I have signed the open letter to the Prime Minister, urging the Government to enact the 2019 Government's manifesto commitment to ban trophy hunting imports. The letter coordinated by Henry Smith, MP for Crawley, and signed by 64 MPs and Peers is set out below:

I presented a petition in the House on Wednesday, 25 October 2023 about the change in DVLA services that can be found at Post Offices. I said: 

"This is a petition of the residents of the United Kingdom who are concerned that post offices will no longer provide customers with access to Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency services. The petitioners say that post offices are vital in accessing DVLA services and provide a service to 6 million people. Senior citizens rely on post offices to renew their licences, which have to be renewed every three years after the age of 70, and citizens who are unable to use the internet require help and advice from post office staff when completing DVLA applications. The petitioners say that many post offices providing this service may risk closure if customers are not able to renew licences or vehicle tax.

The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to recognise the importance of DVLA services remaining accessible from post offices, and to renew the contract with Post Office Ltd so that customers have a choice of in-person or online renewal."

The petition is now forwarded to the ‘Department for Business and Trade’ (DBT) for their initial consideration. If the petition falls within their remit the associated observation will be tabled in their name. In accordance with the resolution of the House on 25 October 2007:

“substantive petitions should normally receive a response from the relevant government department”, and this should normally be within two months of the petition being presented.
Petitions and observations on petitions from Government Departments will be printed in Hansard. Petitions will appear on the day they are presented. Observations will be printed, along with a copy of the petition they relate to, as soon as possible after they are received.

Post Offices in Walsall South risk being forced to close down if DVLA does not renew its contract to enable Post Offices to provide this service. Many elderly residents, people with no access or who are unable to use the internet, or just anyone who needs help and advice from Post Office staff, rely on being able to use this service at Post Offices. 

On Wednesday 25 October 2023, the Palestinian Ambassador, Dr Husum Zomlot, briefed a cross party group of MPs, members of the British-Palestine APPG in Parliament. Dr Zomlot told the meeting of the difficulties the people were facing with a lack of food, water and fuel. He said people were being bombed as they queued for bread. He said that Hamas, who are a group, should not be conflated with the Palestinian people. He told the meeting that a woman gave birth to a baby as she was dying. They named him Naji which means 'survivor'. 

He said the 3rd oldest church in the world has been bombed. He said people were drinking sea water as there was no fuel for desalination plants. There needs to  be an immediate ceasefire and unfettered access for humanitarian aid. In the end there has to be a political solution.

The Ambassador from Jordan thought we had to look beyond the short term and that the situation was at a crossroads. That the settlor activity had to be stopped and there had to be a strategy for the the future so that there would be peace and security for all.

The Ambassador for Qatar said they were continuing to have a dialogue with both parties. There needs to be international media and third parties allowed into Gaza.

 

I was a member of the Draft Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications, Deemed Applications, Requests and Site Visits) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2023 Delegated Legislation Committee on Wednesday, 25 October 2023. I asked for clarification on how many responses the Government received to their consultation, as a percentage?"

Rachel Maclean MP, the Minister of State, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities responded by saying: "I thank the right hon. Member for that point. I will have to write to her about that, if she will allow me.

I followed this up by asking: "I have two points to make. First, I would like the percentage of the number of consultations that were returned—was it 1% or 100%? Secondly, how will the Government monitor whether local authorities are actually using the fees for the purposes intended?"

This intervention was followed by a back-and-forth with the Minister:

"The civil servants have helpfully given the answer that there were 495 responses to the consultation. What was the percentage of returns? Was that a 1% return of the total number of people who were consulted, or was it 100%? Is it 495 of 495? What is the percentage?"

There are two separate points. The point about the consultation is that there were 495 responses, but how many people were consulted? What is the percentage—was it a 1% return or a 50% return? On a separate point, the Minister helpfully said that local authorities have to spend the fees on planning and planning officers. How will the Government monitor whether they are doing that? The intention and the direction are there, but how can the public—my constituents—be reassured that that money will not be used for other purposes?"

The Minister said: I will respond to the right hon. Lady’s second point, as I understand that question very clearly. I think it is better if I write to her on the first question. My understanding is that there were 495 responses, but I do not know how many people were actually asked. I think she is asking for a response rate—" I indicated my agreement, to which the Minister followed up by saying: 

"We may be able to provide a further breakdown and further detail on those responses, and what they were in favour of and against. I am sure we can provide that information to the right hon. Lady and any other Committee member who is understandably interested in that.

"The point about planning performance is really important. It is feedback I always hear from industry and householders, as my hon. Friend the Member for Central Suffolk and North Ipswich has mentioned. Planning performance is an issue that is raised time and again. My overall conclusion and response is that when people are applying for these services, although they expect to get a good service, they have not always had that, which has led to overall dissatisfaction with the system. It also has a knock-on effect on the public’s confidence in the planning system more generally, which leads to a lot of the other issues that we see time and again. I am sure all Members have messages in their inbox about these sorts of issues, which are common across the country.

"We recognise that the current metrics on planning performance, including the use of extensions of time, do not adequately reflect the performance of local authorities. We recognise that they do not capture the consumer experience either. We have therefore recently consulted on proposals to measure performance across a broader set of quantitative and qualitative measures, providing greater transparency of service delivery and enabling early action where local authorities are not performing. We will come forward with further details on those measures in due course.

"Separately to that, my Department and civil servants in the relevant team have very granular information on local authorities’ performance in this area—as well as a number of other areas, of course—on which they regularly report to me. On that basis, other Ministers and I are Toggle showing location ofColumn 10able, where necessary, to exercise our functions and powers to intervene and to remove planning powers from local authorities, although we obviously only want to do that as a last resort. However, we do expect local authorities to be providing these services to their residents, which we monitor."

On Tuesday, 24 October, I presented a petition in the House of Commons on behalf of residents of the United Kingdom. I said: 

"This is a petition of the residents of the United Kingdom And there are 474 signatures to the petition in similar terms.
Who say that Bescot Stadium Station served over 90,000 passengers between 2021 and 2022.
and that passengers can only access the platforms via stairs to a footbridge without any accessible route from the platforms to the station car park other than by stairs.
The Petitioners say that Perry Barr and Witton Station, on the same line, have been upgraded for the Commonwealth Games making them accessible.
The petitioners therefore request the House of Commons to urge the Government to recognise the need for lifts at Bescot Stadium Station to make it accessible and to work with the appropriate body such as Network Rail."

The petition is now forwarded to the Department for Transport for their initial consideration. If the petition falls within their remit the associated observation will be tabled in their name. In accordance with the resolution of the House on 25 October 2007:

“substantive petitions should normally receive a response from the relevant government department”, and this should normally be within two months of the petition being presented.
Petitions and observations on petitions from Government Departments will be printed in Hansard. Petitions will appear on the day they are presented. Observations will be printed, along with a copy of the petition they relate to, as soon as possible after they are received.

Walsall FC Supporters Trust contacted me to say a disabled fan could not leave the Station as it only has stairs leading to a footbridge that connects it to the car park. While the car park has disabled parking spaces it is impossible for passengers in wheelchairs, or with mobility issues, or parents and travellers with prams to access the Station. 

The Government has an obligation under the Equality Act 2010 not to discriminate against people with disabilities. Section 29 of the Act states that service providers have a legal obligation not to discriminate against people on the basis of a protected characteristic and have a duty to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ for people with disabilities.