Starmer pledges to review minimum barrier heights in multi-storey car parks
The Prime Minister said he wanted to 'prevent future tragedies', and the Government will conduct a call for evidence on minimum barrier heights in car parks.
This came after Labour MP Peter Dowd urged Sir Keir to back his calls to increase the minimum required height of guarding.
Mr Dowd's Multi-Storey Car Parks (Safety) Bill also proposes 24-hour staffing of such car parks, to improve safety.
During Prime Minister's Questions, Mr Dowd, MP for Bootle said: 'Gabe Santer, a 15-year-old, fell to his death from a multi-storey car park in Liverpool in 2020. He's one of the many dying in such tragic circumstances, including in my constituency.
'My Multi-Storey Car Parks (Safety) Bill seeks to prevent such deaths.
'Will the Government look carefully at its content as part of a national suicide prevention strategy?'
The Prime Minister replied: 'The answer is yes, we will look at the content of it, and I'm grateful to him for raising it.'
He added: 'Across the House, we have all got tragic experience of suicide, and our thoughts are with Gabe's family and with his friends.
'We will conduct a call for evidence on part K of the building regulations about minimum guarding heights, so that necessary protections are in place to prevent future tragedies. We will also look at the contents of the Bill.'
Defence minister Maria Eagle previously presented 'Gabe's Law' to Parliament in 2023, in a bid to reform the safety of car parks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
26 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Disabled people being left in limbo following 'chaotic' Commons vote on welfare reforms claims Lanarkshire MSP
The Bill initially proposed to slash eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (PIP Motherwell and Wishaw's MSP slammed Labour MPs for showing 'appalling disregard for sick and disabled people' following a 'chaotic' night in the House of Commons prior to the vote on the Bill for welfare reforms. The SNP's Clare Adamson claims that the Westminster chaos over Labour's proposed Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill was the result of dismissing disabled people. The Bill initially proposed to slash eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (PIP), a move which the government's own analysis showed that 800,000 people would lose support by the end of the decade. After months of backlash from disability and anti-poverty groups, an eleventh-hour change to the bill threw the vote into 'chaos and confusion', and resulted in The UK Government promising a review of PIP to be concluded by autumn 2026, which Ms Adamson says is leaving disabled people in limbo. A revolt by Labour MPs led to 49 of them voting against the motion but that number would have been far higher but for the government making a number of eleventh-hour adjustments to gain support for the Bill. SNP MPs voted against the plans, but only four Labour MPs out of 37 in Scotland eventually voted against the watered-down Bill following a five-hour debate in the House of Commons. Pamela Nash, MP for Motherwell, Wishaw and Carluke, who previously criticised the Tories when they were in government over cuts to disability support, was among those to vote in favour of the Bill. According to the DWP's own figures the undiluted plans would have driven 250,000 people – including 50,000 children – into poverty. The bill had initially proposed to slash eligibility for Personal Independence Payment (PIP), a move which the government's own analysis showed 800,000 people would lose support by the end of the decade. The Scottish Government committed to shield disabled people from Labour cuts by protecting the Adult Disability Payment, Scotland's equivalent of PIP, from any reductions. Adamson has pointed out that any Labour cuts would have a knock-on impact on Scotland's budget. Ms Adamson said: 'Labour has shown an appalling disregard for sick and disabled people whose lives will be affected by their plans. I cannot imagine how it felt for a disabled person to watch as their life and livelihood was bartered in real time. 'Shame on the Scottish Labour MPs who did nothing, those who backed the Bill when it would push 250,000 people in poverty, those who backed the 'deal' which would push 150,000 into poverty and create a two-tiered system. 'And then those who sat on their hands amidst the chaos last night. Chaos which was the direct result of Labour's refusal to meaningfully engage with disability groups; the people who said these plans were wrong from the start. 'The SNP Scottish Government confirmed that Scotland would not follow Labour's lead and would protect Adult Disability Payments. But the message being sent at Westminster matters - as do the spending implications for Scotland. 'These changes were going to be made before a review even took place. That is no way to run a country. Keir Starmer rushed through a deal in order to save his skin. It's indefensible. 'This saga has been characterised by cruelty, at worst, and indifference at best, for the real people affected. Sick and disabled people have been sidelined and now Labour MPs have voted to continue the uncertainty. 'It's time for meaningful engagement with the people affected by these proposals. That should have been done in the first place. This Labour administration is unfit to govern and Scottish Labour MPs showed they are not at the decision table. 'The SNP will always stand up for Scotland. And with the limited powers available to the Scottish Parliament, we will protect sick and disabled people in Motherwell and Wishaw, and across the country. But we need independence to be free of this for good.' *Don't miss the latest headlines from around Lanarkshire. Sign up to our newsletters here.
BBC News
31 minutes ago
- BBC News
Rachel Reeves bounces back after tears but challenges remain
It might be uncomfortable territory, but it's worth reflecting on just how unprecedented Wednesday's events in the House of Commons images blared across the media of Rachel Reeves in tears as Sir Keir Starmer answered questions from the dispatch box were devastating for a chancellor who has made having an iron core central to her public believe it is unfair for the media to note that the chancellor was visibly distraught on live television for half an hour. Yet the markets, which quickly responded unfavourably, did not wait for media coverage to decide to trade against counter-intuitively, those market movements point the way through this for least in the interpretation of many, the markets were responding to the possibility that Reeves might soon be replaced as chancellor, and that her replacement would be less committed than her to limiting government borrowing for day-to-day may be why the markets then bounced back when Sir Keir Starmer told the BBC's Nick Robinson that Reeves would remain chancellor for many years to brief interview this afternoon was also geared at reassurance, attributing her tears to a "personal issue" and a "tough day".She insisted she was "totally" up for the job of chancellor - and that she and the prime minister would continue to work in "lockstep together".It came after she made an unscheduled appearance at an East London hospital for the launch of the government's 10-year NHS made no mention of her tearful episode in the short speech she made about the health service and the there were smiles all around and a hug from the prime minister, who said it was "just fantastic that she is here".That's probably enough to draw a line under this excruciating episode. But the challenge for Reeves remains the same as it was just before PMQs is a straightforward difference of opinion between the chancellor (plus the prime minister and perhaps the bond markets), and a large group of Labour MPs. The gutting of the government's welfare policy - in a series of panicky U-turns - displayed this in vivid rebel MPs who forced the U-turns believe strongly that a Labour government should not be, as many put it, "balancing the books on the backs of the poor". But it's broader than just that. "If the chancellor comes to us in the autumn with a cuts Budget," one member of the government said, "Labour MPs will say no."Yet the chancellor, in turn, is firm in her belief that the markets will not wear further borrowing for day-to-day spending, and that therefore the choice is either spending restraint or tax rises. On tax, she is hemmed in by the promises she and the prime minister made during the general election fundamental tensions between what Reeves, Starmer and - it seems - the markets want on the one hand, and what the Parliamentary Labour Party wants on the other will have to be resolved before long.
Rhyl Journal
43 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Ofsted chief inspector apologises for short notice on school inspection reforms
Last month, the watchdog said it would delay setting out its final plan for school inspections until September – just weeks before new report cards are due to be rolled out in November. School leaders' unions have threatened to tell their members to quit as Ofsted inspectors unless changes are made to the timescale for inspection reform. Speaking at the Festival of Education, Sir Martyn Oliver, chief inspector of Ofsted, said he was 'sorry' about the delayed timescale as he acknowledged it was 'difficult' for schools. At the event at Wellington College, Berkshire, Sir Martyn called on school leaders to 'judge' him on the Ofsted's revised inspection model once it is published at the start of the academic year. Last year, the Government announced that headline Ofsted grades for overall effectiveness for schools in England would be scrapped. Previously, Ofsted awarded one of four single-phrase inspection judgments: outstanding, good, requires improvement and inadequate Under proposed report cards, set out in February, schools could be graded across at least eight areas of a provision using a colour-coded five-point scale. They would receive ratings, from the red 'causing concern' to orange 'attention needed', through the green shades of 'secure', 'strong' and 'exemplary' for each area of practice. During the Q&A session at the event on Thursday, Sir Martyn suggested that Ofsted ratings can alter local house prices by thousands of pounds because parents 'value' them. When asked whether Ofsted's new report cards could affect house prices, Sir Martyn said: 'Well, I don't know.' But Sir Martyn, who used to be an academy trust leader, spoke of how he had supported two 'special measures' schools where he lived and the house prices 'shot up' after they received better Ofsted ratings. He told the audience: 'They were both in special measures, both went outstanding, and the house prices went up £15,000 within a week. 'It does make a difference.' Sir Martyn added that 'parents obviously put a value on it'. Ofsted had planned to publish its formal response to its consultation on proposed inspection reforms in the summer term ahead of the changes coming into effect in November. But Ofsted will now publish its full response in September due to the scale of the feedback it received. When asked whether this delay was fair on school leaders, Sir Martyn said: 'I think that is difficult and again I'm sorry about that.' On single-word judgments, he added: 'We've been doing something for 30-plus years in a single way. 'If I look at my phone, there will be pictures of people standing in front of their schools with balloons, with an O, an U, with a T – 'outstanding', and local newspapers up and down the country celebrate. 'It happens all of the time, and we're about to take that away and change it to something else that for more than three decades people are used to.' Sir Martyn said: 'Here's a burning question, what's Rightmove going to do?' Currently, Rightmove includes the Ofsted ratings for local schools in its listings for houses for sale. In a speech at the event, Sir Martyn said children are increasingly receiving life lessons from influencers or 'AI-generated summaries'. The Ofsted boss argued that classroom learning with human interaction 'has never been more important' as many children spend much of their lives online. He said: 'Young people are growing up in an increasingly curated world in which their favoured influencers or corporate algorithms can have a disproportionate impression on their views and opinions. 'It's more important than ever that young people are able to lift their eyes from the screen and connect with their teachers, in person.'
