Results 1-20 of 2,948 for (in the 'Commons debates' OR in the 'Westminster Hall debates' OR in the 'Lords debates' OR in the 'Northern Ireland Assembly debates') speaker:Frank Field

Royal Assent (21 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I shall touch on a topic mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice). He said that he would not speak for seven minutes, and I promise the House that I shall not speak for as long as that. I want to lay before the House the difficulties I have experienced in pursuing an alleged case of fraud against the NHS. In September 2007 allegations were made to me that a local...

Opposition Day — [16th Allotted Day]: US-UK Extradition Treaty (15 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: Will my right hon. Friend give way?

Opposition Day — [16th Allotted Day]: US-UK Extradition Treaty (15 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I am grateful. Does the Minister accept that even those who will vote with the Government this evening are disturbed because many of our constituents feel that the relationship between us and the United States in respect of the operation of this treaty is unfair to people in this country?

Bill Presented: New Clause 2 — Short-term holding facilities (14 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I thank the Minister for that. Given his tapestry analogy, will he take a message back to the Home Office? If what he wants is not delivered, will he remind them that there are many hon. Members with long needles? We do not want to aim them at him, but at other forces.

Bill Presented: New Clause 2 — Short-term holding facilities (14 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: Since we last discussed the Bill on the Floor of the House of Commons, the Government have published a document that is very important—"Building Britain's Future". In the section on immigration, they pledge that we will move to a points system for citizenship so that we break the link between people coming here to work and their automatically becoming citizens. My hon. Friend the...

Bill Presented: Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (Review) (14 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to establish a Commission to review the operation of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme and to make proposals for amendments to the scheme. I rise to introduce a Bill to review the criminal injuries compensation scheme. It is a very small Bill about a very big issue: the impact of the 7/7 bombings on a number of our constituents....

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I am grateful for that intervention, because it allows me to point out that the Minister keeps saying that the Government are open to suggestions, but we have been making suggestions ever since they got us into this mess by abolishing the 10p rate. The most obvious way to bring justice without having to eat humble pie and reintroduce the 10p rate would be to raise tax allowances by the amount...

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: As I have been explaining, I cannot do that. The House of Commons has this absurd procedure whereby either we let things through or we table proposals such as this just to hold the Government back for a moment, so that they have to think again. We are then accused of trying to press the nuclear button. The constructive thing that we cannot do in Budget debates is propose how the Government...

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: There is clearly something wrong with our procedures when Members who wish to reform a Budget constructively have to resort to tabling a new clause that, according to my right hon. Friend, will blow the House and everything else asunder if we press it to a vote. It is very significant, however, that he did not say in response to the intervention of my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham,...

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I have been bending over backwards not to suggest this is a very easy thing that fits into nice little boxes. There are clearly what my grandmother would have called swings and roundabouts, and I accept my hon. Friend's point, but I nevertheless believe that the main thrust of the argument that Labour Members have made remains. If we win the Division on the new clause, we can proceed to...

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: Did the hon. Gentleman notice that as Birkenhead was mentioned, the gods showed their displeasure at the fact that we had to have this debate?

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I agree entirely. We benefited by the 2p rate reduction—I say "we" because those of us in this Chamber benefited.

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: Is the hon. Gentleman going to declare his earnings at the higher rate now?

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: The hon. Gentleman is perfectly right, and the figures, if they are to be trusted, show that 2 per cent. of people did not benefit in this way. When I said "we", I was trying, perhaps too crudely, to identify us with our constituents for once, given the yawning gap that has become apparent in the recent past. The substantive point remains that although moves have been made to compensate those...

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I do not dispute that point, and the hon. Gentleman may be able to make his case later in the debate.

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I confess that I do not know the answer. I am merely reciting the IFS figures. Today it said that 500,000 households would lose, and 1.3 million individuals. I assume that most of those individuals will be in those households. If our constituents were asked whether they believed the Treasury or the IFS, they would probably side with the IFS.

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: Well, I am sure, because it comes from the IFS. When I was broadcasting with representatives of the IFS today, they said that that was their estimate.

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I am sure that those sentiments are reflected on both sides of the House. The disappointment that I feel can be summed up as follows. I am not trying to decry the moves that the Government have made to try to rectify the unnecessary burden that we have placed on some of the poorest households in this country—a burden that would be unforgivable if it were a Tory Government doing it, and...

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Parliamentary Commissions of Inquiry: New Clause 1 — Implementation of section 1 (7 Jul 2009)

Frank Field: I have been in the House for 30 years, and have moved many motions on new clauses and many amendments. I have always taken real pleasure in doing so, but I cannot say that I take much pleasure in moving this new clause, or from the feeling that we are somehow on course for a collision with the Government over the treatment of many people in our society who earn low wages. Political parties,...