Sarah Olney (25596)
This page contains possible times in debates that Sarah Olney may have disclosed an interest.
This match is loose and is likely to include false positives.
2024-09-10: Match score 65%
I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, but it is important to reflect on the disastrous legacy of the mini-Budget and the circumstances that many people continue to struggle with thanks to higher interest rates on their mortgage payments. Certainly, from the perspective of my constituents, that casts a much longer shadow, which the winter fuel payment cuts will do nothing to ameliorate.
2024-07-22: Match score 64%
It is a real pleasure to contribute to the debate on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, not just because I am speaking on behalf of so many more of them than I used to, but because it gives me an opportunity to welcome the Chancellor of the Exchequer to her place and express my personal congratulations on becoming the first woman in the UK’s history to hold the position. I am personally delighted. I spent many years working in banking and finance, and I know how male-dominated those industries still are. I wish her well in her new role and look forward to working with her over the coming Parliament. The Liberal Democrats will be vigorous in scrutinising her plans, but we will always work in the national interest, and I can assure her of the support of the Liberal Democrats on all those matters on which we can agree.
2024-09-04: Match score 63%
We cannot forget that any spike in interest rates does not just carry grave consequences for the public finances, but has a huge impact on household finances and people’s living standards. We all witnessed mortgage rates skyrocket in the aftermath of the previous Government’s catastrophic mini-Budget, and millions of families are still struggling with higher bills as a result. It is therefore wholly appropriate that interest rates be taken into consideration when assessing whether a measure is fiscally significant. This Bill is an encouraging sign of this Government’s intention to act with more integrity and transparency than the last, but its provisions alone may not be enough to protect voters from the consequences of another disastrous mini-Budget if a future Chancellor or Prime Minister is so minded to deliver one. That is why strengthening the fiscal lock by broadening the definition of “fiscally significant measures” is such a vital safeguard.
2023-11-14: Match score 61%
While I fully accept that, does he not think it is in the Government’s interests to provide more substantial funding, because of the strategic nature of the river crossing? Would he consider the fact that, as I said earlier on, this is about more than local transport—it is a piece of strategic infrastructure? Therefore, responsibility aside, is it not in the Government’s interests to provide more substantial funding?
2024-03-15: Match score 61%
This is despite what is now overwhelming public interest to do so
2024-02-28: Match score 60%
My particular interest in pedicabs arises from their use as a means of transport in parts of the capital that are currently closed to motor traffic. I refer of course to Hammersmith bridge in my constituency in particular. We are shortly to mark the fifth anniversary of its closure to motor traffic, although I can assure the Minister that this milestone will not be celebrated with any particular joy among the communities of Barnes, East Sheen or Mortlake, or indeed wider afield, who have suffered ever since from the consequences of appalling traffic congestion.