06/12/2017 Daily Politics

Morning folks - welcome

to the Daily Politics.

It was rejected by Ulster's

Democratic Unionists,

but was the deal the Prime Minister

was about to do with the EU

on Monday also toxic

for many of Theresa May's Tory

colleagues?

The Irish Republic says

they got what it wanted

from the Prime Minister

on the Irish border.

But will a commitment

on business regulations extend

across the Irish Sea to the rest

of the UK?

Labour want to borrow billions more

which they say they'll

spend on infrastructure,

but will the extra borrowing

really pay for itself?

As if there wasn't enough

on Theresa May's agenda,

she faces a packed

Commons at 12 o'clock.

We'll bring you Prime

Minister's Questions - live.

All that in the next 90 minutes,

and they were looking for a couple

of C list celebrities to turn

on the lights on the Downing Street

Christmas tree today

but they didn't get the gig,

so they've decided to

be with us instead -

Shadow Transport Secretary,

Andy MacDonald and International

Trade Minister, Greg Hands.

Welcome to you both.

Good morning,

Andrew.

First today, remember those

Brexit Impact assessments

that the Brexit department

were supposed to be working up -

57, or was it 58, of them?

Well, it turns out they

don't exist after all.

Here's what the Brexit Secretary,

David Davis, had to say

to MPs on the select

committee this morning.

Just to be clear, has the Government

undertaken any impact assessments

on the implications of leaving

the EU for different sectors...

Not in sectors.

Of the economy.

What we do have, not do have,

the Treasury, of course,

have an OBR forecast,

which has an implication,

although even

that's pretty crude.

That's done from the...

From the...

The average, I think,

of all the external forecast impacts

on the economy and so on.

So there's nothing, there's no

sort of system I think,

impact assessment...

So the answer to the question is no.

No.

The answer to the question is no,

Greg Hands, yet last December David

Davis said we've carried or are in

the midst of carrying out 57 sets of

analysis.

Andrew, we've done what

Parliament asked us to do, which was

to publish what we had, subject to

retaining any information that might

be damaging.

Do they exist? To the

UK's negotiating position strap I

did exist?

What exists is what has

been published.

Other 57? I haven't

seen a number counted the number...

He said there aren't any.

We have

published what Parliament asked us

to publish.

The important thing is

ministers tell the truth. In

December he said he was carrying out

57 Central analyses and today he

says there aren't any. Both

statements cannot be right.

I think

the difference is what one defines

as being a sector. The point is,

what Parliament asked us to publish,

these analyses have been published

now. The difference is whether they

relate specifically to a set of

sectors or not. But that is like a

degree of undergrowth that I

think... The important thing is the

government is getting on with the

negotiation.

Really, that's going

really well, isn't it? We will come

onto that in a minute. I want to

clarify once and for all. He said

they had done sector analysis this

morning. In December, last December

he said they had. What is it?

Both

statements cannot be true. It

depends what you mean by a sector

and a sectoral analysis.

We're

talking about 57.

We have published

what is out there.

Have you

published 57?

Difficult to say

precisely what a sector is, in terms

of the analysis today when he said

appearing before the select

committee.

He knew enough about them

two weeks ago to say they contained

cruciate in detail.

Some aspects is

quite detailed, and some details

which might be damaging to the UK in

the negotiations, really important,

no one would want UK to be damaged

in the negotiation.

I'm not asking

whether they should be published or

not, that is another issue and we've

debated on this programme. I'm

trying to get from you, Minister of

the Crown, a member of the Cabinet,

if they exist or not.

I'm not a

member of the Cabinet but what I can

say is what Parliament asked us to

publish has been published, whether

they are 5758 specific sectors is a

matter of different interpretation.

Why did he tell the select committee

sectoral analysis, they don't exist.

Looking at sector by sector analysis

in a very closed and compartmental

way, that does not exist.

But he

said they did only a few weeks ago.

He said analysis existed but not

necessarily in the way you have

described it all the way Hilary

Benn...

This is incredible, no

wonder politicians get a bad name,

if you can't even answer a question

like are their 57 central analysis

or not?

There is a set of analyses

which have been published, redacted

where necessary to protect the UK's

negotiating position. That is the

important thing.

I don't think I

need to come to you on this, I will

come to you later on.

Now, Leavers promised that the UK

would be able to free

itself of burdensome EU

regulation after Brexit.

You heard that during the referendum

campaign.

But have Theresa May and David Davis

allowed resolving issues over

the Irish border to put pay

to those hopes?

Here's Elizabeth to explain.

Thank you, Andrew Foster

At the heart of the issue

is the UK's border

with the Republic of Ireland.

Currently people and goods move

freely across as many as 275

crossing points along

the 310 mile border.

There are no customs controls

or border posts because the rules

of the EU's single market mean goods

can move freely.

Both countries adhere to broadly

the same rules and regulations

which are set by the EU.

But after Brexit, the UK

could diverge from those

rules and regulations -

so EU law would require the Republic

of Ireland to check goods

as they cross the border.

Now, Dublin fears that any physical

Border could undermine

the Good Friday Agreement that

brought peace to Northern Ireland

after years of conflict.

Many in the north are

also very concerned.

The Irish government has made

preventing a so called

"hard border" a red line

in the Brexit negotiations.

On Monday, the two sides seemed

near agreement with the promise

of "regulatory alignment"

after Brexit, in the absence

of any other agreement.

That would mean the same rules

and regulations applying on both

sides of the border,

with no need for customs controls.

But, as we know, the DUP -

who Theresa May relies on to prop

up her minority government -

has rejected any solution

which treats Northern Ireland

differently to the rest of the UK.

Yesterday, the Brexit Secretary told

the Commons that "regulatory

alignment" would actually apply

right across the UK .

But that prospect has enraged many

Leave supporters who believe

tackling what they see

as "burdensome regulation"

is the key to making

a success of Brexit.

thank you for that. Greg Hands, let

me come to you again, before we get

onto the substance of this. Let me

ask, did nobody in the government

think to run this agreement passed

the DUP?

I don't know the ins and

outs of that conversation. We speak

to the DUP on a regular basis. What

I would say, the objective here is

everyone has the same objective,

between both the Irish government,

ourselves...

I will come onto that.

The DUP keeps you in power. You've

done a deal with them, you are a

minority government and you need DUP

votes to stay in power. Here is a

crucial part of the Brexit

negotiations, directly affecting the

DUP, which the DUP have strong views

on. Did nobody Ramis agreement

passed the DUP before the Minister

agreed to sign it?

I'm not going to

comment on the individual workings

of how the government discussions

with other parties in parliament

work.

Why?

That is something to do

with the internal workings of

government...

It clearly didn't, the

DUP said they didn't see it until

the last minute, that's why Theresa

May had to leave her lunch with

Jean-Claude Juncker. You didn't show

them, why?

There's been a lot of

misunderstanding about what is meant

by alignment.

I will come onto

alignment. Will you just finish, can

we agree that you didn't run it past

the DUP, not you personally, the

government didn't do and that is why

it is in the mess it is today?

I

won't comment on the internal

workings of the government with DUP.

On regulatory alignment, in the

agreement, does that refer only to

Northern Ireland or to the UK?

What

the word alignment refers to is the

North-South aspects of cooperation

in the Belfast agreement, the Good

Friday Agreement. It does not refer

to the customs union or to the

single market. That is where the

misunderstanding has occurred.

But

does the agreement, still can it --

and maybe UK to regulatory alignment

only for Northern Ireland or for all

of the UK?

That is something that is

part of those talks with the

European Union at the moment.

You

don't know?

The important thing on

the alignment, it doesn't refer to

the customs union single market, it

refers to the north-south areas of

cooperation in the Belfast

agreement.

Sitting here today, after

the Prime Minister has been unable

to sign this agreement, but it does

exist, you cannot tell our viewers

is regulatory alignment refers to

the whole of the UK?

No, I'm saying

the phrase alignment on Monday and

Tuesday referred to the north-south

aspects of the Belfast agreement.

So

why did David Davis say in the

Commons, then, that everything we

talked about referred to the whole

of the UK?

That was not in reference

to the alignment but the UK's

future, the customs union and single

market.

Not that people are clear

what it means... But let me ask you

a more specific question. If the

deal refers to Northern Ireland to

staying aligned of the EU on those

matters in the Good Friday

Agreement, like energy and

agriculture, are those elements in

the Good Friday Agreement, does it

apply to the rest of the UK?

There

will be nothing that endangers the

territorial integrity of the United

Kingdom.

I didn't ask that.

But a

lot of this is still flowing, still

being discussed and still being

debated. I am confident we will get

to a good position.

You may be but

you cannot answer a simple question.

I'm talking about the alignment

aspect.

This is about the single market,

about the customs union, because

this government has decided it is

going to leave membership of both.

It is having to come up with

arrangements to Saint Northern

Ireland or to accommodate Northern

Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

Though they are quite fundamental

things. And Labour's position, when

John McDonnell says we must leave

the single market, and Keir Starmer

says we should stay in the single

market, who speaks for Labour?

Well,

the whole point is that David Davis

offered us the exact self same

benefits of the European Union. So

we are into this situation now where

the government have asked their

principled partner in this

government about the arrangements...

I understand that. I asked you not

about the government but Labour. I

will ask you again, when John

McDonnell says we must leave the

single market and Keir Starmer says

we should stay in the single market,

who speaks for Labour?

It is

self-evident when you leave the

European Union you are leaving the

single market and the customs union.

That is de facto. It's getting to a

possession which is near as dammit

it which gives us as benefits, and

what Keir setup very clearly is we

should not be removing those

options. If you just take them off

the table, you just remove the

opportunity to have that discussion.

Keir Starmer says we should stay in

the single market.

That remains a

possibility, but we de facto come

out of the European Union on the

day. If we can have a transition

period that keeps us in the single

market and the customs union for the

duration of the transitional period,

that makes eminent sense to me, to

allow us to negotiate something that

will accommodate our ambitions, much

aligned with David Davis' comments.

When Derek Gardner says staying in

the customs union would be a

disaster, and Keir Starmer says we

should stay in the customs union,

who is right?

We are saying that the

option of staying in the union

shouldn't be removed at this stage.

Gardner says it will be a disaster?

I'm not sure, I don't know where

that has come from.

His mouth.

CHUCKLES

There may have been words that led

up to that, you are giving them to

me in isolation. What I am saying to

you is the transitional period we

have promoted keeps that available.

Can I just point out, with these two

issues coming up in the Commons,

Jeremy Corbyn whipped Labour MPs to

vote against the single market and

against the customs union. He

whipped them. And those that defy

the whip, the rebels, were fired. To

give them he did that and now we're

being told we can stay in the single

market, what on earth is Labour's

policy?

Simply as I have set out,

that we should have a transitional

period, where the environment, the

regulatory environment is exactly

the same as it is now, define that

time to negotiate a settlement that

the United Kingdom.

Why vote against

it if you are now in favour of it?

There was a vote two weeks ago.

Why

were people sacked for voting for

membership of the single market when

you and I -- are now saying its

Labour policy?

To lay it down at

that stage of the redline. I think

government is calling the Labour

Party in chaos given the nonsense in

their last 48 hours is quite

frankly... The kettle black.

Let me

try one time, if you are so much in

favour of the single, membership of

the single market, why were MPs who

voted in favour of it fired by

Jeremy Corbyn?

That was the only option available

to us at that time, was deemed to be

the wrong decision for us. At the

time. So, perfectly proper for us to

hold that position...

Can you give

any example of a country that is a

member of the single market, but

doesn't have free movement?

Well,

people - Norway have their own

arrangements. Sglt they have free

movement. We have to, we are a

different economy. We are...

There

is no example. The price of

membership is free movement. Isn't

it?

Free movement - it goes, it's

for us to write our immigration

policy as we see fits our economy,

rather than just simply draw -

pulling up the drawer bridge and

damming the economy.

What's the

difference between regulatory

alignment and regulatory

harmonisation?

The difference is

whether you mutually recognise each

other's regulations or whether you

actually make those regulations

broadly the same.

But wouldn't we

have to recognise their regulations

under the deal that your Prime

Minister is going to sign?

Different

free trade agreements operate in

different ways. You can agree

mutually to recognise each other's

regulations without necessarily

having the same regulations.

If we

wanted to cut our corporation tax to

10% would that fall within alignment

or be outside alignment?

At the

moment we could if we wanted to cut

our corporation tax to 10% as full

members of the European Union.

Under

this agreement would it be?

There is

no way that the agreement is going

to prevent us doing an activity that

we could do at the moment whilst we

are in the European Union, Andrew.

OK. We will leave it there. No doubt

we will come back to it, because all

this is still unresolved. No sign of

the Prime Minister going back to

Brussels tomorrow, yet. She's got

until the weekend.

Over the last few weeks,

John McDonnell has been

using his post-budget interviews

to set out Labour's

economic strategy -

borrowing hundreds of billions

of pounds for infrastructure

spending, nationalising key

industries like rail and water

and also buying back PFI contracts.

But the Shadow Chancellor has

repeatedly refused to put a number

on what all that would cost

and exactly how much more it

would cost in debt repayments.

Let's take a look.

How much is that going to cost?

Right, what we've said,

and this is very clear-cut,

and I said it before,

when you take them over...

I'm looking for a number, John.

OK, well, you don't need a number.

By how much does the economy need

to grow for your plans to work?

Let me just go through them,

because people need to understand

what we're saying, because a lot

of figures being bandied around.

I'm just looking for one.

OK, I'll give you a figure.

What we're saying if we invest £250

billion over a 10-year programme,

so about 25 billion a year.

How much do we now spend on paying

the interest of our national debt?

A lot, a lot.

How much?

Well I'll give you the figure,

I'll send you a note on the figure.

You don't know?

Well, I know the figure,

but I haven't got it in front of me.

How much?

I'll send it.

You tell me now.

If you were elected today, how much

above 48 billion would we pay

to service our debt next year?

It's absolutely minimum because it

would be returned rapidly to you,

and that's about investment...

What's the figure?

I'm telling you, it pays for itself.

Have you got a number

for us now, roughly

of what the interest bill would be?

No, let me explain to

you, Robert, if I can.

The point I'm trying to get at,

is that we do not want figures

bandied around about future

investment, interest

rates at a later date,

that will then be used to frighten

people off from properly

supporting investment.

We all understand that the figure

will shift, depending on the share

price and other factors,

but why don't you just tell us how

much it would cost right now?

Because the debate is about

whether or not it is cost-effective.

All I'm asking for is how much

would it cost today,

to do what you're proposing?

It would be cost free

because it pays for itself.

Well, you are the Shadow Transport

Secretary, and I assume that a lot

of the infrastructure spending that

your Shadow Chancellor talked about

would fall into your area, a better

transport infrastructure, but we

also need to know how much more we

are going to borrow. You are going

to borrow £250 billion over a period

of time for infrastructure. You are

going to borrow to nationalise, that

could be another couple of hundred

billion. You are going to take the

PFI contracts back under state

control, that's another couple of

100 billion. Roughly how much a year

extra would you have to borrow to do

all of this?

Well, in transport, we

will bring the railway back into

public ownership and that will cost

us zero, Andrew.

Because you will

wait for the leases to expire?

Yeah,

and we will stop giving £2 billion

bail outs to stagecoach and virgin

like they did last week.

You won't

be able to do that with water

because it's assets you are buying

there. You won't be able to do that

with energy. So when you add it

together how much extra borrowing

will you need to do?

It's impossible

to say. Can you tell me what the

cost of the water companies will be

in 2022?

I can tell you what the

cost is now, they've a market cap

and there could be an election next

year. You are on election footing,

you could be implementing this next

year, you must have a ball park

figure to know you are going to have

to go to the bond markets to borrow

all of this, we are already

borrowing a ton of money. We have 1.

8 trillion of national debt. How

much more would you borrow?

You

can't put a figure on that at the

moment. It's not possible to do it.

It's a menu without prices?

The

point being you are acquiring an

asset and you have that, it's a

neutral transaction and you are

getting income from that asset.

People are sick and tired of getting

ripped off by energy companies. They

want gas coming into the cooker,

they want to switch the light on.

You may be acquiring the asset but

you are borrowing to acquire that

asset and I am asking how much will

you have to borrow to do so?

You

can't say. John's given a clear

answer.

He's not given an answer at

all.

He has addressed it

fundamentally. It's the principles

of acquiring the asset. It will cost

what it costs, it's a question of

negotiation at the relevant time. We

are not in Government, Andrew.

You

could well be in Government within

the next six months.

Yes.

That's why

your party is on an election

footing. At the very least you are

going to borrow £25 billion a year

for infrastructure spending, could

be another 20, 25 billion for...

You

get a return, if you are investing

in infrastructure, you know that you

get a benefit cost ratio that grows

our economy, grows our tax...

Grows

the economy, you don't get that

money back.

Of course...

You don't

get the money back into the

Government coffers. All the economic

growth? ?

People employed, being

more product yut.

How do you know it

will cost, you still have to cover

the cost of borrowing.

You do, you

also have an income stream from the

assets you have acquired. It works

through.

With that income stream on

all these industries you said to

nationalise, you said the consumer

is being ripped off, so you are

going to cut prices, that will

reduce the income stream. For a

start. Hold on.

Don't you think...

You cannot slash prices, increase

investment, and pay the interest on

the debt. How could you do that?

Lifting people out of inequality and

poverty.

Answer the question.

That's

the fundamental. When people are

getting ripped off...

You are

falling back on rhetoric. I am

asking you...

It's more than

rhetoric.

It is, because everybody

will be poorer if you can't finance

this debt. And you can't get the

bonds away. So I ask again, how can

you slash prices as you promised to

do, increase investment and generate

the revenue that is will finance and

service the debt? How can you do

that?

If you don't have shareholders

to owe way and -- obey and serve,

you have an asset in that hand. You

have the borrowing to acquire the

asset and the revenue stream comes

in. It's not difficult.

You have

bond holders. You will have bond

holders whose debt you will have to

service.

Yes.

And if you cannot do

that well, or you issue too many,

the bond prices will collapse and

they will dump the bonds. So you

have to service the debt.

You have

to get it right. You have to get the

price of it right.

Really.

We can't

get that discussion here and now

about what the precision of this is

going to be. It's impossible. But

the basic principle is utterly

sound. It's one that we will follow

in Government.

Our viewers will

decide.

Now, we know Her Majesty's

had an tiring week,

just scrolling to the bottom

of Meghan Markle's Instagram must

have taken at least four days.

But we also know there's nothing

that'll relax her like a gin

and dubonnet in front of the TV

watching Daily Politics

and Prime Minister's Questions.

We know she does that, God bless

you, maam.

And she's not the only famous viewer

who can't get enough of Britain's

he really liked PMQs -

in particular the verbose

rebukes provided by Commons

Speaker John Bercow.

Here's Liam revelling

in in the debate.

All we can say is that if a Rock

and Roll Star can Roll With It

and enjoy Mr Bercow's lengthy

soliloquies, and even endure

the latest Masterplan

from both frontbenches,

he deserves some Cigarettes

and Alcohol - or maybe even

a Champagne Supernova.

So, if you're looking to mimic this

rock god but can't manage the parka,

the Mancunian accent,

or the history of violent sibling

rivalry, perhaps you'd

like to sit back at 12pm

with a Daily Politics mug.

To win one, just tell us

when this happened...

# Memories ore all I have

To cling to (cling to)

# And heartaches are

the Friends I'm talking to

# When I'm not thinking of just

How much I loved you

# Well, I'm thinking

About the things we used to do...

# Don't stop, come

On and get the rhythm

# Don't stop, come

On and move it rhythm

# Don't stop, come

On we're really living

# Kick, twist, everbody move it...

# Everybody's doin'

A brand new dance now

# Come on baby do the locomotion...

President Kennedy made it clear

that the blockade on Cuba was

only a first step.

# Come on baby do the locomotion #.

Eric Reginald Lubbock, 22,000...

CHEERING

To be in with a chance of winning

a Daily Politics mug,

send your answer to our special quiz

email address -

that's [email protected].

Entries must arrive by 12.30 today,

and you can see the full terms

and conditions for Guess

The Year on our website.

That's bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics.

It's coming up to midday here,

just take a look at Big Ben,

and that can mean only one thing...

Yes, Prime Minister's

Questions is on its way.

It will be interesting given what's

happening. Here to set the scene is

Laura Kuenssberg. I understand the

Prime Minister has spoken to Arlene

Foster of the DUP in Belfast, I

assume she was?

They have, they have

finally had the promised phone call,

there has not as I understand it

been much progress. I don't think

the phone call has changed the

situation. It is still possible

there could be progress by the

weekend. It is still also possible

that there will not. As one DUP

source said to me yesterday, our

approach to deadlines is always they

are there to be broken. Which of

course is not the approach that the

Government has taken or the EU has

taken in all of this. As I

understand it, there is still some

distance between the two sides. By

having had the conversation it will

at least save the Prime Minister

have the embarrassment of being

asked have you spoken, even spoken

to your ally Arlene Foster and

having to say no, which would have

been a humiliating moment.

Let's

hope Corbyn's people are on the

ball. He can't avoid this now, can

he? It would be strange if he

didn't. Historically, we have often

been surprised that he hasn't chosen

to talk about Brexit. Of course

Labour's own divisions confusions

their critics would say on the

departure of the European Union are

often what have held him back from

this subject. Last week he did go on

it and if he doesn't today given the

scale of the events of the last 72

hours that would be strange. It's

not like he hasn't got any material.

Have you got to the bottom yet of

why the Government, number 10

Downing Street, did not run this

draft agreement past the DUP before

preparing to sign it?

There are a

variety of reasons here. I am told

that the Chief Whip on Monday

morning had told Theresa May that he

believed the DUP was squared off.

That's something that hasn't been

officially confirmed but I am told

that conversation took place. I am

also told that they believed and the

DUP had believed also that the level

of communication between the two

sides was quite good, certainly at

the end of last week they felt that

they had been in the loop, they were

feeling that things were kept from

them, but over the sort of frantic

course of the weekend of the

officialdom doing it, somehow they

seem to have slipped out of the

loop. Now people close to David

Davis would say he was frozen out of

the process, it was being done by

officials, by Number 10. But clearly

there was not that level of

political oversight because again it

is suggested that he would have seen

it would have been a problem for the

DUP. Classically in this kind of

situation he is responsible for the

department that's meant to be

delivering Brexit and Theresa May is

the one directing the officials in

Number 10. So ultimately there

was...

Also the one that did the

deal with the DUP. She put this

coalition together. Does she know

what you stands for in DUP? This was

almost certain to be like a red rag

to a bull to the DUP.

The curious

thing about it is how, from the

DUP's side, their belief is the

whole premise of the final text was

wrong-headed, it comes at it from

saying Northern Ireland and the EU

will have a different relationship.

It's a broad understanding of the

document to the rest of the UK. To

them that's always going to be an

anathema. Anything that appears to

pull them closer to Dublin away from

Westminster and the rest of the UK,

that's not on. Seems like a real

oversight.

What bit of politics in

GCSE did Downing Street not get?

There is an interesting dilemma here

and a few Tory MPs I have spoken to

the last couple of days have been

making that point. The new and

improved number ten sten is more

efficient than at the start of this

session but are missing a very

important element of political

oversight and it may well they were

so franticly focussing on trying to

get the deal done this week because

it's hugely important to them, that

they miscalculated but I have been

told conversation is happening with

senior MPs and Number 10 at the

start of this week and on Monday

through the day when it became clear

this was unravelling being told this

is not going to fly and Number 10

sources saying to those MPs it will

be fine, we think we can sell it.

They couldn't even sell it their

their own allies.

It's such a fly in

the ointment. I have read this

15-page agreement now. On the money

she could sell that to the

Brexiteers. There is no upfront lump

sum. It is spread out over a number

of years.

And this is the key thing,

through Cabinet.

On the EU

citizenship it is that the British

courts can consult with the ECJ,

take into account some of the

rulings. It's not a mandate that the

ECJ has to be involved. On this

final one in which the DUP was more

interested than anything else, for

the reasons you have given for the

status, she doesn't do it. It's

amazing. Let's see what Jeremy

Corbyn can find out about it.

The question tabled by the

honourable member for Lichfield,

relating to economic performance and

public services in the West

Midlands, question five, has in Eire

been omitted from the printed copies

of the order paper. -- has been in

error. A corrigendum has been made

available in the vote office, and

copies are on the table. Order,

questions to the Prime Minister.

Ruth George.

Thank you, question

number one.

The Prime Minister.

Mr Speaker, I'm sure the whole house

will wish to join me in offering

condolences to the family, friends

and colleagues of police constable

James Dixon from Thames Valley

Police, who was killed while on

motorcycle duty yesterday, and also

to the family and friends of the

passenger car involved in the

collision. I'm sure the House would

like to join me in offering

condolences to family and friends of

the former member of this house who

was a former miner and strong voice

of Lanarkshire in this place for

nearly 30 years. This morning I had

meetings with ministerial colleagues

and others, and I shall have further

such meetings later today.

Ruth

George.

My constituent Kate has run a

successful nursery for over 14

years, but after two months on the

Government's funding for three and

four-year-old she says she can't

make it work, she's having to sell

her home to pay her staff

redundancies. Over 1000 nurseries

have already closed and 58% say they

cannot continue. If nurseries close,

parents can't work. Please will the

Prime Minister meet with me and

nursery owners to discuss such

widespread and critical problems?

Well, I can say to the honourable

lady that I have indeed recently met

with some nursery owners looking at

this issue, and they've given a very

clear message that actually there

are parts of the country where Local

Authorities are operating the system

very efficiently are very well and

there are parts of the country where

that is not happening. Of course,

what underpins this is the decision

taken by this government to improve

the childcare offer for parents, so

that they actually have a better

opportunity and ensure their

children get the childcare they

need.

Will the Prime Minister give a quick

update on the Brexit negotiations

and does she agree with me that post

Brexit...

LAUGHTER

It's crucial that we enhance skills

and apprenticeships in the

construction housing sector and does

she agree that now is not the time

for the construction training board

to be proposing to close their site

in West Norfolk, putting at risk 600

jobs in a rural area? Will she make

me to discuss this and will she help

me in my campaign?

Can I say to my honourable friend

that he is a great champion for his

constituency. He's been a great

supporter of the CI TB at Birch. I'm

happy to support his campaign, I

wish him well and I'm happy to meet

him. He asked about Brexit and, of

course, what we're doing in the

Brexit negotiations is ensuring we

can indeed build those houses and

build that country for the future

that we to seek, and the principles

we are working to our that the text

that is currently being discussed is

a report on the progress of

negotiations, on which basis the

European Commission will decide

whether sufficient progress has been

made and we can move onto the next

stage of talks. It is for those

future talks to agree precisely how

we ensure cross-border trade, while

maintaining constitutional integrity

of the United Kingdom. We are

leaving the European Union, the

singles market on the customs union.

But we will do, we will do what is

right in the interests of the whole

of the United Kingdom, and nothing

is agreed until everything is

agreed.

Jeremy Corbyn.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I joined the

Prime Minister in offering

condolences to the police officer

and passenger who lost their lives

yesterday and in paying tribute to

Jimmy Hood, he was a good friend of

all of us, and he was a great

fighter for the coal industry and

the mine workers union during the

strike and after that, during his

time here. We thank Jimmy for his

work in the labour movement.

Mr Speaker, in July, the

international trade Secretary said

Brexit negotiations would be the

easiest in human history. Does the

Prime Minister still agree with that

assessment?

LAUGHTER

I am very pleased to report to the

right gentleman, as I've just said,

negotiations are in progress and

very good progress has been made.

But... What my right honourable

friend has been focusing on is the

trade negotiations for the future,

and indeed, because we are already a

member of the European Union, when

we leave we will not be at the same

basis, like Canada was in

negotiating a trade agreement, and

we do expect that be will get a deal

that is right for the whole of the

United Kingdom. What we need to do

to be able to do that is to move on

to phase two, and if he is so

concerned about easing negotiations,

why did his MPs vote against us

being able to do that?

Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister can

always look behind herself. Mr

Speaker, she hasn't, she hasn't

succeeded in convincing many people

and yesterday on Tory donor told the

papers and I quote, "Yesterday

proved beyond doubt that the Prime

Minister is not only weak but it's

her incompetence that is hobbling

the UK." And he wasn't very kind

about the rest of her from bench

either, describing them as a bunch

of jellyfish masquerading as a

cabinet.

Mr Speaker, this is... This is truly

a coalition, this is truly a

coalition of chaos. At the start of

the week, it all seemed to be going

so well. The Prime Minister had

scheduled a lunch with Jean-Claude

Juncker followed by a press

conference and then to triumphantly

returned to the House to present her

deal.

Order, order. Let me make it clear

for the umpteenth time, no, order. I

know what's going on, I can look

after these matters. No one in this

chamber is going to be shouted down.

It will not happen, and if people

think they can sit where I can't see

them and make a raucous noise

they're very foolish. I know where

they are and I know what they're up

to, and it's not going to work. End

of subject.

Jeremy Corbyn.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. On her way

back to Britain, someone forgot to

share the details of the Irish

border deal with the DUP. Surely

there are 1.5 billion reasons why

the Prime Minister really shouldn't,

shouldn't have forgotten to do that.

I think it was a little difficult to

detect the question is that

interruption. Let me say to the

right honourable gentleman, as

President Jean-Claude Juncker said

Monday, there are still a few things

we are negotiating on... LAUGHTER

And he is confident, he is confident

that we will be able to achieve

sufficient progress. But if he wants

to wonder about plans for

negotiations, perhaps he should look

at his own front bench! The Shadow

Chancellor used to say staying in

the single market was not respecting

the referendum. Now he says it's on

the table. The shade -- shadow trade

secretary used to say staying in the

customs union was very unattractive,

now he says it is not off the table.

We now know from the Shadow

Chancellor what their approach

really is, it's not having a plan at

all, because when asked what the

Labour Party plan was, the Shadow

Chancellor said, well, that's

difficult for us. As we all know,

the only thing the Labour Party is

planning for is a runner on the

pound.

Jeremy Corbyn.

Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister was

unable to support her Brexit

secretary when he tried to explain a

deal was supposed to be done in

October but still hasn't been done

by December. The leader of the DUP

told Irish television she only got

sight of the deal on Monday morning,

five weeks after she first asked for

it. Two months after the original

deadline for the first phase of

talks and after Monday's shambles,

is the Prime Minister now, now able

to end the confusion and clearly

outlined what the Government was my

position is now, with regard to the

Irish border?

I'm very happy to outline the

position that I've taken on the

Irish border with Northern Ireland.

It is exactly the same position that

I took in the Lancaster House

speech, that I took in the Florence

speech, that we have taken

consistently in the negotiations,

which is that we will ensure there

is no hard border between Northern

Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

We will do that while we respect the

constitutional integrity of the

United Kingdom. And while we respect

the internal market and protect the

internal market of the United

Kingdom. Those Labour members who

shout "How?", that's the whole point

of the second phase of the

negotiations... Because we will

deliver this, we aim to deliver this

is part of our overall trade deal

between the United Kingdom and the

European Union, and we can only talk

about that when we get into phase

two. We have a plan, he has none.

Jeremy Corbyn.

18 months after the referendum, the

Prime Minister is unable to answer

the question. And on Monday, and on

Monday, as she thought she was

coming here to make a statement, it

was vetoed by the leader of the DUP,

the tale really is wagging the dog

here. Mr Speaker, the Brexit

secretary told the BBC's Andrew Marr

programme in June, "In my job I

don't think out loud and I don't

make guesses. I try and make

decisions. You make those based on

data, the data is being gathered, we

have 50, nearly 60 sector analyses

done." The House voted to see the

analyses but today the Brexit

secretary told the select committee

they don't exist. Can the Prime

Minister put us out of our misery,

do they exist or don't they, have

they done the work or haven't they?

That is surely one question she can

answer after 18 months.

Can I make a gentle suggestion to

the Leader of the Opposition? He

asked me a question on the Northern

Irish border, I answered the

question. He then stood up and said

I had answered the question. Perhaps

he should listen to the answers that

I give. The House requested, as I

understand it, 58 sectoral impact

assessments. There were no 58

sectoral impact assessment. There

was sectoral analysis, over 800

pages of sectoral analysis has been

published and made available to the

select committee and arrangements

have been made available for members

of this house to see it. We are very

clear that we will not give a

running commentary on negotiations,

but what we will do, what we will do

is work for what this country wants.

We will ensure we leave the European

Union in March 2019. We will leave

the internal market, we will leave

the customs union at the same time,

and we will ensure there is no hard

border between Northern Ireland and

the Republic of Ireland when we do

it.

Jeremy Corbyn.

Mr Speaker, this really is a

shambles. All they've done... All

they've done is offered a heavily

redacted abbreviated version that

has not been widely shared, and the

Brexit secretary said in September,

Mr Speaker, that 50 billion divorce

payment was complete nonsense. The

Foreign Secretary rejected any

payment and said the EU could go

whistle, so can the Prime Minister

put before the House a fully

itemised account that could be

independently audited by the Office

for Budget Responsibility and the

National Audit Office on any

proposed payment?

We are at the point of progressing

to the next stage. Snog agreed until

everything is agreed. So the final

settlement won't be agreed until we

have actually got the whole of the

deal agreed. But I have to say to

the right honourable gentleman, he's

asked me questions earlier about

hard borders, half the Labour Party

wants to stay in the single market,

half the Labour Party wants to leave

the single market. The only hard

border around is right down the

middle of the Labour Party.

18 months since the referendum, no

answers to the questions. Today,

they haven't yet concluded phase

one. No answers to the questions.

And the DUP appear to be ruling the

roost and telling her what to do.

Whether it's Brexit, the National

Health Service, social care, our

rip-off railways, rising child

poverty, growing pensioner poverty,

or universe credit, this Government,

this Government is unable to solve

important issues facing this

country. In fact, it's making them

worse. The economy is slowing. More

people in poverty. Brexit

negotiations in a shambles. This

Government is clearly not fit for

the future. If they can't negotiate

a good deal, wouldn't it be better

if they just got out of the way?

Can

I say to the right honourable

gentleman, week in and week out, he

comes to this House making promises

that he knows he can't deliver. And

they keep doing it. At the election

he told students they would write

off their student debt. Then he said

I did not commit to write off the

debt. What are the Labour Party

doing? They're putting around

leaflets which say Labour will

cancel xooising student debt. --

existing. It's time the right

honourable gentleman apologises for

grossly misleading Labour leaflets.

Order. Order! Closed question,

MrMichael Fabricant.

Question five.

Prime Minister.

I am pleased to say

that employment in the West Midlands

has risen by 198,000 since the 2010

election. And in the budget my right

honourable friend the Chancellor

confirmed people living and working

in the West Midlands will benefit

from second devolution deal and a

£250 million allocation for regional

transport projects.

The devolution

deal, the budget, and now the

establishment of the national

battery R and D centre in the West

Midlands puts the whole region at

the very heart of European

autonomous drive and electric drive

cars. So will my right honourable

friend commit to continue to support

this important industry and will she

make a very important promise to me?

Yes. Will she get rid of that gas

guzzler Jagielka of hers -- Jaquar

and get a modern one from the West

Midlands, because we are the party

of the future, not the old Labour

Party danosaurs opposite.

Perhaps I

could just...

Perhaps I could just let my

honourable friend know that, sadly,

the Jaguar Number 10 Downing Street

is not mine. But my honourable

friend is absolutely right, that the

West Midlands is at the heart of

this important industry. We are

investing £31 million in the West

Midlands for the development of

testing infrastructure for connected

and autonomous vehicles and we will

also build on the West Midlands

expertise and self driving cars as

we invest a further £5 million in an

initial test bed and I certainly

look forward to seeing this

technology developing further.

Can I

associate myself with the remarks of

the Prime Minister regarding the

late Jimmy Hood and pass on

condolences to his family and

friends. I am sure the House will

want to join me in welcoming Billy

Irvine, one of the Chennai six who

has arrived back in Scotland this

morning. Now we know that the deal

that was done with the DUP to keep

the Prime Minister in office gave

the DUP a veto over Brexit. It is

embarrassing that it was being

briefed on Monday morning that the

Prime Minister had a deal, only to

take this off the table after a call

with the DUP. Is this the Prime

Minister who is in office but not in

power?

What we are doing is working

for a deal that will work for the

whole of the United Kingdom. There

are particular circumstances for

Northern Ireland because it is the

one part of the United Kingdom that

shares a land border with a country

that will be remaining in the

European Union. But as we look ahead

and during the negotiations as the

honourable gentleman will know, we

are consulting and talking with all

parts of the United Kingdom, with

the Welsh Government and the

Scottish Government, and we want to

ensure that we get the right deal

for the UK and that's the deal that

I have set out, we will be leaving

the European Union, we will be

leaving the single market, leaving

the customs union, but we will

ensure that we get that good trade

deal for the future.

The clock is

ticking. We need a deal that keeps

us in the single market and the

customs union. To do otherwise will

devastate our economy and cost jobs.

Will the Prime Minister recognise

that such a deal will resolve the

Irish border question and protect

jobs throughout the UK, anything

less will be a failure of

leadership.

I have to say to the

right honourable gentleman that he

continues to washing up -- bark up

the wrong tree. We are leaving the

European Union, that means we will

be leaving the single market and the

customs union. We will take back and

we will ensure that we can go trade

deals around the rest of the world

and that will be important for us

and it's important, he references

jobs, it will be important in

ensuring jobs in this country. We

will get a good deal on trade and

security because this isn't just

about trade for our future

relationship. I set out in my

Florence speech the deep and special

partnership we want to continue to

have with the European Union. That

is about a trade deal that ensures

jobs and prosperity across the whole

of the United Kingdom.

I politely

observe that the front bench

exchanges have absorbed a

disproportionately large share of

time. I am determined to accommodate

backbenchers who are waiting to ask

questions.

Thank you. The bottleneck

on the A417 continues to cause

dreadful accidents and traffic

misery in Gloucestershire. Now

following the leadership of the

Transport Secretary and the support

of Gloucestershire honourable

members the vital consultation stage

of the short listed improvement

proposals will begin shortly. Does

my right honourable friend back the

scheme and does she agree by

committing hundreds of millions of

pounds for this crucial project that

Government is backing the

Gloucestershire economy?

Thank you.

I know my honourable friend has been

working tirelessly on this

particular issue and I understand

concerns and frustrations that

drivers in his constituency and

elsewhere have about this vital

strategic road for, not just

Gloucestershire but the wider region

as well. I am happy to assure him we

are backing the development of the

multimillion pound roundabout scheme

announced in 2014. A consultation

will begin shortly. So we can

develop the right solution to tackle

this pinch point and continue this

support which as he says is good for

the whole of Gloucestershire's

economy.

The Prime Minister has been

unable to provide us with a single

plausible Brexit scenario that will

meet her red lines, and be

acceptable to the Cabinet, Ireland

and the DUP. Isn't it therefore time

that she either dropped her red

lines, the DUP, or the pretence she

can govern this country.

I have to

say to the honourable lady she's

completely wrong, this Government

has published a number of documents

which set out various option that is

can be taken forward in relation to

the trade relation for the future,

that address the question of the

customs relationship in relation to

customs, address the issue of the

Northern Ireland border. We have

already published those proposals.

They're not part in detail - those

details are not part of the

negotiations at the moment. They

will become part of the negotiations

when we move on to phase two.

When

the British people voted to leave

the European superstate they voted

to end the free movement of people,

they voted to stop sending billions

of pounds to the EU each and every

year. They voted to make our laws in

our own country judged by our own

judges. Prime Minister, are we on

course still to deliver that? If we

have a problem, would it help if I

came over to Brussels with you to

sort them out?

Well, I say to my honourable friend

I am always happy to spend time in

his company and I hope his petition

on chicken farms went down well the

other evening. The answer is yes, we

are on course to deliver what the

people of this country voted for

when they voted to leave the

European Union.

Will the Prime

Minister support new transpen nine

rail links, namely high speed three,

but also the restoration of the

Skipton coal link which as well as

providing an economic boast to pen

nine towns has the additional merit

of starting in the Government Chief

Whip's constituency.

Can I say to

the honourable gentleman that we are

of course looking very seriously and

have been supporting with this

concept of the railway. We are

waiting as I understand it for

specific proposals to be brought

forward and we will look at those

proposals seriously.

I am sure the

whole House is aware that 40 years

ago today this House came together

and voted for a new charity,

mobility charity which has

transformed the lives of disabled

people and their families. Would the

Prime Minister agree that - it

should be carried forward and gives

a golden opportunity for disabled

people to get into the workplace and

enjoy things everybody else does in

this country.

I am grateful to my

right honourable friend for marking

the whoth anniversary of mobility in

this way and I am happy to join him

in marking that and I am looking

forward to becoming a senior patron,

they do excellent work for people in

enabling them to stay mobile and

active and there are more people

with a mobility car today than there

were in 2010. Can I also wish my

right honourable friend well as I

understand he will be going to the

Palace tomorrow to receive his

knighthood.

Thank you. Prime

Minister, in light of the news today

and the reported terrorist threat on

the Prime Minister and others, can I

assure her of our prayers for her

and Her Majesty's Government on this

side of the House and thank the

security forces for their sterling

efforts. Prime Minister, can you

give us specific commitment that

nothing will be done that creates

any barrier, constitutionally,

politically, economically, or

regulatory between Northern Ireland

and the rest of the United Kingdom?

Can I thank the honourable gentleman

for the remarks that he made. Can I

say to him the simple answer to his

question is yes. He will know as

other members of this House will,

that there are already areas where

there are specific arrangements

between Northern Ireland and the

Republic of Ireland, for example,

the single energy market that exists

between the Republic of Ireland and

Northern Ireland. But we want to

ensure that there is no hard border,

that is exactly what we are working

for. We are also working to respect

the constitutional integrity of the

United Kingdom and protect the

internal market of the United

Kingdom and I think we share those

aims.

The Prime Minister will be

aware of citizens advice Scotland

report issued yesterday that said in

Scotland up to a million consumers

pay on average 30% more to have

parcels delivered than the rest of

the country: In my constitute at

this time there is a huge issue

where ridiculous prices are put on

to deliver. In some cases companies

refuse to deliver at all. Can my

right honourable friend tell me what

the UK Government can do with myself

to ensure we right this wrong once

and for you will.

My honourable

friend is right to raise this issue

and speak up on behalf of his

constituents. I am sure he knows

rail mail does provide a service

that includes parcel service at a

uniform price throughout the UK but

there are commercial issues at play

outside this service. But I am sure

that my right hon friend the

Business Secretary will be happy to

meet and discuss this issue.

The

recognition by Donald Trump of

Jerusalem as the capital of Israel

will do grave damage to the

prospects for a just and lasting

peace settlement with the Israelis

and Palestinians which has been

British and indeed American foreign

policy for decades. Was she

consulted about this announcement

and if so what did she say? Will she

hear and -- here and now clearly

condemn it?

Well, I say to the right honourable

gentleman that I am intending to

speak to President Trump about this

matter. But our position has not

changed. He says it's been a

long-standing position and it's also

a very clear one, that the status of

Jerusalem should be determined as a

- in a negotiated settlement between

the Israelis and the Palestinians

and Jerusalem should ultimately form

a shared capital between the Israeli

and Palestinian states. We continue

to support a two-state solution. We

recognise the importance of

Jerusalem and our position on that

has not changed.

Today

GlaxoSmithKline and many other

companies invested in genetics, does

my honourable friend agree

investment in science and research

underpins jobs and revolution in

medical treatment that will save

lives and give hope to many patients

for new treatments.

Well, I

absolutely agree with my honourable

friend and what she has highlighted

is a sector which is important for

the United Kingdom and I welcome the

investment that she has referred to.

That is why this is one of the

sectors that has been given

significance in the industrial

strategy that my right honourable

friend the Business Secretary has

delivered, has published, because

this is exactly an area where we see

there are Ben bsh -- benefits here,

jobs, but also improving the

treatments available to patients and

improving their lives.

When the

Prime Minister rings Donald Trump to

express our concern about his moves

concerning Jerusalem and the US

Embassy, will she also be informing

President Trump that we will be

proceeding to recognise the state of

Palestine as a central part of

keeping the two-state process under

way?

We want to see a negotiated

settlement between the Israelis and

the Palestinians, we believe that

should be based on a two-state

solution, that should be a Sovereign

and viable Palestinian state but

also a secure and safe Israel. That

should be a matter for negotiation

between the parties.

The whole House

will support what the Prime Minister

said last week in the Middle East on

her visit about the unfolding

humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen.

Will she continue to provide the

maximum amount of pressure to lift

both the humanitarian and the

commercial blockade and use

Britain's good offices at the United

Nations to secure a resumption of

some sort of political peace process

which is inclusive and which does

not have any preconditions?

Well, my

right honourable friend has raised

an important issue and I am sure

everybody across this House is

deeply concerned at the humanitarian

crisis and the spiralling crisis

that we have seen in the Yemen and

the lingering threat of famine

there. I did indeed as he said raise

my concerns when I visited Saudi

Arabia last week. I made it clear

that the UK's view is that we want

to see not just a border open for

humanitarian aid to get in but it

should be open for commercial

vessels as well. This is absolutely

crucial and important and he revenss

the need for peace talks, that is

our top priority. The best way to

bring a long-term solution and

long-term stability is to have a

political solution and we will

continue to support the efforts of

the UN special envoy and play a

leading role as he says in

diplomatic efforts to ensure a

political solution can be reached.

Due to the one billion deal that the

DUP MPs - each one is worth more

than Ronaldo. We need to consider

the cut to Scotland's budget, £600

million rail shortfall, the £200

million... And £140 million VAT

refund. Each one of the Scottish

Tories cost Scotland £265 million.

Can we transfer them?

I have to say

it's time that when he stood up for

questions he actually looked at the

facts. It's my Scottish Conservative

colleagues who have ensured that in

the budget we were able to take

steps in relation to the VAT status

of police Scotland and the fire

services in Scotland and he

obviously hadn't noticed but I am

happy to repeat as a result of this

budget £2 billion extra will come to

Scotland.

In 2010 the

Conservative-led Government set out

to reform the school curriculum to

give children skills they need to

succeed. Does the Prime Minister

agree yesterday's reading standard

results are a vindication of our

reforms and amazing teachers'

efforts which will allow our

children to forge a truly global

Britain.

Well, I thank my honourable

friend, she has raised an important

issue and I am happy to agree with

her. Yesterday we learned how the

UK's revolution in phonetics has

dramatically improved school

standards. I would like to pay

particular tribute to my honourable

friend the Minister for schools

standards who has worked tirelessly

to this end through his time here in

this House but also pay tribute to

the hard work of teachers up and

down the country. We have, just for

the figures, in 201258% of

six-year-olds passed reading checks,

this year it's 81%. We are indeed

building a Britain fit for the

future.

In October the Prime

Minister wrote an open letter saying

EU citizens living lawfully in the

UK today will be able to stay. But

this week my constituent was told by

UK she had to wait until Brexit was

done and take her chances. Can the

Prime Minister tell us are the EU

citizens living here just pawns in

the Brexit negotiations or will she

change UK operating systems to

ensure EU citizens can stay?

The

position on EU citizens that I set

out in the open letter that I sent

is the position of the United

Kingdom Government and I suggest to

the honourable lady if she has a

complaint about something said she

sends that information to the

immigration Minister.

Yesterday the

all-party group on cancer held its

annual Britain against cancer

conference, the largest one-day

gathering of the capser community in

the UK to launch a report on the

cancer strategy. We heard from the

Government and NHS England many good

things that were happening, there

was one issue causing real concern

to frontline services, and that is

the delay in the release of the

transformation funding to those

frontline services, with additional

requirement applied to the funding

after the bidding process closed.

Having discussed the issue with the

Secretary of State who was a jolly

chap, would the Prime Minister meet

with me to discuss this matter

further.

Well, I say to my

honourable friend of course this is

an important issue and we have as he

said seen great progress being made

in relation to this issue of

providing higher standards of cancer

care for all patients. Survival

records are now at a record high.

Around 7,000 more people are

surviving cancer after successful

NHS treatment compared to three

years ago. Of course we want to do

more in relation to this issue. He

has raised a very specific point and

I understand that the Department of

Health are adopting a phased

approach to investment as the

national cancer programme does run

for a further three years but I

would be happy to meet to discuss

this.

Contrary to her previous

answer on the subject, only the

Prime Minister's Government can

remove barriers to universe credit

for ter minutally ill people in

Scotland, England, Wales and

Northern Ireland. Will she answer

this question again this time, will

she end the cruel requirement for

people across the UK who don't want

to know they're dying to

self-certify on universal credit?

Can I say to the honourable

gentleman that I suggest that this

is an issue I will ask the Secretary

of State for work and pensions to

look at. We do want to ensure that

as knows we are working on how

universal credit is rolled out and

how that is dealt with in relation

to individuals. I am sure he will

understand that if there are

particular things that apply to

people and particular circumstances

then they can only apply if - if the

universe credit and Jobcentres are

aware of those circumstances but I

will ask the Department for Work and

Pensions to look at this.

Before my

right honourable friend next goes to

Brussels, will she apply a new code

of paint to her red lines because I

fear on Monday they were beginning

to look a little bit pink?

No, I can

say, happy say to my honourable

friend that the principles on which

this Government is negotiating were

set out in the Lancaster House

speech and the Florence speech and

those principles remain.

This

morning London MPs were briefed by

the Metropolitan Police service on

the grave challenge of serious youth

violence and violent crime,

including the scourge of scooter

assisted crime. With robbers up 30%

in London, the Police Service in

London faces a £400 million squeeze

which will drive police numbers down

to the lowest in 20 years and my own

Borough has already lost is 98

police officers. Does the Prime

Minister still think we have the

police resources we need -- 198.

I

would say we are not reducing the

police budget, we are protecting

police budgets. They were protected

in the 2015 spending review. I

repeat as I said in this House

before, there is more money and

officers or each Londoner than

anywhere else in the country. Of

course it is up to the Mayor of

London to decide how that budget is

spent. But she also raised the

important issue of scooter or moped

crime and I am pleased to say the

Home Secretary has held a round

table with police and others in the

Home Office to look at how this can

be better addressed.

The industrial

strategy identifies that the world

will need 60% more food by 2050. As

we leave the EU will the Prime

Minister commit to supporting our

farmers?

I am very happy to commit

to supporting our farmers. And in

fact markets for British food are

growing around the world and we want

to see those Margetts grow even

further. Leaving the EU means we

will have an opportunity to design a

new approach to agricultural policy,

one that supports our farmers to

grow more, to sell more and to

export more of their world-class

proproducts. What we will be doing

is ensuring we have an agriculture

policy that meets the needs of the

United Kingdom.

This week motor

manufacturers announced a year on

year drop in car sales of over 11%.

They blame confusion caused by the

Government's incoherent policy on