1-20 of 392 results for askedby:"Robert Jenrick"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.292 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.004 seconds
- Search query
- askedby:"Robert Jenrick"
- We searched for
- tablingMember_ses:405409 OR askingMember_ses:405409
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
The Government have cancelled the two main road projects in the east midlands—the A38 in Derby and the A46 in Newark. The Government did not inform anyone. The Labour mayor found out through the trade press that the Government had cancelled the contract, just as I did. What does the Secretary of State have against the east midlands? Will the incoming Prime Minister, who claims to want to see devolution and the empowerment of mayors, do something to fix this mess?
The Government have cancelled the two main road projects in the east midlands—the A38 in Derby and the A46 in Newark. The Government did not inform anyone. The Labour mayor found out through the trade press that the Government had cancelled the contract, just as I did. What does the Secretary of State have against the east midlands? Will the incoming Prime Minister, who claims to want to see devolution and the empowerment of mayors, do something to fix this mess?
Let me be clear that these proposals will be consulted on. The A38 Derby junctions and the A46 Newark bypass schemes are not in contract and are not scheduled to start main construction until the second half of the third road investment strategy. They are not as far progressed as RIS3 enhancement schemes elsewhere, meaning that the implications of potentially cancelling them would have a less significant impact compared with schemes that are further progressed.
I thank the Home Secretary and welcome the Government’s decision to proscribe the IRGC. Many of us campaigned for this and, in fact, were sanctioned by Iran for doing so. Far too many of our previous Prime Ministers and Foreign Secretaries bought the fallacious argument that doing so would prevent diplomatic relations with Iran. Now that the Home Secretary has chosen to do this, how will she enforce it so that we quickly stamp out all the activities of this terrible organisation from our country and ensure that it never takes root again?
I thank the Home Secretary and welcome the Government’s decision to proscribe the IRGC. Many of us campaigned for this and, in fact, were sanctioned by Iran for doing so. Far too many of our previous Prime Ministers and Foreign Secretaries bought the fallacious argument that doing so would prevent diplomatic relations with Iran. Now that the Home Secretary has chosen to do this, how will she enforce it so that we quickly stamp out all the activities of this terrible organisation from our country and ensure that it never takes root again?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his contribution. The Government have passed new legislation to allow for the designation of the organisations that the Minister for Security referenced earlier, and that includes the IRGC. The designation tool means that it is now brought within the context of the National Security Act 2023, and I do expect that when our laws are broken, prosecutions will follow. He knows that we have had some success with National Security Act investigations; I expect that to continue.
Unemployment is soaring and nearly 1 million young people are not in education or training. It is a terrible waste of human potential and an economic catastrophe. Reform is proposing that we scrap the damaging jobs tax and pay for that with a new levy on migrant labour, which would make it much, much easier to employ British workers. Will the Secretary of State consider this and put British workers first?
Unemployment is soaring and nearly 1 million young people are not in education or training. It is a terrible waste of human potential and an economic catastrophe. Reform is proposing that we scrap the damaging jobs tax and pay for that with a new levy on migrant labour, which would make it much, much easier to employ British workers. Will the Secretary of State consider this and put British workers first?
If the right hon. Gentleman has just noticed that there are 1 million young people not in education, employment or training, one has to ask what was he doing when he was a Minister in the last Government when the figures went up by a quarter of a million and he said nothing at all about it? We have brought forward a youth guarantee that will put work and opportunity at the heart of the reform of the system. That is in stark contrast to his record of complete inaction on this issue when he was in a position to do something about it.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, whether he has made an estimate of the cost to his Department of subsidising visa costs for foreign national workers.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, whether he has made an estimate of the cost to his Department of subsidising visa costs for foreign national workers.
As part of the Industrial Strategy, the Chancellor launched the Visa Fees Reimbursement Scheme for Scale-Ups on 10 June. The targeted grant scheme, worth up to £25K for around 50 businesses a year, will help UK scale-ups in Clean Energy, Life Sciences and Digital & Technologies recruit internationally by reimbursing eligible visa application fees. It will support access to exceptional skills, boost competitiveness and reinforce the UK as a place for ambitious businesses to start, scale and stay. In 2023, scale-ups generated £2.2 trillion in turnover and employed 3.9 million people, despite comprising just 0.8% of UK businesses, underlining their importance to growth.
The Government say that less than 1% of the countryside will be covered in solar farms, but if the 7,000-acre Great North Road scheme, which is now before the Secretary of State, the 2,000-acre Steeple scheme, which is also now before the Secretary of State, and the 4,000-acre One Earth scheme, which will be before the Secretary of State shortly, are all approved, almost 10% of the land mass of my constituency—one of the most rural and largest in England—will be covered in solar farms, with good-quality agricultural land in Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire lost. How on earth is that fair to local communities?
The Government say that less than 1% of the countryside will be covered in solar farms, but if the 7,000-acre Great North Road scheme, which is now before the Secretary of State, the 2,000-acre Steeple scheme, which is also now before the Secretary of State, and the 4,000-acre One Earth scheme, which will be before the Secretary of State shortly, are all approved, almost 10% of the land mass of my constituency—one of the most rural and largest in England—will be covered in solar farms, with good-quality agricultural land in Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire lost. How on earth is that fair to local communities?
For reasons that the right hon. Gentleman will understand, I am not going to comment on individual planning decisions, because they have to go through the proper process, but I say to him that solar is the cheapest, cleanest form of power that we have. We can decide to bury our heads in the sand and stay on the fossil fuel rollercoaster, but the people who will pay for it are his constituents, because they are paying for it now in higher energy Bills. This Labour Government will keep going with the drive for clean power.
The establishment of a combined cadet force at the Newark academy was an incredible step forward for the town, bringing discipline, respect, training opportunities and a sense of pride. It was very unfortunate that the Department for Education chose to cut the funding, making it more difficult for other schools—particularly schools like this, in working-class communities—to establish new combined cadet forces in the future. What can the Minister do to ensure that funding is in place so that this is not just the preserve of communities with grammar schools or public schools, and that all communities, like the one that I represent, will be given the opportunity to have combined cadet forces?
The establishment of a combined cadet force at the Newark academy was an incredible step forward for the town, bringing discipline, respect, training opportunities and a sense of pride. It was very unfortunate that the Department for Education chose to cut the funding, making it more difficult for other schools—particularly schools like this, in working-class communities—to establish new combined cadet forces in the future. What can the Minister do to ensure that funding is in place so that this is not just the preserve of communities with grammar schools or public schools, and that all communities, like the one that I represent, will be given the opportunity to have combined cadet forces?
I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will be well aware that we have committed an additional £70 million to funding the expansion of the cadets, which the Government he was a member of never did.
Last month, the United Nations General Assembly voted to demand that countries including the United Kingdom pay reparations for slavery. Astonishingly, the Foreign Secretary instructed our ambassador to abstain and to issue a pathetic hand-wringing statement that failed to mention the United Kingdom’s unique role in the eradication of this great evil. Are we a punchbag or are we a great, proud country? Will the Foreign Secretary explain her decision and state to the House unequivocally that the United Kingdom will never pay a penny of British taxpayers’ money in reparations?
Last month, the United Nations General Assembly voted to demand that countries including the United Kingdom pay reparations for slavery. Astonishingly, the Foreign Secretary instructed our ambassador to abstain and to issue a pathetic hand-wringing statement that failed to mention the United Kingdom’s unique role in the eradication of this great evil. Are we a punchbag or are we a great, proud country? Will the Foreign Secretary explain her decision and state to the House unequivocally that the United Kingdom will never pay a penny of British taxpayers’ money in reparations?
We are, of course, against reparations, and when the right hon. Gentleman was a member of the Conservative party, I think he was against them, but who knows what he is for or against now? Goodness only knows. Let’s face it, Mr Speaker, he has just got his clip for social media, and this is all the response that he deserves.
When some of us campaigned for Hezbollah to be proscribed in full, Foreign Office officials and others said that it was impossible, because it would harm diplomatic relations. That was overcome. The same spurious argument was made with respect to Hamas. That was overcome. Imagine how foolish our country would look today if we had not proscribed Hezbollah and Hamas in full. The same argument has been made by the last Government and by this Government with respect to the IRGC. Will the Foreign Secretary be clear that she will not stand in the way of the full proscription of the IRGC, so that these dangerous criminals who harm our own people and our allies around the world have no place and no home in the United Kingdom?
When some of us campaigned for Hezbollah to be proscribed in full, Foreign Office officials and others said that it was impossible, because it would harm diplomatic relations. That was overcome. The same spurious argument was made with respect to Hamas. That was overcome. Imagine how foolish our country would look today if we had not proscribed Hezbollah and Hamas in full. The same argument has been made by the last Government and by this Government with respect to the IRGC. Will the Foreign Secretary be clear that she will not stand in the way of the full proscription of the IRGC, so that these dangerous criminals who harm our own people and our allies around the world have no place and no home in the United Kingdom?
I just point out to the right hon. Member that I take the threats on UK streets immensely seriously, but he was a Home Office Minister and a Cabinet Minister during an entire period when we saw Iran-backed threats on UK streets. He did nothing to strengthen the legislation in so many years in government. This Government are now taking forward measures to strengthen that legislation.
One of the last meetings that I took as shadow Justice Secretary was with the parents of Lenny Scott. Lenny Scott was an exceptionally brave prison officer who uncovered corruption in his prison. He left the service, and years later he was hunted down and brutally murdered. Because he died after leaving active service, there was never any compensation paid to the children he left behind. I know that the Prime Minister would want to right that wrong. I wrote to the Justice Secretary privately after I discovered this—I should say that Lenny Scott’s parents never asked for any support. Will the Prime Minister correct this, ensure that this brave man’s children have the support that they need as they grow up without the father they deserve, and join me in thanking all the brave men and women who serve us in our Prison Service?
One of the last meetings that I took as shadow Justice Secretary was with the parents of Lenny Scott. Lenny Scott was an exceptionally brave prison officer who uncovered corruption in his prison. He left the service, and years later he was hunted down and brutally murdered. Because he died after leaving active service, there was never any compensation paid to the children he left behind. I know that the Prime Minister would want to right that wrong. I wrote to the Justice Secretary privately after I discovered this—I should say that Lenny Scott’s parents never asked for any support. Will the Prime Minister correct this, ensure that this brave man’s children have the support that they need as they grow up without the father they deserve, and join me in thanking all the brave men and women who serve us in our Prison Service?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for raising this matter. I will make sure that it is looked into as a matter of urgency, given the circumstances that he has set out.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what the total value is of the settlement agreed with Abu Zubaydah; and if she will provide a breakdown of (a) damages paid to the claimant and (b) legal costs paid to the claimant's representatives.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what the total value is of the settlement agreed with Abu Zubaydah; and if she will provide a breakdown of (a) damages paid to the claimant and (b) legal costs paid to the claimant's representatives.
As the Rt Hon Member knows, it has been the UK's longstanding position under successive governments, including the one he supported for over a decade, not to comment on intelligence related litigation.
To ask the Solicitor General, on what specific date the Attorney General recused himself from discussions or decisions regarding the Government’s defence and settlement of Zubaydah v Foreign and Commonwealth Office; and whether he has had any communication with the Foreign Secretary, her predecessor, or any officials regarding this case...
To ask the Solicitor General, on what specific date the Attorney General recused himself from discussions or decisions regarding the Government’s defence and settlement of Zubaydah v Foreign and Commonwealth Office; and whether he has had any communication with the Foreign Secretary, her predecessor, or any officials regarding this case...
Without commenting on individual cases, the government’s robust conflict process would clearly preclude Law Officers having any involvement in cases in which they were instructed for other parties prior to appointment.
By longstanding convention, recognised in paragraph 5.14 of the Ministerial Code, the fact that the Law Officers have advised or have not advised, and the content of their advice, must not be disclosed outside government without their authority.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether her Department is defending a civil claim for damages brought by Abu Faraj al-Libi; and what estimate she has made of the potential liability to the public purse in relation to a claimant identified as the "main...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether her Department is defending a civil claim for damages brought by Abu Faraj al-Libi; and what estimate she has made of the potential liability to the public purse in relation to a claimant identified as the "main...
As the Rt Hon Member knows, it has been the UK's longstanding position under successive governments, including the one he supported for over a decade, not to comment on intelligence related litigation.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, if she will publish a list of all current legal proceedings, including civil claims and complaints to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, brought against her Department by current detainees at Guantanamo Bay; and what is the total estimated value...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, if she will publish a list of all current legal proceedings, including civil claims and complaints to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, brought against her Department by current detainees at Guantanamo Bay; and what is the total estimated value...
As the Rt Hon Member knows, it has been the UK's longstanding position under successive governments, including the one he supported for over a decade, not to comment on intelligence related litigation.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether any settlement discussions have been initiated with representatives of Abu Faraj al-Libi, Mustafa al-Hawsawi, or Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether any settlement discussions have been initiated with representatives of Abu Faraj al-Libi, Mustafa al-Hawsawi, or Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.
As the Rt Hon Member knows, it has been the UK's longstanding position under successive governments, including the one he supported for over a decade, not to comment on intelligence related litigation.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether there are any other live legal cases of prisoners challenging their detention in a Close Supervision Centre or Separation Centre.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether there are any other live legal cases of prisoners challenging their detention in a Close Supervision Centre or Separation Centre.
I refer the right honourable Member to the answer I gave on 11 December to Question 97787.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many (a) murderers and (b) prisoners with a history of attacking prison officers are in open prisons for which the latest data is available.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many (a) murderers and (b) prisoners with a history of attacking prison officers are in open prisons for which the latest data is available.
As of 30 September 2025, there were 266 prisoners with an index offence of murder in prisons whose predominant function is open in England and Wales.
Information on the number of prisoners in the open estate with a history of attacking prison officers could not be provided without incurring disproportionate cost.
The decision to categorise a prisoner at Category D, indicating suitability to be placed in open conditions, involves a thorough risk assessment that takes into account the prisoner’s individual circumstances, including the nature of the offence and any risk they present to the public. In the case of a prisoner serving a sentence of imprisonment for life, or for public protection, the assessment takes account of advice from the independent Parole Board.
Note: The figure has been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
I commend the Justice Secretary on the Government’s decision to extend whole-life orders to those who kill prison officers. Two weeks ago, I had the privilege of meeting the parents of Lenny Scott when they came to Parliament. It is absolutely right that we extend whole-life orders to cases in which brave prison officers are killed, either in the course of their duties, or in the exceptional circumstances that faced Lenny Scott after he had left the service. The Justice Secretary can be assured of the support of Conservative Members.
Two weeks ago, the Justice Secretary appeared on Sky News and revealed that 12 more prisoners had been mistakenly released, and that two remained on the run. I have two very simple questions: since then, how many prisoners have been mistakenly released, and how many more remain on the run?
I commend the Justice Secretary on the Government’s decision to extend whole-life orders to those who kill prison officers. Two weeks ago, I had the privilege of meeting the parents of Lenny Scott when they came to Parliament. It is absolutely right that we extend whole-life orders to cases in which brave prison officers are killed, either in the course of their duties, or in the exceptional circumstances that faced Lenny Scott after he had left the service. The Justice Secretary can be assured of the support of Conservative Members.
Two weeks ago, the Justice Secretary appeared on Sky News and revealed that 12 more prisoners had been mistakenly released, and that two remained on the run. I have two very simple questions: since then, how many prisoners have been mistakenly released, and how many more remain on the run?
The Deputy Prime Minister has set out a five-point plan to deal with the long-standing issue of releases in error in our criminal justice system. There were 800 releases in error when the Conservatives were in government, and never once did they come to this House and give an update. We will release much more of that data over the coming months.
In all the years that I have been in the House, I have never known a Secretary of State fail to answer the first question from his opposite number, but that says a lot about the man. The Justice Secretary was fine answering questions in the media two weeks ago, when the police investigation was under way, but now he says—or his Minister says, in his stead—that it would be inappropriate to comment in the House of Commons. What utter nonsense! Does he seriously think anyone is buying that excuse? He either does not know the details, or he is covering up his failure, both of which are a dereliction of duty. How on earth can the public assist in the manhunts that are presumably under way across our country and clear up his mess if he will not publish the names or mugshots of the prisoners mistakenly released? Once again, he is endangering the British public.
In all the years that I have been in the House, I have never known a Secretary of State fail to answer the first question from his opposite number, but that says a lot about the man. The Justice Secretary was fine answering questions in the media two weeks ago, when the police investigation was under way, but now he says—or his Minister says, in his stead—that it would be inappropriate to comment in the House of Commons. What utter nonsense! Does he seriously think anyone is buying that excuse? He either does not know the details, or he is covering up his failure, both of which are a dereliction of duty. How on earth can the public assist in the manhunts that are presumably under way across our country and clear up his mess if he will not publish the names or mugshots of the prisoners mistakenly released? Once again, he is endangering the British public.
Utter nonsense! We do not take advice from the Conservative party on the operational challenges that we face when we encounter these issues; we engage with the police directly. We will not give a running commentary on this long-standing issue in a criminal justice system that is failing after 14 years of the Conservative party in government. We have set out a five-point plan, through which we are attempting to grapple with this problem, and Dame Lynne Owens will report back to the Government early next year. We look forward to hearing her recommendations.
Under the Justice Secretary’s plans to slash jury trials, he is giving magistrates more serious cases. However, he also plans to scrap the automatic right to appeal—a vital safety valve in courtrooms where justice is delivered at pace by volunteers. Last year, 5,000 cases from magistrates courts were appealed, of which more than 40% were upheld. Given that very high rate of successful appeals, will the Secretary of State be honest with the public and concede that curtailing appeals will unquestionably lead to miscarriages of justice?
Under the Justice Secretary’s plans to slash jury trials, he is giving magistrates more serious cases. However, he also plans to scrap the automatic right to appeal—a vital safety valve in courtrooms where justice is delivered at pace by volunteers. Last year, 5,000 cases from magistrates courts were appealed, of which more than 40% were upheld. Given that very high rate of successful appeals, will the Secretary of State be honest with the public and concede that curtailing appeals will unquestionably lead to miscarriages of justice?
The right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis) on the Conservative Back Benches has just said that summary justice is no justice—either they believe in our magistrates or they do not. I believe in our magistrates. Sir Brian recommended a permission stage, and we accept his recommendation for creating a permission stage on appeal. That is the right thing to do, particularly because many appeals have no merits, and that is why victims fall away.
If the Secretary of State maintains that this change will not lead to miscarriages of justice, he must be expecting the same number of cases to be appealed. In which case, there is no point doing it in the first place. The truth, deep down, is that the Government are willing to tolerate some miscarriages of justice to save a paltry sum of money, yet all the while the solution is staring us in the face. Since the Justice Secretary announced his plan on 2 December, 640 sitting days have been missed.
It is the end of term. The Justice Secretary’s report card is marked “improvement required”. Will he reflect over Christmas and make scrapping his plan to slash jury trials a new year’s resolution that we can all support?
If the Secretary of State maintains that this change will not lead to miscarriages of justice, he must be expecting the same number of cases to be appealed. In which case, there is no point doing it in the first place. The truth, deep down, is that the Government are willing to tolerate some miscarriages of justice to save a paltry sum of money, yet all the while the solution is staring us in the face. Since the Justice Secretary announced his plan on 2 December, 640 sitting days have been missed.
It is the end of term. The Justice Secretary’s report card is marked “improvement required”. Will he reflect over Christmas and make scrapping his plan to slash jury trials a new year’s resolution that we can all support?
I know the right hon. Gentleman has more front than Blackpool pier, but let us be clear: we are accepting a permission stage that was recommended by Brian Leveson. What we need are more sitting days and more investment, and we are doing that. We cannot shirk reform, he knows that jury trials will continue to be a cornerstone of the Crown court system, and we need modernisation. All of that was not done by the last Government.