HoC 85mm(Green).tif

Backbench Business Committee

Representations: Backbench Debates

Tuesday 7 January 2025

Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on 7 January 2025.

Watch the meeting

Members present: Bob Blackman (Chair); Jack Abbott; Jess Brown-Fuller; Mary Glindon; Will Stone; Martin Vickers; Chris Vince.

Questions 1-9

Representations made

I: Paul Kohler

II: Julia Buckley

III: Bob Blackman and David Pinto-Duschinsky


Paul Kohler made representations.

Q1             Chair: Welcome to the first meeting of 2025 of the Backbench Business Committee. Happy new year to everyone. We have three applications before us this afternoon, the first of which is from Paul Kohler on hospice and palliative care. Over to you, Paul, to present your case.

Mr Kohler: Thank you for inviting me to speak to you. As anyone who was at the assisted dying debate saw, the important subtext throughout was hospice funding, palliative care and the lottery of where people could or could not get good palliative care. There were also legal uncertainties over the power of doctors and their legal liability, post-Shipman, to give sufficient analgesics to address suffering where that might hasten death; that issue came up time and again. This debate will allow us to air these matters properly. There was also very real disagreement in the debate as to the limits of palliative care. Some argued that a good death was possible with sufficient palliative care every time; others said that was not so.

We need to address these things. This debate will allow us to address matters that were important under the surface of the assisted dying debate. I have huge support for it. I have had support from Conservative Members, Labour Members, Reform Members, independents and a smattering of Lib Dems, but not too many. There is lots of support. I did not have to twist people’s arms; they were very keen that we have the debate. I think it would bring the House together to discuss something that is so important.

Q2             Chair: Thank you. We have a slot available for next Monday 13 January in the Chamber. Would you be able to take that slot if it was offered to you?

Mr Kohler: Yes, I am sure I could.

Chair: Do colleagues have questions? Is everyone happy? The Clerks will be in contact with you shortly after this meeting, I suspect.

Mr Kohler: Thank you; I appreciate that.

Julia Buckley made representations.

Q3             Chair: Next up we have Julia Buckley with an application for a debate on road safety.

Julia Buckley: Thank you for letting me speak today. The proposal is, “That this House has considered measures to protect young drivers.” In my constituency of Shrewsbury, the story of Harvey Owen and his three friends, who all died aged 17 on the way to Wales, shocked the whole town, but actually, it is not an unfamiliar story. In rural areas like ours, where public transport has been decimated, young people feel they have no option but to drive at 17 to access education, sport, work and social activities. Of course, rural roads are windy, they are not lit, and they often require additional maintenance, so it requires additional skills to drive on them.

Our experience in Shrewsbury is reflected across the country, particularly in rural areas, where young drivers between 17 and 24 are high-risk road users and consistently over-represented in road casualties. Globally, road traffic injuries are the leading cause of death for young people aged 15 to 29, and in the UK, more than 1,500 young people are killed or seriously injured on our roads every year. In Britain, only 6% of total licence holders are aged 17 to 24, but they make up 18% of all car drivers killed and seriously injured. One in five young drivers will have a crash in their first year.

Harvey’s mum, Crystal Owen, has led a campaign to push for more safety measures to protect young drivers. She has a petition which currently has 22,000 signatures, and she belongs to a national campaign called Forget-me-not Families Uniting, for families who have lost a loved one who was a young person. The road safety campaign charity Brake also has a charter setting out proposals to improve road safety and support for road victims. There are many different suggestions to look at how we can protect young drivers, including additional training, progressive licences and safety measures such as Harvey’s hammer, which is a hammer that could smash the glass if a car gets trapped, enabling people to escape.

The Government are currently devising and developing their road safety strategy, so this is a really timely moment to inform that strategy, with contributions from MPs from across the House and across the country.

Q4             Chair: Your application is for a Westminster Hall debate on either a Tuesday or Thursday. As you possibly know, we have to schedule Tuesday debates according to the answering Departments. The first available slot on a Tuesday is 28 January. Would you be able to take that if it is offered?

Julia Buckley: Yes, I would.

Q5             Jess Brown-Fuller: I am grateful that you are bringing forward this debate. My husband lost one of his best friends at the age of 17 in a road traffic accident for the same reasons that you mentioned—rural areas, winding roads and a car full of boys at the time, probably driving too quickly. I know that those families, even 20 years on, are still absolutely devastated at the loss of their sons. This is an important debate for many MPs across the House. You have a really good selection of cross-party support for your application. I just hope that you will take the opportunity to publish it more widely to all MPs, to tell them that they would be welcome to come along and hear your debate and hopefully contribute to it as well.

Julia Buckley: With pleasure, because I think that they can bring forward different suggestions and experiences that could inform that strategy. I am sorry about your husband’s situation.

Chair: Are there any other questions? No. The Clerks will be in touch with you shortly.

Julia Buckley: Thank you very much.

Chair: At this point, I need to vacate the Chair because I am presenting the next application for a debate on Holocaust Memorial Day. I declare my interest as the co-chairman of the all-party parliamentary group on Holocaust memorial. Chris, you are kindly going to take the Chair for me.

[Chris Vince took the Chair]

Bob Blackman and David Pinto-Duschinsky made representations.

Q6             Chair: Welcome to the Backbench Business Committee. Will you please present your application for a debate?

              Bob Blackman: Coming up on 27 January is the 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau. This is the last real occasion where many of the survivors will be with us for a major commemoration. Over the last 20 years, we have had a debate in Parliament almost every year, sometimes in Backbench Business time and sometimes in Government time. It is an opportunity for Members on all sides to raise the issues around the Holocaust and the systematic murder of more than 6 million Jewish people, but also the genocides that have taken place in other parts of the world over that period, and we can go through all of those if you so wish.

For those of you who have not participated in these debates before, they are some of the most emotive opportunities to participate. We commemorate those who have died. We listen to accounts from colleagues of survivors and what they went through, and we take the opportunity to get all the Front-Bench spokespeople to contribute and state what they are going to do to make sure that this is never repeated. This is one of those sombre events when Parliament comes together very effectively.

Technically, the commemoration date would be on Monday 27 January. I do not know whether the Government will allow the debate to take place on that day. Ideally, that is the day when we would like to hold it, but if not, it would need to be any time around that date, because obviously it is an important day. As you can see from the list of people who have co-sponsored the debate, it will be very heavily subscribed. In my humble opinion, I think that it justifies a full days debate, because that will allow everyone to make their contributions as they see fit.

Q7             Chair: Thank you. You pre-empted some of the questions, unsurprisingly. David, do you want to add anything?

              David Pinto-Duschinsky: I can only echo Bob’s points, all of which are fantastic. This is an incredibly important occasion, not just for the Jewish community but for Parliament to come together and take a day to reflect on the lessons of the appalling genocides we have seen, and also because of the particular significance of this day. Holocaust Memorial Day is set on 27 January because that is the day Auschwitz was liberated. Because this will be the 80th anniversary—which, as the Chairman rightly points out, is probably the last major anniversary for which survivors will be alive—there is a particular desire and importance to granting a debate and giving it not just time in the Chamber but a full day, so that everyone can contribute to what will be a quite unique and singular event.

Q8             Chair: Thank you very much. Before I go to questions, did anyone want to declare an interest?

Jack Abbott: I just want to say that I am a member of the APPG on Holocaust memorial.

Jess Brown-Fuller: I am going to declare an interest just in case I am a member of the Holocaust memorial APPG, because it is in the back of my mind that I might be.

Q9             Will Stone: Would it be better for you to have the debate on 20 January or after the 27th, if that was not available from the Government?

Bob Blackman: There are obviously national and international events on the 27th, so if it is not held then, it will have to be on the 20th or around the date. The most important thing is that there is a debate; the exact date is a matter of negotiation.

Will Stone: I am sure you can sort that out.

Bob Blackman: I am sure we can.

Chair: Are there any further questions? No. In which case, that concludes the public meeting.