Danny Kruger (25913)
This page contains possible times in debates that Danny Kruger may have disclosed an interest.
This match is loose and is likely to include false positives.
2023-10-16: Match score 70%
I declare an interest as the founder and chairman of a charity that works in prisons
2024-04-18: Match score 64%
I would be interested in hearing the Government’s response to that
2024-03-07: Match score 63%
I particularly welcome the extension to the household support fund. I have been calling for that on behalf of Wiltshire Council, to which I pay tribute for its really good work in supporting households in need with essentials such as food and utilities. That extension is a really important development. The Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, the right hon. Member for East Ham (Sir Stephen Timms), made the interesting suggestion that the household support fund should be made permanent. I recognise that there are voices on my side of the House who think that it is only a sticking plaster measure during these difficult times. I actually agree with the Chair of the Select Committee: it is important to ensure that local authorities have discretionary funding that they can use. They should be accountable to their local residents for how they use that money. I would like to see the money raised locally as well, but the principle of a discretionary fund for local government is important.
2024-03-21: Match score 62%
To make a quick point in passing, I would be interested in the Minister’s thoughts when he winds up about the nuclear budget
2024-01-17: Match score 61%
I have great respect for the argument that my hon. Friend is making, and I defer to his experience and knowledge on this issue. I am genuinely interested in his view: he has described a judge in the UK issuing an injunction late at night in the event of what, in normal circumstances, would be an individual situation. Does he really think it is comparable to describe in the same terms the act of a Court that is genuinely in another country and a judge who is anonymous and does not publish the rationale for their opinion, which calls a halt—with the support of the Government, it must be said—to the policy of the British Government, enacting a law passed in Parliament? Surely there is a difference, both of degree and of nature, between the two cases.