📚 Business of the House

• Upcoming Parliamentary Business: The Leader of the House, Lucy Powell, outlined the forthcoming parliamentary business for the weeks commencing 10 March and 17 March. Key activities include the Second Reading of the Crime and Policing Bill, remaining stages of the Employment Rights Bill, and general debates on topics like farming, mental health support in schools, children’s wellbeing, knife crime, and coastal communities.

• International Women’s Day and Ukraine: Both the shadow Leader of the House, Jesse Norman, and Lucy Powell highlighted the significance of International Women’s Day. They also expressed concern and support for Ukraine amidst recent developments, acknowledging the unity shown by the House in supporting the Prime Minister’s stance.

• Parliamentary Accountability and Engagement: Jesse Norman criticized the Leader of the House for not engaging properly with questions from the Opposition and proposed a light-hearted “Leader’s bingo” to track evasive responses. Lucy Powell retorted by suggesting Norman focus more on substantial questions rather than personal jibes.

• Flood Defence and Resilience: MPs raised concerns about flooding in their constituencies, pressing for more funding and debates on flood alleviation schemes and the overall resilience strategy. Powell responded by affirming the government’s increased investment and commitment to flood resilience.

• Education and Community Initiatives: Celebrations of World Book Day were mentioned, with focus on the importance of school libraries and reading among children. MPs highlighted community efforts, including youth services and intergenerational schemes, seeking more governmental support and recognition.

• Health and Social Care: There were calls for debates on ambulance response times, the availability of drugs for serious illnesses, and the crisis in social care. Powell emphasized the government’s initiatives to improve health services and promised to look into specific cases mentioned.

• Economic and Infrastructure Issues: MPs discussed challenges faced by rural communities accessing banking services and the delays in broadband rollout. Concerns about the impact of changes to inheritance tax on family farms and the need for energy infrastructure reform were also raised.

• Social and Criminal Justice: Debates were requested on sentencing guidelines, community pharmacy funding, and women-only spaces. Powell responded by outlining the government’s approach to these issues, including efforts to balance fairness with crime prevention.

• Local and Regional Concerns: Various local issues were raised, ranging from library services, museum exhibitions, and regional economic growth to the management of derelict properties and local council accountability. Powell reassured MPs of government plans and actions to address these concerns.

• Miscellaneous Topics: Other topics included a request for a debate on the media sector’s regulation, recognition of community service like mountain rescue, and calls for government statements on a variety of national and international issues, such as protecting religious minorities abroad.

The parliamentary session exhibits a moderate level of disagreement, which justifies a rating of 3. Here’s a detailed analysis of the disagreements observed in the transcript:

1. Disagreement on Responsiveness and Accountability: Jesse Norman criticizes the Leader of the House, Lucy Powell, for not adequately responding to his questions and concerns during their sessions. This is highlighted by Norman’s introduction of a light-hearted yet pointed concept, ‘Leader’s bingo’, to emphasize perceived evasion and lack of engagement by Powell. He accuses her of consistently failing to address important public concerns, instead offering irrelevant comments or political attacks. This clearly indicates a disagreement over how seriously and effectively the Leader of the House is engaging with the Opposition’s queries.

   Example: Jesse Norman states, “Unfortunately, as you will have noticed, Mr Speaker, the Government are not doing that in our sessions. In fact, the Leader of the House rarely, if ever, responds to the important public questions and concerns that I raise.”

2. Political Jibes and Counterarguments: Lucy Powell responds to Norman’s criticisms with political jibes and counterarguments, defending her responses and highlighting what she perceives as the shadow Leader’s failure to ask substantial questions. This exchange shows a level of discord as both parties engage in a back-and-forth where their fundamental disagreements on the nature and conduct of business questions are evident.

   Example: Lucy Powell responds, “The shadow Leader of the House has again used his slot to ask me not a single question. He says that I have not given him any answers in any of the weeks that we have been standing at the Dispatch Box, but if he really wants me to tell him again today where he has gone wrong, I am happy to give him some advice.”

3. Policy Disagreements: There are several instances where MPs call for debates on contentious issues, indicating policy disagreements. For example, Sir John Hayes and Sir Ashley Fox raise concerns about criminal justice, specifically the deportation of foreign criminals and the new sentencing guidelines, criticizing what they perceive as leniency or bias in the system. Their requests for a debate signal underlying disagreements with the government’s approach.

   Example: Sir John Hayes criticizes the judicial system, saying, “Will she allow a debate on criminal justice to enable us to expose the huge gulf between the liberal bourgeoisie’s prejudices and those of our constituents, who want people caught, captured, convicted and punished, regardless of whether they are black, brown, white or any other colour?”

4. Community and Constituency Issues: MPs like Dr Marie Tidball and Andy MacNae request debates on flood alleviation, highlighting dissatisfaction with the government’s allocation of funds and efforts in their constituencies. The calls for debates on specific local issues indicate disagreements with the strategies and priorities set by the government.

   Example: Dr Marie Tidball says, “Despite widespread local support and the importance of that scheme, the Conservatives never actually allocated funding to it. Will the Leader of the House allow time to debate flood alleviation schemes, to ensure that the appropriate funding is allocated in the forthcoming spending review?”

5. General Agreement with Some Discord: While there are many instances of recognition and congratulations on community efforts or tributes to individuals across the session, these are interspersed with requests for government action and debates, pointing to areas of disagreement. The session ends with a high level of participation and a variety of topics raised, many of which express dissatisfaction or the need for change, yet the overall tone maintains a level of decorum and civility.

   Example: Various MPs ask for debates on issues like social care, youth services, banking services in rural areas, and regulatory concerns in the media sector, all indicating points of contention with government policy or action.

In summary, the session displays a moderate level of disagreement, with clear disputes over the handling of business questions, policy implementation, and responses to local constituency issues. However, the debate remains within the bounds of parliamentary discourse without escalating to high levels of confrontation.