14/09/2016 Daily Politics

Morning folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics.

David Cameron intervened in Libya without a coherent strategy

and on the basis of false intelligence, say MPs.

He only left parliament yesterday, but will these claims further damage

The EU faces an "existential crisis" in the wake of the Brexit vote,

says the European Commission President, but the UK should start

the process of leaving as "quickly as possible".

So what progress has been made so far?

We'll give you the Daily Politics Brexit Tracker.

Theresa May squares up for her third bout

with Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs - we'll bring you those exchanges live.

And re-drawing the electoral map to make parliamentary seats

roughly equal in size - but how well do MPs know

All that in the next 90 minutes of the very finest public

And with us for the duration - they were offered handsome fees

to appear on the other side, but they're sticking with the BBC -

the Mel and Sue of political broadcasting.

The new Work and Pensions Secretary Damian Green

and the former Labour Cabinet Minister Caroline Flint.

Thank you for being so loyal. I believe in public service

broadcasting. How long will that last? Until the fees are bigger.

David Cameron launched airstrikes on Libya on the basis

of inaccurate intelligence and without a coherent strategy.

That's according to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee

report, which also claims that the intervention resulted

in political and economic collapse, inter-militia and inter-tribal

warfare and the growth of so-called Islamic State.

It all felt very different back in 2011, when David Cameron flew

to Benghazi to stand alongside then French President Nicholas Sarkozy

and the rebel forces they had been supporting.

Colonel Gaddafi said he would hunt you down like rats,

but you showed the courage of lions, and we salute your courage.

No, just as your courage has written the last chapter of Libyan history,

so it must right the next one, and your friends in Britain

and in France will stand with you, as you build your democracy,

and build your country for the future.

We're joined now by the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select

criticism of David Cameron is easy in hindsight. At the time the

decision was taken on the basis of information available. Was it not

the right thing to do, to protect the civilians? We are clear about

how the decision was taken and that we genuinely believed civilians were

under threat. Our criticism is there had not been proper analysis done

before the decision makers of what the threat was to the people of an

Gazzi, what had been the modus operandi of Gaddafi in the previous

four decades? What had happened in the preceding weeks elsewhere in

Libya? We relied on one small part of rhetoric in a 70 minute speech,

which is pretty bloodcurdling, but then failed to analyse the entire

speech and the offer being made to the people of Ben Gazzi. Nor did we

actually understand what we were defending there. With the rise of

the Islamist elements, Islamist extremist elements of the rebellion

against Gaddafi. Was all of this David Cameron's fault? You say the

former Prime Minister was ultimately responsible for the failure to

develop a coherent Libyan strategy. This report looks at the initial

intervention. It looks at how the mission changed from one of

protecting civilians into one of regime change. And then looks at the

intervening period after the fall of Gaddafi on till now. It also makes

recommendations for the future, given where we are at now in Libya.

Of politicians at Colonel Gaddafi in his regime, was it right or wrong to

get rid of him. That is a perfectly proper position to take, you managed

to establish you have the moral authority to take regime like that

on, you have to make sure you have the legal authority basis which will

be more disputed but critically, you have then got to make sure you can

practically deliver your objectives, the first objective is a military

intervention to knock over the regime. We did that. But then what

follows, and if what follows is a collapse of the governance of Libya,

and the thing falls apart into its tribes and into the militias that

come from that, a massive growth in militias and a failure to control

the arms that were left behind by the regime, then you fail properly

to deal with the follow through. You say it was wrong because of the

consequences. That is what he seemed to be saying. There was a failure of

intelligence to look at the tribal problems that existed and the

potential for Isil to become part of the rebel forces. But intelligence

again is not the Prime Minister rock's. -- PM's. He takes it on good

faith? All of this is made clear in our report. What we have said about

the Prime Minister row is that ultimately be responsible at each

rests with him. The International can hit it, France in particular,

there is at least as much responsibility for the actions of

the international community in this area as does the United Kingdom.

Except, of course, the United Kingdom days have -- did have the

product of its engagement with the Gaddafi regime over the previous

years. Tony Blair's signal diplomatic achievement was the

disarming of Gaddafi and his missiles and his weapons of mass

destruction. And getting control, agreement from Gaddafi, to control

his literal so we did not have the problem of passage into the European

Union. Damian Green, when we think back to

Iraq, is the lesson, never use military force in the Middle East?

No, for two reasons. It is not like Iraq. Failure of intelligence, not

having a coherent plan... There was a UN resolution. Iraq was illegal.

There was a 17 country coalition. The Arab league supported

intervention. Still it was a failure. The best intelligence we

had was that Colonel Gaddafi was going to murdered tens of thousands

of people. The report says that was overstated. Thankfully, we will

never know. But if you are taking that decision in 2011, and somebody

tells you that unless you do something, tens of thousands of

people will die at the hands of a bloodthirsty dictator, the sensible

decision is to intervene. Even so, despite having a legal basis and the

agreement of a number of international nations, it was still

a disaster, according to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee at every

single level, and particularly the failure of intelligence, the fact

they underestimated the growth of extremism that then spread across

net -- North Africa, and to some extent led to the current migrant

crisis we have today. What was its success apart from, and we will

never know, defending the civilians of Ben Gazzi? Libya has been

terrible since then. You cannot set it in isolation. Look at Syria.

Syria, the West took the opposite decision. The West didn't intervene.

We only have to look at Syria to see that nonintervention can cause even

worse effects. Whether you go in or you don't, it is a disaster. What

happens to foreign policy in the Middle East if intervention does not

work, nor does nonintervention? You have to take a judgment in each case

as to what is the best thing to do and the legal case -- thing to do.

It maybe there is no good result. If evil people arrived there with the

forced to do evil things, the best you can do is mitigate them. You

cannot solve it all together. What has it done to David Cameron's

reputation? The is devastating. People will be able to take a

judgment. Libya is pretty terrible. Syria is even worse. I think you do

come to a sensible conclusion that to say in principle you should never

intervene or that this intervention was bad, it's probably wrong. The

answer to your question is, I don't think it will have that big an

effect. Do you think it is fair on David Cameron? I think it is harsh.

Focusing on David Cameron is particularly unfair. This was an

international coalition. And morally at the time it felt absolutely the

right thing to do, to protect the civilians. You defend David

Cameron's decision to intervene in Libya despite mistakes made

afterwards. Caroline Flint, was there a case for regime change?

There are consequences of doing something and consequences of not

doing anything. And possibly, in terms of Libya and Syria, because of

Iraq, and wherever people are on that issue, we have almost become

worried about talking about... We going to try to save initially the

massacre of 700,000 people, from what I understand. Clearly the

question has to be asked, what if that leads to Gaddafi running off?

Or a change in regime? It is a must as if we cannot have a debate any

more because of what has happened in Iraq. All of this is tempered by

what happened in Iraq. It is must stopping, I think, some legitimate

questions because we are all most afraid of asking those questions. We

have had some successes in Sierra Leone, in Bosnia. Pre-Iraq. We

always hear about the ones that haven't worked. Nonintervention has

an impact as well. Lord Richards felt we should have gone in more

comprehensively. There were no ground troops. The other thing is

there was a parliamentary vote by 500 plus to go in. It is not as if

Parliament did not discuss it as well.

It is such a confusing topic that even civil servants

are running around Whitehall, scratching their heads.

We all know that Britain voted to leave the European Union, but how?

This morning, Jean Claude Junker, the EU Commission President,

shed a little more light on the process, warning the UK that

access to the internal market relies on the free movement of people,

and that we won't be able to get "a la carte access".

He also said the EU faced an "existential crisis"

following the Brexit vote, with countries quicker to say

what they don't want from Brussels rather than work together.

Here on the Daily Politics we take our public service remit seriously.

So I am pleased to introduce now - drum roll, please -

our first Daily Politics Brexit Tracker.

One of the key questions is when leaving the EU

The short answer is we don't yet know, though Theresa May has now

said the process will neither be triggered this year nor be "kicked

But there is more debate about how Article 50,

which starts negotiations, will be triggered.

The Prime Minister says there was "no legal obligation"

for a vote in parliament, though this week a committee

of peers described that as "constitutionally inappropriate".

We do at least know who will be negotiating with.

For the European Commission, it's Michel Barnier, a former

And for the European Parliament, it's Guy Verhofstadt,

the federalist former Prime Minster of Belgium.

David Davis is our chief negotiator as Secretary

This week, he briefed peers and MPs on his

plans, but said that he would keep most of

He said his department now has about 200 staff and was full

but did not have "much grey hair yet".

We are also now a little clearer on the government's

The Leave Campaign's call for a points-based

Instead, Home Secretary Amber Rudd says she will consider introducing

So I am pleased to introduce now - drum roll, please -

our first Daily Politics Brexit Tracker.

One of the key questions is when leaving the EU

The short answer is we don't yet know, though Theresa May has now

If you were to think of this building as a temple, well,

Mr Verhofstadt is the high priest, a fanatic.

In fact, there is only one real nationalist

Because you want flags, anthems, armies, you are an EU nationalist,

and I frankly think that this appointment amounts to pretty much

a declaration of war, on any sensible negotiating process.

You can see Mr Research was enjoying that. That. The big questions are

unanswered so there is no point in going there. Let us look at some of

the issues that affect your department, Department for Work and

Pensions. Will it be your policy to insist

that EU migrants cannot claim welfare benefits until they have

been here for at least four years? As you know some of the welfare

rules were tightened beforehand, but what we will get at the end of the

negotiations, in terms both of benefits of EU citizens in this

country or indeed British citizens living in EU countries is precisely

the sort of thing that will go into... We don't know yet. We don't

know yet. But it was a Conservative manifesto pledge that EU migrants

would have to live here for at least a minimum of four years, so that

pledge is now off the table? That was clearly a pledge in an era when

we were in the EU. Now you can do it. What he welcome back will be

doing over the NEC two years is negotiating what is the best deal

for Britain. Will you ask for more or less? Forgive me if I don't set

out our negotiating position live on television. You put it live on the

manifesto when you wanted our votes, what about requiring EU job-seekers

to leave this country, if they can't find a job within six months? Will

that be DWP policy? Well, a DWP doesn't have a policy, the

Government has a policies, and again. It is your department. We can

go through the details if you like, but all will be part of the

negotiations, as David Davis made clear nobody going into negotiation

saying these are what our red lines are. That was also in your

manifesto. Are you saying that the manifesto promise to end the ability

of EU job-seekers to claim any job seeking benefits at all, and added

if they haven't found a job within six months they will be required to

leave, a pledge on which you got elected, that is not extant either?

Since that manifesto was written, we have had the big event of the

referendum, so we are now in a different world where we will be

leaving the European Union, over the next few years. That I understand.

But you couldn't do this by staying in the EU, that is why you had

negotiations about some of these things and you certainly didn't get

your own way, how we are heading out of the EU I am trying to get an idea

of what is the policy going to be now you are free to do what you

want? The policy will end up with what is in the negotiations, we will

obviously be asking for lots of things in negotiations, and the

other side, as Jung, you have pointed out -- Jean-Claude Juncker,

you have pointed out set out an opening position, that is what will

happen in public, in private over the next two, two-and-a-half years,

there will be those negotiations. What... I can't tell you in a TV

studio. What about child tax, child benefit, one of the big complaints

was you, if you were an EU migrant, but your children weren't here, you

could still claim it and send it back. Are you going to change that?

Well, as I say, all of these things we have set out in the past, that we

think would be good ideas, they are all possibilities in the

negotiations. What I can't do, because it would not be sensible for

the interests of this country would be for ministers to say this is our

negotiating stance and this is what we will do next. You were tasked by

the Prime Minister with coming up for a plan for Brexit, can you give

us, no, I mean it was June 23rd we took the vote, can you give us no

idea of what the Government's position will be on any of these

fundamental issues? I wouldn't say it in public because we will be

negotiating them, negotiating with our former European partners, still

our existing partners, countries we want to stay friendly with, we want

too have a friendly negotiation so megaphone diplomacy s TV diplomacy

would not be sensible. I am not asking for that, I am asking on

behalf of the viewers whether you stand by what you promised if your

manifesto to get elected. It would seem the answer is either you can't

tell me or no you don't. The answer is that I am not going to go into

the detail of what we will be negotiating on because it is a

negotiation and your viewers as well as everyone else sensible will know

that you don't go into a negotiation saying in public beforehand, what

the details are. Hold on, David Cameron did to negotiate the deal he

recommended to the British people to stay in, he told us exactly what he

was looking for and allowed us to judge. Why was it different then and

from now? The position now is that we know we are having to negotiate

every aspect of our relationship. I am asking you about your ministerial

responsibility. The same will be true for every individual

department. That it is just not sensible to do it. And it is not for

the purpose of protecting politician, it is for the purpose of

having a successful negotiation. Compton Labour Party Caroline Flint.

If you don't know, just say. Jeremy Corbyn has said he wants Article 50,

which begins the negotiation process, to be triggered right away.

Is that still Labour policy? I think it is sort of a move. He said that

straight after the European referendum. I think there has been

more influence to bear on that to say that moving straightaway is not

a good idea. You can't just hang on forever, so I think we will see it

probably February time or so. Early in the New Year. That is an

understanding. Is that Labour's policy I don't know. But I know I

haven't heard Jeremy Corbyn say that is where we should go. He also said

that Britain should... We have got a leadership contest at the moment. I

understand makes it difficult. He said Britain should reject key

aspects of the single market when we leave the EU. Do you agree with

that? I think it depends what you are talking an. Do you know what he

is talking about? He has done another speech in which he accepted

the single market is important for British business, but what he has

said, interestingly, on the points you were raising today, around let

us talk about it, it is immigration, that was a top issue for many

people, is that we do have to look at whether or not the free. Do of

movement of worker, particularly in the low skill, low pay sector could

carry on as it was before. But he wanted, according to a briefing, he

wanted to ditch some of the rules which other members see as integral

part of the single market, is that realistic? Again, part of this is

about what we are talking about. If you want to have free tariffs,y is

what we have you have to accept certain rule, that is rules about

how you deal with private sector businesses as well. That is part of

it. Again I would have to say in honesty I think in the Labour Party,

we are still working our way through exactly what this should mean, and

that is why looking at your previous film clip, it is important that

Parliament is involved in these discussions. Doncaster you

represent. Overwhelming voted to leave the EU, 69-31%. Despite your

views to stay in. How do you think Doncaster feels about Mr Owen Smith

saying he wants to pledge to take Britain back in to the European

Union? I believe we should respect the vote. I think it is legitimate

to say that once we get to the point where we have an idea about what the

shape of Brexit is going to look like, it may be we will have a

general election, in which people will be able to vote on that and

decide whether they support that model. It may be that a referendum

just to confirm that as the model would be the right way forward. I

personally don't believe we can rerun the referendum to say actually

we are going to turn over what has been decided in June and go back in.

You are an Owen Smith supporter, do you think the next Labour manifesto

should contain a pledge to rejoin the European Union? No. Because do

you agree that such a pledge, if we were to leave, and then attempt to

rejoin, that it would entail joining the euro, joining Schengen, losing

the rebate, we would never get the rebate back. It would be all these

things, agreed? Yes I agree. You cannot, I mean this is the problem

for Scotland as well when it has talked about if they go for

independence and come out, those are the same issues that face anybody

who wants to rejoin as a new member, at the moment to be fair Andrew, the

most important priority in the table is this, a decision was made, the

majority went in favour of leave. We have to make the best of this for

the people of the country. I have to say I think we can't avoid Damian,

that the immigration was one of the top issues I understand that. We

have to say that out friend. As you say, we have a leadership election,

you have been back Owen Smith, so, you can't be comfortable that Owen

Smith has made a pledge which implicit in it is joining the euro,

joining free movement Schengen, going back in without a rebate, that

350 million a week on the Brexit bus would be a more realistic figure for

once if we did that, when you look at how Labour voters in the north of

England voted by substantial majority to leave, what is the

thinking, why has he said this? I am supporting Owen for a whole number

of reasons, but I days degree with Owen in terms of the idea that we

should have another referendum to redo the decision we made in June of

this year. I also think there are consequences, if you know, by, we

come out before the next general election, understandably, and we

have seen it in terms of what Juncker said this morning, there

won't be any easy deal for the UK in terms of the negotiation, and if we

are out we will have to come in on the rules of that club, so I think

there are issues here, in which there are different views within the

Labour Party about how we should proceed. I think we have to deal

with what he have got, make the best of it and deal with the concerns of

the British people... Do most of his supporters feel like you? MPs? There

clearly are some MPs and they have been public about this who feel we

should have a rerun, there is maybe some Conservatives who might be

saying that as well. The truth is, we have come out of what the biggest

vote we have made for decades, and we are sitting here talking about

what does being out look like? And I I know, can I say one more thing, I

did a survey of my constituents post the referendum saying what did they

think their priorities should be, one was jobs, two was getting ?350

million a week back into the NHS, that is obviously not going to be

successful and three was dealing with concerns about immigration, on

immigration I asked further questions and it was the impact on

the low pay, low skill sector. That may explain why a lot of the

That may explain why a lot of the north voted the way it did.

Now, the BBC has lost the Great British Bake Off

And I'm afraid there's more bad news for BBC viewers this morning.

The Daily Politics Guess the Year format is reported to have been

The corporation says it was outbid by 20 pence, and simply

couldn't afford the ?1.20 needed to keep the popular

Jo and I have refused to take Channel Four's shilling.

We'll remind you how to enter in a moment.

But first, can you guess when this happened?

On this car Lord Stokes has based his hope for major sales in Europe.

Now it seems that Europe must again be kept waiting.

MUSIC: "Eye Level" by The Simon Park Orchestra.

# You can't plant me in your penthouse. #

I can only give you one gallon, sir.

That will get you to your nearest garage.

To be in with a chance of winning a Daily Politics mug,

send your answer to our special quiz email address -

Entries must arrive by 12.30 today, and you can see the full terms and

conditions for Guess The Year on our website.

It's coming up to midday here - just take a look at Big Ben.

yes, Prime Minister's Questions is on its way.

And that's not all - Laura Kuenssberg is here.

Welcome, do we know what the subject matter or do we have an idea what

the subject matter will be? We don't today. Maybe housing. That wouldn't

that surprising. That might make a return today, you never know, just

briefly, I come with news that we, I have heard from some sources we

expect the by-election in Batley and Spen replacing Jo Cox, the date is

likely to be October 20th and I pecks that Labour will move the writ

for that tomorrow. The Tories will probably also follow that, and the

Witney by-election is likely to be on the same day. That is in

expectation, so here we are, we will only a few short weeks into the

session, One I think in a safe Labour seat. And obviously a safe

Conservative seat. Neither would be likely to have unexpected results.

By-elections can give an edge to politics down here, people go off to

campaign, there are different things on people's minds so it will be a

interesting quirk of the autumn as we get going. One thing in the last

week we have seen time and time Genk even with a new picture of the new

cabinet released by Number Ten, just how different things have been

already under Theresa May. Almost as if I knew we had that. It is just

fascinating how many things have changed already, you know,

immediately we new knew the surplus rule had gone, grammar is on the way

back, and one member of the previous cabinet said soon there will be

nothing left, as if everything has been torn up. It is not the case

that everything has gone, everything has been junked but it is

fascinating that when we started talking about Theresa May as a

candidate her USP was said to be safe pair of hands, continuity that,

has proved not to be the case. And three big decisions coming up. On a

third runway, Hinkley Point the nuclear power station and will she

continue with HS2, of which there is growing criticism of the cost and

the time it will take. From a committee of MPs repeating some of

those concerns. Caroline expressed concerns about the certainty of this

project. Is it something that will balloon out of control, is it value

for money. On Hinkley, we have sort of been playing the hokey-cokey, it

has been on and off and then on, off, there was a strong expectation

there might be a Parliamentary state today. That is not happening,

everybody is looking to tomorrow. Greg Clarke has still not made his

final, final, final decision, there are four different inner Jos they

are looking at, the expectation from union sources and from business, and

from most people in Westminster is that it will happen, but I think

that it is most likely at this stage to be a yes with conditions, and

frankly, until which hear it come out of Greg Clarke's mouth I

wouldn't put much money on it. No. They are split between business and

political commentators, feel some of the political commentary didn't

think it would go or the price would be high, the business side did.

Indeed. I think that is the same, the different members of Government

have different view, and of course we know also that Theresa May's very

powerful, very smart, one of her chiefs of staff had articulated

public opposition to it before he was back in that job, from the

security angle of whether it was the right thing to involve China in the

nuclear industry in this country, so there are all sorts of factors in

that. In terms of consumers probably value for Monday.

Let me start by paying tribute to my right honourable friend, the former

member of Parliament for Whitney, David Cameron. He has been a

tremendous public servant both for his constituency, but also for the

country as a whole. Under his leadership we saw the economy being

stabilised, more people in work than ever before, people on low incomes

being taken out of paying tax altogether. This government will

build on that legacy. By extending opportunity to all parts of the

country. VISTA Speaker, this morning I had meetings with ministerial

colleagues and others,, and I shall have further meetings today.

Last week, the Prime Minister could not tell us whether she was in

favour of staying in the single market. As an Edinburgh MP, can I

tell her how important the financial sector is to the Scottish economy? I

wonder if she can tell us whether she agrees with her Foreign

Secretary that passport in for a financial services is guaranteed to

continue after the UK leads the European Union? I am not going to

give the honourable lady any different answer from the answer I

gave the House on many occasions last week. Which is that this

government will be working to ensure the right deal for the United

Kingdom in trade, in goods and services. And that includes

listening to the concerns of the Scottish government may wish to

raise, the governments of Northern Ireland and Wales as well. We will

be fully involved with the devolved organisations -- administrations.

The best thing for the financial sector in Edinburgh and the economy

in Scotland is to be part of the United Kingdom. Marcus Fish. Will my

right honourable friend join me in welcoming figures that show that

unemployment in my constituency has halved since 2010? And crucially

that youth unemployment has fallen by 12% in the last year. Will she

promote the value of technical skills and science and engineering,

in her poise for all children to have a good education that enables

them to go as far as their talent and hard work will take them? I am

very happy to join my honourable friend in welcoming the good

employment figures we have seen today. Unemployment has halved in

his constituency since 2010. That is because we have had an economic plan

and build a strong economy. He is absolutely right. As we look to

provide opportunities for young people, we need to ensure we

consider those for whom skills and a vocational education is the right

route. We want an education that is right for every child, so they can

actually get as far as their talents will take them.

Jeremy Corbyn. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am sure the whole House

will join me in paying tribute to the police constable who was stabbed

several times yesterday in the line of duty while trying to arrest a

rape suspect in Huyton. Can we wish him well and a speedy recovery. I

also wish the former Prime Minister well on his departure from this

House and well in his future life. I hope the by-election will

concentrate on the issues of education and his views on selection

in education. I want to congratulate the Prime Minister. She has brought

about unity of Ofsted and the teaching unions. She has united

former education Secretary is on both sides of the House. She has

truly brought about a new era of unity in educational thinking. I

wonder if it is possible for her this morning, within the quiet

confines of this House, to name any educational experts that back her

proposals on new grammar schools and more selection? Mr Speaker, first of

all, may I join the Right honourable gentleman in paying tribute to the

police constable who was stabbed in Knowsley? One of the events that I

used to look forward to going to every year as Home Secretary was the

police bravery awards. At that event we saw police officers who'd never

know when they start their shift what is going to happen to them.

They run towards danger when other people would run away from it. We

owe them a great tribute and our gratitude for that. Now I am glad

the right honourable gentleman has raised the issue of education. It

enables me to point out that over the last six years we have seen 1.4

million more children in good or outstanding schools. That is because

of the changes that this government introduced. It is because of the

free schools, the academies, headteachers being put in charge,

more choice for parents. Changes which I know the right honourable

gentleman opposes. What I want to see is more good school places, I

diversity in provision of education in this country, so that we really

see opportunity for all and young people going as far as their talents

will take them. Mr Speaker, I asked the Prime Minister if she could name

any experts who could help in this policy. Sadly she wasn't able to.

Can I quote one expert, his name is John and he is a teacher. He wrote

to me and said the education system and teachers have made great strides

forward to improve quality and delivery of the curriculum. And he

says, why not fund all schools properly and let us do the job? The

evidence of the effects of selection is this. In Kent, which has a

grammar school system, 27% of the pupils on free school meals get five

good GCSEss, compared with 45% in London. We role for spreading good

practice, but wide does the Prime Minister wants to expand a system

that can only let system down? -- children down?

Can I say to the right honourable gentleman that he needs to stop

casting his mind back to the 1950s. What we will be doing, what we will

be doing is ensuring that we are able to provide good school places

for the one and a quarter million children who are in schools that are

failing, inadequate or need improvement. Those children and the

parents of those children know, they are not getting the education that

is right for them and the opportunities that they need. When

we look at the impact of grammar schools, if you look at Thame and

for a disadvantage and non-disadvantaged children, the

attainment gap in grammar schools is virtually zero. It isn't in other

schools. It is opportunity for young people to go where their talents

will take them. I know that the right honourable gentleman believes

in equality of outcome. I believe in equality of opportunity. He believes

in levelling down. We believe in levelling up.

CHEERING. Mr Speaker, equality of opportunity

is not segregating children at the age of 11. So let me quote the

Institute for Fiscal Studies, which says those in selected areas who do

not pass the 11 plus, do worse than they would have done in a

comprehensive system. The Secretary of State for Education suggested on

Monday, that new grammar schools may be required to set up feeder primary

schools in poorer areas. We'll be children in these feeder primaries

get automatic places in the grammar school? Will they be subject to

selection? What we are doing is setting up a

more diverse education system that provides more opportunities. And

what the right honourable gentleman appears to be defending is the

situation we have at the moment, where there is selection in our

school system but it is selection by house price. I think we want to

ensure that children have the ability to go where their talents

take them. Can I just gently remind the right honourable gentleman... He

went to a grammar school. I went to a grammar school. It is what got us

where we are today. But my side... My side might be rather happier

about that than his. Mr Speaker, the two things the Prime

Minister and I have in common is we can both remember the 1950s, and we

can both remember going to a grammar school. My point is simply this,

every child, every child should have the best possible education they can

have. We don't need and never should divide children at the age of 11, a

life changing division, where the majority end up losing out. I notice

she did not answer my question about feeder primary schools. On Monday,

the Secretary of State for Education said, we have not engaged much in

the reform of grammars. But the government would now start the

process. Can the Prime Minister confirm whether existing grammar

schools, like those in Kent and Buckinghamshire, will now be

instructed to widen their admission policy by the government? The right

honourable gentleman is right that what we are looking and consulting

on is it diversity provision in education. We want to make sure that

all grammar schools actually do the job that we believe is important,

which is providing opportunities for a wide range of pupils. There are

many examples across the country of different ways that is done through

selective education. But he talks about good education for every

child. That is what our policy is about. There are 1.25, one and a

quarter million children today, who are in schools that are not good or

outstanding. There are parents today who fear that their children are not

getting the good education to enable them to get on in life. I believe in

the education that is right for every child. It is the Labour Party

that has stifled opportunity, stifled ambition in this country...

It is the Labour Party that is willing members of the Labour Party

will take the advantages of a good education for themselves, and pull

up the ladder behind them for other people.

I am sorry that the Prime Minister was unable to help anyone in Kent of

Buckinghamshire in the answer to my question and presumably she will

have to return to it, but, it is not about putting up ladders it is about

providing a ladder for every child. Let me quote her a critic of grammar

schools. There is a kind of hopelessness about the demand to

bring back grammars, an assumption that this country will only ever be

able to offer a decent education the a select few, the quote goes on to

say, I want the Conservative Party to rise above that attitude. Not my

words, those of the former right honourable member for Whitney. Isn't

he correct, that what we need investment in all of our school, a

good school for every child, not this selection at the age of 11.

What we need is a good school for every Chile and that is what we will

be delivering with the policy that we have announced. And -- child, and

with that policy, we will see, we will see universities expanding

their support for school, we will see more faith schools being set up,

we will see independent schools increasing their support for schools

in the state sector, a diversity of provision of education is what we

immediate to ensure good school places for every child. That good

school place is important so young people can take opportunities, and

get into the workplace and I notice I think this is the right honourable

gentleman's fifty question. He hasn't yet welcomed the employment

figures today. -- fifth. More people, more people in work than

ever before, wages rising above inflation, that is more people with

a pay packet, more money in those pay packets what would Labour offer?

More taxation and misery for working family, it is only the Conservative

Party that knows you can only build an economy that works for everyone

when even has an opportunity for work.

Mr Speaker, of course I welcome anyone that has managed to get a

job, I welcome those people that have managed to get jobs and keep

themselves and their families together. The problem is, that there

are now almost a million of them on zero hours contract, who do not know

what they are going to be paid from one week the the other. In order to

help her with the expertise on the reform of secondary schools, could I

quote to her the Chief Inspector of Schools who said the notion that the

poor stand to benefit from the return of grammar schools strikes me

as tosh and nonsense. Isn't all this proof that the

Conservative Party's green paper addressing none of the actual crises

facing our schools system. Real terms cut in schools budget, 500,000

pupils in supersize classes, a crisis in teacher recruitment and

retention. Rising number of unqualified teachers in classrooms,

vital teaching assistants losing their jobs, isn't this the case of a

government heading backwards, to a failed segregation for the few, and

second classed schooling for the many. -- class. Can't we do better

than this? Well, I have to say, I have to say to the right honourable

gentleman, that he has got some of his facts wrong. Plain and simple.

They, we have more teachers in our schools today, than in 2010. We have

more teachers joining the profession than leaving it. We have fewer

pupils in supersize classes, than there have been previously, but I

simply say this to the right honourable gentleman, first of all,

that he has opposed every measure that we have introduced to improve

the quality of edge kietion in this country. -- education, he has

opposed measures that increase parental choice, that increase the

freedom for head teachers to run their school, he has opposed to

opportunity for people o set up free school, they are leading to

improvements in our education system and we will build on those with our

new policies. But I recognise to the, for the right honourable

gentleman, this may very well be the last time that he has an opportunity

to face me, across this despatch box.

Certainly... Certainly if his Members of Parliament have anything

to do with it. I accept that he and I don't agree on everything, well,

probably we don't agree on anything, but I must say to him that he has

made his mark. Let us just think of some of the things that the right

honourable gentleman has introduced. He wants coal mines without mining

them, submarines without sailing them and he wants to be Labour

leader without leading them. One thing we know, who ever is Labour

leader, after their leadership election, it will the country that

loses. Can I just point out to the House

that progress today at this Question Time session has been absurdly slow,

absurdly slow. And I ask, order, I ask the House, on behalf of our

constituents to show some respect for those colleagues who want to

question the Prime Minister. And I am determined to get down the list.

Craig Williams. Thank you. Students from Cardiff

schools and UK schools attended the recording of the British Holocaust

survivors giving their testimony for future generation. It was a moving

experience for them and a stark reminder to fight racism,

anti-Semitism and hatred in all forms, as part of this vital

education effort of which I know my right honourable friend is a

supporter is the establishment of a national memorial to the Holocaust,

could my right honourable friend update us on this I am grateful. He

is right that we need to ensure that we never forget the horrors of the

Holocaust and the lessons that must be learned from that. It is right

that we have agreed this national memorial, next to Parliament on

Victoria garden, that is an important place for it to be. The

community's secretary will launch a competition for the design of that

them mall and included among that will be the possibility of a

learning centre, which will ensure that there will be those

opportunities for young people and others truly to learn that the

lessons from the Holocaust and to learn about the appallings a Troyes

the -- atrocities that took place. Last week the Prime Minister was one

willing or unable to give assurances about remaining in the European

single market. Today she has been unwilling or unable to give

assurances to the financial sector about protecting the passporting of

financial services, meanwhile, millions from across the United

Kingdom depend on freedom of movement across the EU for business

and for pleasure, they face the prospect of having to apply and

possibly pay for visas, is the Prime Minister in favour of protecting

visa free travel? Yes or no? There was a very clear message from the

British people at the time of the referendum vote on June 23rd, that

they wanted, that they wanted to see an end to Freeman as it operated,

they want to see control of the movement of people from the European

Union, into the UK, and that is what we will deliver. Free movement. Mr

Speaker, the Prime Minister and the UK Government are totally unwilling

to tell us the true cost of Brexit and what their negotiating position

will be, in contrast there is a different tune from the European

Union union, there knew any away for Guy Verhofstadt said it is wrong

that Scotland might be taken out of the EU when it voted to stay. Stay.

Does she agree with Guy Verhofstadt and the Scottish Government, who

want to protect Scotland's place in Europe? I have to say to the right

honourable gentleman, it is all very well him asking that question but

only two years ago, only two years ago, he didn't want to protect

Scotland's place in the European Union because he wanted Scotland to

leave the EU? -- UK? And on all of these questions, whether it is the

question of the referendum, for leaving the European Union, the

referendum on independence in Scotland, or questions in this

House, the right honourable gentleman seems to think that if he

asks the question all the time, he will get a different answer. I won't

work for me and I won't work for the Scottish people. Thank you Mr

Speaker. Freedom of speech is a fundamental British value. Which is

undermined by so call safe spaces in our universities where a sense of

entitlement by a minority of students that means their wish not

to be offended shuts down debate. As students around the country return

to their places of learning, at the start of this new academic year,

does my right honourable friend agree that university is precisely

the place for lively debate, and that fear of being offended must not

trump freedom of speech. Well, I absolutely agree with my

honourable friend, we want our universities not just places of

learning but places where there can be open debate where people can be

challenged and get involved in that. I think everybody is finding this

concept of safe spaces extraordinary. We want to see that

innovation of thought taking place, that is how we develop as a country,

as a society, and as an economy, and I agree with my right honourable

friend. Mr Speaker, nine-year-old Mohammed is one of thousands of

child refugees alone in Syria, his parents fled the country believing

he was dead and have Vetteled in my constituency of Midlothian, in March

he was identified as being alive, he has been kidnapped, beaten and left

for dead before being refound again. He lives in fear of daily attacks or

sexual violence and assault. With the Prime Minister agree to meet

with me to review the steps the Government could take to reunite

Mohammed with his devastated family, and provide him with what is

required to help overcome his ordeal. I am not aware of the

details of the case. The Home Secretary has heard him, I am sure

if he would like to write to the Home Secretary, there are rules that

enable family reunion to take place and also we are as a country,

taking, have committed to take a number of children who are

particularly vulnerable, potentially vulnerable from sexual violence from

the region round Syria, to ensure that we can Vettel them in the UK

and take them out of that fear that they are seeing, but my right

honourable friend the Home Secretary will look at it if he cares to

write. What assurance can my right honourable friend give that whatever

criteria comes to guide our immigration system, it will be

fairer than the present system? It will no longer discriminate peoples

from outside the EU, as the present system does. The, as I mentioned

earlier in response to a question, it is the case that one aspect of

the vote on the ifrd June was that people wanted us to control movement

from the European Union into the UK, and of course, we are already able

to control movement from outside the European Union into the United

Kingdom, and we intend to, details of the system we will introduce for

EU citizens are currently being worked on, but I can assure my right

honourable friend we will have the ability to control movement from the

EU, and movement from outside the EU, and therefore bring that greater

degree of fairness that I think people were looking for.

How can she try and justify reducing the House of Commons to 600, while

the House of Lords now have 820 members and by 2020 even more. Is

this her idea of democracy in the 21st century? I have to say, of

course, the House of Commons voted for that reduction in the number of

members of Parliament. I think people wanted to see that. But I

would gently remind him when he refers to the House of Lords, and

changes in the House of Lords, that it is this Government that has

introduced the retirement procedure for the House of Lords that has soon

a reduction in the member of the House of Lords. The NHS five year

forward view, states that in future we will see more care delivered

locally. Does the Prime Minister think that in line with that, the

Cambridgeshire MP, ought to consider the importance of loaningle care

when assessing the future of the Princess of Wales minor injuries

unit in Ealing. My right honourable friend is right. The five year plan

does include that proposal for local, more local input, and it is

absolutely right that in looking at for example the future of minor

injuries unit Lokes should consulted. I understand there is to

be a meeting to consider this an I hope she will be able to make their

views known as that meeting. Tomorrow, I will be helping to

launch a programme at the engineering company ADI Group. To

boost the interest of 14-16-year-olds in engineering

skills. Now doubt the Prime Minister would like to join me in

congratulating ADI Group but would she take it from me that her words

of gloition would mean more if they were not accompanied of between cuts

between 30 and 20% in apprenticeship fund, a programme the industry has

described as a car crash. Well, I of course am happy to

commend the company he has referred to, and of course, the West Midlands

are important, driver in terms of engineering skills in this country,

but I simply don't recognise the situation he set out in relation to

apprenticeship, we have seen two million created over the last six

year, we are commits as a government to seeing more being created, that

giving young people opportunities, like the young people I met when I

went to jaguar Land Rover, to learn a skill to get into a job, to get

into the workplace and get on where their talents will take them.

Does the Prime Minister agree that the life chances of many children

particularly the poorest areas are limited through living in chaotic

and unstable household, and would she kindly look at the all party

Parliamentary children centre report produced which recommends family

hubs in local communities and other solutions to this issue, with a view

to considering it further? Thank you. Can I say, commend my right

honourable friend on the work she is doing on the all party Parliamentary

group. The question of that stable background, that family background

that young people are brought up this is an important issue and she

has been a champion for families and for family life. I, can I say to her

I have set up a policy route with, led my right honourable friend the

member for Mid Norfolk, I am surely ask him to look carefully at the

report that has come out of the all party Parliamentary group. On Monday

the Parliamentary advisory group on carbon capture published their

report about the potential of CCS to create thousands of job, save the

country billions and play a major role in meeting emission targets.

CCS is critical to say side. Can the Prime Minister tell the house when

the Government will publish its long-awaited new strategy? Thank

you, thank you. I can I first of all say, that the issue of climate

change of reducing emissions and our energy policy are very important to

this Government, we have a fine record in this area and we will be

continuing to, continuing to do that. But, on the issue of carbon

captured and storage, this has been looked at carefully in the past. It

is one of the key issues round is the cost, we will continue to invest

in the development of CCS, we are developing over 120 million to

develop the technology, through innovation support with the aim of

reducing its costs, and so we will continue to look at the role it can

play. I know that schools have to make the

best use of their resource, therefore I was shocked to learn

that schools in the north-west are charged ?27 million for their water

charge, will the Prime Minister agree with me, that schools are

important community hubs and will the Government make represent days

to Ofwat to change the banding guidance so schools are considered

community asset, rather than classified in the same way as big

business. Can I commend those who play a role

as school governor, she is right schools need to think carefully. The

approach does change but we are looking at the guidance to water

companies, in relation to how they can deal with schools and whether

they could be looking at schools and using more concessionary rates in

relation to schools. Thank you very much. The Prime

Minister may by a wear of last week's BBC Spotlight programme on

what was serious allegation of corruption and fraud round the sale

of properties in Northern Ireland. Can the Prime Minister confirm what

agencies will be investigating those and if the National Crime Agency

will be involved, and will he the report be publicly published in due

course? I have to say to the honourable gentleman on the specific

issue he has raise, if I may I will come back as he know the National

Crime Agency does operate in Northern Ireland on a slightly

different basis, and it will be necessary for the issues where they

are being looked into to ensure that the appropriate skills and

capability are brought to bear. Will write him a detailed answer to his

question. Will the Prime Minister give her full and enthusiastic up

support to the Presidents as they reach a crucial stage of their

negotiations which we hope will deliver a negotiated settlement for

a free and united Cyprus. I am happy to join my right honourable friend

in what she say, it is important I think everybody across the House

will wish these talks well, and hope they have a successful conclusion.

It has been two years since the Prime Minister set up the child

abuse inquiry, it is on to its fourth chair and last week, the

outgoing chair said it had become inherently unmanageable. Since the

Prime Minister appointed Dame Goddard to her position, will she

insist she comes before this House to explain herself, surely child

abuse survivors deserve an eggs plagues. On the process point it is

not for the Prime Minister to insist who attends before a committee of

this house. I understand as she been invited to attend the committee.

What I would say on the child abuse issue, she and I share, we share

across this House many honourable members a desire to see these issues

of appalling crimes of child abuse being looked into it. It is

important that the inquiry, she has set up the diary, many aspects of

this which are already in place and operating, and I am very pleased

that Alexis Jay has take on the job. She will do it very well and we will

have answers to questions that so many have been asking for too long.

Thank you. Child sexual exploitation is an issue that affects many

community, does the Prime Minister agree that shining a light on the

events of the past is the best way to learn lessons in the future, and

will she agree to an independent review of child sexual explore

tasting in Telford? -- exploitation. I think my right honourable friend

has just shown the cross-party's concern that there is on this issue

of child abuse and child sexual exploitation, it is right adds my

right honourable friend says that we are able to look into the abuses of

the past and the crimes of the past, that will be important lessons we

immediate to learn from that as to why institutions, that were supposed

to protect children failed to protect them. It is for the

authorities in Telford to look specifically at how they wish to

address these issues in Telford, but I am sure as my right honourable

friend the Home Secretary has heard her comments and I am sure she will

want to take that up with her. Following the successful

Hillsborough independent panel, will the Prime Minister now look at

setting up a similar review, of the biggest treatment disaster in the

history of the NHS, the contaminated blood scandal. Victims are still

waiting for answers and justice 35 years on. The honourable lady raises

very important point in relation to contaminated blood. I I will take

the point she has made and take it away and consider it. Obviously as

she will know that the reasons and the background which let to the

Hillsborough independent panel. I recognise that the concern people

have about contaminated blood and will consider the point she has

made. Will lead Prime Minister take this

opportunity to send a loud and clear message that the best way to secure

a harmonious society is not only for mainstream bidden to respect

minority traditions such as Diwali and Eid, but also that council

officials appreciate that minority communities should respect the views

and traditions of mainstream Britain. That means Christmas trees

are not festive trees. I do agree with my honourable friend. I'm not

going to comment or pre-empt the findings of Louise Casey's work and

her review. It is an important piece of work. I will join him in saying

that what we want in our society is tolerance and understanding, but we

also want minority communities to be able to recognise and stand up for

their traditions. We also want to be able to stand up for our traditions

generally as well, and that includes business. Would the Prime Minister

look very carefully at the calls from the Royal British Legion and

Poppy Scotland, for a new questions to be added to the next senses so we

can better meet the needs of our serving personnel in the armed

Forces, veterans and their families? In Northern Ireland, where such a

massive contribution is made to the Armed Forces in terms of service,

would she look at funding under the Armed Forces covenant so there is

equitable funding across all regions of the United Kingdom? I say to the

right honourable gentleman that I am pleased it was this government that

introduced the military covenant and has recognised the importance of

that bond and that link with those who are serving in the Armed Forces,

but also the importance in terms of veterans in our armed Forces. I have

not seen the request. That will certainly be looked at by the

Cabinet office when considering the next senses.

Does she agree that the cooperation between Russia and the United States

in respect of Aleppo sets a very important precedent, and it is in

the British national interest to redevelop links with Russia and then

we may be able to solve many more problems in that region? The

agreement reached between Russia and the United States about Syria is

important, and I think everybody in this House will want to see that

working, being put into practice and working on the ground. I would say

there have been a number of occasions where we have seen what we

thought were steps forward and sadly it has not been possible to

implement them. I hope this will be different this time and I hope it

will mark an important step. In relation to Russia, we should have

no doubt about the relationship we should have with Russia. It is not a

business as usual relationship. I made that very clear when I was

responding to the report on the murder of little and ankle. We

should continue with that position. George Howarth. Can I join with my

right honourable friend, the Leader of the Opposition, the Prime

Minister, Jane Kennedy, the police and Crime Commissioner on

Merseyside, in commending the tremendous bravery of the police

officers involved in a stabbing incident in my constituency

yesterday? And also, despite that, they apprehended the suspect. With

the Prime Minister acknowledge that the police, often in very dangerous

circumstances, are being asked to do more and more with fewer and fewer

resources? Once again, I join the right honourable gentleman in

recognising the work of the individual police constable, as he

says, apprehending... Three police constables, I apologise. In

apprehending well-being under attack. Our police officers bravely

go where others would not go in order to protect the public. They do

so much in the line of duty. But also when they are off duty as well,

they are prepared to go and face danger. On the issue of resources, I

would simply remind him that we have protected police budgets over the

period of the comprehensive spending review settlement. In the face of a

proposal from his front bench that we should cut them by 5% to 10%.

Order. It comes to an end, it is almost

quarter to one, almost a record for us. It will be remembered because it

was clearly Jeremy Corbyn's best PMQs since he became leader of the

Labour Party. He chose all six questions on grammar schools and in

a number of these six questions he had the Prime Minister on the ropes.

Which was interesting because the whole policy of grammar schools is

very much the Prime Minister's policy. Yet when it came to general

principles or to some detail in the policy, Mrs May struggled to find

the answers. It also produced what has been a unique situation since Mr

Corbyn became Labour leader which is that the Labour benches behind him

were wholly united in his questions, and in his general approach, where

the Conservative benches behind Mrs May were somewhat quiet and

strangely mute. We will see what the panel thinks in a moment. Let us see

what you thought first. Broad support for Jeremy Corbyn's line of

questioning. Claire said Theresa May defending the indefensible. The

announcement about grammar schools seems to have created as much talk

as The Great British Bake Off. Martin says the provision of grammar

school places is very low and there is not a credible plan to improve

thing, Helen says someone has given Jeremy Corbyn a shot of at Lynn and

he appears relevant. Mike says I failed my 11-Plus,

passed the 13 plus and went to the local technical college. I retired

with an MSC. If Mrs May thought the grammar

school announcement and everything that goes with it, would get people,

would be like throwing a dead cat on to the table to stop them talking

about Brexit, I would suggest after today she may need to find another

dead cat. Quite possibly. This is a hugely risky political project of

Theresa May's. She has decided it is very much her policy she wanted --

wants to bring this back in a complicated way, with all sorts of

caveats and ideas that are meant to sort of mitigate the idea it is

somehow a return to the 1950s, a Reto nightmare that many of the

modern Tory party find unpalatable. What we saw there, is the big

problem for Mrs May in getting this threw. Labour are united on this

policy it is probably the only thing they have been united on since

Jeremy Corbyn took over and the Tories are split. And I think she

was struggling there, to actually defend the policy, to give a clear

narrative of what it has... It is her policy. It is. This is one of

the interesting thing, if you look at the proposals in the green paper,

there are almost as many policies that seem designed to off set the

sort of stereo typical horrors of the gram mar system, as there are --

grammar system, as there are supporting them. This will be

difficult. One thing I would say if there were to be a vote tomorrow, it

would really struggle to go through, but Theresa May has decided it to

take a more old fashioned approach. Do a green paper, then a white paper

before getting to legislation and some Conservative MPs are seeing

this as a real opportunity to fight for a bits and pieces of thing they

want, because Number Ten is trying to have an open approach, allowing

people to make their own arguments I assume she can allow existing

grammar schools to expand. Yes under the existing set of, of rules and

regulations but even that is a fight. When it did happen under

David Cameron, it was something that had huge legal discussions around

it, it went on for months and only eventually did Nicky Morgan give the

green light for expansion of an existing grammar school under

specific condition, one thing that is important to remember, the

Education Bill called education for all, that forces low performing

schools to become academies, that is still going through, and what Number

Ten can't answer effectively is how the two pieces of legislation are

going to interact. This is a major set of reforms on top of a major set

of reform, that does not have broad and whole hearted political support

in Theresa May's own party, so very risky decision to have taken, there

is a lot of conspiracy theory about whether this was was to stop people

talking about Brexit. There was more to it than that. She believes in it.

She does. What is answer? To the To the point many people have raises

including Jeremy Corbyn, in those areas where there are grammar

school, those who go to them are hugely successful, or as successful

as some of the best private school, those that don't make to it the gal

mar schools don't perform as well as those in areas where there are no

grammar schools. The The answer is to improve all grammar school, my,

the other schools have got better, and they have got better for various

reason reason, one is a Church of England academy which has been

transformed out of all recognition and another one has been taken over

by an academy chain and the central point. You are a Kent MP. The

central point I would like an answer to the question, if you are an MP

from that area, you will know that those that don't make it to the

grammar schools in Kent do not perform as well as their equivalent,

their peer group in areas where there aren't grammar school, why is

that the case? There have been grammar school, you have had plenty

of time to put that right. That is not universally true. It is in Kent.

It used to be the case in old binary system if you like. I am talking

about now. I am too. We have got a much more variegated school system

than we used to have, and that is showing the improvements that we

have seen, what we are introducing with this and Laura is right, this

is a consultation followed by a white paper, following by ledge

laying, is another welcome degree of variation investigation, just as

schools can concentrate on arts or music, they can concentrate on

academic excellence.some Why do the grammar schools in Kent, why do only

3% of the children who go there on free school meals? They possibly

need to do better on that. What is the average in Kent? About 15, I

think. Correct. So three. Yes. There are probably independent day schools

do better than that. One of the things we are saying in the

consultation is that grammar schools need to make more. Excuse me Mr

Green, you are a Tory MP for Kent, Kent is a Tory run council, you have

kept these gram many schools going -- grammar schools going while they

have been killed off. With massive public support. Who I in 2016 so few

of the kids are going there, because the whole point of grammar school is

to educate those from poorer background, why are so few on free

school meals. Hasn't the council addressed it. You are a Tory MP.

There are new things you can do. This has been round forever. It has

not been round forever. The percentage of kids on free school

meals lower than the national average has been round since you and

I were in short trousers, we are going back a while. A lot of the

things that have been done to address the opportunities for

children from poor background has been the increased different types

of schools, that have been introduced both in Kent and other

parts, some of them going back to the Blair years, the idea that this

is wring bringing anything back is the central misunderstanding. The

Prime Minister made that point. It is clearly Labour is united against

either extending existing grammar schools or introducing new grammar

schools, what is not so clear, the Prime Minister talked about

diversity, is Labour in favour of academies, no? We are not in favour

of the forced academy programme, and but that was pushed, the

government... The Government had to sideline that We are not against

academy, what we have said is in areas where we have a mixture of

academies, free schools and on the free schools we were concerned they

were being set up in areas where we needed other provision and the money

Simoned off. What we have said is we don't agree with the idea which

sometimes is said about Labour that somehow local authorities should

control everything. We think the there needs to be at a local level a

sense, if it is the local authority or a commissioner, who can look at

how the schools are performing. I have supported academies, but the

truth is some, including my own area, have not done as well as

expected. But this is a... You would, you wouldn't allow any more

grammars, you would stop the creation of more free schools? There

is a question mark about them. If it is taking away money from needy

area, if you allow free schools to set up when there is a lack of

places in other area, I don't think that solves a problem. Would you

allow new academies to be formed? Yes, What is the difference? Look,

the difference is partly about academy, from what I with say, they

are more planned within the area, the problem about the free schools

is they can go to the Secretary of State for Education and decide you

can have one, with no sense of planning in the local area, can I

say something on the grammar school. I think it's a diversion, it may be

given they will have to come up with a Brexit model that doesn't please

Erne that voted leave it is red meat. It is not working. It is about

early years, poorest children are 18 months behind other, we have a

problem of getting good teachers into our schools. I need to

interrupt. You can blame the speaker for that. I would suggest that Mrs

May and her advisers need to have a meeting, and sort out what they are

doing and where they are going. There are two things, one is they

were bounced into revealing this policy long before they wanted to.

That is clear, they were not ready with the details when the storimphed

so this was rushed and it shows because they have not been able to

answer the questions. And the second? Huge political opportunity

here nor the Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn I am told didn't have his

extra Weetabix, he had jam and whether there was was a sugar rush.

Home-made. Maybe it was his own jam he had. Who noes? A much more

effective performance from him. We, no, no, no we have to leaf it there.

You have had your say. We need to move on. This is an important story.

Now, as MPs stroll out of the Commons chamber together

after PMQs, there will only be one topic of conversation

in the corridors of Westminster - what is happening to your seat

Plans to redraw the boundaries of parliamentary constituencies

in England and Wales were published yesterday.

It's all part of a plan to equalise the number of voters

in constituencies across the UK, and reduce the overall number of MPs

Some MPs are worried it could leave them out of a job.

So do our MPs know what their re-drawn boundaries look like?

Let's has a brief look at Caroline's. Don Valley. This is the

current boundaries for the constituencies in Doncaster. This is

for you, Caroline. This is Damian Green's, Ashford in Kent. Both of

you, redraw your boundaries they way they have been suggested by the

commission. I am hoping you will be able to talk and draw at the same

time. We have run out of time, I'm afraid! There is a consultation

period going on for about 12 weeks. And members of the public are

encouraged to give their view. It looks as if the two MPs do vaguely

know what their new boundaries will look like. You do not have to be

precise. Just a vague artistic idea. We will have Caroline's first. I

don't want to put you under any pressure. Then Damien has a bit more

time. His is very simple. There is no prize, Caroline. You hold it up,

turn it around. It is like Blue Peter! Caroline, your constituency

has moved to the east. I don't know if it is going to be my

constituency. It used to be aired by -- Ed Miliband on the top. Doncaster

Central is pretty much the same in the middle. Shift. Damian, you have

had plenty of time. Put your pen down. Turn it around. Quickly tell

us what has happened? The bit I have shaded in is supposed to go

somewhere else and the bits on the other side that used to be mine was

given to Folkestone and Hythe in a previous boundary review and they

are now proposing to give it back to me. What is wrong with these

boundaries? I think it does not take into account 2 million voters who

ref -- registered in the EU referendum. By reducing number of

MPs? People think politics costs too much. This would be fairer. Very

nice drawings. Sometimes you can have too much publicity.

There's just time to put you out of your misery and give

That's all for today. Thanks to our guests.

The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now.

Jo and I will be here at noon tomorrow, with all the big political

stories of the day. Do join us if you can.