🤔 Points of Order

Commons Chamber

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

Victoria Atkins raised concerns about the Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs giving misleading information regarding the closure of the SFI scheme, affecting farmers’ business decisions and potentially leading to legal issues. Dr Marie Tidball corrected the record by declaring her union memberships, which she forgot to mention during a previous session. Sir John Hayes highlighted a discrepancy in the number of records related to nuclear test veterans, suggesting that the Atomic Weapons Establishment might have misled Ministers, and urged for the correction and publication of the full records. These points of order brought critical issues of transparency and accountability to the forefront in Parliament.

Summary

  • Victoria Atkins (Conservative) raised a point of order questioning the Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs, Daniel Zeichner, about the lack of notice given to farmers regarding the closure of the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) scheme. She highlighted the importance of this issue due to its impact on business decisions and potential legal consequences. The Minister did not respond.

  • Dr Marie Tidball (Labour) made a point of order to correct the record and declare her interests, which she failed to mention during her first intervention on the Employment Rights Bill. She confirmed her membership in the Community, GMB, and Unison unions.

  • Sir John Hayes (Conservative) brought up a point of order concerning the number of blood and urine test records related to nuclear test veterans. He noted a discrepancy between the initial figure of 150 records mentioned by former Defence Minister Dr Andrew Murrison and a new figure of 370 records, including 265 previously unreleased documents. He sought guidance on correcting the record and ensuring the full release of the documents.

Divisiveness

The session primarily involves points of order, which are procedural and focused on correcting the record or ensuring proper conduct rather than substantive policy disagreements. However, there is a notable instance of disagreement regarding the communication and accuracy of ministerial statements, which brings the rating up to 2. Here are the detailed observations and examples of disagreements observed in the session:

  1. Disagreement on Notice to Farmers:
    • Victoria Atkins questions the Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs, Daniel Zeichner, over the lack of notice given to farmers about the closure of the SFI scheme. She challenges his claim that notice was given ‘weeks and weeks—months’ or even ‘five years ago’, insisting that ‘no notice was given to farmers’. This disagreement is significant as it could have legal and practical ramifications for farmers who need to make immediate business decisions. The Minister’s indication of dissent suggests a clear disagreement, although it is not elaborated upon in the session.
  2. Other Points of Order:
    • Dr Marie Tidball’s point of order is about correcting the record and declaring interests, which shows no inherent disagreement but rather an adherence to procedural norms.
    • Sir John Hayes raises concerns over the accuracy of statements made by a former Defence Minister about the number of records related to nuclear test veterans. This points to a potential disagreement between the information provided by the Atomic Weapons Establishment and what was relayed to the House, though it is primarily a request for correction rather than an active conflict within the session itself.

Overall, the disagreements observed are relatively mild and focused on procedural and factual corrections rather than substantive policy debates, which justifies a rating of 2. The session could have been rated lower if not for the notable disagreement between Victoria Atkins and the Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs.