14/09/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 14/09/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning folks. Welcome to the Daily Politics.


David Cameron intervened in Libya without a coherent strategy


and on the basis of false intelligence, say MPs.


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


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


says the European Commission President, but the UK should start


the process of leaving as "quickly as possible".


So what progress has been made so far?


We'll give you the Daily Politics Brexit Tracker.


Theresa May squares up for her third bout


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


And re-drawing the electoral map to make parliamentary seats


roughly equal in size - but how well do MPs know


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


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


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


the Mel and Sue of political broadcasting.


The new Work and Pensions Secretary Damian Green


and the former Labour Cabinet Minister Caroline Flint.


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


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


David Cameron launched airstrikes on Libya on the basis


of inaccurate intelligence and without a coherent strategy.


That's according to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee


report, which also claims that the intervention resulted


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


warfare and the growth of so-called Islamic State.


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


to Benghazi to stand alongside then French President Nicholas Sarkozy


and the rebel forces they had been supporting.


Colonel Gaddafi said he would hunt you down like rats,


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


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


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


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


and build your country for the future.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


the Islamist elements, Islamist extremist elements of the rebellion


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


former Prime Minister was ultimately responsible for the failure to


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


practically deliver your objectives, the first objective is a military


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


intelligence to look at the tribal problems that existed and the


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


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


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


the Prime Minister row is that ultimately be responsible at each


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


there is at least as much responsibility for the actions of


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


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


product of its engagement with the Gaddafi regime over the previous


years. Tony Blair's signal diplomatic achievement was the


disarming of Gaddafi and his missiles and his weapons of mass


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


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


Union. Damian Green, when we think back to


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


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


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


There was a 17 country coalition. The Arab league supported


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


agreement of a number of international nations, it was still


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


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


they underestimated the growth of extremism that then spread across


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


Focusing on David Cameron is particularly unfair. This was an


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


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


Cameron's decision to intervene in Libya despite mistakes made


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


There are consequences of doing something and consequences of not


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


Parliament did not discuss it as well.


It is such a confusing topic that even civil servants


are running around Whitehall, scratching their heads.


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


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


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


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


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


He also said the EU faced an "existential crisis"


following the Brexit vote, with countries quicker to say


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


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


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


our first Daily Politics Brexit Tracker.


One of the key questions is when leaving the EU


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


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


But there is more debate about how Article 50,


which starts negotiations, will be triggered.


The Prime Minister says there was "no legal obligation"


for a vote in parliament, though this week a committee


of peers described that as "constitutionally inappropriate".


We do at least know who will be negotiating with.


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


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


the federalist former Prime Minster of Belgium.


David Davis is our chief negotiator as Secretary


This week, he briefed peers and MPs on his


plans, but said that he would keep most of


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


but did not have "much grey hair yet".


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


The Leave Campaign's call for a points-based


Instead, Home Secretary Amber Rudd says she will consider introducing


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


our first Daily Politics Brexit Tracker.


One of the key questions is when leaving the EU


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


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


Mr Verhofstadt is the high priest, a fanatic.


In fact, there is only one real nationalist


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


and I frankly think that this appointment amounts to pretty much


a declaration of war, on any sensible negotiating process.


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


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


the issues that affect your department, Department for Work and


Pensions. Will it be your policy to insist


that EU migrants cannot claim welfare benefits until they have


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


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


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


country or indeed British citizens living in EU countries is precisely


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


negotiations, as David Davis made clear nobody going into negotiation


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


negotiating them, negotiating with our former European partners, still


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


too have a friendly negotiation so megaphone diplomacy s TV diplomacy


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


responsibility. The same will be true for every individual


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


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


having a successful negotiation. Compton Labour Party Caroline Flint.


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


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


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


straight after the European referendum. I think there has been


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


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


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


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


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


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


understand makes it difficult. He said Britain should reject key


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


Parliament is involved in these discussions. Doncaster you


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


England voted by substantial majority to leave, what is the


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


successful and three was dealing with concerns about immigration, on


immigration I asked further questions and it was the impact on


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


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


Now, the BBC has lost the Great British Bake Off


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


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


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


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


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


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


But first, can you guess when this happened?


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


Now it seems that Europe must again be kept waiting.


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


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


I can only give you one gallon, sir.


That will get you to your nearest garage.


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


send your answer to our special quiz email address -


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


conditions for Guess The Year on our website.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


fascinating how many things have changed already, you know,


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


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


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


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


fascinating that when we started talking about Theresa May as a


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


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


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


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


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


those concerns. Caroline expressed concerns about the certainty of this


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


that. In terms of consumers probably value for Monday.


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


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


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


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


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


being taken out of paying tax altogether. This government will


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


Secretary that passport in for a financial services is guaranteed to


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


give the honourable lady any different answer from the answer I


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


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


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


listening to the concerns of the Scottish government may wish to


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


be fully involved with the devolved organisations -- administrations.


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


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


right honourable friend join me in welcoming figures that show that


unemployment in my constituency has halved since 2010? And crucially


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


promote the value of technical skills and science and engineering,


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


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


very happy to join my honourable friend in welcoming the good


employment figures we have seen today. Unemployment has halved in


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


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


provide opportunities for young people, we need to ensure we


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


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


actually get as far as their talents will take them.


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


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


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


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


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


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


concentrate on the issues of education and his views on selection


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


failing, inadequate or need improvement. Those children and the


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


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


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


for a disadvantage and non-disadvantaged children, the


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


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


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


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


in levelling down. We believe in levelling up.


CHEERING. Mr Speaker, equality of opportunity


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


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


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


comprehensive system. The Secretary of State for Education suggested on


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


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


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


selection? What we are doing is setting up a


more diverse education system that provides more opportunities. And


what the right honourable gentleman appears to be defending is the


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


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


ensure that children have the ability to go where their talents


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


process. Can the Prime Minister confirm whether existing grammar


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


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


honourable gentleman is right that what we are looking and consulting


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


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


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


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


selective education. But he talks about good education for every


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


up the ladder behind them for other people.


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


Buckinghamshire in the answer to my question and presumably she will


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


we will see independent schools increasing their support for schools


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


when even has an opportunity for work.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


pupils in supersize classes, a crisis in teacher recruitment and


retention. Rising number of unqualified teachers in classrooms,


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


opposed measures that increase parental choice, that increase the


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


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


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


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


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


to face me, across this despatch box.


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


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


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


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


honourable gentleman has introduced. He wants coal mines without mining


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


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


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


loses. Can I just point out to the House


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


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


constituents to show some respect for those colleagues who want to


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


Craig Williams. Thank you. Students from Cardiff


schools and UK schools attended the recording of the British Holocaust


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


experience for them and a stark reminder to fight racism,


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


learning centre, which will ensure that there will be those


opportunities for young people and others truly to learn that the


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


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


willing or unable to give assurances about remaining in the European


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


assurances to the financial sector about protecting the passporting of


financial services, meanwhile, millions from across the United


Kingdom depend on freedom of movement across the EU for business


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


referendum on independence in Scotland, or questions in this


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


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


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


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


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


entitlement by a minority of students that means their wish not


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


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


does my right honourable friend agree that university is precisely


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


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


honourable friend, we want our universities not just places of


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


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


concept of safe spaces extraordinary. We want to see that


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


particularly vulnerable, potentially vulnerable from sexual violence from


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


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


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


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


criteria comes to guide our immigration system, it will be


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


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


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


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


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


to control movement from outside the European Union into the United


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


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


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


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


degree of fairness that I think people were looking for.


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


Cambridgeshire MP, ought to consider the importance of loaningle care


when assessing the future of the Princess of Wales minor injuries


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


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


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


injuries unit Lokes should consulted. I understand there is to


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


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


launch a programme at the engineering company ADI Group. To


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


particularly the poorest areas are limited through living in chaotic


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


Parliamentary children centre report produced which recommends family


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


the Parliamentary advisory group on carbon capture published their


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


develop the technology, through innovation support with the aim of


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


play. I know that schools have to make the


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


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


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


important community hubs and will the Government make represent days


to Ofwat to change the banding guidance so schools are considered


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


business. Can I commend those who play a role


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


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


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


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


relation to schools. Thank you very much. The Prime


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


what was serious allegation of corruption and fraud round the sale


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


agencies will be investigating those and if the National Crime Agency


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


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


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


Crime Agency does operate in Northern Ireland on a slightly


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


are being looked into to ensure that the appropriate skills and


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


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


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


negotiations which we hope will deliver a negotiated settlement for


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


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


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


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


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


outgoing chair said it had become inherently unmanageable. Since the


Prime Minister appointed Dame Goddard to her position, will she


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


will she agree to an independent review of child sexual explore


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


authorities in Telford to look specifically at how they wish to


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


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


want to take that up with her. Following the successful


Hillsborough independent panel, will the Prime Minister now look at


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


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


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


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


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


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


Hillsborough independent panel. I recognise that the concern people


have about contaminated blood and will consider the point she has


made. Will lead Prime Minister take this


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


a harmonious society is not only for mainstream bidden to respect


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


officials appreciate that minority communities should respect the views


and traditions of mainstream Britain. That means Christmas trees


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


introduced the military covenant and has recognised the importance of


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


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


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


Cabinet office when considering the next senses.


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


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


the British national interest to redevelop links with Russia and then


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


agreement reached between Russia and the United States about Syria is


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


Minister, Jane Kennedy, the police and Crime Commissioner on


Merseyside, in commending the tremendous bravery of the police


officers involved in a stabbing incident in my constituency


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


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


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


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


recognising the work of the individual police constable, as he


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


apprehending well-being under attack. Our police officers bravely


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


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


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


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


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


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


Order. It comes to an end, it is almost


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


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


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


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


Which was interesting because the whole policy of grammar schools is


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


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


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


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


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


the Conservative benches behind Mrs May were somewhat quiet and


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


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


questioning. Claire said Theresa May defending the indefensible. The


announcement about grammar schools seems to have created as much talk


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


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


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


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


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


with an MSC. If Mrs May thought the grammar


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


before getting to legislation and some Conservative MPs are seeing


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


green light for expansion of an existing grammar school under


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


Education Bill called education for all, that forces low performing


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


including Jeremy Corbyn, in those areas where there are grammar


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


meals lower than the national average has been round since you and


I were in short trousers, we are going back a while. A lot of the


things that have been done to address the opportunities for


children from poor background has been the increased different types


of schools, that have been introduced both in Kent and other


parts, some of them going back to the Blair years, the idea that this


is wring bringing anything back is the central misunderstanding. The


Prime Minister made that point. It is clearly Labour is united against


either extending existing grammar schools or introducing new grammar


schools, what is not so clear, the Prime Minister talked about


diversity, is Labour in favour of academies, no? We are not in favour


of the forced academy programme, and but that was pushed, the


government... The Government had to sideline that We are not against


academy, what we have said is in areas where we have a mixture of


academies, free schools and on the free schools we were concerned they


were being set up in areas where we needed other provision and the money


Simoned off. What we have said is we don't agree with the idea which


sometimes is said about Labour that somehow local authorities should


control everything. We think the there needs to be at a local level a


sense, if it is the local authority or a commissioner, who can look at


how the schools are performing. I have supported academies, but the


truth is some, including my own area, have not done as well as


expected. But this is a... You would, you wouldn't allow any more


grammars, you would stop the creation of more free schools? There


is a question mark about them. If it is taking away money from needy


area, if you allow free schools to set up when there is a lack of


places in other area, I don't think that solves a problem. Would you


allow new academies to be formed? Yes, What is the difference? Look,


the difference is partly about academy, from what I with say, they


are more planned within the area, the problem about the free schools


is they can go to the Secretary of State for Education and decide you


can have one, with no sense of planning in the local area, can I


say something on the grammar school. I think it's a diversion, it may be


given they will have to come up with a Brexit model that doesn't please


Erne that voted leave it is red meat. It is not working. It is about


early years, poorest children are 18 months behind other, we have a


problem of getting good teachers into our schools. I need to


interrupt. You can blame the speaker for that. I would suggest that Mrs


May and her advisers need to have a meeting, and sort out what they are


doing and where they are going. There are two things, one is they


were bounced into revealing this policy long before they wanted to.


That is clear, they were not ready with the details when the storimphed


so this was rushed and it shows because they have not been able to


answer the questions. And the second? Huge political opportunity


here nor the Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn I am told didn't have his


extra Weetabix, he had jam and whether there was was a sugar rush.


Home-made. Maybe it was his own jam he had. Who noes? A much more


effective performance from him. We, no, no, no we have to leaf it there.


You have had your say. We need to move on. This is an important story.


Now, as MPs stroll out of the Commons chamber together


after PMQs, there will only be one topic of conversation


in the corridors of Westminster - what is happening to your seat


Plans to redraw the boundaries of parliamentary constituencies


in England and Wales were published yesterday.


It's all part of a plan to equalise the number of voters


in constituencies across the UK, and reduce the overall number of MPs


Some MPs are worried it could leave them out of a job.


So do our MPs know what their re-drawn boundaries look like?


Let's has a brief look at Caroline's. Don Valley. This is the


current boundaries for the constituencies in Doncaster. This is


for you, Caroline. This is Damian Green's, Ashford in Kent. Both of


you, redraw your boundaries they way they have been suggested by the


commission. I am hoping you will be able to talk and draw at the same


time. We have run out of time, I'm afraid! There is a consultation


period going on for about 12 weeks. And members of the public are


encouraged to give their view. It looks as if the two MPs do vaguely


know what their new boundaries will look like. You do not have to be


precise. Just a vague artistic idea. We will have Caroline's first. I


don't want to put you under any pressure. Then Damien has a bit more


time. His is very simple. There is no prize, Caroline. You hold it up,


turn it around. It is like Blue Peter! Caroline, your constituency


has moved to the east. I don't know if it is going to be my


constituency. It used to be aired by -- Ed Miliband on the top. Doncaster


Central is pretty much the same in the middle. Shift. Damian, you have


had plenty of time. Put your pen down. Turn it around. Quickly tell


us what has happened? The bit I have shaded in is supposed to go


somewhere else and the bits on the other side that used to be mine was


given to Folkestone and Hythe in a previous boundary review and they


are now proposing to give it back to me. What is wrong with these


boundaries? I think it does not take into account 2 million voters who


ref -- registered in the EU referendum. By reducing number of


MPs? People think politics costs too much. This would be fairer. Very


nice drawings. Sometimes you can have too much publicity.


There's just time to put you out of your misery and give


That's all for today. Thanks to our guests.


The One O'Clock News is starting over on BBC One now.


Jo and I will be here at noon tomorrow, with all the big political


stories of the day. Do join us if you can.


Download Subtitles