26/10/2017 Business Questions

Business question, Valerie Vaz.

Could the Leader of the House give

us the forthcoming business?

The

Leader of the House.

Thank you,

business for the week commencing

30th October will be Monday 30th

October, second reading of armed

forces flexible working bill.

Tuesday, remaining stages of finance

bill. Wednesday, the 1st November,

opposition day. Thursday 2nd

November, debate on a motion on

Calais and uncompanied child

refugees in Europe and a debate on

sexual harassment in schools. The

subjects for these debates were

determined by the business

committee. The provisional business

for the week commencing 6th November

will be Monday 6th, business to be

nominated. Tuesday business to be

nominated by the committee. The

provisional business for the week

commenting 13th November, will

include on Monday 13th November

second reading of the bill. Tuesday

14th November the committee of House

of the European Union withdrawal

bill day one.

Wednesday 15th, committee of the

whole House of the European Union

Withdrawal Bill day to. Thursday

16th, business to be nominated by

the backbench business committee,

and Freddie 17th, the House will not

be sitting. I should like to inform

the House that the business in

Westminster Hall for the 2nd of

November is a general debate on HMRC

closures, and on Monday the sixth, a

petition relating to mental health

education in schools. I am pleased

to inform the House that there are a

further rate committees on the order

paper for the establishment today or

Monday, including the committees on

standards and privileges and the

joint committee on statutory

instruments. All remaining

committees will be set up as soon as

possible. I would also like to

direct the attention of members to

the written ministerial statement I

have laid this morning on opposition

Day debates. Following the

suggestions of many members

including my honourable friend the

Member for Wellingborough, where an

opposition day motion is passed, the

relevant minister will respond to

the vote by making a statement to

the House. This will be within a

maximum time period of 12 weeks. I

have updated members of both houses

on the restoration and renewal of

the Palace of Westminster. This is

an urgent manager for Parliament, so

the government is facilitating a

debate in both houses to ensure

swift progress can be made. It is

key that the work to repair the

Palace offers the best value for

taxpayers money as well as ensuring

the safety of the many visitors and

staff who work in and visit the

Palace of the year. Thank you.

Thank

you Mr Speaker. I am delighted to

see that the Leader of the House has

given us until November the 17th,

even though one week is two days of

backbench committees and the other

best days of recess. We have the two

days of the EU bill and those will

take place on the 14th and 15th.

Could she confirmed we will have all

eight days of committee stage of the

House before the Christmas recess? I

am pleased that the Leader of the

House has raised this, but sadly I

only received this note this

morning, and it was embargoed until

10:30am on opposition day debates. I

checked with the library before

coming in, but they do not appear to

have it, so I'm not sure it has been

published. I'm not even sure if you

have seen a copy of it. I have

concerns because, as the reader

said, it will be a resolution of the

House on opposition days, and the

Minister will make a statement no

more than 12 -- with no more than 12

weeks after the debate. So could the

Leader of the House please say

whether the Minister will be

attending in the chamber, because I

understood that was the purpose of

windups. Secondly, the Leader of the

House seems to have two tiers of

resolutions of the House, it is the

resolution of the House for

opposition days, then the normal

resolutions of the House. Could she

say what discussions she has had

with the clerics and the Speaker

about these tears, and whether it

should be amended. She says in the

last paragraph that this is in line

with suggestions made by members

across the House, could I say there

has been no discussions with

business managers on our side? And I

do not think this is acceptable, and

no way to treat the House. This is

rapidly becoming like the House of

games, a combination of the House of

cards on the game of thrones, and

the government should get their

House in order and deal with the

democracy of why we're here, are

elected representatives to speak on

the half of our constituents. The

reader may also want to correct what

she said to the House last week, but

there were discussions about

sanctions and anti-money-laundering

bills in place. There were no

discussions. My friends on the other

place have said they were told the

bill would start there. There was a

first reading member Bill was

published. That cannot possibly be

right. That must be profoundly

against the democracy of the country

that there is a first reading then

no one has sight of the bill until

the next day. So, could the Leader

of the House confirm this will not

be used again? We have all received

a letter on the debate in September,

but there will be a delay of 18

months just to get to a position

where the report that was published

in 2016 of a final option. This

actually takes the opposition --

option away from members because it

says the House members will be able

to vote yes or no macro. This cannot

be acceptable. I see no reason why

these options cannot be set up

without the delivery authority. Can

she let me know how many consultants

there have been on the costs of

people who have been appointed.

Issue really asking our gracious

sovereign to attend the building

site, and will hard hats be

available? In a week we're, through

his actions, a government whip

raises the

spectre of... His inspiration was

Lennon and McCartney, because he

wanted to be a paperback writer. If

he was writing a book, should he

have written on whip headed paper?

You should have been clear what the

information was. He could have found

all the information out if he had

looked at the University because

four years ago these apparent

students -- the students who are

being brainwashed by the

universities, economic

undergraduates formed the postgrad

society, they criticise university

courses are doing little to explain

why economists failed to warn about

the global financial crisis, and for

having too heavy a focus on jobs,

and not focusing on theories. I'm

afraid the reader is on her own. It

is not an isolated because all those

who received it sounded menacing

unthreatening. That is including the

Prime Minister. She has also

distance herself from this. There

seems to be a return to the nasty

party.

Nearly three months after the

employment Tribunal is policy was

struck down by the Supreme Court,

the government has only now revealed

plans for the refunds, and they will

be made when officials are starting

to rate to 1000 people. That was

also hidden in a written statement.

With the leaders say when the former

Justice Secretary will apologise for

acting unlawfully, and when will

claimants receive their refunds

including interest? Why is the

government to press ahead with the

legal aid fees in criminal cases,

despite 97% of submissions and

against these plans. It may be

hoping to challenge the decision is

made against the evidence, with no

valid reasons. To Brexit. The

farmers say that no deal will have

severe effects on them. This week UK

business leaders from Britain have

asked the EU to establish that the

situation mirrors the existing

situation. In March 29, if there is

no deal, what will the government be

implemented? Yesterday, before 12pm,

the Secretary of State said to

select committee, there will a vote

on a deal after March 2019. After

then he intends the will be a vote

before. No wonder we are stuck.

Remember the urban negotiating with

friends, not enemies. We worked with

them on Common causes of growth

strategies, climate change, tax

avoidance, health and well-being,

and the peace and security of our

nations. Finally, we say goodbye to

fats Domino and thank him for all

those wonderful songs and

congratulations to the new Labour

Prime Minister of New Zealand. It

was the Leader of the Opposition who

said at the time of the election, do

it for us, and she did.

I would like

to start joining in wishing New

Zealand well with a new New Zealand

leader. I'm not sure the opposition

of welcomed the achievements of

women on this side of the House, but

nevertheless I am very happy to

welcome the achievement of the

people of New Zealand. In response

to her specific questions, she will

be aware that my office rang her as

to give advance notice of the laying

of the WMS, which was published at

10:30am, which is appropriate. It

has been published, that is

confirmed, so she is not wrong, and

is incorrect to suggest it was not

published. She asks whether a

minister will attend the House, and

I can tell her that it is intended

that ministers will attend in person

wherever possible, but it is

possible that a written ministerial

statement will be provided from time

to time. It is also intended that 12

weeks is the maximum time before a

ministerial responses provided. She

asks if standing orders need to be

amended, no they do not. There was

no discussion on this, she says. Can

I say to her, as the representative

of the government in parliament and

as Parliament's representative in

government, it is for the Leader of

the House to listen to all members,

and it is members across the House

who have been urging a response from

government, and that is what we have

responded to. She talks about the

R&R options that have been put in

front of the House. It is right that

we have the best value for taxpayers

money. It has been clear that the

party opposite do not care about

taxpayers money, and honourable

members opposite constantly talk

about just going with three options

in front of this House, but the

reality is that the full cost of

each option have not yet been

bottomed out, and that is the reason

it is important to set up an

independent delivery authority that

can assess the costs in a short

space of time so they can... The

honourable members shouting 18

months, we need to bottom out the

costs. We need to get the best

possible value for future

generations, and the members of the

House should support that. It is

rightly take the decision across

both houses that will look at the

full cost and then make a

recommendation across both houses.

It is right that whoever oversees

this has parliamentary

representation. She asks about the

universities and what the response

should be to a question on their

courses, and I can say to her that

across this House we support free

speech. Our universities are total

bastions of free speech and they

should absolutely welcome

exploration of all sides of an

argument. I will leave it there on

that point. She asks about the issue

of refunds to claimants following a

judiciary review. As I understand

it, that was discussed in the select

committee for Justice this week, and

I urge her to look at that. I can

write separately with information on

that discussion. She then comes onto

the subject of Brexit, and what I

can say to members is that the Prime

Minister set out in her Florence

speech a very generous and

collegiate offer to the European

Union. I am delighted that following

the European Council there have been

warm and improving tones coming from

European leaders about the prospects

for moving on to discuss trade and

cooperation across all areas. The

government remains committed to

getting an excellent deal for the

United Kingdom and our EU friends

and neighbours, and we believe that

will be possible to do before March

2019. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Can we have a debate on making

better use of natural resources. In

a few days we will go through that

ritual of putting our clocks back an

hour and plunging the nation into

darknessed by mrch. By mid

afternoon. Can we look at putting

our clocks forward an our. It would

reduce accidents.

I'm aware this has

been a long-standing issue with

strong views on all sides. At this

time of year it is something my

honourable friend might want to

raise in an adjournment debate.

There are views on accidents and

agriculture and it is important all

those views are taken into account.

Can I thank the Leader of the House

for the business of next week.

Another week, another no play. This

is a Government that couldn't even

organise a vote in a Parliament. We

have had a woeful statement of

opposition days which says a

minister will respond within a 12

week period if the House approved a

motion. Instead of a statement

months later why not get the

Government to agree to what the

House has agreed in the votes.

Scotland has to be the hardest

impacted part of UK with this Tory

hard Brexit. We didn't vote for it

and we have been taken out against

our national will. Now the

Government says that they won't let

the Scottish people see the cost of

this disaster that is coming. Sure

think Scottish people have every

right to see what the cost of this

Brexit will be and they then have an

opportunity to assess all the

options that will be available to

them. And finally, I wonder if

myself and the Leader of the House

could get together with the speak

tore assist our new Conservatives

colleagues from Scotland. They seem

to have a difficulty in

distinguishing what is a reserve

responsibility and what is devolved

responsibility and if the occupants

of your chair are getting tired of

constantly having to correct them on

this. Maybe we could do a Father Ted

to Father Dougall. These are the

powers for this Parliament, these

are the powers for a Parliament far

away. Maybe it is not good news for

them, because they will have nothing

else to talk about in this House.

Well, Mr Speaker, I'm sorry to say

that I'm concerned that the

honourable gentleman is showing is

an inability to understand how

Parliament works. As you said, Mr

Speaker, it is not for Parliament to

tell individual MPs that they have

to vote or indeed how they should

vote. It is a matter for parties and

members of Parliament I'm sure that

the honourable gentleman will recall

days when his Scottish nationalists

have abstained on a vaet. Vote. Its

for them to be able to do so and it

is for members on all side to decide

whether they wish to vote. You have

made clear when the House does

express an opinion and a motion is

passed that is a motion of this

House. What I have set out is how

the Government intends to respond to

an opposition day motion that is

passed. That is genuinely an effort

on the part of Government to be

listening to members across the

House, to be responding to the

concerns that they have raised and

to be coming back to this chamber to

make sure that the response of

Government is seen and understood by

all members. I think he should

welcome that, rather than displaying

a lack of understanding of

Parliamentary process. He also

insists on some plans for the cost

of Brexit. I think again he is not

understanding how this works. There

is a negotiation going on at

presents and once that negotiation

has happened, we will be able to

assess the implementation

implication and what the costs are.

That is how it works. He seems to

suggest that my honourable friends

the very excellent Scottish

Conservative MPs are somehow

representing their constituents in a

way that he doesn't like. Well, I

absolutely encourage my honourable

friends to carry on with the

excellent work they're doing to hold

the Scottish Government to account

and to make very clear those areas

where in England people are being

better looked after than they are in

Scotland. It is absolutely right

that they should be doing that and I

encourage hem to continue.

Will mmd

v my honourable friend find time for

a debate on support for children who

suffer from diabetes in school.

Diabetes UK understand the

challenges that our schools face,

but they think there should be

further training given to staff

charged with this particular

responsibility of giving support.

I'm very sympathetic to my

honourable friend's point. In fact I

have a brother-in-law who was

himself a child diabetic and I am

aware things have improved in

schools and there is a requirement

since 2014 where, the Government has

introduced a new duty on schools to

arrange support for pupils with

medical conditions such as this, I'm

very aware of the constituency MP of

challenges where parents have found

schools have struggled to find that

sup fort. I encourage him to

continue to take up this issue,

perhaps through an adjournment

debate.

Could I thank the minister

for the notice of time that is very

useful indeed. We have received 21

applications over the last three

weeks and I have a number of debates

which have not yet been allocated

time. Could I ask one question about

what she said about opposition days,

and the 12 week response time. Would

that also apply to backbench

business debates if there was a

division of the House on a backbench

motion and would that be a response

within 12 sitting weeks or 12

calendar weeks. And you may remember

I ventured a crack pot theory last

week that the House was suffering a

far day cage affect because of

scaffolding, I had a call from

technical services to confirm that

my crack pot theory was right and

telephone cables are being affected.

The honourable gentleman is not only

a good chair of backbench business

committee, but he has other

qualities to boot. Including a

degree of technological or

scientific or either

physicist-orientated knowledge. But

the honourable gentleman has

recovered since then. The House re

-- rejoices in his distinction.

Thank you I can't to look into this

issue. I'm glad he is ahead of me on

that. The honourable gentleman will

be aware that there are significant

differences between opposition and

backbench business days. Backbench

business motions are selected by a

cross party committee with cross

party support and the majority of

the time they have therefore

nonpartisan motions which are

designed very importantly to

facilitate cross party debates,

which I think they do effectively.

My proposal for statements is

specifically for opposition day

motions. But I will indeed take on

board his point and wherever

possible of course ministers do come

back to respond during the debate on

matters that they can take forward

following those cross party

discussions.

We know the power of

language, especially you and we have

a duty to respect that power outside

the chamber. Can we have a debate on

the use of misogynistic and

homophobic language?

Well, my

honourable friend is absolutely

right to raise this point. I think

we have all right across the House

been disgusted by some of the

reports of some appalling language

used. And it is right we should have

a debate on this. We have had a

debate on abuse and intimidation

during the general election. It is

right all members are careful and

considered in how they refer to

other people. But it is much broader

than that, we have seen an enormous

amount of abuse going on against

people in public life. We want to

encourage people to feel that they

can come into public life and not

receive that abuse. Any support that

my honourable friend needs in

bringing forward such a debate, I

would be happy to provide.

Can we

have a debate on whether Government

ministers understand the concept of

urgent? Because the Leader of the

House said earlier that it is an

urgent problem that, the state of

Palace of Westminster. Yet, the

joint committee on which her

predecessor but two, because we are

getting through leaders of the House

at a pace, the leader but two ago

agreed there was an impending crisis

and that was publish on 8th

September last year with a guarantee

of a vote by Christmas last year.

Now she says we will have a debate

by the end of this year and we are

not going to make a decision, but

delay it for 18 months. Just let the

House make a decision if you

understand the concept.

Do you

understand the continue September or

perhaps the honourable gentleman

misspoke? But essentially this is an

urgent matter for Parliament to

resolve. The honourable gentleman be

aware since I became Leader of the

House we have had a commission

chaired by Mr Speaker actually lets

and contracts to ensure that urgent

repairs to this House are carried

out to ensure that we do have a safe

space to work, while this decision

is taken. As I have made clear, we

have to ensure value for taxpayers'

money. The joint committee made a

recommendation without having been

able, having been in a position, to

pin down the entire cost of the

option they were proposing. It is

essential that work is done and it

will be done as quickly as possible.

John Howell.

Can we have a debate on

the puma II helicopter which is an

aircraft that can be deployed on

contingent operations very quickly

and is often providing assistance to

those in desperate need?

Well, my

honourable friend raises a point

about his constituency, RAF Benson,

who do a huge amount of very

supportive work in promotion of

Government priorities, including

support for those suffering from the

hurricanes in recent months. And I

encourage him to seek to find a way

to have a debate on this important

subject.

I wonder if the Leader of

the House would draw the attention

of Chancellor to a debate led by the

member for Mitch ham concentrating

on local authority funeral fees and

my campaign to establish a

children's funeral fund. She way

wish to draw to the Chancellor's

attention the consensus across the

House that if he was to make

provision for such a fund in the

budget it would not only be welcomed

by colleagues, but by the public in

general.

I certainly commend the

honourable lady for her

long-standing commitment to this

issue. And I do urge her to seek a

way to raise that directly with the

Chancellor. I would be very

sympathetic to her concerns.

Will my

honourable friend find time for a

debate for health outcomes across

the regions and nations of United

Kingdom in the light of the highly

critical audit Scotland report on

the state of the NHS in Scotland,

which exposes how badly the SNP have

mismanaged the NHS since they came

to power more than ten years ago?

Absolutely. My honourable friend

raises a very important point. Which

is the inequalities across the

nations of the United Kingdom in

certain areas and the members on the

SNP benches there are shouting and

yelling, because they don't want a

spotlight on their activities in

government in Scotland. BuI think on

these benches my honourable friends

will continue to raise their inned a

Quaye sis. -- inadequacies.

Can she

answer a question the Prime Minister

failed to, has the Government or its

agencies received any requests from

the congressional investigator in

the United States for help in their

ink inquiry into the Russian sub

version of American election?

If the

honourable gentleman wants to write

to me on this I will see if I can

get him an answer.

My thoughts and prayers are with the

people of Kenya today as they go to

the polls and we wish a peaceful

outcome and dialogue between

government and opposition for the

future. Can we have a statement on

the current situation with the

overseas territories in the

Caribbean after the terrible effects

of hurricane -- Hurricane to. It is

crucial that the assistance from the

OECD should not stop making that

available.

He will be aware that

every assistance possible has been

given to those suffering from those

awful hurricanes and continues to be

provided. There have been statements

made in this House and I suggest he

raises this either with CF IDE or

Foreign Office questions at the next

opportunity. -- DFID.

We have proof

that Russian millionaire is at

interfering with elections. Can we

have an urgent debate about having

no integrity over elections,

regarding a second Brexit vote?

I

think he is as concerned as members

are across the House about potential

intervention in democratic systems,

and he will be aware that a lot of

investigatory work has been going

on, and he will know very well of

appropriate ways to raise the matter

through a debate in this House.

The

government has helpfully published a

number of plans post-Brexit. Could I

ask the Leader of the House to ask

for a plan on financial services. It

is the largest export sector and

affects many of my constituents.

I

share his enthusiasm, and I am sure

he is as delighted as I was when he

saw the UK's financial services

sector has extended its lead over

all financial services sectors

around the world, and that

announcement has been made only in

recent months. I will pass on his

request.

Could she clarify the

position from yesterday about the

statement on supported housing, and

would it be beneficial to have a

general debate in government time on

fear rent -- fair. Tenants of mine

is part of a group, new tenants are

being charged lower rent than

existing tenants. And I have taken

it up with them, they refused to

lower the rents for the existing

tenants, which is taking money away

from vulnerable parents and those

struggling to make ends meet. Could

we have a debate managed by the

local authority? Nel as ever, I

encourage him to take up specific

cases directly with DC LG. It is

vital that we all represent the

individual problems that crop up.

The last Spending Review we

committed 400 million to deliver a

further 8000 units, and we're

working towards a model that is

responsive to the needs of this

diverse sector and delivers

long-term sustainability. So, I

think we are on the same side in

solving this argument, and

individual issues he should take up.

Last week the Scottish Government

give itself a pat on the back for

being on track with its commitments

over access to superfast broadband.

However the reality is that as of

2016, 2000 premises in Scotland were

still without -- 20% of premises in

Scotland were still without

superfast broadband, compared with

11% in the rest of the UK. Will my

honourable friend find time to

debate this issue of improving

broadband connections?

She hasn't

answered yet!

LAUGHTER

It is very important to

hear from my honourable friend, but

it is also important that I reply to

him because he is absolutely right

that the SNP do like to take credit

for things going well and to try to

blame this Westminster Parliament

when things do not go so well.

The UK Government has provided £100

million for phase one broadband

roll-out in Scotland, and has

committed nearly £21 million for

phase two. Superfast broadband in

Scotland now reaches 91.8% of homes,

but only 78% in the Scottish

Borders, so the plans for Scotland

is to get superfast broadband by

2021, whereas the UK Government plan

to achieve it by 2017.

The UK

Government's own deadline is the 1st

of November the ratification of the

convention, so can the Leader of the

House confirmed that the government

will issue an oral statement on

this, and does she agree that this

is an important convention?

I cannot

answer his question because I did

not get sight of it, but I will

answer that if he hates to me. I

agree that the Istanbul convention

is very important.

Opposition Day

motions will be responded to by an

oral statement within 12 weeks, that

was committed. That convention is a

slight movement back to the House

from the executive could we have a

statement next week perhaps by the

shadow do it a leader on the House

-- of the House on this issue so we

can press this and get it extended

to any motions in this House and

perhaps also backed up by a written

statement, and also have a progress

debate on how government is dealing

with this on each session.

I think I

have already given a lot considering

my honourable friend did not buy me

that glass of wine when we discussed

this. But I am always keen to hear

thoughts from members across the

House.

I'm sure the Leader of the

House knows that I was not trying to

jump the queue, but I was eager to

ask if she had seen the comments of

Sir David Attenborough about marine

pollution this week, and the growing

evidence that we are poisoning the

oceans of this world, and could we

have an early debate on this, and a

series of debates and statements? It

is too important to leave.

There is

absolutely cross-party consensus

that David Attenborough is a

national treasure, but second ball,

vital that we do everything we can

to stop and reverse marine

pollution. This government has done

an enormous amount to create a blue

belt around overseas territories, to

ensure the protection of those

areas. We're looking at what further

we can do to reduce litter on land

which often ends up in seas, and

also the ban on Micro plastics, I

was pleased to put forward. The

Secretary of State is fully

committed to this, and there will be

many more initiatives from this --

to address this very issue.

The

Secretary of State for the

environment has rightly highlighted

the danger of intensive farming on

soil nutrient levels. The Woodland

Trust have rightly highlighted the

grave danger that ancient woodland

is in in terms of soils and

environment, and indeed ancient

pastures. Can the leader considered

a debate to look at the profile

around these ancient and important

issues and these very precious

sites.

I think we all enormously

value ancient woodland, and any

members who have not been to one, I

do encourage them to do so, because

it is astonishing, some of the

oldest woodlands we have in the

United Kingdom at irreplaceable. She

is right to raise the importance of

protecting soil, and as DEFRA

Secretary of State myself, I

attended a conference sponsored by

the Prince of Wales to discuss this

issue and the importance of reducing

the inventiveness of agricultural

activity to reduce the damage being

done. It is something my right

honourable friend is determined to

promote.

Can we have a debate or

statement on the application of the

1985 prosecution of offensive acts,

because John Bryant, the campaigner,

has set to take action about a

racehorse owner,... Magistrates have

repeatedly refused to issue a

summons.

We cannot interfere with

the law, and we have got a case

where a general answer will be all

right. Who have got next?

The

weekend before last, I attended a

brilliantly organised world Squash

Day event, organised by my

constituent James Roberts.

Frustratingly we do not have any

squash courts at the moment. Can we

have a debate to discuss the

benefits of squash, but also the

pressing need for squash courts.

I

would like to invite his

constituents to come and play squash

down the road in my constituency,

where we are doing rather well in

some of the leagues. His

constituents might like to come and

get some training. He is right, we

want to do more for this, I

encourage him to have an adjournment

debate on what more can be done.

In

light of unlawful calls made by blue

telecoms under half of the

Conservative Party during the

general election, can the Leader of

the House and your time is made

available for a debate about the

importance of all political parties

fully complying with the electoral

roll?

All members agree that all

political parties should abide by

electoral law, and if there were any

issues, we will be taken up by the

Electoral Commission.

Can we have a

debate about emergency medication.

Back in 2013, before I was elected,

the emergency department was

downgraded, can we have a debate to

establish whether this explanation

still holds water?

Chillies is a

vital constituency matter, and is

right to do so. The decisions taken

by... I do encourage him to seek an

adjournment debate so he can hear

from ministers what more he can do

to protect his own medical

facilities.

I am sure the Leader of

the House agrees that our armed

services veterans deserve the best

treatment when they are suffering

from mental health problems,

including PTSD. My constituent

received treatment, but this

facility is now under threat of

closure. Can we have a debate in

government time regarding facilities

of brave veterans?

She is right to

raise the importance of looking

after our veterans, but secondly the

issue of mental health problems that

arise from the trauma that they

suffer. She will be aware that the

Ministry of Defence and the Royal

foundation have announced a

partnership to deal with the issues

around stigma and treatment for

mental health across the defence

community. The government is

determined to do what it can to try

to promote good strong mental

health, and she can raise these

points at defence questions.

Before the election, the Government

presented an excellent White Paper.

At the weekend, the Secretary of

State for communities and of the and

suggested the Government should

borrow £50 million to kick-start the

housing policy in this country. The

Chancellor, in his budget statement,

will make housing in this country a

keynote element, we are told. Could

my right honourable friend find time

in government time for a debate on

housing policy so that members of

this house can contribute ideas to

this before my right honourable

friend the Chancellor stands up to

make his budget statement.

My

honourable friend is right to point

out that sorting out our housing

market is not just a priority for

the Chancellor, it is a personal

priority for the Prime Minister, who

is determined to see us tackle the

ever-increasing challenge for young

people to get onto the housing

ladder, either to buy or to rent. I

am sure that my honourable friend,

as he is always able to do, we'll

find a way to raise this with the

Chancellor before the budget.

Yesterday I wrote to the CEO of RBS,

Ross McEwan, about my call for a

judge-led inquiry into the treatment

of smaller businesses by the bank.

His reply was I have no interest in

supporting another investigation

after four years of review. Many

small-business will regard his

comment that he has no interest in

it as dismissive and disrespectful,

given so many have seen our lives

torn apart as a result of what the

Financial Conduct Authority

describes as the inappropriate

treatment of SMEs. Can the leader of

the house ask a minister to respond

to my request for a judge-led

inquiry and to comment on what Mr

McEwan has said?

I would say first

of all that, as city minister, I

always found Ross McEwan to be

incredibly sympathetic to the issues

facing small businesses. I just want

to give an alternative view in that

regard. He is right that there have

been some appalling cases of banks

failing to support small businesses.

Certainly the Financial Conduct

Authority has looked at many

specific cases. They have carried

out quite an in-depth review. If the

honourable gentleman has further

specific cases, I am sure he should

raise them with ideally Financial

Conduct Authority or with the city

minister.

Many thanks. My

constituent attended my surgery last

week to inform me that she was

repeatedly raped and beaten by her

ex-partner and currently has an

injunction against his contacting

her. However, much to her horror she

has been told by her bank she can't

remove herself from the joint

account without attending with her

ex-partner and his agreement to this

change. So could we maybe have a

debate statement on the way that

banks are treating people under the

regulations that have been abused

domestic league and make sure these

changes can take place to ensure

their safety?

The honourable lady

raises an absolutely appalling

sounding situation. I am absolutely

sympathetic to her. I am quite sure

that there must be a way through

this. I do urge her to raise this

with ministers and try to find a way

forward for her constituent.

I was

delighted to attend the launch of

the Scottish Poppy Appeal yesterday.

What became apparent was that 2017

and 2018, there will be many

centenary is, particularly about the

role of women in The Great War. Can

we set aside time to properly

commemorate the centenary of these

occasions and give proper notice to

the country that we are remembering

those that made the ultimate

sacrifice?

I think this is a

cross-party supported issue and I am

absolutely certain that his

honourable friend the chairman of

the backbench committee would be

very interested in promoting such a

debate in this chamber. I would like

to share with the honourable

gentleman in paying tribute to all

of those that made the ultimate

sacrifice and, of course, to remind

honourable members that next year we

also celebrate the centenary of

women's suffrage. I think the

particular contribution of women

over the last 100 or so years is

something that we can all celebrate.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Government

reforms in 2015 lead to the

unlocking of pension pots for over

200,000 people. Today's financial

Times reports high-pressure sales

tactics, scaremongering and

mis-selling. Can we have a

government statement on this? It

looks as if another pension scandal

is brewing.

Well, like the

honourable gentleman I sort of April

Xhaka report. I share his concern.

It does look alarming and I am sure

he will find a way to raise this

with ministers.

Thank you, Mr Deputy

Speaker. I am currently pursuing a

meeting with a minister of the case

of my constituent, an Iraqi born

Kurd, granted citizenship in 2009.

He is currently trying to get his

one year daughter out of a war zone

around a area where she was born.

The issues he is facing, problems

with paperwork and the impossibility

of moving the case forward, it

seems, prompt me to ask whether we

can have a debate in this chamber

about how we are helping those

families torn apart by war coming

here for century or having to leave

family members at home. What we're

doing, and how we are working to

them.

I am incredibly sympathetic to

the honourable Lady's point. She is

absolutely right standard for her

constituent. We all, as constituency

MPs, do have cases where the

procedures seem to get in the way. I

do encourage her, if she would like

to like to write to me, I could take

it up with the Home Office or she

could take it up directly with

ministers.

On Sunday of last week, I

attended a charity fundraiser in my

constituency to help raise money to

buy women and girls sanitary

products, because they said we can't

afford them. This is a growing issue

in schools up and down the UK,

regardless of which administration

is in control. In the Leader of the

House find some time in government

time for a debate on the impact of

government cuts, particularly those

impacting on women and girls?

Well,

I would say to the honourable

gentleman that this government has

done more for women in the

workplace, for women's incomes, for

reducing inequality, for ensuring

more families have the security of a

pay packet and a wage to protect

themselves and their families than

in the 13 years of the Labour

government. He raises a very

specific point that he may wish to

raise at an adjournment debate or,

indeed, through oral questions.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. A

plumbing firm in my constituency is

going to close before Christmas,

having been sold as a going concern.

The reason being is because of false

debt accrued under the employer

pension provisions of the 1995

pensions act. When is the leader of

the house and this Government going

to act and make changes to these

regulations to stop more firms going

to the wall?

Well, the honourable

gentleman is raising an important

point about a business in his

constituency. He may well want to

look into that further through an

adjournment debate. The general

point about regulations, I do urge

him to raise with the Treasury,

Treasury questions, to see what more

can be done.

Thank you, Mr Deputy

Speaker. Given the Government's

recent and welcome conversion on the

road to Manchester regarding

Council, social and affordable

housing, could I ask for an urgent

debate ahead of the budget on what

support the Government is providing

to ensure that all local authority

owned land such as that in the

ownership of my local Warwick

District Council is used exclusively

in its provision, as this would be

the simplest, cheapest and most

significant action if its delivery.

I think the honourable gentleman is

absolutely right to raise the

importance of ensuring that local

authorities do all they can to

facilitate new house-building. He

will be aware that the Government is

exactly looking into how we can

facilitate exactly that. I encourage

him to raise that with ministers at

every opportunity.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I was

bitterly disappointed that the

leader didn't announce a debate

around the NHS. We have heard from

across the house about the state of

the NHS. In York, our health service

is going to run out of money within

a month. Can we have an urgent

debate on NHS funding ahead of the

budget, so we can make sure the

money goes into the right place? We

are having real Tim cuts in York. --

real terms cuts.

As I have said to a

number of honourable members, it is

absolutely right that we all focus

on the specific health issues in our

own constituencies. Where necessary,

that we defend them, absolutely. But

she will be aware that NHS funding

will be over half £1 trillion from

2015 to 2020. And that the

overwhelming majority of patients

continue to be seen within four

hours, that the Government is

investing more money in doctors, in

GP surgeries, in nursing training

and so on. The specific point she

raises, I think she should certainly

seek an adjournment debate to talk

about specific issues for York.

The

citizens advice bureau in Wrexham is

doing an excellent job at the moment

providing advice on the Universal

Credit and debt pressures. But

fortunately, the local authority is

proposing to withdraw funding for

the CAD in Wrexham at the end of

this financial year. Can we have an

urgent debate on advice and the

importance of funding advice for

people that are under financial

pressure?

Well, I will take this

opportunity to absolutely thank

citizens advice bureaus for all of

the excellent work they do in all of

our constituencies. The honourable

gentleman raised an important point,

that they are very often largely

volunteer funded, although they do a

lot of their own fundraising, and we

should all defend the budgets for

those citizens advice bureau is, as

well as the budgets for other

advisers who do provide a lot of

volunteer work to help people to

stay out of debt.

When honourable

members and right honourable members

e-mail the DWP Hotline, it would be

reasonable to expect an

acknowledgement of correspondence,

details of who is dealing with the

case and a rough time scale. Sadly,

this is not the case, as it simply

acts as a hub for passing on

inquiries. Can we therefore have a

statement from ministers as to how

it could be made fit for purpose?

It

is in fact a very good service and

Universal Credit from DWP. As the

honourable gentleman will be aware,

ministers are committed to

incremental improvements every time

they hear of some problem, they are

determined to resolve it. We have

seen that in recent weeks, that

ministers are responding. The

roll-out of Universal Credit is slow

and assured. 8% of benefits

recipients are now on Universal

Credit. That is expected to be only

up to about 10% by January, when the

next pause is due to look at what

more needs to be done. I am sure the

honourable gentleman has put his

concerns on the record and ministers

will be listening to that.

Mr Deputy

Speaker, ministers have said

recently that the pay cap on public

sector workers is now scrapped. It

obviously the reality on the ground

is that there will be no more money

for the public services who have to

find extra pay. Can we have a debate

at the floor at the heart of this,

to make sure that we do not see

erosion in police and other public

services.

Our public servants do a

fantastic job, for which we are all

incredibly grateful. But the

honourable gentleman will be aware

that our economy is still struggling

to recover from the state it was

left in in 2010. We are still

spending far more money than we take

in in tax revenues every year. We

have a choice. We can either tackle

at ourselves in this generation, all

we can leave it for our children and

grandchildren to deal with the

problems of this generation, left to

us by a Labour government. So what

is absolutely vital is that we

listen carefully and take the advice

of the independent pay review

bodies, that is what we are

committed to.

Can the leader of the house find

time next week to debate the

decision taken yesterday behind

closed doors of Airedale Hospital

trust, as part of a VAT scam to set

up a separate company, registered at

companies house, to run a large part

of its activities, with the power to

reduce the terms and conditions of

new stuff? -- staff.

That sounds a

concerning issue that he raises

regarding his constituency. I urge

him to take it up directly with

ministers in the Department of

Health.

Can we have an urgent debate

on the very worrying 13% increase in

crime, and a very worrying concerns

raised by Chief constables and the

ONS that this represents a genuine

increasing crime, not just changes

in reporting, rises in knife crime,

violent crime, homicides and the

pressure it is putting on police

resources question time the issues

of the impact of Spice and drug use,

and the police need extra resources

to cope with this rise in crime.

Firstly, I say to the honourable

gentleman that we are absolutely

committed to doing more. My right

honourable friend the Home Secretary

has announced her intention to bring

forward draft legislation on what we

can do to stamp out knife crime. We

already have the psychoactive

substances act, passed last year, to

try to deal with the increasing use

of psychoactive substances such as

the ones he mentioned. Actually, the

crime statistics, the figure this

year cannot be compared with the

previous year because the previous

estimate did not include fraud and

computer misuse offences. In fact,

crime is traditionally measured by

the independent crime survey by

England and Wales show a 9% fall

over the last year, which is a

continuation of the overall downward

trend.

Can we have a debate about routine

delays in the Home Office? Yesterday

the Immigration Minister promised a

Q&A session for 90 minutes, left

after 12 minutes. An insult to those

who turned up. My constituent

entered further submissions in his

asylum claim in 2014, but they have

still not be considered by the Home

Office's complex casework team. But

she think a three-year delay is

acceptable for someone who has fled

persecution in Georgia?

The

honourable lady is absolutely right

to raise a particular constituency

case and I doing courage heard to

speak to Home Office ministers and I

am sure I will take it up -- I do

encourage her. It does sound

extremely concerning and I'm

sympathetic.

I would like to welcome

the Leader of the House micro's

comments about the difference

between this government and the last

about their commitment to women, and

which you like comparative debate?

Could we have a debate on the rape

laws? The rise in maternity

discrimination because of the

charges now for going to court?

Could we have a debate on the one in

four women who cannot get refuge?

The number of split payments in

Universal Credit? Can we have a

debate on the gender pay gap and how

it is not closing? The women

under-25 not entitled to the minimum

wage? I could go on and on. I would

like some debates.

The honourable

lady raises an absolute smorgasbord

of issues which is a strong

supporter of women, I heartily

agree, we need to raise issues that

affect women. We also need to raise

issues that affect the entire

population of this country and this

government is determined to improve

the lives for all people in the

country. We have done a huge amount

specifically focused on women,

including having two female prime

ministers. We have improved the

numbers of women on boards, in

public life, the employment rate for

women, the wages of women, the

childcare support the families, were

both work, and it is absolutely

vital we continue to do that, and on

that, we can heartily agree.

If we

are going to have some debates, I

have read the leader's written

statement today, could we also add

to that, this has been caused by the

Government not turning up for

divisions on opposition day motions?

Could we issued to the government

Whip's offers white flags to waive

every time we have an opposition day

debate to provide a visual

representation of the reality of the

craven attitude of the Government to

opposition day debates?

The

honourable gentleman is plain wrong.

The side of the House has turned up

to all opposition day debates. We

have had senior ministers speaking

from the dispatch box, introducing

the debates, answering and

responding to all members' points.

We have had fully equal numbers of

government versus opposition

speakers, we have fully participated

in all of the debates. As Mr Speaker

has reminded the House, it is up to

individual members and parties on

whether they vote. His party

frequently abstains on votes. He

would not appreciate the side of the

House insisting he turns up and

votes against every single policy.

It is for individuals and parties to

decide whether and how to vote.

On

the 16th of October, there was a

bill which includes clauses are

rising religious conversion. These

types of clauses have been widely

missed in neighbouring countries and

used to persecute religious

minorities and there are signs that

these have begun to happen in the

poll. Would she agree to a statement

or debate on this very important

issue

or debate on this very important

issue?

-- in Nepal. It is the view

of the side of the House that all

religions should be protected, they

have the right to express their

views, free from fear and threat.

And I know the honourable gentleman

always finds a way to raise these

individual matters and it is right

he does so.

Thank you, Mr Deputy

Speaker. A doctor from the

University of the West of Scotland

has awarded... They will be

collaborating to support learning

has awarded... They will be

collaborating to support learning,

so as we approach the 13th of

November, can we have a debate and

nine members to discuss how

innovative approaches like this can

help?

-- honourable members.

Bullying is something that affects

all children and young people right

across our society and it is

something we are fully committed to

stamping out in every way we can. I

absolutely commend him for looking

at innovative ways to achieve this

and I urge him to raise this as a

suggestion for all members to take

up in their constituencies.

Last but

certainly not least, the member for

Scunthorpe.

Thank you. I recently

launched my small business Saturday

awards. Celebrating the richness and

diversity of small businesses. With

it coming up on the 2nd of December,

can we have a debate on the

contribution small businesses make

to our economy and communities

before that date?

I commend the

honourable gentleman for raising

this matter. Of course, small

businesses are the lifeblood of our

communities and we all share a

concern that too often the town

centre dies when small businesses

leave and close down. We should do

everything we can to support them.

Small business Saturday is something

the side of the House also welcomes

and fully takes part in and I think

we will all be visiting our local

small businesses on that Saturday.

Point of order. Could I raise a

point of order with the Leader of

the House? She may have

inadvertently misled the House to

say her statement, written

ministerial statement, was available

at 1030. We have had numerous times

when it is available, some say they

only receive the alerts at 1142,

could she looked at one statement is

produced that we all receive it at

the same time, when she presses that

button?

Mr Deputy Speaker, I can

only say again, it was published, I

have absolute assurance it was

published at 10:30am.

Thank you.

Further point of order.

I do not

mean... I'm not alleging anything

about the Leader of the House, but

the truth is, it was not available

on the parliamentary website, nor in

the vote office until 1130. The only

reason this matters because none of

us would want the Leader of the

House to be ill advised by others

and to be living in a state of

ignorance about what is actually

going on and the written ministerial

statement was about the timeliness

of responses so it would seem

appropriate to get it right.

I am

sure it can be taken and I am sure

the times can be put right and

nobody wants to mislead the House.

The Leader of the House seemed to

suggest part of the responsibilities

of a member of this post was to hold

the Scottish Government to account.

Short of getting Nicola Sturgeon in

the dispatch box, could you advise

us how we discharge these

responsibilities?

I do not think I

need to! That is the good news.

Point of order. I would like to... I

have informed the member concerned.

They hosted anti-Muslim extremists

last Wednesday. He is on record for

calling upon the UN to control the

birth rate of Muslims. Praising the

genocide of running the in Burma and

also said Muslims should be forced

to leave their religion if they come

to a western country. Only this

Monday, he was pictured with UK far

right extremist leader Tommy

Robinson. It seems incredible any

member would think it would be

acceptable to host a meeting with

this individual let alone invite him

to the House of Commons. Can you

please advise us all on our

responsibilities to protect

everything that this house stands

for and not allow it to be used as a

platform to propagate and legitimise

hate and extremist views?

Do you

want to come in?

I thank the

honourable member for notifying me

she was going to raise this point of

order. She has inadvertently misled

the House. Let me be clear, I did

not invite this person to this House

of Commons. I hosted in my capacity

as chairman of the all-party

Parliamentary group for British

Hindus to macro functions last

Wednesday at which he attended. One

was the annual celebration on House

of Commons terrace where a number of

honourable and right honourable

members attended, for Diwali. In the

evening, we had the launch by the

national council of Hindu temples of

a report into Hindu minority rights

in Bangladesh and Pakistan. He was

invited by the national council of

Hindu temples to attend that meeting

and present evidence of physical

attacks, rates and forced marriages

and forced conversions that have

taken place in West Bengal and other

places. I have made clear and the

national council of Hindu temples

has made clear it was only in that

capacity as presenting that evidence

that that individual was invited to

the House. He made no abhorrent

remarks at the meeting and I am

quite clear that both myself and the

national council of Hindu temples do

not agree with his views that have

previously been stated, do not

accept them, we do not endorse them

in any shape or form. But I think it

is right this House has the

opportunity to hear evidence from

people of what is happening in other

countries.

Let me just give you some

of the facts of where the House

stands. I thank the honourable lady

for notice of the point of order. I

also thank the honourable member for

clarifying parts of the position.

The Speaker's principal

responsibility for access to this

state by members of the public

relates to security in which I have

a particular role. Subject to that,

it is open to honourable members to

save who they wish and we all -- to

see who they wish and we all value

the rights of free speech. We do not

control the views of those who visit

here. All honourable members will

inadvertently hold meetings with

individuals whose views they do not

share. That said, I will place

firmly on the record the abhorrence

which I know is shared by all

colleagues about racism, bigotry,

such views have no place here. On

the eve of international freedom of

religion or belief day, I know all

colleagues want to do everything

possible to foster tolerance and

respect. Is there a further point of

order? Are we all right? OK.

Thank

you. In the social care debate

yesterday, the minister claimed the

number of people working in social

care has increased yet the ONS

workforce data says the number of

people working in other health and

social care had decreased every

quarter consistently for the last

five years. Is it in order to ask

the Minister could have in writing

the evidence that informed that

comment?

One thing is that I am sure

you will find another avenue in

which you may wish to put another

named a question done to solve the

problem. Point of order.

Further to

the point of order about the written

statement, this does tend to be a

perennial issue. Would it be

possible for the Leader of the House

to winch investigates what happened

this morning around her written

statement, to write an place that

letter in the library of the House

of Commons, to be clear as to

exactly what was the sequence of

events? There is a dispute about the

facts as to when the written

statement was released. She is

convinced it was released at 1030

and I'm sure she has been given that

information, but other honourable

members have had other experiences.

Would it be possible for that to

happen?

I am sure

the Leader of the House will take on

board the views of the House and

will want to check what information

was given and I am sure the House

matters to all members and therefore

I would like to think things will