Edward Miliband (Doncaster North) (Lab) (Urgent Question): To ask
the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
if he will make a statement on Ofgem’s decision to suspend the
forced installation of prepayment meters. The Minister for Energy
and Climate (Graham Stuart) As I have set out to the House
previously, it is critical that our most vulnerable energy users
are protected, which is why we have already put in place a generous
package of...Request free trial
(Doncaster North) (Lab)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Business,
Energy and Industrial Strategy if he will make a statement on
Ofgem’s decision to suspend the forced installation of prepayment
meters.
The Minister for Energy and Climate ()
As I have set out to the House previously, it is critical that
our most vulnerable energy users are protected, which is why we
have already put in place a generous package of support to help
people with their energy bills this winter. I was appalled,
however, to see reports that vulnerable customers struggling with
their energy bills have had their homes invaded and prepayment
meters installed when there is a clear duty on suppliers to
provide them with support. Since those reports came to light, we
have acted swiftly and we will not hesitate to go further to
protect consumers.
The Secretary of State has called for more robust Ofgem
enforcement on those issues, as well as, more importantly, action
from suppliers. It is right that Ofgem has now taken the steps it
has, including asking suppliers to pause forcible installation
and to conduct a thorough review of processes, and I welcome
steps from those suppliers who have already announced that they
will do so. I welcome the move by Lord Justice Edis today,
ordering magistrates courts in England and Wales to stop
authorising warrants for energy firms to forcibly install
prepayment meters with immediate effect.
The Government expect strong and immediate action where suppliers
fall short of their obligations. I discussed these matters with
the chief executive officer of Ofgem this morning, and I met the
CEO of British Gas on 1 February to tell him of the strength of
the Government’s concerns at the distress that his company has
caused to customers. The Secretary of State has asked suppliers
to set out by the end of the day tomorrow how they will make
redress to customers who have inappropriately had a prepayment
meter fitted, including the possibility of compensation, and I
look forward to seeing the responses from suppliers.
I thank the right hon. Member for Doncaster North () for raising this issue. I
remind the House that I have committed to meeting the all-party
parliamentary group on prepayment meters, where I can keep
Members updated on the issue as we move forward after today.
I thank the Minister for his reply, but it is simply not good
enough. The story of this scandal is of a Government sitting on
their hands and being far too slow to act. Ofgem did reviews in
September and November and highlighted the problem—where were the
Government? In early January, Citizens Advice reported that 3
million people have been disconnected by the back door. Even
after that, he came to the House and refused an outright ban. Now
we know the result of his inaction: 30,000 people have had
warrants issued for the forced installation of prepayment meters
in the past month alone, and 6,000 in the past week since he said
no to a ban—thousands of people who are victims of Government
negligence.
Let me ask the Minister some questions. First, how long will this
pause, which has finally been put in place, last? Will he pledge
that it will not be lifted until this discredited, rotten system
is properly reformed? Secondly, he mentioned compensation as a
result of remedial action for those adversely affected. Will he
tell us how this compensation scheme will work? Thirdly, will he
look at the case for energy companies having to supply a minimum
amount of power to all customers, as in France, so that nobody is
cut off—just like we do not cut off people’s water supply in this
country? Fourthly, this crisis is happening against a backdrop of
energy bills being due to rise 40% in just eight weeks’ time
because the Government say there is nothing more they can do.
This is the next looming scandal. Will he finally end the
loopholes in the windfall tax, including billions being siphoned
to fossil fuel companies, to stop bills rising?
Energy companies forcing their way into people’s homes, millions
getting disconnected by the back door, no proper windfall tax on
fossil fuel profits—this is Britain under the Tories. There is no
one else to blame; it is long past time they got a grip.
The right hon. Gentleman asks how long the pause will last. That
is up to Ofgem, as the regulator. It looked at this process
before, as he rightly said, and it had assurances that have not
proven to be accurate. Ofgem needs to ensure that the processes
are properly observed, because it should be an absolute last
resort that a prepayment meter is forcibly installed. He asks how
compensation will be worked out. That is a matter for Ofgem. As
is proper for the regulator, it stands between the Government,
consumers and the suppliers in delivering that.
I have asked officials to look at providing a minimum amount of
power, like France does. There are a lot of technical and other
challenges to such a system. One of the benefits of having a
prepayment meter is that it allows someone who is not engaging
with their supplier and is running up debt to none the less have
a supply continuing in their home. Having people cut off
completely if they fail to manage that is not something we would
want to see.
The right hon. Gentleman talked about the position from April. I
am proud that the energy price guarantee will continue after
April, providing support for households right the way into 2024,
and we have committed to consult on a new system to look after
vulnerable consumers after that date.
The right hon. Gentleman mentioned the windfall tax and
loopholes. We are investing in our energy security. While we are
importers of oil and gas, as we will be under net zero all the
way to 2050, the absurd position set out by the Leader of the
Opposition is that Labour will oppose any new oil and gas
licences, meaning that we pay billions to other countries to
import it. There is no magic bullet to stop us using fossil fuels
immediately. This Government have accelerated the move to
renewables as fast as possible and will continue to do so, but it
is absurd to have a policy under which we pay billions to
countries abroad to produce oil and gas that we could produce at
home to ever higher carbon standards.
(Rother Valley)
(Con)
An Englishman’s home is his castle, so it is disgusting that
British Gas is forcing its way into people’s homes. What is
especially galling is that, five years ago, Ofcom sent a missive
to British Gas warning it not to do this, and British Gas is
clearly ignoring Ofcom—[Hon. Members: “ Ofgem.”] Ofgem. What
further powers can the Government give the regulator to ensure
that British Gas and other such companies cannot do this again
and to protect the sanctity of people’s homes?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We should all be grateful to
The Times and its journalists for going undercover and revealing
such behaviour—the processes were not followed. Ultimately, as a
final resort, we need a forcible installation of prepayment
meters in order to ensure that someone is not cut off entirely;
that is necessary, but every effort must be made to support
people, offer them payment plans, provide them with emergency
credit and the like. We are ensuring that we have a system that
does that. Ofgem has therefore since announced that it will
conduct a further assessment of supplier prepayment meter
practices, and we will back Ofgem to have all the powers it needs
to hold suppliers to account.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the SNP spokesperson.
(Glasgow North East)
(SNP)
It should never have got this far. We should never have ended up
in a situation in which we are now talking about compensating
people for something that should never have been allowed to
happen to them in the first place. Nor would it have happened if
the Government had listened to the many voices who have been
telling them this for months. Since I first wrote to the
Secretary of State in September—I am still waiting for a reply,
incidentally—prepayment meters have been mentioned 450 times in
this place and the other place, so the Secretary of State
feigning surprise at the weekend is just not acceptable. Nor is
stopping at this one aspect of forced switching, and nor is
compensation alone—these meters need to be taken away.
Why are we so appalled? It is because prepayment meters are
unfair, full stop. Whether they are forced on vulnerable people
or whether people choose to have them, they are unfair because
someone who is on one will pay more per unit of energy than those
who pay in arrears, which is most of us; they will pay more in
daily standing charges; and they will be automatically
disconnected the second they run out of money. That is why these
abhorrent practices, which have been going on for a very long
time, are so unfair: prepayment meter customers are treated
unfairly, full stop. Will the Minister ask the Secretary of State
to look at all aspects of prepayment meters with a view to
radically overhauling the entire unfair system? Does he believe
that energy should be a human right?
The hon. Lady says that prepayment meters are unfair, full stop.
That is clearly not true: they have a great use. What they should
do—
(Glasgow Central)
(SNP)
They are more expensive!
Where the charges are higher, it is because the system, which I
think was last changed when the right hon. Member for Doncaster
North () was Secretary of State,
has meant that Ofgem is under an obligation to ensure that
suppliers match charges to the actual cost of serving a customer.
That was the principle established under the last Labour
Government, and it subsists today, but I tend to agree with the
hon. Member for Glasgow North East () that we need to look at
this again. That is why we are looking at a reformed system for
the treatment of vulnerable customers from April 2024.
(Calder Valley) (Con)
It is welcome news that forced prepayment meters have finally
been stopped, but that is only half the story. The premium paid
by those who are on prepayment meters is also a scandal. The
least able to pay are paying the highest tariff because they
cannot afford the cheapest tariff—you couldn’t make it up. Will
the Minister update the House on what Ofgem is doing to radically
and quickly look at the matter so that this injustice is finally
put to bed?
As I said, the system for a long time has been that charges
should be cost-reflective, and it is more expensive to service
prepayment meters. We need to look hard to ensure that the
increase in prices, which has come as energy prices have gone up,
is commensurate with that before we look at the position of PPMs
overall, which we will do as part of our overall reform of the
treatment of vulnerable people. It is worth pointing out that the
last time a survey was done, only 30% of those who are in fuel
poverty had a prepayment meter, while 70% did not. Ensuring that
we have a system that is fair to all is really important; that is
why it is quite a complex job to make sure that we have a better
system than the one we inherited from the Labour party.
Dame (Llanelli) (Lab)
I am very disappointed in the Minister’s reply to the question
that my right hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster North () asked about a minimum
level of supply. It is utter nonsense to hide behind the idea
that it is complicated. I am sure that energy companies could
find a way of doing it. When will the Minister make them?
It is worth pointing out that emergency credit should be supplied
to customers and support should be put in place for those who get
into arrears. It is a failure of the existing processes and
duties that has been highlighted and has caused us to come before
the House today. We must make sure that companies do that which
they are obliged to do.
(Harwich and North Essex)
(Con)
Can we be clear about the fact that, inexplicably, what has been
happening has been completely legal? Nothing has changed since
the gas and electricity Acts of the 1980s, and, indeed, the
Rights of Entry (Gas and Electricity Boards) Act dates from 1954.
Can the Minister explain whose decision it was that the courts
should start issuing warrants for the forcible fitting of
prepayment meters online, with no judicial oversight or scrutiny?
Applications have been submitted in their thousands, and granted
in their thousands, without even a magistrate looking at each
case. Whose decision was that?
Of course I welcome the move by Lord Justice Edis to order
magistrates courts to stop the authorisation of warrants for
energy firms, and I will write to my hon. Friend if I can
identify the root cause of the original decision.
(Bath) (LD)
On 7 December, I presented a private Member’s Bill to ban the
installation of prepayment meters this winter, but the Government
chose to ignore me, and since then nearly 60,000 people have been
put through the misery of prepayment meter warrants being issued
against them. Will the Government now apologise to all the
households who had prepayment meters wrongfully installed, will
he force the energy companies to remove the prepayment meters,
and will he personally commit himself to ensuring that the
companies pay back the poverty premium that so many vulnerable
people have been forced to pay this winter?
I entirely agree with the hon. Lady. That is exactly the sort of
development we want to emerge from what has happened. We want to
ensure that prepayment meters are removed when they should not
have been installed, that people’s rights are respected, and that
if the processes that should have been followed have not been
followed, compensation is provided as well.
(Bromley and Chislehurst)
(Con)
It is clear from the evidence received by the Justice Committee
only last week and, now, from the statement made by the senior
presiding judge, Lord Justice Edis, that—leaving aside the merits
or otherwise of prepayment meters—the agreement by the judiciary
to deal with warrants in bulk resulted from their reliance on
assurances given by the energy providers that they had complied
with Ofgem’s requirements and that the representatives of the
energy providers, giving evidence in relation to each bulk
application, would swear on oath that the requirements had been
met. It is clear that in many cases they cannot have been met.
That must surely indicate, first, that the process itself is
flawed and should not be continued and, secondly, that there must
be an inquiry into not just the process itself, but the
suitability of some of those who are representing the energy
suppliers and Ofgem in court. Either they gave misleading
information by inadvertence or, potentially, they did so
deliberately, which, on oath, amounts to perjury. That is a very
serious matter which brings the court process into disrepute, and
it needs to be investigated too.
I thank my learned hon. Friend for his typically erudite
question, and I agree with him. That is why, two weeks ago, we
said that we would work with the Ministry of Justice to look into
this and ensure that the processes were suitably robust. It is
clear—not only, potentially, from court proceedings but from
evidence given to the regulator—that some suppliers did not
provide evidence on which we could rely.
(Feltham and Heston)
(Lab/Co-op)
The Minister will know that prepayment customers, many of whom
are the least well off in society, are charged a higher rate for
their energy; that has been mentioned by Members on both sides of
the House. Does he recognise the injustice of thousands more
families being forced on to prepayment meters, on his watch, and
on to higher rates at a time when so many are facing severe cost
of living pressures? Does he not accept that it is time for him
to step up and act further and faster, because this country needs
that?
As I have said, that situation has obtained since the Labour
Government introduced the current regime, and it is that
cost-reflective principle which leads to prepayment meter
customers being charged more. That was the position when the
right hon. Member for Doncaster North was Secretary of State, and
it still exists today. However, I agree with the hon. Lady, which
is why, within the existing system, I have asked Ofgem to seek to
ensure that not a penny extra goes beyond what is necessary to
reflect cost. We are undertaking to look again at the whole
system to ensure that it is fair to all, and most of all to the
most vulnerable.
(Stoke-on-Trent South)
(Con)
There are concerns that some of the poor practices around
prepayment meters may have been going on for some time. How far
back will the investigation look into these matters? Will it look
at some of the historical issues, particularly abuse of those
vulnerable people?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The Government will support
the regulator to look into this matter thoroughly because any
injustice done to any consumer must be identified and
redressed.
My constituent Mr Valmassoi has to move out of his home at the
end of the month because Utilita has taken so long to investigate
a potential fault with his prepayment meter that saw his bills
soar by over 400% in 14 days, despite no increase in usage. What
can the Minister do? Mr Valmassoi says that a refund nine months
later will not replace losing the flat that he has made his home
for the past few years. What can he and others like him, who have
been ignored and let down by providers such as Utilita, expect
from the Minister?
It is precisely for people who have been ill-treated such as the
hon. Lady’s constituent that we need to reform the system and
ensure that suppliers meet their licence obligations. It is the
job of the independent regulator to work with suppliers and
ensure that we minimise that. We would encourage anyone to pursue
the system of redress to make up for that as best they can. But
no one can make up for the fact that someone lost their flat and
home. They should not have done so if the supplier had acted as
it was under a duty to.
(Garston and Halewood)
(Lab)
Figures from the Ministry of Justice show that, between July 2021
and December 2022, magistrates granted 536,139 warrants and
refused 75—0.014%. It is inconceivable that none of those people
and families had vulnerabilities. I welcome the fact that the
Minister has said that the meters will have to be removed and
that compensation should be paid, but many of these poor and
vulnerable people are suffering now because they do not have heat
and electricity. What will he do to ensure that those people get
immediate redress?
That is exactly the purpose of the further work undertaken by the
regulator: to ensure that we have a system that is fair to all
and that, if there has been a failure of due process by
suppliers, it is rectified.
(Arfon) (PC)
On “Sophy Ridge on Sunday”, the Secretary of State said that
Ofgem had had
“the wool pulled over their eyes”
and had been taking companies “at face value”. Who was pulling
the wool, and what penalty should they face? Is the regulator
that allows the wool to be pulled over its eyes and takes
companies at face value—and the Secretary of State who failed to
deal with that in time—fit for purpose?
The hon. Gentleman asks a good question. I would not want to
encourage focus on anything other than the failure of suppliers
to fulfil their obligations. He is right that we also need to
ensure that we have a regulatory regime and a system that does
its job. As ever, we will keep that under review.
(Middlesbrough) (Lab)
It is interesting that the Minister is now blaming suppliers; he
was blaming Ofgem at the beginning. In the Business, Energy and
Industrial Strategy Committee last week, we had the retailers’
body Energy UK blaming Ofgem for not enforcing on its members
strictly enough. We cannot keep going around this, with Ofgem
blaming people who could pay their bills for not paying their
bills. The reality is that this is brutal. The Minister may not
have noticed, but he is actually in Government. He has to get a
grip of this to ensure that people are not in their homes
freezing to death. The cost to our NHS will be off the scale.
When is he going to take up his responsibilities, stop blaming
other people, put an end to this nightmare and make sure that
people are not having forced installations?
Of course, the Government have stepped up. That is precisely what
we have done with the energy price guarantee, providing £900 of
support this winter, plus the energy bill support scheme with an
additional £400, plus support through the benefit system for
those on benefits. The Government have stepped up to help people
and we need others to make sure that they step up and meet their
obligations. That includes the energy suppliers.
(Motherwell and Wishaw)
(SNP)
I hope I can be coherent, because I am so angry. People with
disabilities and their families face a monthly cost in excess of
£600 a month for a single person and over £1,000 for a family
with a disabled member in it. Right throughout this cost of
living and energy crisis, they have suffered more than double the
amount that normal households have. The Minister says he wants to
focus on suppliers who are not doing things correctly, but I want
you to focus on people who are—
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
Order.
I beg your pardon, Madam Deputy Speaker; I did say that I would
try to be coherent.
I want the Minister and the Department to focus on those who are
affected by this abhorrent practice and to stop it—not pause it,
but stop it immediately. When will he do that?
I thank the hon. Lady for her question. As I have said, the legal
decision today that no more warrants will be implemented is, I
think, the right one and should give her some confidence that
between the regulator, the suppliers, the justice system and
others, we will ensure that we have a system that is fit for
purpose and has the interests of people including the disabled
people she has highlighted as its top priority.
(Lewisham East) (Lab)
According to information from the Ministry of Justice, on 1
February The Times published a story revealing that British Gas
routinely sends debt collectors to break into customers’ homes
and forcibly fit pay-as- you-go meters, even when those customers
are known to have extreme vulnerabilities. Is this not just
another example of the Government’s failure to regulate our
broken energy market?
I would say no, because there are clear duties on the suppliers,
in this case British Gas, which is why I spoke to its chief
executive last week to tell him how disgusted the Government and
indeed the whole House were with that behaviour, that it was
unacceptable, that the proper processes had to be followed and
that we had to ensure that people were treated fairly.
(Glasgow North) (SNP)
I am not sure that the Minister answered the question from my
hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North East () on this, so I will try
again. Does he think that access to energy and electricity should
be a fundamental human right?
As the hon. Gentleman will know, my job as the Energy Minister is
to ensure that we have a strong, robust energy system that is
fair to everyone and most of all to the most vulnerable, and that
is what I will focus on. I will leave it to others to decide what
is or is not a human right.
(York Central)
(Lab/Co-op)
The Government’s job is to govern, but for months and months the
Minister has been sitting on the sidelines watching this car
crash happen, and it is the people of our country who are paying
for that. Why does he not bring forward legislation right now to
ensure that people on prepayment meters do not pay a different
tariff from everyone else and that the other corrections can be
put in place?
As I have said, the situation was created under the last Labour
Government in which suppliers have been obliged to charge rates
that reflect the actual costs to them of delivering a service to
someone. That, at face value, is the correct system. We need to
look at whether we need to change that system to be fair to
vulnerable consumers, remembering that most vulnerable consumers
are not on a prepayment meter. We have to have a system that is
fair for all.
(East Lothian) (Alba)
Almost one in five households in Scotland are off the gas grid.
Fuel poverty and the use of prepayment meters are greatest in
those areas because those households are reliant on unregulated
fuels and on electric heating systems, which have always been
more expensive. Will the Minister recognise that additional
burden, regulate those additional fuels and provide sufficient
support in those areas for insulation and alternative heating
systems, as well as financial support? The crisis there is even
greater due to the double whammy of people being off the grid and
in fuel poverty.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, and he is quite
right to speak up for people in rural areas who find themselves
in exactly the position he describes. I am pleased to say that as
of today, credits to electricity bills will be being paid to of
people who are on the electricity grid but off the gas grid—they
will be appearing from now on. We are determined to help those
people, which is why we announced in the autumn statement a
doubling of the alternative fuel payment from £100 to £200. That
money will be going to help those people, and the portal will
also open before the end of the month for those who are not on
either the gas grid or the electricity grid, so that they too can
apply and get that £200 support.
(Brent Central) (Lab)
It should not take a journalist going undercover for the Minister
to finally decide to wake up. I have been campaigning on
prepayment meters since 2015, and the Government are still
relying on energy companies to do the right thing. They are not
going to do the right thing, so the Government need to force
them. We have seen how quickly the Government can put legislation
through.
Can I ask the Minister to confirm three things? First, in
addition to providing compensation, will he remove prepayment
meters from vulnerable households? Secondly, will he make
prepayment meters cheaper per unit of energy? That is when the
energy companies will start changing how they act. Thirdly, the
cost has been significantly reduced due to smart meters, so the
energy companies cannot use that as an excuse, but the scandal of
smart meters is that energy companies can switch people remotely.
Will the Government ensure that that can no longer happen and is
outlawed?
I thank the hon. Lady for her question, and I am happy to confirm
the compensation. If prepayment meters were made cheaper, we
would have everybody seeking a prepayment meter and there would
be nobody left to subsidise the vulnerable, and most of the
poorest people do not have a prepayment meter. That question is
entirely aligned with typical economic policy from the Labour
party, but I do not think it contributes usefully to the
debate.
However, the hon. Lady is right to highlight the importance of
smart meters, and we want to see an acceleration of that
programme. Smart meters provide a much better service and are
cheaper to run, and I hope that as part of our plans for April
2024 onwards, when the Government support ends, we will have a
system that encourages the installation of more smart meters and
is much fairer to vulnerable users.
(Carmarthen East and
Dinefwr) (Ind)
Analysis by Citizens Advice Cymru indicates that around a third
of prepayment users in Wales have been disconnected at some stage
during the past year. Furthermore, there has been a threefold
increase in the number of consumers being switched to prepayment
meters. Do those stats alone not indicate that there is a real
issue with the way in which energy companies use prepayment
meters?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. The cost of energy
has gone up, and despite extraordinary interventions by the
Government, families are none the less finding it harder as a
function of the Ukraine war and of global energy prices. That is
why this Government have gone so fast in moving ourselves to
cheaper renewable energy and away from the—what was it?—just 7%
of energy that came from renewables when the right hon. Member
for Doncaster North left office. Now that figure is well over
40%. We are going to move to a cleaner, greener and cheaper
system that will be better for consumers in Wales.
(Glasgow North West)
(SNP)
My constituent had fallen into arrears with ScottishPower, but he
was complying with his repayment plan when ScottishPower demanded
the full settlement of his debt in December. When he could not do
that, he was forced on to a prepayment meter, which of course
compounded the problem.
I have two questions. First, the Minister has mentioned that only
30% of the most vulnerable are on prepayment meters. I would like
to know when that data is from, because it would be useful to
have a more up-to-date figure than that; I struggle to believe
that is still the case. Secondly, if energy companies are forcing
the installation of these prepayment meters, can the Minister
give the House an assurance that it will not be the vulnerable
customers who end up footing the bill—that those costs will be
absorbed by the massive profits that the energy companies will
make—and that prepayment rates will be on par with other energy
rates?
I will write to the hon. Lady with the exact date—I believe it
may have been 2020 or so—when 30% of those deemed in fuel poverty
were on prepayment meters and 70% were not. It is highly unlikely
that that would have materially changed in the period since so
that the ratios are reversed. I can give her the assurance that
there is no way that people who have been subject to the wrongful
installation of prepayment meters will be picking up the tab.
However, a complexity worth highlighting in the House is that
although energy generators may be making record profits, energy
suppliers have not been making profits in recent years, and we
need a system that is fair to consumers and ensures stability in
the energy supply market.
(Inverclyde) (SNP)
We have heard that the people who are struggling most to pay
their energy bills are often the most vulnerable in our society,
and they are being forced on to a higher tariff. We have also
heard that the appeals system is cumbersome and people may even
lose their house. The Minister has blamed the utilities companies
and Ofgem, neither of which have covered themselves in glory. He
has even blamed the previous Labour Government, of 13 years ago.
Does he not think that perhaps now is the time that this
Government should take their responsibility?
Under this Government, not only are we seeing the transformation
of our system to being greener, but we have seen the contracts
for difference, which are of course reducing the costs to
consumers, as those generators pay hundreds of millions of pounds
into the pot to help lower bills for everybody. This Government
have taken forward the greening of our energy system and at the
same time we are working towards a sustainable future that will
be fair to everyone, most of all the most vulnerable.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for his answers. Does he not agree that this
treatment of customers—of the disabled, pregnant women and single
parents with young children, some of whom were in hospital when
they were moved to prepayment meters—if not already illegal,
should be? What further steps will he take to prevent the big
companies from being able to trample all over the little man and
the little woman, not simply in this one aspect, but in the
overall treatment of the ill and the vulnerable?
The hon. Gentleman may always come at the end of the questions,
but his are rarely the weakest ones. He is absolutely right on
this. If we need to do more to strengthen the regulator, we will
do so, to make sure that, as he says, the people who feel
themselves to be at the bottom of the pile are not ill-treated—we
cannot have a system that does that. We have to have one that
puts their interests at the top of our list of priorities.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I thank the Minister for answering the urgent question.
|
