t: 020 7219 8155 e: fieldm@parliament.uk

Category: Speeches

  • March 4, 2010

    Crown Estate

    Mr. Mark Field (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con): I congratulate Frank Dobson on securing this important debate. I associate myself entirely with his words. As he will know, we have tried to work together, along with Meg Hillier. Underlying much of what the right hon. Gentleman said is the fact that the Crown Estate has traditionally been a very good landlord. The communities that it has built have been more stable than many of...
  • March 2, 2010

    Crown Estate

    Mr. Mark Field (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con): I congratulate the hon. Member for Ealing, Acton and Shepherd's Bush (Mr. Slaughter) on initiating the debate. As he will know, I have raised my general concerns regarding housing provision in the capital a number of times over the past year in the House. However, I would be grateful if you allowed me to take a slightly more parochial approach on this occasion, Mrs. Humble. ...
  • February 10, 2010

    Professional Football (Regulation)

    Mark Field (Cities of London & Westminster, Conservative) I am a lifelong supporter of Bury football club, which beat Macclesfield Town only last night to record a sixth consecutive victory. I was not going to bring up that sore subject. I congratulate Tony Lloyd on securing this extremely timely debate....
  • February 2, 2010


    Mark Field (Cities of London & Westminster, Conservative)The hon. Gentleman rightly makes the case for the benefits of extending Thameslink to each and every one of the 50 stations from the Sussex coast up to mid and, indeed, north Bedfordshire, but does he recognise that ensuring that we have sufficient capacity in the centre of London-this obviously applies to the Crossrail debate as well as to the Thameslink debate-is of crucial importance if there is not to be the overcrowding to which he referred earlier?
  • February 2, 2010

    Population & Immigration

    Mark Field (Cities of London & Westminster, Conservative) I warmly welcome today's debate, and thank my hon. Friend Mr. Soames for introducing it. It gives us the opportunity to discuss openly the challenges that we face over immigration control. Unfortunately, as has been alluded to by both my hon. Friend and Mr. Field, some politicians discuss this topic only when quick and populist headlines are required. That is regrettable because it reduces the legitimacy of immigration as an important issue to be discussed rationally and pragmatically.
  • February 1, 2010

    Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

    Mark Field (Cities of London & Westminster, Conservative) I agree with my right hon. Friend Sir George Young that it essential for us to put these matters on to a statutory footing, and I welcome the Government's determination for that to be done. As my right hon. Friend said, nothing would be more damaging to the reputation of parliamentary democracy in this country than for the allowances scandal to permeate the next Parliament as it has permeated this one.
  • January 26, 2010

    Constitutional Reform & Governance Bill

    Mr. Mark Field: The Lord Chancellor wishes to belittle the Earl of Stair and the Earl of Glasgow, but doubtless if they had been large-scale donors to the Labour party, they would have been welcomed as life peers for the remainder of their days. The Conservatives would be quite happy to go along with clause 29, if the Lord Chancellor had been true to his word. We made it clear in a Division in the House almost three years ago that we wanted to see how phase 2 would pan out, with an 80 or 100 per cent. elected House. Had he introduced that at the same time as the clause, we would have had no objection whatever, but our objection is the only safeguard to ensure that there is going to be a proper phase 2. Without it, we could wait 100 years, as he and Asquith have pointed out, to get rid of the remaining hereditaries. The risk is that if we allow clause 29 to go through, within 30 or 40 years, there will be no further reform, and the Government will have got their way.
  • January 26, 2010


    Mr. Mark Field (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con): I am glad to be able to introduce this important debate, because in the face of difficult economic times, a hitherto united front in favour of the Government's international development programmes is perhaps beginning to crack-not, I hasten to add, in Parliament, but among the public at large. As all politicians look towards cutting the vast budget deficit that we have run up in the past couple of years, some of our constituents-I suspect that this applies as much to Harrow, West as it does to the Cities of London and Westminster-are beginning to ask why we are reducing significantly assistance to British citizens when we continue to channel taxpayers' money into international development.
  • January 11, 2010

    Home Education

    I appreciate the opportunity to make a brief contribution to the debate. Given the time constraints, I hope that you will forgive me, Mr. Deputy Speaker, if I focus on the aspect of the Bill that is of particular interest to me: home education. Almost exactly one year ago, the Department for Children, Schools and Families launched an independent review of home education by Graham Badman. Fearful that it represented another attempt by the Government to intrude into their lives, two home educating parents from my constituency, Tina Robbins and Helen White, came to meet me in Parliament to see what could be done.
  • December 15, 2009

    House Of Commons Reform

    I welcome the fact that we are having this debate today and I thank the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central (Mark Fisher) for introducing it. Regrettably, I must say that I do not entirely agree with the thrust of what he said. I am afraid that the report to which he has referred was far too timid; it needed to be a good deal more robust. I accept that there was an element of compromise about it and one certainly hopes that at least what has been proposed in the report will go through as a starting-point to what I think will be a radical reform.