Mark Ferguson

Co-operative Sector: Government Support

I have to make progress—sorry. Additionally, the Government asked the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority to produce, by the end of 2025, a report on the wider mutuals landscape, which is well under way. The Government are continuing to fund the Law Commission’s independent review of the legislation that governs co-operative societies in Great Britain, which is expected to be published later this year. That review will consider ways to update and modernise the leg

Co-operative Sector: Government Support

That point is very well made, and my hon. Friend is right to be proud of his forebears, who were doughty working-class politicians and representatives of his area, as he is. The Rochdale principles, established by the Rochdale pioneers, have formed the basis of modern ideals for the operation of co-operatives across the globe. The UN General Assembly declared 2025 to be the International Year of Co-operatives, recognising the positive impact that co-operatives have around the world. The Governme

Co-operative Sector: Government Support

My hon. Friend intervened on my maiden speech, which is slightly irregular, and now he has intervened on my first outing at the Dispatch Box. Co-operatives have a wide variety of uses in the economy and I am sure that the Department and the Government more broadly will consider them. Their importance in community cohesion is certainly not lost on me or, I am sure, on other Members here. On the shadow Minister’s question about cash ISAs, cash savings are important for people looking to put cash a

Co-operative Sector: Government Support

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. Please do not adjust your sets: I am not the Economic Secretary to the Treasury. But I am very pleased to be here on her behalf for my first stint at the Dispatch Box. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] Thank you. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon) for securing this important debate. He is a huge asset not only to our party and his constituents but to the Co-operative party, whic

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

I thank the Father of the House for giving way. He makes a compelling point about other countries. Would he care to name some other countries that have people sitting in their legislature, able to introduce and vote on legislation, entirely by dint of their parentage? For the life of me, I cannot think of many examples.

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

I delighted to inform the right hon. Member about the parliamentary Labour party’s Back-Bench committee, which meets the Prime Minister weekly when Parliament is sitting. I see at least one of my hon. Friends from the committee here—[Interruption.] In fact, there are two here. Staffordshire is well represented at the moment on the committee, and that is quite right—oatcakes all round for them, and of course for the Prime Minister.

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Will the hon. Member give way?

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

My long-standing views on reform of our Parliament can be looked up by any Member if they so wish. I very much welcomed, both on Second Reading and from the Front Bench today, the comments on the future reform of the Lords and what that might look like. However, I dare say to the hon. Gentleman that we might agree on some specific aspects more than he imagines. There has not been much discussion of Lords amendment 2, on Ministers’ pay. I welcome the Conservative party’s stout defence of working

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

I thank my hon. Friend, although I do not think that will help me with my diet. However, I am doing the great north run on Sunday so I will probably need the calories. I am happy that we are having the debate, but I am somewhat surprised by its tenor, which runs contrary to the Salisbury convention—its correct name, of course, is the Salisbury-Addison convention; we too often neglect the Labour Member of that important duopoly. It has been surprising—particularly so on Second Reading, when the f

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

I will happily take a point in a second from my hon. Friend, which I presume will be on the Lords amendment and not on oatcakes, but I wish to respond fully to the point made by the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) before I got so distracted. I apologise for that self-distraction, Madam Deputy Speaker. The role of the Lords in our legislature is quite clear, as is the role of the monarch. In fact, I spoke this morning to students from Emmanuel college in my c

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

This has been a suitably fascinating debate. I do not plan to speak for too long, because the points have already been well made. We have had 10 hours here and 52 flippin’ hours in the House of Lords on this concise, four-clause Bill, and now we have a number of amendments. I will address Lords amendments 1 and 2. Lords amendment 1 is fairly straightforward up and down. We know what it is. It is a wrecking amendment, pure and simple. It is nothing more than an amendment designed to preserve the

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

That is a fascinating argument. The hon. Gentleman has argued in favour of the Lords for their restraint, and now he is arguing in favour of the Lords because they allow radicalism. That does not make any sense.

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

This is a fascinating return to the ’90s—like much about the Conservative party—but I think the shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has missed the fact that there was an election last year in which the Labour party clearly won a mandate to deliver the removal of hereditary peers. What may or may not have been discussed in the 1990s is for the birds. There was an election. We won that election. We said we were going to do this. Let’s get on with it.

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Will the Father of the House give way?

Property Taxes

Indeed. Thank God the Conservatives are not writing the Budget, because we have seen what their Budgets led to. I understand Opposition Members’ frustration. It is nice to see that they have settled into the most comfortable aspect of being in opposition. As I have said before in these debates, as a Labour party member of many years’ standing, I have a huge amount of experience of the comfort of opposition; you start to create straw men, talk about what the Government might be doing and your fea

Property Taxes

It is wonderful to be back for another Opposition day debate, as I am sure we can all agree. It is another debate about imagined proposals. It must be a difficult time for Opposition Members, because for so many years, this was the time of year when they were preparing for their conference and for the Budget, but this year, scant attention will be paid to them—and, of course, they are not writing the Budget anymore.

Asylum Hotels: Migrant Criminal Activity

The shadow Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Croydon South (Chris Philp), has spoken passionately about crimes in this country—including, I dare say, some by a number of individuals who entered the country on his Government’s watch when he was a Home Office Minister. As other Members have said, when Opposition parties take that position while voting against tagging asylum seekers who are perceived to be a threat, and against barring from the country those who have been convicted of sexua

Afghanistan

As I am sure many Members do, I feel a sense of anger that once again the Afghan people have been betrayed. I thank the Secretary of State for his candour and his response, and for lifting the super-injunction, which will allow proper parliamentary scrutiny, but will he assure me that the following three questions will be answered? First, how was a year allowed to pass between the initial leak and it being uncovered? Secondly, how was an email with a spreadsheet attached considered a serious way