13/12/2017 Daily Politics

Morning folks - welcome

to the Daily Politics.

The general election of 2017 saw

a rise in abuse and intimidation

of candidates fuelled primarily

by social media.

That's according to the Government's

own ethics watchdog.

So will ministers legislate to hold

tech firms responsible?

As the Prime Minister prepares

for the EU summit tomorrow

which will give the green light

to start trade talks,

she faces a potential rebellion

at home on her flagship Brexit Bill.

Tory rebels say they want

a "meaningful vote"

on the final Brexit deal.

So will the Government back down?

Jeremy Corbyn will be hoping to land

a few metaphorical blows

on Theresa May when they square off

at Prime Minister's Questions.

We'll have all the

action live at noon.

And, in a major upset,

a Democrat has won election

to the US Senate in the solidly

Republican state of Alabama,

defeating President Trump's

preferred candidate.

All that in the next 90 minutes,

and with me for the duration

is the Minister for Agriculture,

Fisheries and Food, George Eustice,

and the Shadow Brexit

Minister, Jenny Chapman.

Welcome to you both.

Now, according to the Government's

own ethics watchdog,

social media is primarily

responsible for fuelling abuse

and intimidation towards candidates

in the recent general election.

The independent committee

on Standards in Public Life also

suggests legislation should be

introduced to force social media

companies to deal with illegal

content to stop the intimidation

of those in public life.

Let's hear from Lord Bew,

the committee chair.

Millions of people in this country

have an interest in everybody who

lives here and the quality of our

Parliamentary democracy, the quality

of the people who feel able to come

forward. They have an interest in a

form of political deate which is

Frank, sometimes tough and

aggressive, it has always been so,

but contains an element of respect,

within it for the other side. It is

really important that the parties

come together, this report will not

work if the parties don't come

together, and agree some kind of

common Code of Conduct.

Do you get much online abuse Jenny

Chapman?

Not like some.

You are not

at the bad end of it.

I don't seem

to be, I have been fortunate in that

respect. I have had some, but

nothing like I've seen some

colleagues get, and it is

disgusting.

Some that is, well

unrepeatable.

I don't care which

party they are from.

George, do you?

I am not on Twitter, one of the

reasons is I have...

So you might

but you don't know.

I have had the

view though, that 140 characters

when people are anonymous, it is too

easy for people to say things,

anonymously they wouldn't say do

your face, we have seen that

spilling over into debate. At the

election I detected a coarsening in

our political debate, hustings where

sensible people were walking away

because they couldn't take the

acrimony and people were being

shouted down. It is not helpful.

Does the Government yet have a

policy to deal with this online

abuse?

Well, you know, there is a

limit to what you can do with

regulation on this, where you have

the extreme things, death threats

and the like, obviously, the content

providers and the social media

platforms have a responsibility to

act. So this is an interesting

report.

At the moment they don't.

Under the law, they don't, because

they are regarded as hosts, rather

than publisher, so if a newspaper or

broadcaster published that sort of

stuff, we would be held responsible,

because we are publisher, the online

platforms are not, so does the

Government, should the Government

have a policy to change that?

It is

a difficult area. We have said that

we are going to look carefully at

this report and we are open to

taking steps in this area, the

social media is a new phenomenon,

new platform.

It is not that new

now.

It takes a why for the

regulatory environment to be able to

catch up with it. We have to be

careful we protect free speech.

Where you have extreme death threats

and the like, we need them to act

and we should be looking at that.

Does Labour have a policy for this?

I think the approach has been taken

by the Home Affairs Select

Committee, is the right one, and

Yvette Cooper let on -- led on,

where the publishers, the Facebook,

Twitter.

But they not publisher at

the moment.

I think they ought to be

and they ought to be held

accountable. Let us not forget it is

sick individuals...

I understand

Making posts in the first place.

We

understand that, but what I am

trying to get to do either of you

have a credible policy towards it?

The committee recommends rather than

regarding these social media sites

at simply contenting a gay for, they

should be regarded as publishers

which brings a legal liability, does

Labour support the committees

policy?

My understanding is that we

are looking at it, me personally, I

think that we ought to move closer

to that position, and I think it

isn't, we are not just talking about

Facebook and Twitter and Instagram.

Look at the chatrooms on newspaper

websites, there are lots of

different ways that this kind of

abuse is meted out not just to

people in the public eye but people

who are the subject of newspaper

story, it needs to be looked at in

the round.

Newspapers are subject to

the law.

You look at some of the

comment sections on newspaper

websites and think you will find

very few of those comments would

find their way into a story or...

They are subject to this...

It is

not being enforced. Look at it.

I do

look at a lot of comments, they are

fog like the social media, certainly

not in the mainstream newspaper

comment sites because they are

moderated.

They are not. That is not

true. They are not.

The Guardian

website is moderated for example.

The Telegraph website is moderated.

The Times is moderated. So they, my

business, I know what is happening.

When somebody makes a complaint,

That is a different matter

It takes

somebody to make that complaint.

Could you do this without EU

legislation?

Yes, we have to come to

stick laws.

Under EU legislation

social media platforms are class as

hosts. That is EU law.

Well

obviously EU law is about to be less

of a problem. For the UK, we have

got our own domestic approaches now,

on broadcasters which are very

strict and on newspapers as well,

where we have common law developed

in areas like privacy, and

defamation, it is open to us to be

able to extend...

Is it your

understanding you would change the

way Jenny Chapman has been talking

about making these social platforms

publisher, could you do that under

existing EU law?

I

I am not sure

that is the right way to approach

it. My view is they are not

publishers but they are a platform.

The fact they are a platform

shouldn't mean you can't do anything

about abusive content. You might say

they are not responsible gps

Under

EU law they are not liable for the

content.

It is possible in my view

to bring forward some kind of

approach where you could make them

have responsibilities on them to

take down conmeant that was clearly

against the law. While not making

them personally liable for the

comment somebody put up. There are

ways round this. It is a new

platform, a new way of doing things.

The report found that Conservative

candidates were significantly more

likely to be subjected to

intimidation than Labour. Why do you

think that is?

I think that is, I

mean if that is the case, it doesn't

matter which party somebody is

standing for, they shouldn't be

subject...

Why do you think

Conservatives are more subjected...

I don't know. If we knew why people

did this we might be more successful

in trying to do something about it,

but I would hate for this to put

somebody off standing for any party.

The point of the committee is, it

is.

That is why we have to take it

seriously.

Professor Tim Bell told

the inquiry politics has become more

polarised since 2015 when Jeremy

Corbyn took over the Labour Party,

there has been an influx of people

into the Labour Party, who are

rather more used to a kind of

faction liced culture of politics.

What to you say to that?

Well, if

that is happening and there will be

members of the Labour Party

conducting this behaviour, then,

they need to be brought to book,

kicked out of the party and dealt

with, but I don't think it is as

simple as that. I think that people

in the public eye, whether they are

Parliamentary candidates or other

high profile people have become

almost legitimate targets to say

what ever you like, make whatever

comments you want about them or

their family, I don't think we need

to...

I understand all that, what I

was trying to get this morning was

what the political policy response

would be, but clear from both of you

we will have to wait.

Now, as I'm sure you all know, today

is day seven of the Committee Stage

of the EU Withdrawal Bill -

a date I'm sure you've had

in the diary for a long time.

But before your eyelids

really do close shut,

I should explain that today's debate

could result in a damaging

defeat for the Government

over its flagship Brexit Bill.

Tory rebels, backed by Labour,

are demanding that Parliament be

given a "meaningful vote"

on the final Brexit deal.

So what does that mean?

Fortunately Lizzie Glinka

is here to explain.

The European Union Withdrawal Bill

is a key part of the

government's Brexit strategy.

It'll repeal the 1972

Communities Act, ending

the supremacy of EU law,

and copying existing EU law

onto the UK statute book.

Over 350 amendments and 75

new clauses were put forward,

but the government has yet to lose

a vote and so far the Bill

remains unamended.

MPs could vote this evening

on an amendment tabled by Tory MP

Dominic Grieve calling

for a "meaningful vote"

on the final Brexit deal.

Mr Grieve says his amendment

would make it "possible

for Parliament to say

to the Government 'I'm sorry,

I don't think you've negotiated

a good enough deal'."

The Labour Party says it

will support the amendment

if it comes to a vote,

with Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir

Starmer tweeting:

And around 20 other Tory MPs

are reported to support

Grieve's amendment.

But the Government is trying

to head off the rebellion,

with Brexit Secretary David Davis

writing to Tory MPs this morning,

committing the Government to holding

a vote on the final deal

in Parliament "as soon as possible"

after the negotiations conclude.

This vote, he says, would cover both

the Withdrawal agreement

and the terms for the UK's future

relationship with the EU.

He pledges that the Government

would not implement any parts

of the Withdrawal Agreement

until the vote has taken place.

Joining me now from central lobby

is the Conservative MP Heidi Allen,

who is one of those

who says she will vote

for Mr Grieve's amendment.

David Davis said there will be a

vote on the deal, when it is made,

if and when it is made, there will

be a vote if the House demapedz on

the treaty, and -- demands, and

there will be legislation on the

withdrawal and implementation

process. Why is that not enough?

Because without being disrespectful,

this is difficult, we have heard

that before, we need this amendment

to be accepted by the Government

this evening so that vote can be

meaningful and well timed, because

currently the way the legislation

stands, our vote could come after

ward, so a Ritzen -- written

statement is a good step in the

right direction but it needs to be

binding, so that needs a vote, so if

the deal isn't good enough we can

push back. But it doesn't give us

fall back plan if there is no deal.

Phase one of the negotiations have

gone well and that is unlikely, but

saying to people political tectonic

plates are shifting like never

before, anything is possible and we

want the very best possible outcome

for in country, we accept we are

leaving but we don't want to bind

our hands.

More important from what

you have told the viewer you do not

trust a written ministerial

statement from a minister of the

Crown, in your own Government?

It is

not about that. It's a complicated

process, and you know, the dynamics

are shifting all the time. The

Government is determined rightly...

You said you had heard it all before

which implies you don't trust it.

Why don't you trust a minister of

your own Government?

Because the

timing can change, and as I say, the

writ instatement doesn't deal with

the situation where there might not

be a deal brokered at all. So it

only fixes half the problem.

Dominic's amendment seven, he is a

knowledgeable guy, this is an

ex-Attorney General, he says the

legislation is not strong enough to

protect our country, then believe he

is right, and the Government, which

we still hope there is a good nine

hours to go, we are hoping the

Government will be able to improve

op that and accept our amendment or

put something in a similar format

inno the bill themselves.

Let me ask

for clarification again, I don't

understand what more you want, the

Government has committed to having a

vote on the deal, it is committed to

having a vote on the treaty, it is

committed to having legislation to

implement the deal. I think people

will not understand why a

Conservative doesn't find that

enough.

Because it is about the timing.

When

will the deal be ratified? When will

Parliament get the vote? Will there

be enough time? The government have

tabled another amendment for next

week with a drop dead close to the

bill. There just isn't enough time.

The MPs in Parliament are here to

scrutinise and vote, and what we are

asking is perfectly reasonable.

We

have George Eustice of the

government here. Why shouldn't Heidi

Allen get what she wants?

Because we

have addressed all the concerns she

has raised with the announcement

today. This debate about the

referendum last year was divisive,

and we have a big responsibility in

Parliament, whatever side we are on,

to put the country together.

Parliament has a responsibility to

drive through the necessary

compromises to get agreement. That

is what is going on now.

What about

the direct point?

What we have made

clear today is when that withdrawal

agreement is concluded, likely to be

in October, which is what Michel

Barnier has said, it will be laid

before Parliament in the usual way,

and Parliament has an opportunity to

pass a resolution against it. If

they don't do that and they accept

it, as we hope they will, there will

then be another bill, on EU

withdrawal and how we implement the

agreement, and covering things like

the transition. Parliament will have

ample opportunity to discuss this.

So you will not move on your

position, the government?

The

government has heard all of the

concerns raised, and answered them

today. We have addressed this. If

Heidi wants to debate this, she has

plenty of opportunity to pray

against the treaty when it is

agreed.

Heidi Allen, what do you say

to George Eustice?

Thank you,

Andrew. You are behaving a little

bit like a marriage counsellor! We

saw it yesterday with the Henry VIII

powers, that the government have

moved, and that they are listening.

He is right that this has been so

divisive for our country, but giving

Parliament a vote at the right time

with everything that comes forward,

whether that is no deal as well.

This is how we heal the country, by

those people who voted to remain as

well is to leave, having a vote in

parliament.

You had a chance to do

this when the Article 50 resolution

came up, which triggered the whole

process. You could have put this

into that process at the time. Why

not?

I don't think that was the

right time, because that was the

starting gun for leaving the EU, and

that is what every single one of us

who are backing Dominic Grieve today

are being clear about. Voting to

change Article 50 would have looked

like we were trying to stop it, and

that is not right, and that is

disloyal to the people who voted in

the referendum to leave the EU. It

is about making sure the deal is the

right one.

If Parliament voted

against the deal, if a deal is done

and Parliament voted against it,

that would effectively be a vote of

no-confidence in the government, and

the beginning a constitutional

crisis, which you would probably

welcome because you might be able to

reverse the result.

That is 100% not

the case at all. This is about

making sure we have the right deal.

The European Parliament will get to

vote on whether the withdrawal

deal...

Was so will the British

Parliament. How can you vote on a

deal if there is no deal?

That is

the whole point.

What do you want?

You cannot vote on a deal if there

is no deal. That is not what David

Davis was addressing. What do you

think should happen if there is no

deal?

We think Parliament should

have the opportunity to say, the

deal is good enough, or the deal

isn't. I believe the UK and Europe

who want a deal, but these things

can take time. Negotiations don't

always happen to the time tell you

one.

Why do you think the 27 members

would want to extend this process?

Because if we haven't reached a deal

that is good for the both sides...

Our economies rely on each other.

But the other 27 will not agree a

deal if it is not good for them.

That's the whole point. It is

pantomime season coming early. This

is about Parliament and MPs doing

their job to scrutinise this piece

of legislation.

Thank you for

joining us. Jenny Chapman, Labour

will vote with the Tory rebels

tonight?

Yes. We vote for Dominic

Grieve's amendment if it should go

to a vote.

Which it probably will.

I

hope so. I expect he's still waiting

to hear what the Minister says.

To

see if there is some movement?

The

threat of a rebellion can sometimes

be as powerful as the rebellion

itself, but we will certainly vote

with Dominic.

Is there a three line

whip on Labour's side?

Yes.

How many

of your colleagues will ignore that.

We usually have about seven, as you

will know, because we have this

conversation a lot.

About seven, but

some may not turn up as well.

Who

may not turn up?

I don't know.

Whipping is not an exact science,

but there is a whip on. We expect we

would have enough to defeat the

government should the Tory rebels

stay true to what they have

indicated.

And you will get a solid

Labour turnout?

Yes.

Do you expect

to win or lose?

All of these

amendments we have one so far. We

are listening to Parliament and we

have addressed all of these concerns

that Dominic Grieve has raised. What

we have done today has outlined how

we would deal with that.

Will you

win the vote with what you have

already said, or do you need to say

more?

Through Parliamentary

procedure, they are going to get

that vote, and there is also a whole

bill, which they can argue ad in

tonight.

So you have listened to,

you have made your statement?

I

haven't heard anything from Heidi

Allen that explains why what we have

done today isn't enough. It does

address the issue.

If there was no

deal, what would happen?

We are

going to get it. We are working on

it.

It is the point Heidi Allen

raises, not me. If there is no deal,

will we still leave?

We will get a

deal if the other side now we are

serious about leaving, so part of

our planning is planning for a no

deal scenario. You have to do that

to be taken seriously. If our

European partners see that people

back here may be trying to play a

game to stay in the EU, they will

not negotiate properly with us. We

have to be serious that we have a

partnership that answers our

concern...

I asked something simple.

What will happen if there is no

deal?

We are planning for a no deal

scenario.

Will Parliament get a vote

on that?

Parliament can vote on

anything it wants at any time, but

we have true good Article 50 and we

are going to get a deal.

If there is

no deal, what is then the of

Parliament?

It can put down

amendments or motions...

Not on

something that doesn't exist?

We are

going to get this withdrawal bill

through, and then there will be an

endless debate about it.

That's not

what I asked, but clearly it's all

I'm going to get.

Now, I'm sure you've

all been hashtagging

and tweeting your way

through the programme so far.

I have.

The Daily Politics is, after all,

the third most-tweeted about current

affairs programme in the land.

Oh, yes!

Only Question Time and the Andrew

Marr show prompt more political

reactions in the Twittersphere -

I've never heard of them either.

But what's the secret

of our success I hear you ask?

Could it be down to this -

the humble Daily Politics mug?

Or should I say #Mug?

Yes, these little gems are a staple

of social media chatter.

But, to win one, you

can't just tweet us.

You have to use something

called electronic mail.

Just watch this and guess the year.

# Why do birds suddenly

appear

# Every time you are near...

It's a victory for

traditional unionism.

# Just like me, they long to be

# Close to you...

# Now there's some sad

things known to man

# But ain't too much sadder than

# The tears of a clown

# When there's no-one around

# Raindrops keep

falling on my head...

There are men walking the streets

today, with eggs in their pocket

just on the off chance

they will bump into the leader

of the Labour Party!

# In everything I do

# That's the wonder...

I just think it's the greatest

aeroplane I've ever been on.

# The wonder of you

# Like a bridge

over troubled waters...

Do you agree with the national

decision to go on strike?

Yes.

# I will ease your mind. #

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.u/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.

And that's not all -

Laura Kuenssberg is here.

It's process, process, process these

days.

I'm afraid it is, and

Parliament and MPs like nothing more

than talking about process,

particularly if their own importance

is in question. What ever Jeremy

Corbyn chooses to go on today, and

we know that he doesn't really like

talking about Brexit, Westminster is

abuzz with all of the questions

about this vote. Who is going to

blink? The rebels or the government?

It's early to know. Both sides are

saying they are not shifting. At

5pm, that might feel...

It could

change our world by our?

It could.

There will be notes passed backwards

and forwards. Yesterday, Dominic

Grieve and some other MPs were

huddled together on the backbenches

during the bill. Theresa May does

not like to lose. It is not unusual

for the government to lose on

amendments, but when you are a

minority government, the fragility

of that gives it a different

context. She's got to go to Brussels

tomorrow, supposedly to say, hurrah!

Is done.

I concede that that would

not look good if she turns up having

lost the vote. But if she loses the

vote, it means the amendment is

carried, that there is a vote that

the label rebels wanted on the deal.

Job done, not a lot to say?

The

problem for the government, as the

Prime Minister is heroically trying

to defend, MPs would believe they

have the chance to get into the guts

of the deal before giving it a

thumbs up or a thumbs down at the

end of the process. That is at root

here. If they vote it down? What

happens? Does Theresa May have to go

back to the negotiating table? What

ever potential deal she is going to

get, if there is one, are we really

going to be in a situation where

Theresa May has to come back and

actually have proper, full debates

with MPs about

whether or not she's done the right

thing? So the kind of nightmare

scenario for the government is for

MPs to be having a say and debates

and votes on the different bits of

the actual deal itself. You can see,

from the government's point of view,

what the negotiators are asking for?

Are they asking for carte blanche to

say no to the deal, or are they

trying to get into the guts of it,

trying to get the government to go

back to Brussels and discuss it.

This will amount to a treaty. The

Commons cannot really to gay

treaties. The Commons either has to

accept the treaty as presented by

the government, or reject it. That

is true in the US Congress. It

rejected the treaty of Versailles.

It is an either or proposition.

That

is the problem. MPs do not like that

they are being offered a take it or

leave it vote. They do not

necessarily trust the government.

It

is remarkable to say -- it is

unremarkable to say that they do not

trust their own government.

You do

sometimes wonder, in a parallel

universe, had to reason may not

appear to be so sky-high in the

polls, so far ahead, being able to

do what she did in the early months

of her office, you wonder if taking

a more conciliatory approach to

Parliament, if she would have ended

up in this situation?

She didn't

think she had to at the time.

Exactly. People are digging in today

because they feel it is a pattern of

behaviour. Also, the Tory rebels are

mindful that, if they don't walk the

walk today, having talked the talk

on plenty of occasions, will they

still be taken seriously? It's going

to be very, very tight. It could

change in a flash.

As things stand,

David Davis's written statement

placed before Parliament, that has

not done enough?

No, it hasn't. Six

rebels have told us that they are

going with Dominic Grieve, and we

haven't been able to get round many.

To be a real rebel, you have to vote

against, not just abstained?

That's

right. There are 20 or so Tory MPs

who have this very deeply held

concern. It's also become quite

unpleasant, I'm told.

We will talk

more about this after PMQs.

This is the six month anniversary of

the Grenfell Tower fire. I will be

attended the service tomorrow and I

am sure I speak for members across

the House that it remains at the

forefront of our minds as a tragedy

that should never have happened.

Many who survived the fire lost

everything that night and I can

assure the House we continue to do

everything we can, to support those

affected, and take the necessary

steps to make sure it can never

happen again. Mr Speaker, this

morning I had meetings with

ministerial colleaguings and others

in addition to my duties I shall

have further such meetings today.

Mr

Speaker I think the Prime Minister

will be able to take to that

memorial service the thoughts and

prayers of every single member in

this House across all parties.

My right honourable friend said at

the end of the Brexit process

members of Parliament will have an

opportunity to vote on the deal. Can

she confirm that it is still her

intention to hold such a votesome

I am happy to confirm we will put

the final withdrawal agreement

between the UK and the EU, to a vote

in both Houses of Parliament before

it comes into force.

As we have said we expect the UK

Parliament to vote ahead of the

European Parliament, so we fully

expect Parliament to vote well

before March 2019. So to be clear,

the final deal will be agreed before

we leave, and right honourable and

honourable members will get a vote

on it. As my right honourable friend

the Secretary of State has said

today, we will bring forward,

withdrawal agreement and

implementation bill, to give the

withdrawal agreement domestic legal

effect, which will be subject to

full Parliamentary scrutiny. After

believe the withdrawal agreement

will be followed up by one or more

agreements and will introduce

further legislation where it is

needed to implement this into UK

law, providing yet another

opportunity for proper Parliamentary

scrutiny.

Thank you Mr Speaker, this week does

indeed mark six months since the

avoidable and tragic fire at

Grenfell Tower which took the lives

of 71 people and injured and

traumatised many more, I too will be

at the service tomorrow in memory of

them. But that fire also shone a

light on the neglect of working

class communities all over this

country. And since this Government

came to power, homelessness is up by

50%, rough sleeping has doubled.

Homelessness and rough sleeping have

risen every single year, since 2010.

Will the Prime Minister pledge today

that 2018 will be the year when

homelessness starts to go down?

Across this House, we don't want to

see anybody who is homeless or

anybody who is sleeping rough on our

streets. That is why the Government

is putting £500 million into the

question of homelessness. It is why

we backed the bill that was brought

forward by my honourable friend the

member for Brent, sorry for harrow,

and it is why we have ensured we are

putting into place a number of

projects that will deal with this

issue of rough sleeping. But I have

to say to the right honourable

gentleman that when we look at the

question Hoff housing we need to

look at ensuring that there are more

homes available to people, that we

are giving people support, to get

into those homes, that is why, in

the budget my right honourable

friend the Chancellor set out a

whole range of ways in which we will

be helping people to ensure they

have their own roof over their

heads. Compared to Labour, where

house billing went down by 45%.

Where the number of homes bought and

sold went down by 40%. And social

housing went down by 400,000.

Mr

Speaker, the last Labour Government

cut homelessness by two thirds

during its time in office. When

Labour left office the number of

children in temporary accommodation

was a lot less than it is now. I

asked the Prime Minister for a

pledge to reduce the amount of

homelessness next year, the pledge

was not forthcoming. 128,000

children will spend Christmas with

out a home to call their own. 60% up

on 2010. It is too late for this

Christmas, but will the Prime

Minister promise that by Christmas

2018, fewer children will be without

a home to call their own?

Again, we

of course want every child to wake

up in their own home, particularly

at Christmas, but, it is incredibly

important people know they can keep

a roof over their heads even in the

most desperate circumstances, that

is we are making sure that councils

can place families in a broader

range of homes if they fall into

these circumstances, so since 2011

councils have been able to place

families into private rented

accommodation so they can get a

suitable place sooner. We have

changed the law in relation to, so

families with children shouldn't

find themselves in B&B accommodation

except in an emergency. And through

implementing the homelessness rezhun

act we are making sure families at

risk can get support before they

find themselves homeless. I say to

the honourable gentleman, I have

been very clear, as I was a few

weeks ago, that this Government is

going to be a government that puts a

clear focus on housing, on building

the homes that people need, on

ensuring, on ensuring that people

are given help to get into those

homes, and also, on acting to

prevent homelessness before it

happens a. That is what we are

doing, that is what will make a real

difference to people's lives.

Mr Speaker, the sad reality is that

one in 100 children in this country

are homeless at any one time. It is

a national disgrace, and it is

getting worse. And for all she says

about the private rented sector, can

I just quote from a letter I

received from Rachel this week.

Lives.

Mr Speaker, the sad reality is that

one in 100 children in this country

are homeless at any one time. It is

a national disgrace, and it is

getting worse. And for all she says

about the private rented sector, can

I just quote from a letter I

received from Rachel this week. She

says "I have a knot in my stomach,

every New Year period, when we are

due to sign a new tenancy agreement.

After renting the same flat for ten

years, never being in arrears and

keeping the property in good order,

we were given notice to quit out of

the blue." Will the Prime Minister

help people like Rachel and back

secure three year tenancies for all

private renters?

Well, I say to the

right honourable gentleman, that if

I think he was present in the

chamber when the budget was given to

this chamber, and that is why

precisely why we said that we are

looking at ways in which we can

encourage longer term tenancies. The

point is, what is important, what is

important is ensuring that people

have the ability to have the

accommodation they need, that they

want and on the basis they, that is

right for them. That is why, as I

say, we are dealing with this issue

of longer term tenancies but he

talks about renting, people renting

their homes, and his response on

renting is to bring in rent

controls. Rent controls have never

worked. They result in reducing the

number of homes available for people

who want to be able to have

accommodation and a roof over their

own head. It is not just me that

says that Labour Party party policy

won't help people who are renting.

Renting. Shelter say they won't help

people who are renting.

Mr Speaker, evictions by private

landlords have quadrupled since

2010. There is not security in the

private rented sector and the Prime

Minister well knows it. She also

promised one for one replacement of

council housing sold off through

right to buy. But just one in five

council homes have been replaced.

Hundreds of thousands of people are

on housing waiting lists. Will the

Prime Minister apologise for what

she said and tell the house when she

will deliver this one for one

replacement?

And as the right

honourable gentleman knows we are

increasing the flexibilities to

enable councils to build homes, we

have put more money into affordable

housing, he talks about the right

the buy. What a contrast, we want to

give people the opportunity to buy

their own home, the Labour Party

would take that opportunity away

from them. What do we see, what do

we see on housing? The shadow

Housing Minister, the shadow Housing

Minister recently said that fewer

people owning their own home is not

such a bad thing. Well, I have to

say to the right honourable

gentleman, that what he is offering

to people on housing, if you live in

a council home he will take eye your

right to buy. If you are looking to

rent sheller say his policies will

harm you. It is only the

Conservative that will deliver the

homes this country needs.

If only it were true Mr Speaker.

Under the Tories, the home ownership

has fallen by 200,000. Under Labour,

it rose by one million. And 40% of

all homes sold through right to buy

are now in the private rented

sector. The latest figures Mr

Speaker, show that a quarter of all

privately rented homes are not up to

decent standards. Meaning many

families are living in homes with

damp, that are not secure, or very

poorly insulated. Does the Prime

Minister support homes being fit for

human habitation?

Of course we want

homes to be fit for human

habitation, can I just remind the

right honourable gentleman that the

number of homes failing to meet the

decent homes standard is down by 49%

since the peak under the Labour

Government. And while I am... While

I am talking about the record of the

Labour Government, statutory

homelessness, statutory homelessness

peaked under the Labour Government

is down by over 50% since then. It

is this Government that is

delivering for people on housing, it

is his Government that Labour failed

to deliver over 13 years.

I would

just remind the Prime Minister, Mr

Speaker, that under Labour, a

million homes are brought up to

decent standard. I would assume from

what she said she will be here on

19th January to support my

honourable friend the member for

Westminster North's bill to make

privately rented homes fit for human

habitation.

When it comes to housing Mr Speaker,

this Government has been an absolute

disgrace. After seven years, more

people are living on the streets,

more families in temporary

accommodation, more families in

homes not fit for human habitation,

and fewer people owning their own

home. When is this Government going

to get out of the pockets of

property speculators and rogue

landlords, and get on the side of

tenants and people without a home of

their own this Christmas.

Under Labour, House building down,

homes built and sold down, social

housing down... I will tell him one

thing that went up under the last

Labour government, the number of

people on the social housing waiting

list. 1.74 million people waiting

for a home under a Labour

government. We have delivered over

346,000 new, affordable homes since

2010. More affordable homes have

been delivered in the last seven

years than in the previous seven

years under a Labour government. We

are building more homes. Last year

we saw 217,000 more homes being

built in this country. That is

a record for the last 30 years. It

is the Conservatives that are doing

what is necessary. Labour will

produce failure for this country

once again. It is the Conservatives

that is delivering the standard of

living that people need.

A

14-year-old constituent of mine lost

both her arms and legs at the age of

six when she was a victim of

meningitis. I was one of many MPs

campaigning for the meningitis

vaccine to be introduced into the

NHS. Isabel is on the way to

becoming one of the UK's most

proficient junior gymnasts, one of

the most talented trampoline lists

in the country. She was recently

handed the pride of sports award as

a young achiever. Will the Prime

Minister join me in congratulating

Isabel in receiving this prestigious

national award?

I'm very happy to

congratulate Isabel on receiving

this award and on her sporting

achievements, but also on her

incredible bravery. She is an

inspiration to all of us. My

honourable friend has mentioned

about the meningitis vaccine, and

she is one of those campaigning on

this issue. Meningitis can be a

devastating disease, so we have

taken steps to increase the

availability of the vaccine. In

September 2015 we became the first

country to have a meningitis B

vaccination programme. It is

necessary that Public Health England

continues to raise awareness of the

symptoms, and its campaigns are

reaching hundreds of thousands of

parents. The NHS has been running a

programme to vaccinate teenagers,

school leavers and university

freshers against four different

strains of meningitis. I think my

honourable friend can be pleased

with the work she did in relation to

this.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. In

2008, we collectively bailed out the

Royal Bank of Scotland at a cost of

£45 billion. In 2017, the Royal Bank

of Scotland are paying us back by

turning their backs on 259 of our

communities. Given we are the

majority shareholder, will the Prime

Minister step in and tell the Royal

Bank of Scotland to stick to their

commitment and not close the last

bank in town?

I think the honourable

gentleman knows that the decision to

close branches is a commercial

decision for banks, without

intervention by the Government. We

do recognise the impact this has on

communities, and the Secretary of

State for Scotland raised concerns

on this issue in his meeting with

RBS. More people are banking online,

which is having an impact, but we do

want to ensure that all customers

can access over-the-counter

services, so we have established the

access to banking standard, which

commits banks to carry out a number

of steps before closing branches.

The post office has also reached an

agreement with thanks to allow more

customers to use post office

services. We recognise the impact of

this on communities.

The Prime

Minister should be summoning Ross

McEwan in to see her. We will not

accept towns and villages up and

down the United Kingdom losing tank

services. There are 30 towns in

Scotland where the last bank will be

going. This is not acceptable. Will

she summon Ross McEwan and will she

tell the Royal Bank of Scotland this

must be reversed?

The decisions on

opening and closing branches is a

commercial matter for the banks, as

I say. This is an issue for the

Secretary of State, that he has

raised with the Royal Bank of

Scotland. But what is important is

that services are available to

individuals, which is why those are

being provided and alternatives are

available. I would also say that an

awful lot more people are banking

online these days, not requiring the

use of a branch. We want to ensure

that vulnerable customers

particularly, who don't have access

to online banking, are able to have

services provided, which is what we

are doing with the access to banking

standard and our work with the post

office.

In 2015, the heart of

England Trust will trust got into

major trouble due to poor

management. In response, the

management of universities hospitals

Birmingham was brought in to take

charge. As a result, services and

patient care have in improved

dramatically. Would the Prime

Minister join me in praising this

turnaround and agree that we must

support good management in the NHS.

Can I say to my honourable friend

that I am happy to join him in

paying tribute to the work that's

been undertaken by University

hospitals Birmingham? We do want to

see strong management across the

NHS. I understand there are a number

of practical and financial issues

still to resolve, and I would

encourage all of those involved to

make progress on this issue, but I

congratulate all those NHS staff who

have worked hard to ensure that

improvement takes place.

Does the

Prime Minister agree that the

resignation of lurve Kerslake does

put the Government on a... --

resignation of Lord Kerslake. In my

constituency, it is disgraceful that

people have to travel at least 15

miles to get to the nearest A&E.

Can

I say to him that I think Lord

Kerslake made the right decision in

stepping down as chairman of King's

College Hospital? I'm not surprised

the Labour Party are interested in

this, given that Lord Kerslake is a

key adviser to the Labour Party. If

I can say to the honourable

gentleman, he might care look at

what NHS improvement said about

King's College Hospital. The

financial situation at Kings has

deteriorated seriously over recent

months, and we have now placed the

trust in special measures. It is not

acceptable for organisations to run

up such significant deficits when

the majority of the sector is

working extremely hard to hit their

financial plans, and in many cases

have made real progress. They called

the situation the worst in the NHS.

Perhaps it's no surprise that noble

lord Kerslake is advising the Labour

Party on matters of debt and

deficit.

At the end of their first

and successful term, will my right

honourable friend congratulate the

teachers, parents and students of

the Newark free school, a school

designed to raise standards and

performance of schools. Would she

agree with me that Conservatives,

great teaching like this is not just

about education, it is a daily

battle for social justice, and we

will never be distracted from that?

My honourable friend is right.

First, I'm very happy to join him in

congratulating those who were

involved in setting up this

much-needed free school. I know my

honourable friend will ensure the

school provides young people in his

constituency with an excellent

education, despite the school being

opposed by the party opposite. My

honourable friend is right, this is

not just a question of education,

it's a question of social justice. A

good quality education opens the

door to the future for the lives of

those young people. That's why it's

so important to ensure the quality

of education is there to give young

people the best start in life.

Tonight, this House will hopefully

have the chance to vote on my new

clause 22 to the EU Withdrawal Bill,

which would give Parliament the

power, at a future date, to

determine whether we leave the

single market by coming out of the

European Economic Area. It doesn't

dictate how honourable members

should then votes, but it does

ensure proper, democratic oversight.

Shouldn't it be our sovereign

parliament, and not the Prime

Minister, that decides our country's

economic future?

First, as I

indicated earlier in response to the

member for Cheshire and Amersham,

this parliament will have the

opportunity to vote on withdrawal

arrangements. Can I say that the

honourable lady says it should be

parliament that makes the decision

about our membership of the single

market. This parliament gave that

decision about membership of the

European Union to the people of this

country. It is the people of this

country that voted to leave the

European Union, and this government

will deliver for them.

Mr Speaker,

today thousands of profoundly

disabled children are denied the

opportunity to enjoy a day out with

their families simply because there

isn't an adequate changing room. The

stories of parents at the Dales

School in my constituency deeply

moved me, so can I ask the Prime

Minister to consider updating our

building regulations, and ensure all

relevant buildings voluntarily

install changing facilities to give

these children the opportunities

they deserve?

My honourable friend

is right to raise this very

important issue, which might seem

such a small issue, but actually is

very important in the lives of those

disabled children, to enable them to

lead the life they want to lead. I

agree that the provision of changing

places can make a real difference to

disabled children and their carers.

I understand the Department for

Communities and Local Government has

been working hard for this. I'm sure

that the Communities Secretary will

be happy to discuss this matter

further with my honourable friend.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. This week,

the right reverend bishop of

Stafford wrote to the Conservative

Stoke on Trent City Council to plead

not to cut £100 million from the

homelessness support budget. Does

the Prime Minister agree that the

measure of society can be found in

the way we treat our vulnerable

people, and will she join his calls

to the city to not cut the

homelessness support budget, and

will she agreed to fund local

government properly so it can play

its part in dealing with

homelessness?

We don't want to see

people without a roof over their

head. That's why we are working in a

number of ways to deal with this

situation, and why we are committed

to cutting rough sleeping in half by

2022, and eliminating it by 2027. We

are dedicating over £1 billion to

cutting homelessness and rough

sleeping. That is to tackle what we

agree is something we don't want to

see on our streets.

It is now one

year since I was sworn in as an MP.

During the last year, the biggest

issue in my postbag has been the

provision of broadband to rural

areas. The Government has invested

heavily in this area, but many are

still struggling with slow

connections. Would my right

honourable friend reassure my

constituents that we will do

everything to ensure that everybody

gets superfast broadband, and nobody

is left behind?

Can I congratulate

my honourable friend, not only on

her election a year ago yesterday,

but also on her re-election earlier

this year. And on her year in this

House. She's raised an issue that is

a matter of concern to many rural

areas across the country, and we do

remain committed to universal

broadband coverage of at least 10

megabits so that no home or business

is left behind. Superfast broadband

is available to over 90% of premises

in Lincolnshire, and we have

committed over one billion pounds

for next generation digital

infrastructure. I can reassure her

we have not forgotten any community

across the UK. We recognise the

importance of broadband to

communities, and we are working to

ensure we deliver further.

In 2016,

the then Home Secretary launched the

ending violence against women and

girls strategy, emphasising the need

for an national network of domestic

violence refuges. In 2017, Women's

Aid save the Government is proposals

for short-term housing threatens

this network. Will the Prime

Minister support Women's Aid and

step in to save our refuges?

I recognise the importance of

dealing with domestic violence, we

ring-fenced funding to support the

victims, we have continued to

ring-fence that funding, we have

also made a number of step, we will

be introducing a new laws, we have

introduced the coercive criminal act

of coercive control, we have

introduced changes that have

improved the support for people

suffering from domestic violence, we

are proposing a new funding model in

relation to the provision of housing

homes for people who have suffered

from domestic violence and there is

a good reason for wanting to see a

change, which is to make this more

responsive to the needs of the

individuals, at a time of crisis in

their lives, to make the system work

better because at the moment the

funding isn't responsive enough to

their needs in local area, they have

to worry about meeting housing costs

themselves, at this time of crisis,

and access relies on welfare claims

and eligible. We are proposing a new

model that frees women from worrying

about meeting the housing costs

themselves and the funding available

will remain the same.

Will she give her personal assurance

they and their families will have

the right to remain after Britain

leaves the European Union?

I, first

of all I am happy to join her. They

do do incredible work, and it is

right we recognise the contribution,

that EU nationals are making in this

sector, but also across our economy,

and our society. That is why we want

people to be able to stay and we

want families to be able to stay

together and that is why I am

pleased that the arrangements that

we have and were published in the

joint progress report between the

United Kingdom and the European

Union last Friday, show very clearly

on citizens rights that where people

have made that life choice to be

here, we will support them and

enable them to carry on lovelying

their lives as before.

In her

answers so far the Prime Minister

has shown she hasn't got a clue

about the concerns of... Today, and

on the 14th June she said that

no-one and no community would be

left behind but the Doncaster market

towns have been told their NatWest

branches are to close. That is two

more on top of a record-breaking 700

branch closures this year and that

is despite the Big Four banks

delivered 13.5 billion half year

profits. Will the Prime Minister

admit that the Government's access

to banking protocol has failed to

keep a single branch open, and will

she restore the bank Levy and use

some of it to stop communities

losing their last bank branch.

Can I say to the right honourable

lady, first of all I have responded

to the leader of the Scottish

National Party in relation to

closures. But, I think, also she and

others need to accept that people's

behaviour in relation to banking

branches has changed over the years,

and there is less demand but we have

the access to banking standard in

place, she referred to the Levy, let

us be very clear there is a bank

Levy there is a corporation tax

surcharge for banks and this

Government is raising more money

from the banks than the Labour

Government ever did.

Would my right

honourable friend join me in

congratulating the UK's community

found disagrees who have just

reached the notable milestone

distributing £1 billion to local

communities across the country,

should she agree the community

foundations are perfect example of

her shared society, and that funds

from dormant assets, once available

should be provided to them, to

continue their very important work.

I am happy to join him in

congratulating community foundations

across the UK, I was pleased to be

able to have a meeting with the

chief executive of the Berkshire

foundation a couple of weeks a, I

know from what my honourable friend

said across communities across the

country these are an important

contributor to the shared, an

example of the shared society adds

he say, and I understand dormant

accounts scheme has already

distributed over 362 million for the

benefit of good causes and there has

been a report on possible expanding

the scheme that would have the

potentially significantly build on

the success of the current scheme.

Mr Speaker, can I remind the Prime

Minister of June 2nd 1997 when I

heard her make a very competent

maiden speech in which she stressed

the importance of vocational

practical education for young people

in our country, is she wear there is

now a crisis -- crisis for

apprenticeships, a 62% fall in

apprenticeship starts? Many

independent excellent trainers going

out of business, a FE college in

dire financial straits. Will she

break a few heads, crack a few eggs

and get this sorted?

We see growing

number going into apprenticeships,

we are putting £500 million into

technical education to ensure for

the first time this country has

first class technical education, I

called for it 1997, in 2017 I am

delivering.

As an enthusiastic member of the

women and equalities committee, I

aim to be a strong champion for the

equality of women, and I aspire to

the title of honorary sister as best

towed on you Mr Speaker, so will the

Prime Minister join me in

congratulating Ruth Cook on her

appointment as chief executive of

collar Ron group, the largest

housing association in the country,

proving that exceptional women can

get the top job in housing and

politics.

I am very, I am very very happy to

agree with honourable friend and to

congratulate her on her appointment

for the clarion group. It shows that

women can take on senior job, I have

to say he is aspiring to an accolade

that I don't think the right

honourable friend member for

Camberwell and Peckham has given to

me, despite being only it could

second female Prime Minister in this

country and one day, maybe the

Labour sisterhood will manage to get

a female leader of the Labour Party.

Assessing the impact of leaving the

European Union on the different

sectors of the UK economy, is surely

basic spade work for thing in, yet

the Brexit secretary said none of it

has been done why not?

It isn't the

case no work has been done in

looking at the, as the right

honourable gentleman knows from the

over 800 pages of analysis that have

been published.

The Prime Minister

has made clear that Brexit means

Brexit. When it comes to the closure

of Grantham A&E now the trust

believes it has recruited enough

doctors does she agree with me that

temporary means temporary?

Can I

say, I know my right honourable

friend has been a strong champion on

his constituents, I know he will

agree with me the first priority

must be to ensure patient safety and

that is why a report was

commissioned. I understand NHS

improvement will, are continuing to

work closely with the trust and I am

sure the Health Secretary will be

happy to discuss the detail with him

In the run to Christmas people will

take on extra seasonal work to earn

extra cash but many employers will

be offered unpaid trial work with a

job doesn't exist. It is affecting

tens of thousands up and down the

UK, but I have a bill coming to end

unpaid trial shift, will she ensure

this is the last Christmas of this

exploitation and give Government

backing for it?

We already have a

legal position in this country in

relation to the payment of the

national minimum wage, and ensuring

people are paid for the work they

do.

Given the Scottish National

Party has an extra £2 million to

play with, will the Prime Minister

join me in calling on the film to

rule out higher taxes for

hard-working Scots

This is a very

real test of the First Minister and

Government in Scotland as to whether

they are willing to recognise, last

week I recall, or in previous weeks

we have had strange claims being

made by the Scottish Nationalists in

this House about the I impact of

decisions on Scotland but he is

right. £2 billion extra going into

Scotland. Let us watch carefully how

the SNP Government choose to spend

that money.

Last week I tabled a

written question to the Chancellor,

asking for the evidence behind his

extraordinary claim to the Treasury

Select Committee, that disabled

workers are responsible for the UK's

productivity problem, last night I

received his written answer. Up sur

-- unsurprisingly there is no

evidence for that claim. So

disgracefully, since he has declined

to express regret, will the Prime

Minister take back control and order

the Chancellor to withdraw his

remark and apologise for inaccurate

and offensive comments.

The Chancellor did not express the

views she claimed he was expressing,

this is a government that values the

contribution that disabled people

make, to our society and to our

economy in the workplace n is a

government that is working to ensure

that we can see more disabled people

getting into the workplace. We have

had some success, there is more to

do but we will continue to work, to

ensure those disabled people who

want to work are able to do so.

I

sponsored an event in this place for

the United Kingdom -- UN, the draw

the line campaign which helped 6,000

women and girls to have a better

life. One in four women in the UK

and 70% of girls around the world

will expect to see physical or

sexual violence in their life. Can

this Prime Minister confirm this

Government will continue to lead the

world, on tackling trafficking and

exploitation?

She raises a very

important issue once again, this

Government introduces the modern

slave react. It is continuing to

work not only to increase our

ability to deal with the

perpetrators of these crimes but

also to provide support for the

victim, I want a world in which

women and girls have the confidence

to be able to be what they want to

be, and know they won't be subject

to exploitation, to violence, to

trafficking, to slavery, slavery

applies to men as well but I think

our commitment as a government to

ending violence and exploitation of

women and girls is absolute.

Thank you Mr Speaker, last week it

was announced that my wonderful city

of Coventry had been successful in

its bid to become UK City of Culture

2021. We are bursting with pride.

Will the Prime Minister join me in

congratulating every one who was

instrumental in this great

achievement and which Coventry

success, prosperity, hope and some

fun in the next few years up to

2021, and beyond.

Can I say that I will join her in

congratulating Coventry, on being

selected as City of Culture as she

will be aware from exchanges that

have taken place, there will be a

number of honourable MEPs of this

house who are disappointed because

their cities have not achieved that

particular status but I am happy to

congratulate all those involved in

putting the bid together, and

ensuring that Coventry is that city

of churl, including the mayor for

the West Midlands.

,

Mr Speaker the Prime Minister and

I have many things in common,

including if I may say being proud

of being called bloody difficult

women. My Right Honourable and

learned friend member for be cobs

field is not in that category for

many reasons. He is obviously a man,

he is a respected seasoned

Parliamentarian and like many on

these benches has been for many

decades loyal to his party, nobody

wants to be disloyal or to bring

about more disunity, the Prime

Minister says she wants a meaningful

vote on Brexit, before we leave the

European Union, even at this last

moment would she be so good as to

accept the Right Honourable and

learned gentleman's amendment in the

spirit of unity for everybody here

and in the country.

My right

honourable friend makes an important

point about the concerns people have

had in this house about having a

meaningful vote on this particular

issue before we complete the deal.

As I is set out in the earlier

answer I gave to my right honourable

friend, that is what we will have,

we will ensure that there is a

meaningful vote on this, in this

House, there will be of course be an

opportunity for Parliament to look

at the withdrawal agreement and

implementation bill, this, the fact

that there will be that meaningful

vote has been set out an confirmed

by the Brexit secretary in a written

ministerial statement today. We were

clear that we won't commence any

statutory instruments until that

meaningful vote has taken place, but

as currently drafted what the

amendment says, is that we shouldn't

make any of those, put any of those

arrangements into place, until the

withdrawal agreement and

implementation bill has reach the

statute book. That could be at a

very late stage in the proceedings,

which could mean that we are not

able to have the orderly and smooth

exit from the European Union that we

wish to have.

You are on! The honourable gentleman

is trying to overcome his natural

reticence. I know he is a shy

fellow, but I'm trying to encourage

them.

Mr Speaker, not 1p to fit

sprinklers to Birmingham's 213 tower

blocks from government. Now the city

is suffering the biggest cuts in

local government history, is to

suffer another £100 million further

funding cut, yet made in hand is the

least hard-hit of any local

authority in Britain. How can the

Prime Minister justify one law for

her own constituency and another law

for her own constituency?

Can I say

that of course the local government

settlement has yet to come before

this House. We have been very clear

in relation to fire safety

arrangements and any action that

needs to be taken by local

authorities, that they should

discuss this with the Department for

Communities and Local Government. We

will ensure it is possible for the

Nasa street safety work to be under

an taken.

2017 marks the 100th

anniversary of the foundation of the

women's Royal navy service. Will the

Prime Minister join with me in

marking the outstanding service of

women for over 100 years in the

Royal Navy, but also the Royal Air

Force and the Army? Will she

welcomed the fact that they are no

longer restricted to dibs on shore,

but can take part in every aspect of

the service?

It is right then when

marking the centenary for the

Women's Royal Naval Service, we

recognise the contribution women

have made across our Armed Forces,

and it's important they can now

contribute across all aspects of

work in the armed services and are

no longer restricted to jobs on

shore. This is an important step

forward and strengthens our Armed

Forces, and I congratulate all women

in our Armed Forces.

Mr Corbyn went on housing,

particularly homelessness and rough

sleeping, we will come to that in a

moment. There are a number of

questions about the big vote

tonight, whether the Government has

changed its position, let me just

come to Laura first, did we learn,

was there any change in the

Government's stance there

Theresa May gave a long and

complicated answer talking through

various bits of the procedure. But

there was no budge as far as I could

see. We could see the reactions of

the backbenchers, shaking their

heads furiously. No change so far.

Still hours to go. And it might

change very fast.

We will talk about

housing in a moment.

Now, in the US, Doug Jones has

become the first Democrat in 25

years to win a Senate seat

in Alabama, after an unexpected

victory over Republican Roy Moore.

The Democrat win is a blow

to President Donald Trump,

who had shown enthusiastic support

for Moore, despite allegations

of sexual misconduct against him.

Mr Moore, who arrived

on horseback to cast his vote,

has so far refused to concede,

saying "it's not over".

But it almost certainly is.

President Trump has distanced

himself from the candidate, saying

that he was right all along, that Mr

Moore could not win. Mr Moore is a

controversial character, having

faced allegations of sexual

misconduct from a number of women,

particularly when they were

children. The winner, Mr Jones, told

his supporters that the entire

election race had been about dignity

and respect.

I am truly overwhelmed. I am truly,

truly overwhelmed. But you know,

folks, and you have all heard me say

this at one point or another in this

campaign, I have always believed

that the people of Alabama had more

in common than to divide us.

SHE COUGHS

The way it works is that he has to

fight for the seat again in 2020.