03/11/2015 Tuesday in Parliament

Hello, this is Tuesday in Parliament,

The International Development Secretary says more will be done to

help rescue refugees in the Mediterranean.

The UK will as of Thursday be deploying a new ship in the

Mediterranean. Police chiefs express concern over

the new way forces will be funded. And remembering the death of another

MP, who died in World War I. Britain is to send

a new ship to help rescue refugees The VOS Grace will be deployed

on Thursday, Justine Greening announced, in answer to an urgent

question on the migrant crisis. Migrants -

mainly those fleeing the conflict in Syria - continue to try to cross

into Europe, even though winter is starting to set in, and their

predicament has become even worse. In October this year,

more than 218,000 refugees crossed the Mediterranean -

more than in the whole of 2014. The International Development

Secretary said the UK could be proud Having been in touch with Frontex to

offer further support the UK will as of Thursday be deploying a new ship

to help provide search and rescue We have now had that

request accepted. VOS Grace will be part

of that effort which I think is good news and it's worth reflecting that

the support already from the UK in relation to border force cutters

and Royal Navy ships have saved We are simply not doing enough

and too many people are dying. On Europe's soil and off Europe's

shores. I've stood on the north shore

in Lesbos and watched The smugglers are giving discounts

when the weather is worse so more people are arriving and

although there is valiant work being done by the residents and volunteers

on the island there is simply not There

isn't enough shelter and support. There isn't enough blankets, enough

basic sanitation, toilets, taps. I was told they were worried

about cholera. This is what Save

the Children said yesterday. Minutes later we found three young

men unconscious with hypothermia, forced to sleep for three days

in a field to queue for papers. There were no toilets

for those queueing so there were faeces mixed in the

flowing streams of drinking water. But this is in Europe

so we are all failing. All of us need to make sure

that there is action now. I think we can be proud

as a country of the work we have done to help people affected by this

crisis in Syria but also latterly as That is not just the work I talked

about in relation to saving lives We have provided asylum

for thousands of people and of course as I have just set out we are

helping very actively on the ground She's announced

a further 5 million emergency funds and we will be deploying

a new ship but what action will the British Government and EU partners

take to tackle the increasing The Government has promised to

resettle 4,000 refugees this year Can we have a progress check

on this? Are there any plans to increase

the number? And will the Secretary of State

recognise that while the Government is to be commended for the money

that has been spent on the camps in Syria that we are seeing a crisis

unfolding in Greece and the Balkans which shames the European family

of nations. That country has been the leading edge of providing

support to people affected by this crisis but it is important that when

we see people arrive on We talk today

about symptoms. The real cause as

the Minister knows full well is the fact that 11 million Syrian people

have had to flee their homes. What's

the Government doing to stop the The brutality

of the fact that 250,000 people have already died and many more will do

as a result of Russian air strikes What are we doing about safety,

safe havens, humanitarian corridors, protection

of the population inside Syria? So that we can get to people

inside Syria many of our cross border supplies are

going into the country from Turkey and it took us over two years to

get a UN Security Council resolution In terms of the way forward first

of all the action by the Russians is simply taking us further away

from being able to reach But of course,

as we have set out as a Government, more action needs to be taken

against Isil, which of course is up also perpetrating huge atrocities

on the Syrian people now as well. Senior police officers

and policing commissioners have been giving their reaction to

a new policing funding formula to One of the police

and crime commissioners who gave evidence is among those threatening

legal action over the proposals. Witnesses discussed with MPs

their concerns for the future of bobbies on the beat and

which other services could survive. You use the word madness

in respect of the proposed cuts. Normally don't expect

the chief constables to be using And in your letter to me I think you

said there are serious There is serious financial

turbulence and a risk to forces. Will you stand

by the statements that you made? You've given us I am sure

a justified, pessimistic scenario Can I ask you first

of all can we work from the assumption that bobbies

on the beat is coming to an end? What I am referring to is routine

patrolling that you are familiar with from when you started

your police careers I am sure. Targeted patrols will always

be part of what we do. There is some evidence

that it works. The level of coverage will

become less numerous. I started on the beat in the

West Midlands, I think the people we will

have covering geographical areas will reduce because

there are simply less of us. We will need to be accessible

in different ways It has been argued that

Bedfordshire Police is the worst I inherited a force that has decided

to strip all warranted officers out So I listen to debating

about whether bobbies on the beat have a future with interest

because in Bedfordshire I think we are further

down the path of where policing is going and my colleagues will be

following us very shortly. As we cut and cut

and numbers are reduced and reduced it is the community policing, the

problem-solving, the preventative And then you all you are left with

is a sticking plaster model where the

police turn up after the event and go after the offender but there's no

work to try and stop that bad thing Tony Hogg was one of those whose

letter to the Home Office Minister Mike Penning about the funding

plans got into the public domain. I would like to have

on record that we regret that this We wanted to put

a responsible thing. To answer

your question I think there are One is the consultation period which

we believe doesn't meet the normal. When you say the letter is leaked,

Clive Grunshaw, the Commissioner for Cumbria, was

on Victoria Derbyshire this morning Yes but before that there was an

article that alluded to it in the And it's crept into more

visibility than we would wish. You're watching Tuesday

in Parliament. Britain is to send a new ship to

support efforts to rescue Still to come -

MSPs in Holyrood debate Trident. A Conservative former minister says

the Prime Minister is "purging" Eurosceptics from the UK's

delegation to the Council of Europe. The council was set up in 1949 and

is Europe's oldest political body. It aims to uphold human rights,

democracy and the rule The Council has

a parliamentary assembly made up of 630 delegates from the member states

- and Britain sends 18 politicians Until recently, the Conservative MP,

Christopher Chope was one of them. He asked an urgent question

about how the decision was made to re-appoint

members of the UK delegation. The minister paid tribute to

Mr Chope's work for He will know that decisions

about appointments to the delegation is a matter for

the different political parties. And that places on the delegation

are allocated in proportion to Normally decisions are taken through

the usual channels and are approved by the leaders of the parties

represented on the delegation. I appreciate my honourable friend's

disappointment with the changes for the delegation in this Parliament

but I am sure he will take advantage of the extra time he has to spend in

the chamber by making more of his pithy and perceptive

contributions to debate. It is most reassuring to have

confirmation from my honourable friend that

the issue of reappointment was not Why won't she confirm that the real

reason why three independently former ministers are being purged is

because we voted in favour of a free and fair EU referendum with a strict

28 day purdah period, as recommended by the Council of

Europe's Venice Commission as well I do not understand why the Leader

of the House has not come here. I would suggest that the deputy

leader here considers the position I'm afraid the Prime Minister

should be ashamed of himself. My honourable friend is right to pay

tribute to our honourable friend from Christchurch for the work that

he has done on the Council of Europe but I do put again the fact that

there are new people on the council of Europe as happened five years

ago. And as a consequence I don't The Ministerial Code sets out

the standards expected of Government ministers

when they carry out their duties. But it's just been re-written -

and the latest version This new version omits any explicit

mention of the duty of Ministers to Some commentators have asked

if this means the Government can ignore international law on,

for instance, drone strikes. The minister - answering

a question from Labour's Lord Dubs - said the code was normally updated

after a general election. The updated code makes clear that

ministers must abide by the law. The obligations on ministers under

the law, including international It's somewhat puzzling

for the Government to make a change in the code, quite a significant

change, and for the Minister to say Some of us wonder why the change has

been made at all, and the Minister wouldn't have had to answer this

question and others on this. Surely

as an annex to the Ministerial Code there are seven principles of public

life, one of which is openness. If Government ministers have to

show openness, why can't the The Government is showing openness -

the Ministerial Code is available It's normal for there to be

a variation of the Ministerial Code just as there is from time to time

with the Civil Service Code. By Lords, if the former AG,

if journalists, if campaigners, senior lawyers, ex-ministers,

ex-civil servants and academics think this change is

wrong, is it possible that they are And could the Government explain why

they I think sneaked this change, and a change to the code

for special advisers, why they sneaked it through rather than

by a proper statement in the House? There's no question of sneaking

in through, it has been available since 15th

October 2015, and this is the second time in a week in which I have

answered questions at the dispatch At the weekend, Scottish Labour

Party delegates backed a vote to scrap the UK's Trident nuclear

missile system, which is based at It means

the Labour party now holds different positions on the issue north

and south of the border - although the party's UK leader Jeremy Corbyn

supports not renewing the system. The Scottish government's

Infrastructure Secretary began a debate at the Scottish

Parliament, entitled Trident:

Welfare or Warfare? The Scottish Government has sought a

further debate for a number of reasons. Firstly, further analysis

suggests a dramatic increase in estimates on the total potential

cost to the UK Government's proposed successive programme.

Secondly there is the potential that the UK Government may be considering

bringing forward the main gate investment decision to take place

before Christmas. Finally in addition to our opposition to the

possession of nuclear weapons, it remains our view that it is wrong

for the UK Government to work towards the replacement of Trident

while implementing welfare cuts impacting on the most vulnerable

people in our society. My position of course and that of the Scottish

Government is that the possession of nuclear weapons cannot be justified

at any cost, whether at ?1 or ?167 billion. I suppose the question for

those who still support by nuclear weapons at this cost is at what

price do they say is too expensive? Have the parties enable debate and

are prepared to reflect that position. I have always said that

the debate on Trident is complex, and I outlined the arguments for and

against a few weeks back in a members proposed debates. While I do

respect the views -- I do respect the views and arguments. The

arguments opposing the view of Trident won the day on Sunday,

because they represented a strong case for Trident renewal being the

wrong case at the wrong time. There was also a strong fundamental

argument against nuclear weapons. These are weapons which if used

would cost unimaginable destruction and death. I can be no justification

for deploying them. We all want a world without nuclear

weapons, but the SNP has failed to explain why nuclear -- unilateral

disarmament would achieve this. What evidence is there that if we get rid

of our weapons, others will get rid of those? If the SNP is using

Trident as a cynical political football, the Labour Party cannot

decide what their position actually is. Their leader is not backed by

their own party. The SNP's position on Trident is cynical, the Labour

Party's motion is simply muddled. As long as the UK or an independent

Scottish Government remains part of Nato, they will continue to be

required to support directly and indirectly nuclear weapons systems

being used and -- in and around Scotland. The reality of the matter

is that Nato alliance is a cardboard relic, not suited to the realities

of modern day security threats. Labour MSP Jackie Baillie,

whose constituency includes Faslane, said there were 6,800 people

employed there by the Ministry of Defence and contractors, with

thousands more linked to the base. She opposed Labour's Trident

resolution. They will come as no surprise I

believe in multilateral nuclear disarmament, I want all nations to

give up their weapons because my ambition is nothing short of global

zero. I believe that is an ambition shared by the majority of people in

this chamber. Where we disagree, is in the mechanism that we actually

achieve that. I know some opposed to Trident argue we are unilaterally

the army and cite the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and I

respect that, but it doesn't reflect what is happening outside the UK.

At decision time MSPs backed the motion AGAINST the renewal

of Trident - with 96 MSPs for it and 17 against.

Now, the Government has been warned that its plan to bring forward

a British Bill of Rights could undermine devolution in Scotland,

The Conservatives have pledged to abolish and replace the

Human Rights Act - breaking the link between the courts here and

We will bring forward proposals for a British Bill

of Rights to replace the Human Rights Act later this autumn.

Preparations are going well, and we look forward to consulting

widely, including with the devolved administrations.

I thank the Minister for his condolences to the tragic

I think the whole thoughts of the Chamber are with

In terms of my question, human rights as the Minister will know are

not reserved as part of schedule 5 of the Scotland Act, therefore the

Human Rights Act cannot be repealed and replaced with a Bill of Rights

without the legislative consent of the Scottish Parliament -

something the First Minister of Scotland has said is

With that in mind, why is the Government wasting money pursuing

I thank him for his question but I am afraid that is not quite right.

Revising the Human Rights Act can only be done by the UK Government.

Of course the implementation of human rights in a wide range

of areas are already devolved to Scotland, and I would urge him

Given the constitutional importance of this issue,

will my honourable friend confirm that the consultation will result

in a draft Bill that will be subject to full pre-legislative scrutiny

Well, I thank the Chairman of the Justice Select Committee.

We will be engaging in full consultation; I hope he doesn't

mind if I don't trail the precise terms of it at this point in time.

The Human Rights Act as we have heard is fundamental to

devolution in Scotland, and there are different legal views about how

The Act is also fundamental to Wales, and it is the cornerstone

of the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland.

Will the Government recognise that abandoning the Human Rights Act

may have consequences which they had initially not thought of?

Well, one of the reasons why we have engaged in consultation

and engaged in a pause at this stage is precisely so we can work through

Just in relation to Scotland, which he raises specifically,

he will know I'm sure that through 2014 and 2015 YouGov polling showed

consistent Scottish support for a Bill of Rights to replace

In 2011 on the specific question, YouGov found that 61% of Scots

wanted to see the UK's Supreme Court and this Parliament rather than

the European Court of Human Rights in this country and across Britain.

Can I remind my honourable friend that it was

the English Parliament that brought in the Bill of Rights in 1688,

and it was the British Parliament that brought in the Human Rights Act

And like so much legislation at that time,

So will he not listen to the people opposite, and get on with it?!

Well, I thank my honourable friend, he expresses himself in the usual

It's true the Conservatives have a long tradition of upholding

We want to protect and strengthen that tradition, but we also want to

We want this place to have the last word on where the bar is set

for human rights, and we want the Supreme Court to be the ultimate

As fog enveloped the City of London, one Labour MP has used

a Westminster Hall debate to call for piercing the blanket of mist

Stephen Pound told MPs that the National Fraud Authority

reckoned ?52 billion was lost to the economy each year through

fraud - and he wanted to see some kind of corporate criminal liability

for offences such as fraud and money laundering.

As the fog lifts from our city, I intend today to cut through some of

the fog around Government policy in the area of prosecuting economic

crime, and I have every confidence that the Minister will be able to

eliminate the stark part of the legislative process.

The MP was worried that the government was going cold

on its promise to tackle corporate economic crime.

Current corporate liability law is based upon the identification

principle. The prosecutor must show that a person who is the direct link

or controlling mind of the party -- company intended to commit or have

knowledge of a criminal act. This requires identifying somebody at the

most senior level as being responsible. In the context of the

modern globalised world we now live in, where companies span numerous

borders and jurisdictions, this is no small task and virtually

impossible. I hope the Minister will be able to stand up to date proudly

say the option of introducing a criminal offence for failing to

prevent economic crime is still on the Government's agenda. I hope the

Minister will be able to provide that reassurance today, because

after the events of 2007, 2008 and everything that has followed, the

public has a right to expect that those who commit white-collar crime

are brought to justice. The minister offered no promise to

change the law on corporate criminality

but he did acknowledge the problem. There have been many other

assertions made, the evidential threshold is too high and it makes

it easier to prosecute smaller businesses, and particularly

difficult to come -- prosecute complex multinational corporations.

All these problems are inherent in trying to enforce the regulations in

the sector, what we certainly don't want to see the small businesses

hammered while the big ones go scot-free. -- what we certainly

don't. And finally - 22 MPs and 20 Peers

died in service in the four years of World War I - and Parliament is

marking the centenary of the war. The name

of every Mp killed is printed on the order paper on the anniversary

of their death - and the Speaker marks the occasion in the chamber at

the start of the parliamentary day. One third of November 1915, left ten

at the honourable William Lionel Charles will rot, well transport

officer in the Army service Corps, member for the Tiverton division of

Devon, died in Scotland of consumption contracted while on

service entrance. We remember him today.

I'll be here for the rest of the week so from me,