📋 Business of the House

• Forthcoming Business:
  • 3 February: Second Reading of the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill.
  • 4 February: Debates and approvals on the Social Security Benefits Up-rating Order 2025, Guaranteed Minimum Pensions Increase Order 2025, Social Security (Contributions) (Rates, Limits and Thresholds Amendments, National Insurance Funds Payments and Extension of Veteran’s Relief) Regulations 2025, and Child Benefit and Guardian’s Allowance Up-rating Order 2025.
  • 5 February: Motions on police grant and local government finance reports.
  • 6 February: Debates on government support for coalfield communities and financial education.
  • 7 February: The house will not sit.
  • 10 February: Second Reading of the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill.
  • 11 February: Consideration of Lords amendments and remaining stages of the Arbitration Bill [Lords].
  • 12 February: Second Reading of the Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords].
  • 13 February: A general debate with the subject to be announced.
• Economic Discussions:
  • Joy Morrissey (Con) criticized the Chancellor’s budget, calling it disastrous and linking it to economic decline, including drops in employment and business confidence. She urged for a debate on the impact of budget policies and potential U-turns.
  • Lucy Powell (Lab) countered by highlighting positive economic indicators under the current government, including reduced inflation, increased employment, and high business investment.
• Government Initiatives:
  • The government is proceeding with the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill and Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill to tackle small boats, smuggling gangs, and welfare fraud.
  • Announcements include the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor, redevelopment of the Old Trafford site, and support for regional projects including mineral industry in Cornwall and the lower Thames crossing.
• Community and Cultural Issues:
  • Calls for debates on the role of music in community cohesion, support for local creative venues, and discussions around the importance of local heritage centres were made.
  • Concerns about police community support officers and their funding were raised, with calls for the Home Secretary to make a statement on their future.
• Infrastructure and Transport:
  • Discussions on the importance of local transport infrastructure, including the success of the reopened Northumberland line, and the need for debates on rail freight interchanges.
  • Concerns about ferry services in Scotland and the impact on island communities were raised.
• Public Services:
  • Calls for debates on improving access to treatments for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, addressing the rise in ketamine usage and its impact on mental health, and the need for better funding for youth services were highlighted.
  • Discussions about hospital repair backlogs and access to ATM services in rural communities were noted.
• Foreign and Environmental Concerns:
  • Issues around human rights in Pakistan and Kyrgyzstan were raised, with calls for updates on how aid is utilized and foreign policy implications.
  • Calls for a statement on progress in halting deforestation and the government’s environmental commitments were made.
• Miscellaneous:
  • Birthdays and condolences were acknowledged, including a birthday wish to Joy Morrissey and condolences for an air crash in Washington DC and the tragedy at the Kumbh Mela in India.
  • A request to rename Heathrow Airport after Queen Elizabeth II was suggested as a tribute.
• Backbench Business Committee:
  • Announced debates on apprenticeships, open access to rail services, debt cancellation for low-income countries, the cost of energy, HIV testing, prevention of cardiovascular disease, maternity services, rural crime, and mental health support in educational settings.
• Bill Presentation:
  • The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill was presented, addressing border security, immigration, and the sharing of customs and trailer registration data.

The session exhibits a moderate level of disagreement, primarily centered around economic policies, fiscal measures, and specific legislative actions. Here’s a detailed analysis of the disagreements noted in the transcript:

1. Economic Policy and Budget Impact: The most notable disagreement is between Joy Morrissey (Conservative) and Lucy Powell (Leader of the House). Morrissey criticizes the Chancellor’s Budget, claiming it has led to negative economic consequences such as a drop in employment, business confidence, and rising mortgage rates. She suggests the need for the Chancellor to change course and ‘U-turn’ on certain policies. Powell counters these claims by presenting positive economic statistics, such as falling inflation, wage growth, and job creation under the current government, indicating a significant disagreement on the effectiveness and impact of the current economic policies.

2. Legislative Actions: There is a mention of the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error, and Recovery) Bill, where Powell notes that it was promised by the Conservative Party but not delivered, and the current government is taking action. This suggests a disagreement on legislative priorities and follow-through between the parties.

3. Specific Issues and Responses: While much of the session involves congratulatory remarks and requests for debates on various issues, there are instances of mild contention or dissatisfaction with the government’s policies or actions. For example, concerns raised by Marie Goldman (Liberal Democrat) about the reduction of Police Community Support Officers due to budget constraints could be seen as an implicit disagreement with government funding decisions.

4. General Tone: Apart from these more pronounced disagreements, the majority of the exchanges are cordial and focused on raising awareness of constituent concerns and proposing debates rather than direct confrontation. The session maintains a generally collaborative tone, with the Leader of the House responding positively to many suggestions for debates and promising to follow up on raised issues.

Overall, the disagreements are significant but not pervasive across the entire session. The key areas of contention are focused on economic policies and specific legislative actions, with the rest of the session being more collaborative and constructive in nature. Hence, a rating of 2 is appropriate as it reflects a moderate level of disagreement in an otherwise cooperative environment.