1-20 of 50 results for subject:Devolution
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.551 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.008 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Devolution
- We searched for
- subject_t:Devolution OR subject_ses:90891
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to his Department's consultation entitled Fur market in Great Britain, published in May 2021, what recent discussions he has had with his counterparts in the devolved Administrations on the publication of the results of that consultation.
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to his Department's consultation entitled Fur market in Great Britain, published in May 2021, what recent discussions he has had with his counterparts in the devolved Administrations on the publication of the results of that consultation.
Defra has regular discussions with the Devolved Administrations about a range of animal welfare topics. This includes our work to build the evidence base on the fur sector.
The Minister will know that the Lord Advocate in Scotland has issued a prosecution statement saying that she will not prosecute anyone in possession of controlled substances in any pilot safe consumption or overdose prevention facility that might be established in Scotland. Can he confirm what the Secretary of State for Scotland indicated in the House last week—that the UK Government will not seek to use any administrative or legislative means to frustrate or block the establishment of such a pilot facility?
The Minister will know that the Lord Advocate in Scotland has issued a prosecution statement saying that she will not prosecute anyone in possession of controlled substances in any pilot safe consumption or overdose prevention facility that might be established in Scotland. Can he confirm what the Secretary of State for Scotland indicated in the House last week—that the UK Government will not seek to use any administrative or legislative means to frustrate or block the establishment of such a pilot facility?
First, it is important to make it clear that the UK Government’s position on drug consumption rooms in England and Wales is that we do not support them. We are concerned that they condone or even encourage illegal drug use. I want to put that on the record straightaway. Of course, we respect the independence of the Lord Advocate as Scotland’s prosecutorial authority.
Providing that that power is exercised lawfully, of course we are not going to stand in the way of it, as my right hon. Friend the Scottish Secretary set out last week. I understand that plans may involve a strong integration with treatment and some consideration of each case on its individual merits, but we do not plan to interfere with the lawfully exercised prosecutorial independence of the Lord Advocate.
Whether she has had discussions with Cabinet colleagues and the Scottish Government on further devolution of drugs policy to Scotland.
Whether she has had discussions with Cabinet colleagues and the Scottish Government on further devolution of drugs policy to Scotland.
I have not had discussions on the devolution of drugs policy, which is of course reserved to this Parliament, but I do have regular discussions about co-operating with colleagues in the Scottish Government. I had a discussion with the new Minister just a few weeks ago, and I think we are going to be meeting in Cardiff in just a few weeks’ time with Ministers from the three devolved Administrations to discuss how we can work constructively and collaboratively together.
The Secretary of State says that the Scottish Government are not using the powers that they have, but it is his Government who keep vetoing Scottish Government policies and legislation that has been passed by the Scottish Parliament. Does that not just show that the Conservatives never wanted devolution in the first place and can now barely contain their glee at getting to roll back the powers of devolution?
The Secretary of State says that the Scottish Government are not using the powers that they have, but it is his Government who keep vetoing Scottish Government policies and legislation that has been passed by the Scottish Parliament. Does that not just show that the Conservatives never wanted devolution in the first place and can now barely contain their glee at getting to roll back the powers of devolution?
No, it was the Scottish National party that did not want devolution; it wants independence. It is in the name, isn’t it? They are nationalists and they want to break up the United Kingdom; we extend devolution within England and we support it in Scotland.
The Minister clearly thinks that that is a very clever line, but he knows well that Glasgow takes more refugees per head of population than any other local authority in the United Kingdom. The line he is trotting out is simply wrong and it is insulting to all those in Scotland who have opened their homes to Ukrainians, the communities across the country who have welcomed Syrians and the volunteers in the big cities who work with asylum seekers every day, helping them to overcome trauma. If he wants Scotland to do more to welcome refugees, when is he going to devolve the power and the financial levers that would allow us to do so?
The Minister clearly thinks that that is a very clever line, but he knows well that Glasgow takes more refugees per head of population than any other local authority in the United Kingdom. The line he is trotting out is simply wrong and it is insulting to all those in Scotland who have opened their homes to Ukrainians, the communities across the country who have welcomed Syrians and the volunteers in the big cities who work with asylum seekers every day, helping them to overcome trauma. If he wants Scotland to do more to welcome refugees, when is he going to devolve the power and the financial levers that would allow us to do so?
For good reason, immigration is a reserved matter, but the statistics I have just read out make the point as clear as can be. The SNP tries its very best to undermine the Government’s work to stop the boats, but it refuses to accommodate these people when they arrive, and the costs of its fake humanitarianism are borne by everyone but itself. That is not just hypocrisy; it is deeply irresponsible, and the public have had enough.
It is not the Scottish Government’s policy towards immigration, refugees and asylum seekers that has been ruled unlawful by the Court of Appeal. If the Minister wants the system to work and he wants the Scottish Government to do their part, he must take more action to clear the backlog, as we have heard; there must be proper safe and legal rights for people to arrive; and they must be given the right to work when they get here, because then they can pay for their own accommodation and they will not cost the taxpayer money.
It is not the Scottish Government’s policy towards immigration, refugees and asylum seekers that has been ruled unlawful by the Court of Appeal. If the Minister wants the system to work and he wants the Scottish Government to do their part, he must take more action to clear the backlog, as we have heard; there must be proper safe and legal rights for people to arrive; and they must be given the right to work when they get here, because then they can pay for their own accommodation and they will not cost the taxpayer money.
Just the other day, the Home Office suggested to the Scottish Government that a vessel that had been used to house Ukrainian refugees in Leith could be used for others who are asylum seekers—the same vessel, the same port, the same provider, the same package. What did the SNP say? No.
T6
.
Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP):
Will the Secretary of State confirm clearly, for the record, that the Government will not make changes to the Human Rights Act without legislative consent from the devolved institutions?
T6
.
Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP):
Will the Secretary of State confirm clearly, for the record, that the Government will not make changes to the Human Rights Act without legislative consent from the devolved institutions?
The hon. Gentleman will know, because I have said it in the House on a number of occasions, that it would be inappropriate to consider the application of the Sewel convention until we have the text of the Bill of Rights, but he will not have to wait too much longer for that.
What recent discussions he has had with (a) the devolved Administrations and (b) Cabinet colleagues on the Barnett consequentials of allocations from the Stronger Towns Fund for health and social care.
What recent discussions he has had with (a) the devolved Administrations and (b) Cabinet colleagues on the Barnett consequentials of allocations from the Stronger Towns Fund for health and social care.
At the Spending Review last year, the Ministry for Housing,Communities and Local Government received funding for the Towns Fund, which includes the Stronger Towns Fund. Barnett consequentials do apply and are handled through the Ministry for Housing,Communities and Local Government and HM Treasury in this context.
What recent discussions he has had with the devolved Administrations on the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill.
What recent discussions he has had with the devolved Administrations on the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill.
The Government have sought to engage constructively with the devolved Administrations throughout the passage of the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill. The recent fruits of that continuing commitment include several amendments tabled by the Government strengthening a role for the devolved Administrations.
Those of us who are paying attention will have seen that the House of Lords has passed amendments to the UKIM Bill to try to salvage what might be left of the devolution settlement, which the Government have explicitly rejected. If Members look at the Order Paper, they will see that it states:
“The Scottish Parliament and Senedd Cymru have each decided not to approve a Legislative Consent Motion relating to this Bill.”
How is this respecting the devolution settlement? This Government legislated to protect Sewel on statute, but now they are riding roughshod all over it.
Those of us who are paying attention will have seen that the House of Lords has passed amendments to the UKIM Bill to try to salvage what might be left of the devolution settlement, which the Government have explicitly rejected. If Members look at the Order Paper, they will see that it states:
“The Scottish Parliament and Senedd Cymru have each decided not to approve a Legislative Consent Motion relating to this Bill.”
How is this respecting the devolution settlement? This Government legislated to protect Sewel on statute, but now they are riding roughshod all over it.
The Sewel convention envisages situations such as this, where the UK Parliament may need to legislate without consent. We regret the fact that the Scottish Parliament has chosen to do that, but the Bill is essential for protecting businesses and citizens across Scotland, and across the whole of the UK, as the transition period ends.
What discussions he has had with (a) the Scottish Government and (b) Cabinet colleagues on the effect of the delay to the Autumn Budget 2020 on the finances of the devolved Administrations.
What discussions he has had with (a) the Scottish Government and (b) Cabinet colleagues on the effect of the delay to the Autumn Budget 2020 on the finances of the devolved Administrations.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what discussions he plans to hold with his counterparts in the devolved Administrations on the findings of the Public Health England report on Disparties in the risk and outcomes of covid-19.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what discussions he plans to hold with his counterparts in the devolved Administrations on the findings of the Public Health England report on Disparties in the risk and outcomes of covid-19.
The Department is regularly in discussions with the devolved administrations at both ministerial and official level on a wide range of issues relating to COVID-19. COVID-19 presents a global challenge which requires a collaborative response. The Department will continue to work with the devolved administrations throughout the crisis and beyond.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Equalities (Kemi Badenoch MP) will be taking forward work off the back of Public Health England’s report on disparities in the risk and outcomes of COVID-19. Stakeholder engagement will be a key part of that work, as set out in the Terms of Reference at the following link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/next-steps-for-work-on-covid-19-disparities-announced
What the Government’s policy is on maintaining the Sewel Convention.
What the Government’s policy is on maintaining the Sewel Convention.
This Government remains fully committed to the Sewel Convention and the related practices and procedures for seeking legislative consent.
We will continue to uphold the spirit and the letter of the devolution settlement, as every Government has done consistently throughout the last twenty years.
I am glad the Secretary of State seems to think that constitutional perfection has now been reached on these islands. I wonder whether that means he agrees with his new party leader, the right hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Boris Johnson), who told a group of activists that we do not need
“an England-only parliament. We have an England parliament, it’s in Westminster.”
If the Secretary of State does agree with that, does that not make his post and, indeed, all of us who represent Scotland a little redundant? If he does not agree, why has he been so effusive in welcoming his new leader? Is it perhaps because he himself does not want to be made redundant?
I am glad the Secretary of State seems to think that constitutional perfection has now been reached on these islands. I wonder whether that means he agrees with his new party leader, the right hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Boris Johnson), who told a group of activists that we do not need
“an England-only parliament. We have an England parliament, it’s in Westminster.”
If the Secretary of State does agree with that, does that not make his post and, indeed, all of us who represent Scotland a little redundant? If he does not agree, why has he been so effusive in welcoming his new leader? Is it perhaps because he himself does not want to be made redundant?
If that was a question about a separate English Parliament, I should say that I am clear, as is the new leader of the Conservative party, that England does not need its own separate Parliament.
What assessment he has made of the merits of the devolution of powers to Scotland over the last 20 years.
What assessment he has made of the merits of the devolution of powers to Scotland over the last 20 years.
As there will not be another opportunity for Scottish questions before September, I draw the House’s attention
to an issue that was raised in an earlier session of Scottish questions. I am sure that you, Mr Speaker, will join me in looking forward to the Murray trophy ATP Challenger tournament that will take place in Glasgow from 16 to 22 September. We all welcome this positive addition to the tennis calendar, and I particularly look forward to welcoming you, Mr Speaker, to the tournament.
After 20 years, I believe that the current devolution settlement is the right balance, with appropriate decisions being taken for Scotland at Holyrood and for the whole UK in this Parliament. Since the first Scotland Act, Holyrood has become one of the most powerful devolved Parliaments in the world.
What assessment he has made of the merits of devolution over the last 20 years.
What assessment he has made of the merits of devolution over the last 20 years.
I have recently participated in events to celebrate 20 years of devolution, which has transformed the constitutional landscape of the United Kingdom. Devolution has successfully brought decision making on key public services closer to the people who use them while keeping the benefits that arise from the strength of our United Kingdom.
It is nice to hear the Minister say it like he means it. The Scottish Government are launching an innovative, engaging and participatory programme of citizens’ assemblies to look at what direction the devolution settlement in Scotland might go in. By contrast, this Government have appointed Lord Dunlop, an unelected peer, to review devolution. Does that not tell us everything we need to know about this Government’s attitude to devolution? They never really wanted it in the first place.
It is nice to hear the Minister say it like he means it. The Scottish Government are launching an innovative, engaging and participatory programme of citizens’ assemblies to look at what direction the devolution settlement in Scotland might go in. By contrast, this Government have appointed Lord Dunlop, an unelected peer, to review devolution. Does that not tell us everything we need to know about this Government’s attitude to devolution? They never really wanted it in the first place.
Dearie me! The SNP need to stop misrepresenting the review. A key part of its terms of reference states that it will
“need to respect and support the current devolution settlement”.
It is about how the UK Government can work better with the devolved Assemblies and Governments. The SNP should be welcoming the review, instead of trying to foster yet another false grievance.
What recent assessment she has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the progress of talks on restoring devolution in Northern Ireland.
What recent assessment she has made of the effect of the UK leaving the EU on the progress of talks on restoring devolution in Northern Ireland.
The Northern Ireland parties have made it clear that they want to use the limited window ahead of us to make a success of the current talks process. I agree with them that restoring devolved government cannot wait. I remain determined to do what is necessary to make this talks process a success.
Did the Prime Minister consult the Secretary of State before appointing Lord Dunlop to conduct a review of devolution? Brexit is already driving a coach and horses through the devolution settlement on these islands, and it will not be helped if the two arms of Government do not know what the other is doing, so will the Dunlop review extend to Northern Ireland and the effects of Brexit on devolution?
Did the Prime Minister consult the Secretary of State before appointing Lord Dunlop to conduct a review of devolution? Brexit is already driving a coach and horses through the devolution settlement on these islands, and it will not be helped if the two arms of Government do not know what the other is doing, so will the Dunlop review extend to Northern Ireland and the effects of Brexit on devolution?
I do not comment on leaked briefings.