debates/debates2025-10-23b conversation_14
Source: hansard.parliament.uk (2025-10-23)

UK Parliament Hansard data: debates/debates2025-10-23b conversation_14

Shaun Davies:If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities. \p Darren Jones: This is my first appearance at the Dispatch Box as Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister. In this role, I have been tasked with modernising the state to build a system that will better deliver the public’s priorities and better communicate the changes we are making across the country. Sadly, too many political parties today wish to tear down our institutions and the public services we all rely on as the solution to the public’s frustration with a legacy system that struggles to deliver change, but there is an alternative. This Government are committed to renewal and delivering on the promise of change. We will build a modern state and better public services that are there when people need them. We will lead the way to a Britain renewed.

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will just answer the question from the official Opposition that I could not answer in substantive questions about when I was informed of the Crown Prosecution Service decision to not proceed with the case. I was informed of this decision after the Prime Minister. I should also inform the House that I look forward to answering more questions before the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy on Wednesday next week. \p Shaun Davies: Transforming Britain’s public services will be a mammoth task, but while the white heat of artificial intelligence and digital technology offer a revolutionary opportunity to improve performance and value for money in healthcare, tax services and everything in between, will the Government seize this opportunity to modernise our public services, working with the brightest and best industries across Britain? \p Darren Jones: The answer is absolutely yes. All our constituents know from their experiences at home, whether they are trying to do their banking, do their shopping or book a holiday, that they have the power to do it, when they want to do it, how they want to do it, on their phone, with services delivered in the way they want. That is in complete contrast to a number of our public services, and the public rightly expect, when they are paying tax money for public services, that we catch up with the private sector and deliver better public services that work in the way they want. \p Lindsay Hoyle: I call the shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. \p Alex Burghart: I thank the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster for giving us a degree more clarity. Perhaps he will give us a degree more clarity again. Was he told that the alleged case of spying against Members of Parliament was due to collapse before the information became public and, if so, who told him? \p Darren Jones: I was not informed. \p Alex Burghart: I believe the right hon. Gentleman, but I find that answer extraordinary, and I think he should find it extraordinary, too. As we have already said, the right hon. Gentleman chairs the National Security Council. He oversees the Cabinet Office’s national security secretariat. The Prime Minister knew, the Home Secretary knew, the Cabinet Secretary knew, the chief  of MI5 knew, the Attorney General’s Office knew, but the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister did not. Has he asked why he was not told, and what answer was he given? \p Darren Jones: The hon. Member seems to be confused by his list of institutions. The only relevant institution in this case is the Crown Prosecution Service. It is the CPS that independently decides whether to bring forward these cases, and it was the independent decision of the Crown Prosecution Service not to proceed. Might I just point out that the Opposition’s arguments over the last few weeks have been quite bemusing? They started with an accusation that there was political interference in a Crown Prosecution Service case. That was proven not to be the case, so they changed their argument and are now asking, “Why did you not politically interfere, because that is the way we do things in this country?”