Sam Rushworth

Getting Britain Working Again

I fully agree with my hon. Friend. It would be remiss of me if I did not mention my absolute delight at the education for all Bill included in the King’s Speech. I intend to speak in the debate on that Bill when the time comes. I also thank the Minister for School Standards and the Secretary of State for what I thought was a model of how to engage with charities and parents, as well as with Back-Bench MPs, on that difficult but important piece of legislation. I think everybody across the House w

Getting Britain Working Again

I hear what the hon. Lady is saying—we have exactly the same challenges in my rural community, where people cannot get to job interviews or to jobs—but we passed the Bus Services Act 2025 in the last Session.

Getting Britain Working Again

rose—

Getting Britain Working Again

I am coming on to talk about the importance of FE funding, while understanding the challenges the Government face. There is enormous demand to spend money everywhere, but I want to make the case for why we really need to resource FE. FE colleges endured years of under-investment. Funding per student fell by 11% over 14 years of Conservative government. Vocational education was too often treated as second class, and apprenticeship opportunities declined precisely at the moment we needed them most

Getting Britain Working Again

I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests in that I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for T-levels. I thank Harrison Willmott, a sixth-form student and work experience student, who helped research some of the figures for my speech today. He is sitting in the Gallery. I also welcome today’s positive growth figures—the highest quarterly growth in the G7 and the highest real-terms growth in over four years, as well as falling unemployment. However,

Getting Britain Working Again

I certainly do. It is this Labour Government and it is getting people off NHS waiting lists and back into work. However, it is not for me to answer the questions; my intervention was simply to give the hon. Lady another opportunity to answer the question that was put to her by my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) and which she did not really answer. This broken system that she described as “Benefits Street” is a system that the Conservatives created. Why, in 14 years, did they

Debate on the Address

It would be interesting to be reminded of how the right hon. Member voted on Andrew Lansley’s reforms of the NHS, many of which are still creating problems in our NHS today.

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

I will not take any more interventions, because Madam Deputy Speaker is looking at her watch. The allegation simply has not been substantiated. There is pressure going on at the moment: documents are being released under the Humble Address and evidence is being given before the Foreign Affairs Committee. I have to wonder why the Opposition have not waited until that process has been concluded before writing to the Speaker requesting this motion. I want to address a couple more points quickly, an

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

I believe so, Mr Speaker.

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

A moment ago, the Leader of the Opposition described the statement read out by the Prime Minister as “doctored”. That is akin to saying that it was dishonest and that he was lying. Is that not unparliamentary language, Mr Speaker?

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

Will the hon. Member give way?

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

I think the hon. Lady may be inadvertently misquoting the Prime Minister, but if I am wrong, I invite her to quote exactly what the Prime Minister said about pressure to expedite the process. My recollection is that the Prime Minister said that there was no pressure to change the decision, not expedite the process.

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

I think the hon. Member knows that I have great affection for her, so I am disappointed in the way she has just made that point. In Sir Olly Robbins’s testimony, he said that No. 10 was repeatedly asking, “Has the vetting been completed?” That is inconsistent with the idea that No. 10 regarded the vetting as immaterial to its decision—quite the opposite. It demonstrates to me a No. 10 that felt that this was an important process that had to be followed. There was of course pressure to complete i

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

Will the hon. Member give way?

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

I simply disagree. Pressure to get things done is part and parcel of what we do in government all the time. I am always under pressure and under deadlines. On the central allegation that the Prime Minister somehow pressured them with regard to the decision, I am sorry but the evidence has not pointed to that in any shape or form.

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

We have seen no evidence and, indeed, Sir Olly Robbins made it quite clear that he did not feel pressure to change his mind, that pressure was exerted on him with regard to the decision that he made. There was pressure exerted to make a decision. That is just part and parcel of the normal running of government, particularly when working to a timeline. Let me quote him: “I walked into a situation” where there was a “strong expectation—you will have seen the papers, released…under the Humble Addre

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

I am happy to answer that point—[Interruption.] If Opposition Members stop chuntering, they will hear the answer, which is no, not at all. It is my personal view, although I am not an expert in these things, that I probably would have appointed an ambassador. I have said I thought the appointment of Peter Mandelson was wrong. I would have probably appointed an ambassador to the United States or left her in post, but that is immaterial to the point I am making. The point I am making is that No. 1

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

I will in a moment. I want to address my colleague’s question about pressure. Clearly there are different types of pressure that can be exerted, and Sir Olly Robbins was clearly talking about the pressure to reach a decision quickly—[Interruption.] Opposition Members all know what was going on in the decision to appoint Peter Mandelson. We had had a change in Government in the United States. We had no trade deal with the United States, thanks to the legacy that the Conservatives left us. We had

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

I will address that point in just a moment. First, let us address the point about process. Sir Chris Wormald’s letter to the Prime Minister said: “The evidence I have reviewed leads me to conclude that appropriate processes were followed in both the appointment and withdrawal of the former HMA Washington.” Sir Olly Robbins confirmed that he did not tell the Prime Minister that Mandelson had failed the vetting process, and said: “You are not supposed to share the findings and reports of UKSV, oth

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

The Whips have not told me very much, but I will address the right hon. Gentleman’s question as I make progress in my speech and he will see why I have drawn my conclusions. The question is this: has the Prime Minister deliberately or recklessly misled the House, sufficient to make a referral to the Privileges Committee? As I said a moment ago, it is important that we treat that question properly, because we should not treat the Committee lightly; we should not mock it. If we made political refe

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

As others have said, it is important that when we speak in this place we reflect the feelings of those we represent, and I think that if they see anything at all in all of this, they will be thinking about Epstein’s victims. As someone who knows more about sexual abuse than I would like to, I want to be absolutely clear, before I make any other remarks, that I think that it was wrong to appoint Peter Mandelson, even knowing what the Prime Minister knew at the time. But I will also say this: the

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

A moment ago, the Leader of the Opposition talked about selective quoting. I am sure that she would not want to selectively quote Sir Olly Robbins herself, so could she tell us what the rest of that quote was? When he talked about pressure, was he talking about pressure to deliver a decision in time for President Trump’s inauguration, or was he saying that he felt pressure to materially change what the decision would be? That is quite an important distinction, is it not?

Referral of Prime Minister to Committee of Privileges

rose—

Representation of the People Bill (Fifth sitting)

In one of our evidence sessions, we heard clearly from a KC who said there were almost no examples of personation prior to the introduction of mandatory ID. We also heard, quite alarmingly, that about 1.7% of people—potentially enough to swing an election—were turned away at polling stations under the current system. Clearly, this is about getting the balance right. Does the hon. Gentleman honestly feel that the balance is currently right, given the evidence we heard in that session?

Representation of the People Bill (Fifth sitting)

The hon. Gentleman has quoted the official figures, but we heard from election volunteers that they believe that the official figures are not accurate, because that is only the people who made it to the clerk’s desk. They saw lots of evidence of people being turned away at the door because they were arriving without identification.

Representation of the People Bill (Fifth sitting)

I understand the hon. Member’s point about the 0.08%, but does he accept the evidence that we heard about that figure most certainly being at the lower end? There are people who do not go out on polling day because they realise that they do not have the correct ID, and there are people who get turned away before they make it to the clerk’s desk, so that figure is certainly an underestimation. I also accept that there is a way for people to acquire ID that does not have to cost them money. None t

Representation of the People Bill (Fifth sitting)

The hon. Gentleman cited the example of his constituency, but I have looked at the data, and there have been only three convictions in a six-year period in all elections. Now, that is three convictions too many, and I agree that we need to increase security, but can he not see that going from a system in which literally nothing is needed to vote to a person needing to acquire their neighbour’s bank card to vote in their name is a significant added measure of security, and that it might bring thr

Public Baths and Lidos

I want to thank my hon. Friend for his speech that he is making and for bringing this matter to the Chamber. I am greatly enthused by what he has achieved because every time I visit Stanhope, I know that it is a great source of sorrow for people that our lido closed during covid and has never reopened. Likewise, if I am in Crook, the No. 1 thing that people raise with me is the loss of the swimming baths about 10 years ago. Those are two areas where I am working with people and hoping that we ca

Public Baths and Lidos

I just want to extend the Minister’s invitation list: I invite him to see the lido that we want to reopen at Stanhope and to come to Crook, where the public baths closed 10 years ago. Will he write and let us know what opportunities there are for Sport England funding for that sort of project? At the moment, I am not promising it to my voters, although I am really committed to it. I am meeting with Crook Community Leisure and others and trying to make it happen, but I struggle to see a way to do