with illegal immigration, this is a Government in paralysis. The Prime Minister made the criminal justice system a top priority, yet he said this week that it is the Department that is"““most distant from what reasonable people want””."
Why, after four Home Secretaries, 43 pieces of legislation, and nine years, should anyone believe that he is the right man to sort it out?
I can sum up the Prime Minister’s performance in one word—rattled. If the problem is the system he has inherited rather than the Ministers he has put in place, why did he sack his Home Secretary last week? Whether it is deporting dangerous criminals, sorting out the mess of the Human Rights Act, or dealing with illegal immigration, this is a Government in paralysis. The Prime Minister made the criminal justice system a top priority, yet he said this week that it is the Department that is"““most distant from what reasonable people want””."
Why, after four Home Secretaries, 43 pieces of legislation, and nine years, should anyone believe that he is the right man to sort it out?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
17 May 2006
For the simple reason that, as I have just pointed out to the right hon. Gentleman in stating the facts on asylum and immigration and on the criminal justice legislation, there are changes that have made a real difference. But yes, I agree that we have to do much more. That is precisely why we need the new measures such as identity cards and border controls that allow us to do something about it.
If we are comparing records on crime, let me just say to the right hon. Gentleman that under this Government, according to the British crime survey, overall crime is down, domestic burglary and vehicle theft are down, and police numbers are at a record high. When he was in the Home Office and the Conservatives were in office, crime doubled. I do not say that we have got everything right—of course not; we have got to do far more. What I do say, however, is that every time the tough measures that the right hon. Gentleman goes out and tells the media he wants are introduced here, they are opposed by him and his party. Next time we introduce them, perhaps he will put his vote where his mouth is.
Legislation
Human Rights Act 1998
Subjects
Crime; Administration of justice; Asylum; Deportation; Human rights; Undocumented migrants; Legislation; Offenders
Date
17 May 2006
Reference
446 c991-2
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
He will see me in the Lobbies. We back school freedom. That is 200 of us. If he can just find 150 of his own MPs, we can get on and pass the Bill.
Two former Cabinet Ministers, the right hon. Members for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers) and for Darlington (Mr. Milburn), have said that the Prime Minister's position would be untenable if he relied on Conservative support. Does he agree that that is nonsense and that he should just get on and do the right thing for school standards and for our children?
He will see me in the Lobbies. We back school freedom. That is 200 of us. If he can just find 150 of his own MPs, we can get on and pass the Bill.
Two former Cabinet Ministers, the right hon. Members for North Tyneside (Mr. Byers) and for Darlington (Mr. Milburn), have said that the Prime Minister's position would be untenable if he relied on Conservative support. Does he agree that that is nonsense and that he should just get on and do the right thing for school standards and for our children?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 March 2006
We are doing the right thing for our children. What we have done so far as a result of the changes and the investment and reform in our schools is that we have raised standards substantially. We have 100,000 extra staff in our schools—teachers and teaching assistants—the biggest ever building programme for schools is under way, and this country's schools have had the best results they have ever had for children at the ages of 11, 16 and 18. We will continue to do the right thing for children in our country because we want to ensure that every child, no matter what their background, gets the best start in life.
Subjects
Education; Legislation; Reform; Secondary education
Date
1 March 2006
Reference
443 c250-1
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Good, so trust schools remain. That is important. That is clear. Let me try to clarify something else. The Government's White Paper said that local authorities would not be able to provide new schools. The Prime Minister made a concession and said that they could, but that the Secretary of State for Education and Skills would have a veto. Will he confirm that, as the Bill goes through the House, that veto will remain in the Bill?
Good, so trust schools remain. That is important. That is clear. Let me try to clarify something else. The Government's White Paper said that local authorities would not be able to provide new schools. The Prime Minister made a concession and said that they could, but that the Secretary of State for Education and Skills would have a veto. Will he confirm that, as the Bill goes through the House, that veto will remain in the Bill?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 March 2006
It has to remain for this reason. We have made this clear all the way through. The change was made because we listened to the Local Government Association, which includes Conservative as well as Labour members, which said that, if the driving force behind this is parental choice and parents want a new community school, it seems a bit much to prevent local authorities from being in the competition to provide a new school. However, let me emphasise that, if a local authority proposes a new community school, it is not then the deciding authority. That decision is made by the adjudicator. Of course, the Secretary of State has to have the power to ensure that it is in accordance with parental choice.
Subjects
Education; Legislation; Reform; Secondary education; Trust schools
Date
1 March 2006
Reference
443 c250
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Good, so the veto remains in the Bill. Given that the Prime Minister has our support, he does not have to make any further concessions to the rebels, so will he make it clear that the Bill will not be weakened any further?
Good, so the veto remains in the Bill. Given that the Prime Minister has our support, he does not have to make any further concessions to the rebels, so will he make it clear that the Bill will not be weakened any further?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 March 2006
Yes, I do make that clear, but let me say to the right hon. Gentleman that I do not know whether he agrees with what we have done, with local authorities being able to propose community schools. If he does—both Conservative and Labour members of the Local Government Association have said that that should happen—that is a point of agreement between us. Also, as far as I am aware, he now supports us on selection and agrees that we should put in safeguards against selection. So we now have a very happy consensus between us and I look forward to seeing him in the Lobbies.
Subjects
Education; Legislation; Reform; Secondary education; Trust schools
Date
1 March 2006
Reference
443 c250
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
May I join the Prime Minister in expressing our sympathy for the families of the two British soldiers who died in Iraq yesterday? They died serving our country, and we should honour their memory. I also agree with what the Prime Minister said about Mr. Speaker, and wish him a speedy return.
On a happier note, may I thank the Prime Minister for the flowers that he sent to my family? He may not know that I received flowers from both No. 10 and No. 11. I am delighted to be the first man in history to get bunched by both our Prime Ministers.
Yesterday the Government published their Education and Inspections Bill. The phrase ““trust schools””, which appeared throughout the White Paper, has now disappeared. Can the Prime Minister confirm that he is renaming those schools ““foundation schools,”” and that they will have all the same freedoms?
May I join the Prime Minister in expressing our sympathy for the families of the two British soldiers who died in Iraq yesterday? They died serving our country, and we should honour their memory. I also agree with what the Prime Minister said about Mr. Speaker, and wish him a speedy return.
On a happier note, may I thank the Prime Minister for the flowers that he sent to my family? He may not know that I received flowers from both No. 10 and No. 11. I am delighted to be the first man in history to get bunched by both our Prime Ministers.
Yesterday the Government published their Education and Inspections Bill. The phrase ““trust schools””, which appeared throughout the White Paper, has now disappeared. Can the Prime Minister confirm that he is renaming those schools ““foundation schools,”” and that they will have all the same freedoms?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Prime Minister
Prime Minister's questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
1 March 2006
Let me first congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on the birth of his child, wish him and his family well, and say thank you to him for his thanks to me for the flowers? I am glad that the Chancellor was immensely generous in sending him flowers as well. Whether he will be as generous in the Budget I do not know. I certainly hope that that is the limit of his generosity to the right hon. Gentleman. We do not for legal reasons need to mention the words ““trust school””. It is exactly the same for specialist schools, which are not mentioned in legislation either. However, the trust schools will have exactly the freedoms that we have set out in the legislation and those freedoms will allow schools by a simple vote of their governing body to become self-governing trust schools.
Subjects
Education; Foundation schools; Legislation; Reform; Secondary education; Trust schools
Date
1 March 2006
Reference
443 c249-50
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Three weeks ago, the Secretary of State said that the code of practice on admissions would not be made a statutory code. Today, she said that she did not think that that was necessary. Can I ask her to go a bit further and rule out that change?
Three weeks ago, the Secretary of State said that the code of practice on admissions would not be made a statutory code. Today, she said that she did not think that that was necessary. Can I ask her to go a bit further and rule out that change?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Education and Skills
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
24 November 2005
I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the code achieves its ends of ruling out selection by ability on its current statutory basis. He is confused—the code already operates on a statutory basis. Schools take it into account, and then the adjudicator, which is also statutory, can use its discretion to say whether the school has interpreted it correctly. Interpretation of the code, however, is very important for schools that want to create their own distinctive ethos.
Subjects
Admissions; Schools; Trust schools; Legislation; Reform
Date
24 November 2005
Reference
439 c1644
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons
Thank you for recognising me, Mr. Speaker.
The White Paper states that the Government's aim is"““the creation of a system of independent non-fee paying schools.””"
We support that principle. Part of it is giving the new trust schools, such as the academies and the foundation schools, control over their admissions. Instead of endlessly reassuring her Back Benchers, will the Secretary of State explain what benefits she thinks the new freedom will bring?
Thank you for recognising me, Mr. Speaker.
The White Paper states that the Government's aim is"““the creation of a system of independent non-fee paying schools.””"
We support that principle. Part of it is giving the new trust schools, such as the academies and the foundation schools, control over their admissions. Instead of endlessly reassuring her Back Benchers, will the Secretary of State explain what benefits she thinks the new freedom will bring?
Asked by
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton
(Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Education and Skills
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Answered on
24 November 2005
It can be important for a school in certain circumstances to have control over the criteria that it sets for its admissions. For example, if a school operates in an area where specific ethnic groups are highly concentrated, it might be appropriate for it to move away from a catchment-area system towards one that promotes a mixed-ability intake from a much broader area. On the other hand, it may be appropriate, as I explained to my hon. Friend the Member for Bury, North (Mr. Chaytor), for a music college to be able to select 10 per cent. by aptitude to build up an orchestra in the school. It could then share best practice on music with other schools in the area. That is the sort of freedom that I want. I do not want the sort of freedom that the hon. Gentleman talks about when he says that his only objection to the city academy programme is that it cannot select on ability.
Subjects
Admissions; Schools; Trust schools; Legislation; Reform
Date
24 November 2005
Reference
439 c1644
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
House
House of Commons