24/11/2016 Business Questions

recommend we all watch that. That's very good news, because she is an

house can testify. If I can say so house can testify. If I can say so

myself, a fine appointment... By me. Business question. But the leader of

the house please give us a forthcoming business? The business

for next week will be as follows. Monday, the remaining stages of the

Digital economy Bill. Tuesday, second reading of the Commonwealth

development Corporation Bill, followed by post private business,

as announced by the chairman. Wednesday, opposition day, 14th

allotted day. There will be a debate and motion in the name of the

Scottish National party, subject to be announced. Thursday, debate and

motion on transgender equality, followed by general debate on the

future of the UK fishing industry. Friday, private members bills. The

provisional business for the week commencing the 5th of December will

include as follows, Monday 5th of December two reading of the children

and social work Bill, Lords. Tuesday the 6th of December quarter

remaining stages of the health service medical supplies costs bill.

Wednesday 7th of November, opposition day, 15th allotted day.

There will be a debate on opposition motion, subject to be announced.

Thursday the 8th of December, debate and a motion on UN national day for

elimination of violence against women, followed by a general debate

on cancer strategy, one year on. Friday the 9th of December, the

house will not be sitting. I should also like to inform the house that

the business in Westminster Hall by the 8th of December will be a debate

on the fourth report of the Scottish affairs committee on post study

works schemes. Interview of yesterday's conclusion of the trial

of the man who murdered our late colleague Jo Cox, I hope you will

allow me to say that I believe the entire house would wish first to

express our thanks to the police and the Crown Prosecution Service for

the work that they did in bringing this man to trial and securing his

conviction. Second, to send our solidarity and I would love to her

family, who I think I've shown quite unbelievable grace, dignity and

courage in the months just passed. And the road, I hope we can all

agree that perhaps the best tribute that we hear, what ever our party

politics, can pay to Jill and her memory -- Jo and her memory, is to

recommit ourselves to do all that lies within our power to make sure

that this country remains a place where people of different ethnic

origins and different faiths can live together in mutual respect,

goodwill and harmony and can celebrate together our common

citizenship and our shared institutions and values and

traditions. And that we will also continue unflinchingly to stand for

the truth that it is through parliamentary democracy that we can

seek to secure a change and find a better future for those who sent us

here, rather than through violence or extremism. I thank him for what

he has just said. The power and beauty of those words clearly it

will resonate with all of us. Can I thank the leader of the house for

those words, he shows what a great parliamentarian he is, and associate

myself absolutely with everything he said about those people who have

brought the murderer to justice. I need to ask the Leader of the House,

because he hasn't mentioned this, about the dates for the recess after

February. We need to know, because obviously, if the Prime Minister

says she is going to trickle article 50 in March, we need to know if

we're going to be away in recess, if we're going to have a debate, what

is the mechanism? Will the Prime Minister be making an announcement

on the steps of Downing Street, will she do it in a phone call? She will

relinquish the EU presidency by telephone. Could we know the

mechanism? The British people need to know the framework. As soon as

article 50 is triggered, the European Council will draw up a

negotiating mandate, the guidelines, without the UK's participation. Mr

Speaker, the Ministry of Justice Izzy troubled department. Hardly 24

hours had gone by and we have the first concession. It turns out that

the figures in the government proposals for the last reform are

out of date and will be updated to the implementation process, so the

consultation referred to the 12 judicial guidelines as a basis for

the figures instead of the more generous 13th edition, which

significantly increases the guideline damages from the blast. So

that is what happens when you have a policy and found the evidence for

it, rather than evidence -based policy. It takes a riot and a

breakdown before money is given to the prison service, despite numerous

calls for that. The health Department is troubled. I don't know

if representations were made by the Health Secretary, but he nowhere to

be seen. Every former Health Secretary for the last 20 years has

signed an open letter to the government to honour the pledge to

the public to restore parity for mental health, so good Leader of the

Has seen what the response was to that letter of duty place in the

library? According to Cancer Research UK, there are long waits

for results. Early diagnosis is vital for treatment. Shortages of

specialists in those areas. There are many members who are undergoing

treatment for cancer. We wish all of them well and their families and

everyone who has touched by cancer. We wish them a speedy recovery. The

Autumn Statement was a statement for the elite. The Chancellor said

Oxford and Cambridge would become a transformational tech college,

drawing on world-class research strengths. Elitism not based on

evidence, because the university league tables of 2017 but Oxford and

Cambridge third and fourth. Imperial was first, LSE second, Cardiff

birth, and Edinburgh in the top ten. But we have a statement of what will

be available for the other universities? They don't have a

historic wealth that Oxford and Cambridge do. In a previous outing

at the dispatch box, I asked for money for local government. Will the

government is in desperate need, but the money has now gone to unelected

bodies, rather than local authorities. The Minister for the

Northern Powerhouse said, if you sign up to a directly elected mayor,

you have funding in the hands of one person. Another letter from county

councils, they said, funding should not be on arbitrary prioritisation

of the specific government model. Money should flow according to need.

This is not a statement for women, so could we have a debate on the

impact of the state of the budget statement on women? Women are not

satisfied by a passing reference to Camberley, we want more. 65% of

those earning too little to pay income tax and women. The 3 million

per women's charities is just a balance for the millions raised

under the tampon tax, 12 million of which has been given away by the

previous Chancellor. Despite 74 written questions on social care,

there is no mention of extra money. Cuts to social care hit women

particularly hard, because the majority of those needing care and

providing it is women. Just about managing is a government product, it

is home made jam. I would like to thank those who played in tribute to

Jo Cox. Her love, values and example lives on in all of us. Governments

are not just about fixing the roof. We are about transforming lives. Let

us dedicate ourselves to that task in her memory. If I can try and

respond fairly briefly to the large number of questions that she put to

me. On recess dates, I do understand the patients on all sides to know

Easter recess dates. I have not been able to announce those today, I hope

there will be in a position to announce us very soon. She asked

about the process for triggering article 50. That has to be a formal

notification to the European Council. She asked about the

rather hoped that she would have rather hoped that she would have

welcomes the action the government is taking as regards whiplash,

because that is something I thought had commanded quite widespread

support in all parts of the house, but we are now embarking on this

consultation with a view to legislation at some stage, once the

consultation has concluded. I hope we will be able to build a

cross-party coalition in support of such measures. She was unfairly

dismissive of the ambitious vision for the transformation of our prison

service that was contained within the white Paper on prisons, launched

by Mike Right Honourable friend the Justice Secretary just a fortnight a

go. She asked me about the Secretary of State for Health and the health

Department, the Secretary of State was answering questions here earlier

this week. She enquired about mental health, it is this government that

has not only invested more in mental health than any of its predecessors,

but, which for the first time, has written into law a requirement for

physical and mental health to be given equal priority. And she asked

about cancer treatment. What is happening within the health service,

despite the demographic and other pressures that there aren't totally

are on the National Health Service and in part due to the money this

government has put in, but also the reforms is government has taken, we

have seen, since 2010, an increase of some 822,000 in the number of

people seen by a cancer specialist, and an increase of 49,000 in the

number of people who are commencing cancer treatment. Yes, there is more

work to be done, but that is not a bad track record to be getting on

with. The Oxford and Cambridge Expressway, I think she fell into

the trap of believing this rather stale, antiquated class war rhetoric

that she gets from the leadership of her priority. The Oxford to

Cambridge Expressway would benefit places like Milton Keynes and like

Bedford, where, at some stage in the more distant past, the Labour Party

once thought they might win constituencies or local councils. Is

a sign of The Times that the party opposite appears to have given up

such communities. That Expressway, that corridor offers opportunities

for economic growth and to unlock significant new housing development

in areas of high demand, when the party has been calling for more

house-building to take place. It was leaders in the North who are

good for the model of devolution that we had, precisely so there

could be an allegation for central government funds for those devolved

authorities to enable strategic planning and expenditure today

please. She will find the housing investment infrastructure fund,

targeted in particular that local authorities who are able to come

forward and bid in areas that will unlock additional housing supply. On

social care, yes, I happily acknowledge, as the Prime Minister

did yesterday, that there are pressures on social care, we see

that in our constituencies, but this government has introduced the better

care fund, and the social care at preset to put some extra money in

the system to help local authorities to cope with those demands. If I can

turn finally to what she said about the position of women, there are

more women in work now in this country than ever before. It is this

government that has increased the level of support to families through

childcare than any of its predecessors. Those are things that

would have worked very much to the benefit of women in all walks of

life. And I think if she looks at the distribution analysis published

yesterday by the Treasury, she will see that the Chancellor's measures

yesterday provided a modest but positive improvement in the incomes

and living standards of all details in our society apart from the

richest. And the richest would experience a modest loss after those

measures. But I do want to completely endorse and to associate

myself with her remarks on violence against women and her tributes to

those honourable friends who have played a part in that work. I hope

that she will also agree with me that we need to stand firm against

violence against women and girls in all its forms both here and

globally, and the work that was initiated by my right honourable and

noble friend Lord Haig, when he was Foreign Secretary, to awaken the

world's conscience to the use of sexual violence as a weapon of war

and try to secure the extirpation of that vile practice continues under

this government and I hope will continue under all British

governments in the future. Can I also associate myself with the

remarks made by the leader of a House about our colleague, Joe -- Jo

Cox, she made such a big impact on country in a short time. The

Paralympics started in our county, in the Leader of the House's

constituency, Stoke Mandeville, and we were terribly impressed by the

achievements of our Paralympics teams in the last Olympic Games. At

the last budget the Chancellor announced ?1.5 million to be spent

on research and issuing running blades to children. I am afraid to

report eight months on, not a single child has yet received running

blades. The Leader of the House probably knows that it has not got

out of the starting blocks, and I wondered if there is anything he can

do to move this into the fast lane because then we could a debate on

how we can inspire our next generation of Paralympians, to the

credit of the screen. Double I'd better declared an interest as the

patron of the National Paralympic Heritage trust. It seeks to maintain

the Heritage of Stoke Mandeville is the birthplace of the Paralympic

movement. I was concerned by what my right honourable friend has just

said and I will take this up with my colleagues at the Treasury and the

Department of Culture, Media and Sport to see what can be done. Can I

thank losing the business and grand associate with the remark made by

the trial yesterday, which finally saw the conviction of the appalling

act. As the Leader of the House, today he spoke on the half of the

whole House, and hopefully his words will help us all recover and move

forward. It is barely 24 hours since the Chancellor said that his Autumn

Statement, and already we have the Conservative Party fighting among

itself about how big the Brexit disaster is going to be. Today it is

the OBR, the doom and gloom, who are the villains of the peace after they

predicted this could be a ?60 billion premium which will be paid

for this clueless Brexit. Can we have a debate on the economic

consequences of this Brexit? Maybe the Leader of the House could help

us out. Who should we best trust, the OBR and honourable member from

Chingford Green? Could we have a debate about Ferrero Rocher? I

cannot understand what problem this government has with an ambassador,

Nigel Farage? The EU referendum was won on his terms and conditions,

we're practically living in the early days of a Ukip UK. What could

possibly go wrong with him going to Trump Tower? Lastly, in its latest

escapade in trying to read scrutiny, we learn that exiting the European

Union is not going to come -- the head of the European Union is not

prepared to come in front of the Treasury committee, and in

correspondence to me he said he is not prepared to come before the

select committees of this House man the Brexit committee. -- other than

the Brexit committee. Can the Leader of the House convince his right

honourable friend that proper scrutiny must be in place and he

must come in front of the select committees of this House? Mr

Speaker, can I thank the honourable gentleman for his words. On the

question of the OBR and the Autumn Statement, the responsibility was

set up as an independent body in order to remove any suggestion that

the economic forecast were being tampered with on political grounds

by the government of the day. The OBR forecast yesterday -- forecasts

yesterday are their own, but it is sensible for the government to work

on the basis that they are accurate, and they are not out of kilter with

the main stream of other independent forecasters. The Bank of England is

a bit more pessimistic than the OBR in its contradictions. There are

many uncertainties. Will befall the value of sterling against other

currencies be maintained? And if it is, will importers be able to pass

on the price impact of that in terms of the price charged to customers?

But I think it is perfectly sensible for the Chancellor to have steered a

course in the light of the OBR forecast, and I think my right

honourable friend was completely honest with the House and country

yesterday in saying completely plainly, where the uncertainty and

difficulties lie, and not trying to wish away any of those problems that

guide his budget judgment. On the question of accountability of

ministers for the Department of exiting the European Union, we had

another debate yesterday on the impact Brexit from the EU, this time

on transport policy. I can give the honourable gentleman the promise

that the Secretary of State and his entire team will be here on Thursday

the 1st of September -- December, when he and his colleagues will have

the chance to interrogate them. Regarding the ambassadors, I do not

think they will be serving Ferrero Rocher at the embassy. But he will

be glad to know that British ambassadors are keen to offer a

selection of malt whisky is the aperitif of choice when they are

entertaining officially on the half of the country. We have an excellent

ambassador in the United States of America, it is certainly no vacancy

there. The last time I checked, Mr Farage had a very well-paid job as a

member of the European Parliament, although regrettably he also had one

of the worst attendance records at the European Parliament of any other

member, which suggests to me that to head up a UK embassy might not be a

job for which he is particularly suited. Yesterday in the Autumn

Statement we had the welcome news of additional finance of the

development of housing, and ?3.15 billion and 90,000 homes in London

alone, as well as a doubling of the money to combat rough sleeping in

London. Plus, the abolition of letting fees for tenants. Could my

right honourable friend find time for a debate on housing? I

understand there will be a work paper next month, but surely we

should have a debate in this House on housing so we make sure the money

is well spent and that much-needed housing across the country is

provided and all members have the opportunity to input, so we have

ideas and use the money effectively. There will be questions next Monday,

providing opportunities for housing issues to be raised. I want to pay

tribute to the tireless work of my honourable friend in pressing

forward his homelessness reduction Bill, and winning government support

for that. I am glad he paid tribute to the measures on rough sleeping

and the scrapping of let increases for rough sleeping announced

yesterday. While I think it is a good idea we should have a debate on

housing policy, probably that should await the publication of the White

Paper, which will give members on all sides of the House the

opportunity to comment upon government proposals rather than to

guess what they might be. Could I also add my thanks for the obviously

sincere and deeply heartfelt words that were expressed about our late

colleague Jo Cox. I am very grateful to him for that. The Leader of the

House announced that on the 8th of December we have two debates, one in

the debate on violence against women, and the cancer strategy one

year on. That demonstrates the importance of members of the House

if they wish to make a bid for time sensitive debates to bring their

applications to the committee in a timely fashion so we can plan ahead

and get those dates into the diary. Can I also ask, the clerk to our

committee does try to get the decisions and offers the committee

wish to make to members as soon as possible, but we also ask that

members respond to these offers as soon as possible, so we can actually

get the business sorted out. A number of members are sitting on a

response, and I would appreciate it if ministers could make their

feelings known as soon as possible to the clerk. I am grateful for his

kind words. The backbench business committee is playing an important

part of enabling members in all parts of the House to raise

important issues that matter to our constituents which might not

otherwise be heard, and I would endorse the advice he gives to

colleagues. This month we have seen another remarkable Poppy Appeal in

my constituency, with enormous sums of money raised, and thousands of

people turning out on Remembrance Sunday to pay tribute to the Armed

Forces, and to see many young people involved was fantastic. Can we have

a debate next week to pay tribute to the Royal British Legion for the

work they do but also to say thank you to those in our communities who

work tirelessly to make the Poppy Appeal is successful?

While I am unable to offer him a debate, I would like to pay tribute

to all those who worked to make the Poppy Appeal a success each year.

The appeal in Scotland is run by the Scottish Legionnaire. It is

important we all remember that, while it is the veterans of the

Second World War who tend to be particularly in our minds in

November, in these years, the Region and the revenues from the Poppy

Appeal go to support service men and women from much more recent

conflicts, Alton very young people who have suffered quite shocking

physical and mental injuries as a result of their servers and it is

important we remember this work is still relevant and important today.

Can I also thank the Reader for his eloquent remarks about Jo and her

legacy. BBC research as reported that investment in infrastructure

per head over the next five years will be 6457 for London, that only

1684 from Yorkshire and Humber. With last week was my decision not to

back the electrification of the line to Hull and no reference to the

Humber, capping a debate about the Northern Powerhouse and whether the

government is really serious about rebalancing is not on the north and

south but East and West? I think that is honourable members from each

side examined the Autumn Statement, they will find that all partners of

the United Kingdom will benefit from the infrastructure spending that the

Chancellor identified. I don't blame any member for making particular

plays on the part of their own constituency or the greater area

they represent. From memory, while it's not in Humberside, that is an

important slice of funding for a significant motorway junction

improvement around that Beverley area, which I think should benefit

Hull and the area the honourable lady represents, and if she looks

elsewhere in the statement, I think she will find Yorkshire and Humber

is going to benefit in a number of ways. Shortly before the summer

recess, the All-party Environmental Group of which I am chairman

published its report on the quality of new-build housing. There has been

a significant amount of new-build, but some of the quality has been

shoddy. Can we have a debate on this or please? As far as the government

is concerned, we want all new homes to be well designed and built to

good quality and standards. I think home-buyers are entitled to expect

nothing less. There needs to be an effective complaints procedure, for

example, through the consumer accord, where if people are

dissatisfied with the quality of their home, the particular report

that he mentioned, does raise important issues. And my honourable

friend 's in the Department for local communities and governments,

are looking at this closely and will respond in due course. A small and

rapidly formed private members bill on adding mother 's married names,

could we please have a statement debate in government time to see

where we're going on this, so we can have a bit of action before my

daughter gets married in February 2018? I know how frustrating it is

for honourable members who are low-down in the list on private

members Bill Dave. On Friday, I will work with the relevant Minister and

see whether there is anything we can do on this matter. May I associate

myself with the words of the Leader about Jo Cox and paid tribute to the

tremendous work she did on behalf of poor people all around the world.

Lord O'Neill launched a vital report in May on antimicrobial resistance

in May, in which he said the consequence of no action would be

$100 billion a year and 10 million lives lost in a year. Could we have

a debate in government time, since ours was a report commissioned by

the previous Prime Minister, on this, in which many members will be

pleased to contribute. He raises a very important point indeed. Since

Lord O'Neill's global review, the government has been supporting

research efforts, both in the United Kingdom and abroad, including ?51

million on research here in the UK, but also 265 million through the

Fleming Fund to support surveillance and lower and middle income

countries in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. I hope you will also welcome

the fact that in September, following an intense campaign led by

the Health Secretary and the Chief medical officer, there was an

agreement at the United Nations General Assembly to what was the

landmark declaration by 193 countries, agreeing to combat

antimicrobial resistance, which was identified as the biggest risk to

modern medicine. Getting this agreed internationally is a vital first

step towards the effect of action that we all want to see. Can I

associate my party with the remarks of the Leader and the shadow Reader,

the memory of Jo Cox will indeed endure for many years ahead.

Following the tragic death of a 21-year-old constituent of mine at

the hands of drink-driving in 2014, her family have committed themselves

campaign for reform of drink-driving sentencing guidelines, and presented

a 100,000 strong petition to Downing Street recently. We have a debate on

the need for that reform? Yes, it is a quite unspeakably tragic

experience for any parent, any farmer led to have to go through.

What I might suggest to the honourable gentleman is either to

seek an adjournment or a backbench committee debate on this subject.

But I would also draw his attention to the fact that the EU petition

system that we have now introduced in Westminster is also providing an

additional route by which this subject can be brought up and

debated in the Commons -- e-petitions. That might be something

else he wants to suggest to his constituency. Last night, in my

capacity as chairman of a group on retail crime, I attended an event

organised by newsagents. It is evident that those who work in

retail are very concerned about the level of not just left, but violence

against them. Google reader found time for the debating government

time to investigate this matter? I understand very much the point that

he is making. No employee working for retail, large or small should be

going to work fearful that he or she may be the victim violence. I think

this trend is, in part, due to things like the growth of the gang

culture we have seen in London and other big cities. As he knows, the

government is working with chief const is to try to address this

problem, defeat this threat. I can't promise a quick, easy answer, but I

think it will need determined work by the Home Office, by the Ministry

for justice but also critically for local police forces, their local

Police and Crime Commissioners, to make sure the right response is

given and this problem is properly addressed. Could he provide

government time for a statement on the BT arrangements in Brexit. While

we welcome the relief for the tampon tax fund, what will the Chancellor

do to make sure there is a secure long-term investment for vital

services and agree a date by which the tampon tax will finally come to

an end? I think my answer to the last point is that will depend in

part on whether there is is agreement first at EU level, while

we still remain members, and changes to EU law on value added tax.

Secondly, if that's not being dealt with by the time we leave the EU,

how rapidly we could then make that change of our own volition. But I

will ask Treasury ministers to contact her with the information she

is seeking. He brings forward approval to spend millions of pounds

on this palace and Buckingham Palace. We'll hear arrange for a

special screening of the film I, Daniel Blake, so we can remember

those who are losing benefits. I cannot think of anything more

damaging to the cause of constitutional monarchy than the let

them eat cake attitude which prioritises the rebuilding of

palaces while people are struggling for bread. I do think he is in

danger of going over the top here, not for the first time. Buckingham

Palace is a public building that is used by the monarch to exercise her

state functions as head of state. It is also a place in which thousands

of two lists visit and enjoy each year. The reason that the royal

household is facing the sort of Bill which shocks him is that these

decisions have been put off and a backlog of repairs has been allowed

to accumulate. So I think what was decided and announced a few days ago

was perfectly justifiable. I think in respect of sanctions, I just ask

him to bear in mind that I think it is fewer than 4% of recipients of

jobseeker's allowance have received any sort of benefit sanction and

fewer than 1% of recipients of employment support allowance, so

there can sometimes be mistakes by officials, yes, but I think we need

to recognise that the proportions involved are very small. And I also

associate myself with the Leader of the House's moving tribute to Jo

Cox. She is greatly missed. Figures released yesterday by the ONS show

that in the past five years, there have been a staggering 252,000 extra

winter deaths. But 25,000 people who died last winter alone. The rate of

deaths in winter in our country is almost twice that seen in Norway and

Germany. Given that we are experiencing a crisis that is

avoidable, will the Leader give consideration to having a debate so

that this matter can be most openly discussed? Any unnecessary death is

clearly a tragedy and everything possible should be done to avoid

that. In fairness, I need to point out that, partly due to the

extensive preparation for a winter that the NHS to, the excess winter

mortality last winter was Darren on the level it reached in the previous

year. Earlier this month, NHS England and Public-health England's

launched its Stay Well This Winter campaign, which reached a great

proportion of the over 65 's. The NHS is alive to these risks and is

taking action to alert elderly payable to what they can do to keep

themselves warm. Could I associate myself and my colleagues with the

comments of the Leader of the House about our late colleague Jo Cox and

say we must all respect people at a different religious, political or

difference. Yesterday we launched our first report into the visitor

economy and that report was about supporting skills and

apprenticeships and hospitality -- in the hospitality and Judaism

industry. It resulted in many different types of evidence

submitted to us, but it also said there are core issues affecting

apprenticeships in the fourth largest service injury. Around the

school curriculum, lack of career guidance and lack of encouragement

for people to go into the chef and catering industry. Would it be

possible to have a debate on this very important industry, which is

important to many parts of our constituencies in terms of Judaism,

and the direct relationship with the economy?

I was glad to hear about the report that she has prepared, and she

highlights an important issue. I think the government's commitment to

3 million apprenticeships needs to include tourism is one of the

sectors which are assisted, and she is right to draw attention to the

need for proper preparation and the right content in terms of those

apprenticeships, so that young people concerned are then seen as

readily employable, and when I have spoken to directors and managers in

the hospitality industry, they say that it is often difficult for them

to recruit UK citizens who are properly skilled for the work they

are offering, which is why they often look to people coming in from

other countries. We need to address that challenge. You may recall that

a few weeks ago I raised the question of tax treaties. This week

another double taxation relief order covering Turkmenistan was approved.

We are likely to see many more as a result of Brexit. Can I ask the

Leader of the House again if he will look at how members can be given

better advanced notice of when such treaties will be considered, and how

he might ensure this House has more opportunity and scrutiny of the UK

tax arrangements with other countries? The double tax treaties

are a sort of standard international agreement negotiated by British

governments of all political colours, and as the honourable

member knows, they are designed to ensure our citizens and those of the

other country concerned cannot be taxed twice by two separate Jude

extinctions on the same income. But I will draw his points about

scrutiny and parliamentary process to the attention of Treasury

ministers and perhaps I can write to him with some thoughts. I hope there

will be a permanent memorial to Jo Cox in this building, whether that

is a shield or a bust. But last Friday, we gave a second reading in

this House by more than two hundred votes to the parliamentary

constituencies amendment Bill. That cannot go to committee unless the

Leader of the House provides the appropriate motions. When will that

happen? On that point, we need to consider and take advice from the

Treasury about whether e-money resolution is needed in particular,

but I would also say to the honourable gentleman that he should

not forget that the legislation that established the current system for

detecting electoral boundaries and the terms of reference for the

boundaries commission were themselves the subject of

legislation passed by a clear majority in this House. I do not

think we can shy away from the principle that electorates are

grossly unequal at the moment, that they are based on figures for the

population that date back to 2000, and it is in the interests of basic

democratic fairness that we equalise the number of electors so that every

man and woman's vote has the same value. Given that the Leader of the

House seems to be in a generous mood, can I ask if we can have an

urgent debate on compensation for the victims of the concentric

scandal? After the number of parliamentary questions, I have

discovered information which confirms that in relation to

mandatory eerie considerations after the fishing expedition, nine out of

ten of those have been successful, which is just shocking.

Notwithstanding this, the average compensation is only ?48, which does

not even cover the cost of phone calls or postage of documents to

prove their innocence. Can the government do the right thing and

have a debate to bring this out in the open. It is the case with any

citizen who has grounds for claiming that they have suffered loss as a

result of maladministration by any part of government or any agency of

government has the right to go through the member of Parliament to

the parliamentary ombudsman and seek compensation, that is something I

have done under half of my own constituents at various times during

my time here. Though clearly what one cannot have is some sort of

blanket scheme that operates and awards public money irrespective of

the case. But I think the ombudsman may provide the route she is

seeking. On the 7th of December, the then presidential hopeful Donald

Trump called for a complete ban on Muslims entering the US. On the 15th

of November I wrote to the Foreign Secretary to ask what

representations were being made in respect of the 2.7 million British

Muslims, some of whom may want to go today US. His response was shocking,

basically it is a matter for the US government. I fundamentally

disagree. This government has a responsibility to stand up and every

citizen in this land. When can we have a debate to make sure the

Foreign Secretary is held to account? It is the case that this

government in terms of freedom to travel, as on everything else, will

stand firm for the principle that citizens of the United Kingdom

should be treated on an equal basis regardless of what religion they

profess or what ethnic origin they may have come from. But it is a

truth in law that the United States, like every other nation state, has

the responsibility to determine for itself its rules on how people are

allowed to enter their territory, and I think it is important that we

now work alongside the elected president and his administration and

ensure that we have the best possible bilateral relationship that

works in the interest of all British citizens. Can I thank the Leader of

the House for his moving words, and could we have a debate about whether

Britain first should be described as a terrorist ordination and banned

from elections? That terrorist organisation. -- Britain First.. The

Home Office brings forward but they do so based on evidence.

There have been cases in the past where organisations which have been

prescribed have gone to the courts and successfully won a judicial

review to say that the evidence on which that action had been taken was

not sufficient, so I will make sure that her proposal is reported to my

right honourable friend the Home Secretary, but there has to be clear

evidence of terrorist involvement for the terrorist prescription to be

applied. Tory backbenchers rightly lamb basset the debt legacy left by

the Labour Party, and usually gets full agreement from ministers on the

front bench, so why is it then and yesterday's Autumn Statement,

paragraph 3.27 outlines a new guideline that the PFI projects have

announced? Can we have this explained, or even better a debate

on this? I will ask Treasury ministers to write to him on that.

It has already been mentioned that the government published a Northern

Powerhouse strategy report yesterday, but I cannot see in that

report any mention of either Cumbria or nuclear energy. Given that West

Cumbria is going to be putting the power into the Northern Powerhouse,

I would like to support the honourable member for Hull north to

request a debate so that the government can appreciate how much

all of the North of England has to offer, and why Cumbria must not be

an afterthought. I completely agree that Cumbria must not be an

afterthought, and I am confident that the leaders of the Northern

Powerhouse locally would make sure that the decisions that they take

work to the advantage of everybody living within that area of this

country. On nuclear power, I am aware of the importance of the

nuclear industry to her constituents, and I hope there would

be some common ground between her and this government because this

government has taken a difficult and controversial decision to go ahead

with a new generation of nuclear power stations, which I think is

something generally supported by members on all sides. Everyday

around 2200 babies are born in the UK, including my new granddaughter

who was born in Glasgow yesterday. Can we please have a debate on

government time about the impact of the measures announced in the Autumn

Statement on new families, and how we can support all of them at this

joyful but often vulnerable time? Can I first of all congratulate the

honourable lady, or perhaps her daughter or daughter-in-law, and use

child is a source of joy for any family. On the point she mentions, I

suspect we're going to have a number of opportunities to debate the

various questions that arise out of the Autumn Statement, as

well as different departments affected by the announcements. I

would say to her as I said earlier, if she looks at the distributional

analysis of the Autumn Statement, she finds that it works modestly,

yes, but to the benefit of all income groups in society, except the

very richest, and I hope she would also agree that all families benefit

more than anything else from having parents in work and able to work.

The record numbers of people we have in employment is what is helping to

drive the reduction we have seen in the number of children who are

living in workless households and the introduction of universal credit

means people, including mothers of young children, who take on

part-time work, will still always find that works makes them better

off than staying on benefits. Can I thank all the members about the kind

words about Jo Cox. Yesterday the Chancellor announced infrastructure

funding for broadband in rural areas. This is a problem for my

constituents and people who work in dockyards. Can the government debate

on how it plans to improve speeds for all areas? The additional money

that the Chancellor announced yesterday to provide for

strategic infrastructure investment is additional to the current

programme of connecting people to high-speed broadband. That current

work will continue, and what was announced yesterday is additional to

that. Can I also thank the Leader of the House for his words about our

colleague Jo Cox. Can I also paid tribute to her incredible staff, who

have shown such as strength of character throughout this period, I

know she would be incredibly proud of what they achieved in her

absence. In 2012, the government axed careers advice, and put money

into a website, which collapsed in October, as it lost control of what

it could do. Can we have a statement from the government on how this

waste of taxpayer money was allowed to happen? Can I associate myself

with her tribute to Jo Cox's staff, and I know she herself had to

undertake a number of constituency duties between her murder and the

recent by-election, so she will have had personal knowledge of how hard

her staff have worked. On the point she raised, I am not aware of the

details of the case, that it sounds to me possibly something that may be

a serious use of -- misuse of public money, and you may want to have a

word with the chair of the Public Accounts Committee because that

probably would be the appropriate parliamentary means to investigate

this further. Can I also associate myself with the tributes made to our

colleague Jo Cox. Yesterday we heard a lot from the Chancellor about

increasing productivity, but can we have a statement on increasing

ministerial productivity? I refer to the government's review of

employment tribunal fees, which have been sitting on his desk for over a

year now, and he appears not to have even read it. Thousands of people

are being denied access to justice, but this report has not been acted

upon. When will something happen? I will have a word with the relevant

minister, I cannot promise the reply will be the one he wishes for, but

let's get the relevant Minister to write to him, so he can see what

current thinking is. And we have a ministerial statement addressing the

rear but dramatic issue experienced by my constituent, a transgendered

woman, having reached the militarily gen seeking her pension, her case is

with the Tribunal service, having undergone surgery when gender

realignment certificates were not possible. Her passport and driving

licence recognise her female service, but the government is

rooting through an upsetting process to prove she is living as a woman.

There will be a backbench debate on transgender equality that may give

him the opportunity to raise this particular case. If he is having any

problems himself in corresponding with government departments, I am

always ready to help any member get a prompt reply. Yesterday I asked

the Prime Minister how she could justify the scrapping of the May

be's heavy duty service charge with no replacement. The Prime Minister

replied that she did not recognise the situation I described. But the

truth is that it is the case that at the end of 2018, this missile will

be scrapped and there will be no replacement and this is against the

advice of the Navy. Can we have a debate about naval defence in the

Prime Minister's first opportunity. The Ministry of Defence, while it

has a significant budget and quite old terms, does still have to take

difficult decisions, including decisions at times to phase out and

to replace particular weapon systems or weapon platforms. I will make

sure that defence ministers are aware of the honourable gentleman's

concerns. This subject might be an appropriate backbench debate or

something and you may wish to raise on the adjournment. On November the

7th, in a debate in Westminster Hall on the future of shipbuilding, the

honourable member for West Worcestershire, who is defence

procurement minister said, the National shipbuilding strategy will

report by the Autumn Statement. The Autumn Statement was yesterday and

we still haven't seen the strategy. Can the Beta is sure that the

Secretary of State for Defence comes to this chamber and makes a

statement on exactly what is happening to the national

shipbuilding strategy? I had noticed that this matter was raised

yesterday, so I did check out the current position with the Ministry

of Defence this morning. My understanding is that Sir John

Parker has now submitted his independent report and did so just

before the Autumn Statement. That is being considered by ministers.

Defence ministers do intend to publish his report soon, and they

will then be providing a more considered response to the detail of

his report at a later date. The chaotic sustainability and

transformation plan, warp commonly known as the slash, trash and

privatised programme, is being compounded by reports that our

General Hospital is to be caused, marriage is unmoved. If we can't

have a debate on this in government time, can we have a debate on the

report of the health select committee to demonstrate how the

government is bamboozling the public with false claims of money to the

NHS that it isn't actually providing? I simply don't agree with

his final comments. The government has provided ?10 billion to the NHS

over the period of the current five-year plan, plus the preceding

financial year. And in giving evidence to the health select

committee, the chief executive of the National Health Service in

England said that the government had provided the upfront funding that he

was seeking. When it comes to the STPs. The important thing is they

are determined locally. They are not being imposed from on high. He will

also find that the health of oversight committee of his local

authority has the right to challenge proposals presented under a STP, and

if they feel sufficiently strongly, to revert that to the Secretary of

State for a second look. But it is important, not just that the

government, as it is doing, spends more money on the National Health

Service, but the National Health Service looks at the way in which it

is operating, so that it is getting the best possible value of their

patients out of every penny that is being spent. An important tenet of

the better together campaign was that the people of Scotland should

vote no to Scottish independence in order to protect their pensions.

Yesterday, the Chancellor suggested that the triple lock may be set to

go. Can we have a debate in government time on the future of

state pensions, to discuss the prospect of future cuts and this

potential betrayal to the people of Scotland? The Chancellor was very

clear yesterday that the triple lock is going to remain in place for the

duration of this government's lifetime. At the next general

election in 2020, it will be for all political parties to put forward

what ever proposals they wish on pensions, as anything else. The

biggest threat to the well-being of pensioners in Scotland would come

from a vote for separation, which would plunge Scotland into the kind

of economic instability where pensioners and others relying on

fixed incomes are likely to lose out heavily. People living close to

recreational airfields don't have the same protection from noise and

nuisance that people living close to similar recreational activities that

stay in the ground have. In a statement from the Department for

Communities and Local Government on this issue, its impact on local

people and what they're going to do about it? I refer him to the

questions next Monday and hope he is lucky in that tracked in your eye,

Mr Speaker. Dee Valley water is valued independent business in North

East Wales, supply water to Wrexham in Chester. Its independence and

many jobs are threatened by the takeover by Southern Trent. If local

decision-making is important, what say you local people in my area have

about yourselves and the water that they drink? Clearly, this is a

commercial decision for the two companies concerned, and while I

understand the concerns he has expressed, I don't know the details,

there may be a question in mind that a larger company would be able to

provide more capital investment for his area, so people might be able to

benefit. I suggest to him this is probably a suitable subject for an

adjournment debate. The new administration has been quick to

jettison just about every aspect of the predecessor, so when will we get

rid of the farcical procedures, on Monday night, nobody had a clue what

was going on. There were no divisions, there were no English

Casper English laws. Surely he agrees the answer is not this mess

left him by his predecessor? I am absolutely confident that the teller

knew what was going on at all times, and if last Monday's events raised

any concern about the technical operation of the procedures, then as

the honourable gentleman knows, I am currently carrying out a review of

those procedures, embodied in standing orders, and he's welcome to

submit evidence to me. But the basic principle remains right, that where

legislation affects only England, and that matter is devolved to the

Scottish Parliament in Scotland, Ben English members here should exercise

a veto upon whether that legislation passes or not. I am sure you were

watching avidly last Sunday as Andy Murray one the ATP world tour 's

finals and retained his position as the world's number one tennis player

in the singles, joining his brother, who is number one player in the

doubles. These brothers are the pride of Dunblane. I wonder if we

can have a debate on the legacy to tennis and the wider benefit that

sporting excellence can have in terms of getting the next generation

of sporting heroes? I did indeed watch both Andy and to meet several

times last week, and the honourable gentleman will not be surprised to

know that I bellowed on regular occasions in their support, albeit

in an entirely orderly manner. I am very happy to add my congratulations

to both Andy and Jamie Murray and while I can see people of Dunblane

and Scotland will take a special pride in their achievement, I think

that that pride is shared by everybody else in all parts of the

UK. I hope that the tennis authorities will use this

achievement as the springboard to intensify their efforts to improve

the opportunities available through, both the grassroots tennis and

through coaching schemes for the most able players, so we produce

eight new generation of tennis players, both men and women, to

follow in their footsteps. If the honourable gentleman won the debate

on the matter, I can't take part, but if he wants an adjournment

debate on the matter, I am saying he might secure it. This flawed

neoclassical theoretical assumptions, combined with problems,

are enshrined in the model of the UK economy used by both the Treasury

and other bodies, so I would call into question how independent that

makes the OBR. When can we have a debate on this? It is up to the OBR

to decide how it meets its own forecasts, and the assumptions on

which it makes them. They do publish with their report a statement of the

various assumptions they make, but if he isn't happy with the OBR,

there is a plethora of other independent forecasts, using

methodologies that defer to a great or lesser extent. I think this is

the question. Can I join others in ensuring our thoughts and prayers

are with Jo Cox's family and her staff. As you predicted yesterday,

following my point of order, I do wish to push the Leader of the How

is just a little further in terms of the National shipbuilding strategy.

Can he ensure and feedback to ministers that many members want to

debate the strategy and the government response to it. It is an

important industry and it needs topped up. Those of us who represent

shipyards, we'd be obliged if the Leader would be amenable to that. I

do understand the importance of the industry to his constituency, as in

all parts of the UK. The position is, as described it earlier. The

first thing the house will want is to see Sir John Parker's report and

members to bomb views on that. But I will certainly be leader colleagues

in defence the importers that he and other honourable members attached to

this matter. Point of order, Mr Alex Salmond. During business questions,

in answer to the right Honourable member for Rhondda, the Leader of

the Coasting to suggest there was? Over with their resolution would

come forward on the second reading of the boundaries Bill but this has

class overwhelmingly last Friday. You will remember that there was one

example in the last parliament with this happens, I wasn't viewed at the

time. Due to the incoherence of the Coalition Government