07/02/2018 Daily Politics

Morning folks - welcome

to the Daily Politics.

Theresa May's key Brexit committee

of senior ministers meets today

to agree the Government's

negotiating priorities for the next

phase of Brexit talks.

Can they come to a consensus or are

they still hopelessly divided?

In Brussels, draft EU plans

for a Brexit transition period

are leaked showing the bloc wants

the power to punish Britain

if it's deemed to break any

transitional arrangements,

without reference to

the European Court of Justice.

Adult social care services will get

an extra £150 million this year.

The extra cash appears

to have headed off

a parliamentary rebellion,

but council chiefs say the long-term

funding pressures haven't gone away.

After the B-team last week

normal service resumes

at Prime Minister's Questions today

- it's May versus Corbyn

in the final bout before

the half-term recess.

We'll have the action live

and uninterrupted from midday.

All that in the next 90

minutes, and with me today

are the International Trade Minister

Greg Hands and the Shadow Transport

Minister Rachael Maskell.

Happily, I can confirm

there is absolutely no gap in pay

between my two guests today.

That's because we're not paying

either of them anything to be here.

Welcome to you both.

Good morning.

They are on zero-hour

contracts.

The EU wants to be able to restrict

the UK's access to the single market

and impose tariffs if the Brussels

Commission deems Britain

to have broken aspects

of a transitional agreement.

It wants the ability

to do this quickly,

without recourse to the ECJ.

That's according to official EU

papers leaked to the media last

night and published today.

As you can imagine, Tory Brexiteers

aren't too impressed -

Jacob Rees-Mogg called the EU's

position "aggressive."

And later today, Theresa May

will chair the first of two meetings

of her Brexit war cabinet

and this is just one more

problem on her plate.

Here's Ellie with all the details.

That's right, Andrew -

the European Union Exit

and Trade Strategy and Negotiations

sub-committee, or to give

it its more exciting name,

the "war cabinet", is chaired

by the Prime Minister

and consists of ten

other senior ministers.

Today they will discuss

Northern Ireland and immigration

in the first of two crunch meetings.

And tomorrow they'll move

on to trade and the future

economic partnership.

So will we get any firm

decisions on the UK position?

Probably not.

And today the British Chambers

of Commerce has written

to the Prime Minister calling

for more clarity,

urging ministers to "deliver

a clear, unequivocal,

statement of intent" on Brexit.

And this morning the EU has

published a draft section

of the final Withdrawal Agreement,

saying that there should be

a mechanism allowing the EU

to "suspend certain benefits"

of single market membership

during the transition period.

The UK Government has sought to play

down the leak, saying: "This

is a draft document produced

by the EU that simply

reflects their stated directives."

Both sides are hoping to be able

to reach agreement on the terms

of the implementation or "transition

period" by the time they meet at the

European Council summit in March.

Thanks, Ellie. What is the British

Government position? Are we prepared

to negotiate Britain on sanctions on

punishments -- and punishment if we

had deemed to have broken the

transitional agreement?

This is a

draft document and is obviously

about the rules of what the period

will be. I will say that in previous

times Brussels have been clear that

they don't want to punish Britain,

and actually very much in terms of

the trade flows, and we have to

remember it is very much in the EU's

interests to keep trade flowing...

Sure, I know that, but the talk is

if they deem us to have broken any

aspect of the traditional agreement

Brussels would have the power to

grow and British flights, suspend

access to the single market and even

impose tariffs on British goods. Are

we prepared to negotiate on that

basis?

Looks, that will be in terms

of the details of how the

implementation period work and that

is subject to the negotiation, but

on the specific points we have to

remember it is also in the EU

interests to keep trade flowing and

to keep flights between the EU and

the UK, so why would they want...

They are saying if we agree to a

transitional period which they then

deem we have broken aspect of, they

want the power to have sanctions

against us, and these sanctions

could include grounding flights in

Britain or tariffs against certain

manufacturers that are deemed to

have broken the transitional

arrangement. I ask again, is the

British Government prepared to

negotiate on that basis?

Looks, we

will sort it out, there will be an

negotiation of how the

implementation period works. I am

saying it would be logical for that

you'd want to ground flights between

you and the UK.

It is in the

document which I have here. They

want to suspend certain benefits

derived very from the UK position in

the internal market where it

considers referring to the court

would not happen in time. It needs a

mechanism for them to be able to

respond. Let me try a third time.

Are we prepared to negotiate on

sanctions if we are deemed to have

broken a transitional agreement?

This is a draft document, I will be

clear again, it will not be in the

EU's interest...

It is the

negotiating document am a minister.

That is the EU's position. I will

try to break my rule because I

normally only go three times. I will

try for a fourth time. What is the

British Government's negotiating

position? Is it prepared to

negotiate on this basis?

We will

come to an agreement on the terms of

the limitation period, that is what

we will negotiate, and we will

not...

Will you accept sanctions if

you are deemed to have broken the

deal? I know what the EU position

is. I am trying to get the British

Government's position. Mind you,

trying on any issue is pretty much a

lost cause these days, so let me try

again. What is our negotiating

position? Are we prepared to

negotiate any kind of sanctions or

not?

We will have to see how we will

enter this negotiation. What I am

saying is a lot of what is published

there is a logical. Why would you

want to ground flights were

presumably half of the passengers

are coming from the European Union?

For you would be against it?

I am

saying let's look at it over the

implementation be a... Lets wait for

that negotiation. It's not for me

today to pre-empt a negotiation.

No,

but it is for you as a member of the

British Government to tell this

country what our negotiating

position is as a country, and you

are incapable of doing that.

The

negotiation hasn't started yet,

Andrew.

The EU has published its

side and I am asking a simple

question on behalf of the British

voter, what is our side?

A draft EU

document you have said that four

times but it is a negotiating

document, the position paper on

transitional arrangements and the

withdrawal agreement. This is the

document. But, Andrew, we will

negotiate about the terms...

Would

Labour agree to this?

The problem at

the moment is we haven't even agreed

a transition period.

Would Labour

agree to it?

We would be in a far

different position.

But you are not.

With Labour agree to that?

We

clearly are because we are not in

power at the moment.

There could be

an election any day. Your party is

on an election war footing, Mr

Corbyn has told us that many claims,

so if it falls to you to negotiate,

would it -- which it could, would

you agree to this document?

We would

not be in this position.

I'm sorry,

but you would inherit this. You

quite rightly constantly complain it

is hard to get a position out of the

Government, who won't answer, and we

have seen that this morning, but I

am asking you as an alternate

Government of this country, what

would your position be when faced

with this negotiating demand?

I have

been absolutely clear that we

wouldn't even be discussing this

document been very clear on what we

look to the future which is very

different from the position of the

Government which, quite frankly, is

in complete chaos.

You think if

there was a Labour Government this

document would be withdrawn?

It

would be a very different

negotiating period. Firstly, we

would be clear on transition

agreements, that we would stay in

the single market and the customs

union, we are not messing around

with the European Union...

What this

document is about is the

transitional period, so the

Government says it will stay in the

customs union as well during the

transitional period. What would you

as part of the transitional

agreement, that you say you have

been very clear about, except these

sanctions?

We would not be in the

position of having to because we

would be so clear about our

relationship with Europe, about...

I'm sorry, whatever the relationship

you need transitional arrangements

for them and you need a dispute

mechanism if someone is found in

breach. This is the EU's suggested

dispute mechanism. Do you accept it,

or don't you?

Clearly there needs to

be sanctions on both sides with any

agreement is moving forward, that is

always the case in a negotiation.

So

you would accept these sanctions?

But whether it is about those

sanctions or obviously the sanctions

placed on the EU, but where we have

been very clear is the transition on

the same terms we are on now and

therefore the EU, and Labour has

been clear about where we stand on

these issues.

Lets come onto the

customs union. Am I right that it is

the Government position during the

transition we stay in the customs

union?

We haven't yet negotiated the

transition period.

But what is your

position?

Position is we will be

leaving the customs union at the end

state.

I'm not asking that. I'm

sorry to interrupt, but you simply

won't address any of the questions I

am asking. I

am asking. I notice the Government

position we leave the customs union.

We will even leave a customs union

after the transition. My question

was quite clear. It was your

Government policy, that you would

stay in the customs union during the

transition period...

We want there

to be only one change throughout all

of this, that businesses only have

to prepare a for one change in terms

of the current trading relations

with the European Union.

Are we in

or out of the customs union during

the transition period? Labour-saving

would stay in. What would you do?

That would be a matter for the

negotiation -- the Labour Party say

that they will stay in. It is not a

matter for the negotiation.

I am

asking for your position going into

the negotiation. Is it your position

that you will accept membership of

the customs union during the

transition?

Andrew, that is a matter

for the negotiation and I will not

tell you today what our starting

position will be, before the

negotiators have even started.

You

are negotiating on behalf of the

British people and we have a right

to know.

What I am telling you is

the position and it has been laid

clear over the last year, we are

leaving the single market and the

customs union.

We know that

afterward, but are you telling me

this morning, even at this stage, I

mean, I must confess, I am mistaken,

because I thought it was Government

policy to stay in the customs union

and the single market, like Labour,

during the transition period. You're

telling me this morning that

position has not yet been

determined?

I am telling you we want

to preserve the same terms of trade

during the implementation period as

is currently in place today.

So you

will stay in the customs union? I'm

not asking about the end state for

the moment, Minister. I'm asking

about the transition period. Are you

telling me we will be in the customs

union for the transition period or

are you not?

I am telling you that

as a matter for a negotiation that

hasn't yet started.

No! It is a

matter for us to find out what the

Government position is going into

the negotiations, and at this late

stage you cannot even tell me that?

A negotiation that hasn't yet

started.

It can't start until you

make up your mind what you want.

What is the point of negotiating if

you can't make up your mind?

That is

not the case at all. The

Government's position in terms of

long-term position is clear. We want

the implementation period to be on

the same terms of trade as today.

Is

that a convoluted way of saying you

will stay in the customs union

during the transition period?

No, it

is a way of saying keeping the same

terms of trade as today.

That is the

customs union, what we have.

That is

your inference.

We are in the

customs union.

We are going into

that negotiation, Andrew.

Do you

have any idea what you're talking

about?

I am the Trade Minister, yes.

This is what worries me! This is

your field and you cannot give a

simple answer to a civil question.

It is a process that hasn't started

yet.

One question. Even after the

transition period in the Lords, how

should Labour vote on that?

We have

said absolutely clearly in the long

term we will stay with the same

frictionless trade moving forward.

But do you want to stay in the

customs union or not?

Post-transition?

We have not got

hung up on names of institutions but

what we have said is the terms,

which are absolutely vital to moving

forward...

There are votes coming up

in the house that could determine

whether we stay in or leave the

customs union and the Government

position after the transition is to

leave. We'll Labour vote to leave or

stay after the transition?

We have

taken nothing off the table because

we agreed...

What is your position?

That is what I am saying, nothing

off the table.

That is not an answer

to a question on your position. Do

you think we should stay in the

customs union after the transition

period or not?

Wheeler said, very

clearly...

You haven't said anything

clearly -- we have said, very

clearly. Everything on the table is

just a phrase. Is it Labour's

position, I will try one more time,

is it Labour's position to remain in

the customs union after the

transition period is over?

We have

said we will stay in a customs

arrangement with the EU making sure

we have frictionless trade, and it

is the concepts of being able to

trade freely which is very

important. This Government has

had...

I don't have time for the

Government when you can't even

answer. I have done enough of that.

You don't get out of not answering

the question by attacking the

Government.

Andrew, there have been

two thoughts.

Neither of you have

answered, so let's just move on.

Even by our standards that was

remarkably unproductive.

Ministers have announced an extra

£150 million for adult social

care services this financial year.

It's part of the latest local

government finance settlement

which will be debated and voted

on by MPs later today.

The promise of extra cash looks

like it's placated some Conservative

backbenchers, who were threatening

to rebel over the plans.

However, councils say

they are still facing squeezed

budgets in the years ahead.

Gary Porter is a Conservative

peer and the chairman

of the Local Government Association.

He joins me now.

Gary Porter, you get £150 million,

my understanding, for this financial

year. It is better than nothing. It

would seem to me it does nothing to

resolve your long-term financial

situation?

I think we need to make

it clear it is a lot better than

nothing. Last week we were facing

being £190 million lighter in cash

than we are today, so it is a big

achievement given the Treasury were

not prepared and the Secretary of

State has done well to achieve what

he has, but clearly we all know that

adult social care, people looking

after your mum, dad, you're elderly

relatives, we don't have enough

money in the system.

Funding gap of

£2.3 billion by 2020. Is that true?

Yes, 2020, and we need another

billion into the marketplace now to

make it sustainable. We saw in the

news last week, big heralds going

out of business, returning

contracts.

You have the 150 billion

-- big care homes going out of

business. What you want the

Government to do now?

We urge them

to move quickly on the Green paper

and we should have a seat on the

table table. Our people providing

the care need to be there to sort it

out.

What would you ask them to do?

We need more money into the system.

At the moment the Treasury take half

the rate we collect, so as councils

we collect £27 billion a year and we

get 13 back, and the Treasury take

the other 13. We could sort this

problem in the morning by keeping

the business rates we collect.

Keep

all £26 billion? I have a funny idea

the Treasury will not agree to that.

I have a funny idea they want

volley-mac won't either, but it is a

local tax, why isn't it being spent

on local services?

The Treasury

feels they have no money either so

that is why the Chancellor was you

can for -- looking for obscure ways

of putting up tax.

They shouldn't be

using local tax to pay for National

services, it should be for local

services.

Will local authorities, to

try to meet some of this funding

gap, council tax payers, Ivy in for

a regular round of 6% rises? They

can do three without a referendum

and another three if it is for

social care. Will that be widespread

now? They won't be able to carry on

because it is coming to an end that

period, so as it stands we will be

back to 3% cap on council tax.

But

why should it be capped? Why

shouldn't the council be able to

determine how much to charge local

people for local services? It is not

for the Government.

We don't have a referendum on any

other tax.

We will say goodbye to

you, but you have given me my next

question for which I am grateful.

Thank you very much, Gary Porter.

Why is council tax cut?

We have

introduced a lot of flexibility,

being able to increase council tax

by 3%, an additional 3% on the adult

social care precept. The Government

has an excellent record on keeping

down council tax, we froze it

throughout the course of the last

parliament.

Why is the Government?

It is council tax. Why do you

control what councils are taxing?

We

think it is the right balance, that

councils can raise more.

If they

wanted to raise more than that they

go to a local referendum. If they

want to raise more than 6%, which is

well more than the rate of

inflation, they would have to go to

a local referendum.

Well, more than

3%, unless they want more money to

be earmarked for social care, so it

is

more than 3% they would have to go

to a referendum for.

But on top of

that there is the 3% adult social

care precept as well so they would

have to go to a local referendum in

excess of 6%.

He is a Conservative.

What do you say to?

I know him very

well. He is good, rivers and local

Government. We provided more money.

-- representing local government.

These are the Tories saying this,

this spending gap, not Labour!

We

have provided £200 billion for local

government over the course of these

five years, and we have also

announced a green paper, later this

year, to look again at the long-term

aspects of the funding of social

care.

The funding gap is £2.4

billion by 2020. In the long-term a

lot of people under social care will

be dead. In the long term we are all

dead! This is a social funding gap

now. What is to be done?

We

recognise the degree of the problem

and the size of the problem, and

that is why we are looking afresh

with the green paper, but we did

provide £2 billion... We have

provided it, Andrew. We provided 2

billion in the budget last year, an

additional million pounds today.

Over a course of two years -- an

extra £150 million today. We are now

looking at the longer term aspects,

in a correct way, in consultation

with local government.

I would

Labour plug this spending gap?

Well,

we wouldn't be just throwing

sticking plasters at a problem.

Fundamentally, we know the 40% cut

which has now fallen across all

local authorities has had a

devastating impact, not just an

adult services...

We know the

problem, but my question to you is

how would you fill the gap?

We

certainly wouldn't be making the

scale of the cuts from central

government to local authorities to

hollow out local government, so

actually it is quite dysfunctional.

If we think about social care, the

crisis, not only is the green paper

incredibly delayed, by eight years,

but we have at that situation where

we have £6.3 billion deficit.

We

know! This is all history.

No

comment as the present.

The lack of

social... Lack of funding for social

care from central Government goes

back almost to 2010. What I am

asking you is how would you resolve

it? Because the Government, other

than the £150 million and the £2

billion given before, which still

leaves this gap I was talking to

Gary Porter about, it looks to me it

is not going to fill it. So how

would you fill it?

The gap is

growing as well we must remember

because obviously the Government are

withdrawing the revenue support

grant to local authorities. We

wouldn't be going down the action of

taking the money of my local

authorities who are providing

crucial services.

Even without

further... No, no, even without

further cuts, the cuts that have

already taken place that you would

inherit if you came into power, a

substantial funding gap, so how

would you fill it?

We have ready set

out in our manifesto if you're not

back to last summer, about the

investments we would put back into

local government to ensure we can

pay to care for the most vulnerable

people in our communities, whether

children, adults...

How much would

you put in extra to social care?

I

don't have those figures on me, but

I said there was a £6.3 billion

funding gap there, and we see that

as an essential part of what we're

doing in the future.

Would you fill

that gap by an increase of £6

billion?

Have already made a

commitment to start addressing those

issues, but... I didn't have the

figures on me. I already stated that

to you.

If we are agreed there has

been a £6 billion gap has developed,

which has been said on this

programme many times before, would

you fill that £6 billion gap?

I

apologised to you to say I didn't

have the figures on me on the amount

we are putting into social care, but

we will address the issue and make

sure our most vulnerable are cared

for.

We will leave it there.

Now, we hear the Prime Minister

of Canada, Justin Trudeau,

has been taking a bit of flak

recently after he interrupted

a young woman who used

the word "mankind".

Mankind.

He says we should all be

using the word "peoplekind" instead,

as it's more "more inclusive".

Now, we here at the Daily Politics

have some sympathy with Mr Trudeau

as we like to think of ourselves

as an inclusive sort of a show.

And what could be more inclusive

than the humble Daily Politics mug?

And luckily for Justin,

the competition to win the mug

is also very inclusive.

It's open to mankind,

womankind, even Canadians...

But not French Canadians.

You can take this inclusion to fire.

-- too far.

As long as they're in this country.

To enter, just tell us

when this happened.

# When the going gets tough

# The tough get going

# When the going gets rough...#.

The President's spokesman

described him as "hanging

tough" on basic principle,

including the Strategic Defence

Initiative or "Star Wars" programme.

# Word up, everybody say

# When you hear the call

you've got to get it under way

# Word up...#.

Let's face up to it.

Let's not deceive ourselves.

We are on the verge of civil war

in Northern Ireland.

# Don't leave me this way

# I can't survive,

I can't stay alive

# Without your love

# Oh, baby, don't

leave me this way...#.

# And I see you true colours

shining through...#.

The Labour leadership is getting rid

of the Liverpool Militants it

considers the most serious threat

to the national image of the party.

There's a battle to be waged.

That battle will be waged

within the rank and file of the

trade union Labour movement.

MUSIC: The Final Countdown

by Europe.

# The final countdown...

# It's the final countdown #.

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 12.30pm today, and you can

see the full terms

and conditions for Guess The Year

The

on our website - that's

bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics.

although I know the people of Quebec

are renowned for their sense of

humour, I should emphasise I was

only joking when I said

French-Canadians cannot enter the

competition.

competition. It is all laypeople

from Montreal who can't enter. Greg

Hands it is only people from

Montreal.

-- it is only people from Montreal.

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.

Can I be a member of womankind?

You

can be a member of any kind you want

to. That is how inclusive we are.

Brexit, for a change, limbs across

the airwaves. Mr Corbyn won't go on

it. I see that as a prediction, but

I could be wrong. This EU document

about sanctions and so on -- Brexit

looms across the airwaves. What is

the view in London about what

Brussels is up to?

I think,

privately for something when you

talk to ministers about this and how

the EU is playing it, I think they

sometimes feel frustration the EU is

playing hardball and playing a

political game, just as the British

side is. And although often the

documents, issued from Brussels,

they are coming from the Council or

the Commission, from officials

without the smiley face of a

politician at the front of it, but

they are still being intensely

political, of course they are. The

process of Brexit, these directives

and negotiating guidelines and all

these kind of things, sometimes they

come forth with the very sort of

official stamp as if "This is the

law and it must be obeyed," but of

course this will be subject of the

back and forth of the negotiating,

the hardball, going backwards and

forwards. I think ministers will be

looking at this latest thing with a

bit of a sceptical eye, OK, that is

their opening position, look at the

first phase, in the end you did not

do as much compromising as the UK,

but they did in the end have to do

is uncompromising. -- in the end the

EU did not do as much comprising.

But I am hearing about this

particular footnote, whether it is

actually getting things a little too

far in terms of the potential

punishment tactics.

You said

something very interesting, because

the member states are now finding

their voice, in phase two. In the

first place they were pretty much

united around the common agreement

to screw as much money out of the

British as they could, but when you

look at what is coming out of Italy,

or even the Belgians, the most

federal of all, or Mr Macron on the

Sandhurst deal, or the Dutch as

well, and the Spanish as well, there

is now a different emphasis.

That is absolutely right because in

the second phase, inevitably,

because it is about the long-term

future relationship rather than

settling our bill on the way out or

being screwed out of money,

depending on how you look at it, the

member states have such different

interests. They have such different

economies, different domestic

priorities, and therefore it will,

as the thinking goes, give more

opportunities to the UK to be able

to play that old diplomatic game of

divide and rule. Brussels is still

very much trying to keep an iron

grip on what the member states want,

they are trying hard and still doing

a good job of keeping them together,

but you're absolutely right, in the

second phase there will be more push

and pull between the member states

and I think we are seeing some of

the sides of that at the start. At

the end of the first phase we did an

interview with the Brexit secretary

David Davis in Berlin, where he

actually named six or seven

countries who he believed were being

more helpful than others. At the

time that seemed like a really

controversial thing to do, but we

may well see more of this in the

next phase.

The Government we

haven't heard from on this has been

the Germans because they have been

totally consumed by their coalition

talks, which this morning have come

to an end. There is to be a grand

coalition, and part of that deal is

that the social Democrats get the

finance ministry and the Foreign

Ministry. I would suggest that is

not good news for the British

Government. They are very hard line

on Brexit.

Absolutely. Sounds like a

very very nerdy point but it

basically means the most powerful

country in the European Union, you

have a more strident approach on

making Brexit hard for Britain or,

you know, just being that, we must

stick together, closer to the

Commission view, in the most

powerful ministries in Berlin. And

of course that is something that

might colour the way some of the

docs call.

I think it will, but it

may not. Let's go to our own House

of Commons.

And the house will join me in KGB to

Dean sprouting in Iraq, his death

was not the cause of enemy activity.

The house will join in offering

condolences to his family and

friends at this difficult time.

Yesterday, winning one the right to

vote. I know the

vote. I know the whole house, well,

from a sedentary position, Labour

say someone, I'm pleased to say that

universal suffrage did come for

women ten years later under a

Conservative government. But I'm

sure Mr Speaker, the whole house

will want to join me in marking the

heroic and tireless struggle that

led to women having the vote because

it forever changed our nation's

future. Mr Speaker, this morning I

had meetings with ministerial

colleagues and others, in addition

to my duties in this house, I shall

have further such meetings later

today.

My constituent, Natasha,

suffers from Hank Hanley anaemia, a

debilitating disease which carries

with it a high risk of cancer.

Natasha was on lifetime disability

living allowance which was removed

following her T20 assessment. When

she appealed, she was told because

she has a degree she does not need

as much support. I'm sure the Prime

Minister is aware that disease and

cancer are no respect is of

disability and qualifications. --

following her PIP assessment. I'm

asking the Prime Minister what

urgent action she will take to

improve the quality and the standard

of PIP assessments?

Obviously, the

DWP is constantly looking at the

standard of PIP assessments that are

being made. I'm sorry to hear the

case the honourable lady has set

out, I think those people would be

very concerned at hearing that case

and I'm surprised at the judgment

that was given in relation to that

individual, can I suggest she sent

in the detail and I will make sure

it is looked into?

Mr Speaker, my

right honourable friend will be

aware of the Ukip led Thanet

Council's broken election promise to

support the reopening of minced and

airport. On the basis that the site

was to be redesignated as mixed use

with thousands of houses, the plan

was sensibly rejected by local

councillors and I salute them for

doing so. And she give me her

assurance that Thanet should now be

given as miserable a time as

necessary, perhaps under a new

administration. -- as reasonable

time is necessary, perhaps under a

new administration, to get it right.

My honourable friend is right to

raise this matter on behalf of his

constituents. I understand that

Thanet District Council has not

adopted a local plan since 2006.

That is why my right honourable

friend the Housing Secretary has

written to the District Council to

begin the formal process of

considering intervention and this is

a very serious step which shows that

the council has not been doing what

it should be doing in relation to a

local plan so my right honourable

friend the Secretary of State is now

considering whether to intervene and

he will be making an announcement in

due course.

Jeremy Corbyn.

Thank you

Mr Speaker, I joined the Prime

Minister in paying tribute to

captain Dean Sprouting from Jarrow

on his death and his family,

hopefully they will accept our

condolences after this terrible

incident. It is of course the

anniversary of women first getting

the right to vote in 1918. I pay

tribute to all those that campaign

all over the country to achieve that

right. We should understand that our

rights come from the activities of

ordinary people doing extraordinary

things to bring about democracy and

justice within our society. And

those women that suffered

grievously, being force-fed in

Holloway prison in my constituency,

and those that suffered so much,

need to be remembered for all time.

Working-class women as well as many

other women fought for that right

and it is one we should all be proud

of. Mr Speaker, with crime rising,

does the Prime Minister regret

cutting 21,000 police officers?

Can

I first of all said to the right

honourable gentleman that we should

be saluting all of those who were

involved in that struggle to ensure

that women could get the right to

vote. I was very pleased yesterday

to have an opportunity to meet Helen

Pankhurst, the great granddaughter

of Emmeline Pankhurst and to see

that the memory is being kept going

and as I said yesterday in my

speech, I myself heard about the

fight by the suffragettes from my

late godmother, whose mother was a

suffragette and both of whose

parents knew the Pankhurst family.

He raises the issue of police

numbers and crime. What we actually

have seen from the crime survey is

that crime is now down at record low

levels. That is what has been

achieved and it has been achieved by

a Conservative government that at

the same time has been protecting

police budgets.

Jeremy Corbyn.

Mr

Speaker, recorded crime is up by a

fifth since 2010. Violent crime is

up by 20% and during the period the

Prime Minister was Home Secretary,

£2.3 billion was cut from police

budgets. Her Majesty 's Inspectorate

of Constabulary warns neighbourhood

policing risks being eroded and the

shortage of detectives is at a

national crisis. Does the Prime

Minister think the Inspectorate is

scaremongering?

The right honourable

gentleman mentions the issue about

recorded crime. One of the

challenges we have seen in the

police in recent years is ensuring

that we get proper recording of

particularly certain tribes of crime

-- types of crime and I'm pleased to

say we have seen improvements in the

last seven or eight years in the

recording by police of certain types

of crime. He also talks about the

issue of police budgets. As I have

said, this is a government that is

actually protecting police budgets

and I might remind the right

honourable gentleman that the Labour

Party's former Shadow Home

Secretary, now the police and crime

commission for greater Manchester,

Intel said the police could take an

up to 10% cut in their budgets.

Mr

Speaker, the Inspectorate also found

that the police are failing to

properly record tens of thousands of

offences and in addition to the

gutting of 21,000 police officers,

the government has also cut 6700

police community support officers.

The Chief Constable of Bedfordshire

says, "We do not have the resources

to keep residents safe. The position

is a scandal"

to keep residents safe. The position

is a scandal". Too many people don't

feel safe and too many people aren't

safe. We have just seen the highest

rise in recorded crime for a quarter

of a century. The Chief Constable of

Lancashire said, "The government's

police cuts have made it much more

difficult to keep people safe". Is

he wrong?

Can I say to the right

honourable gentleman, on the issue

of recording crime, he mentions Her

Majesty 's Inspectorate of

Constabulary, it is precisely

because when I was Home Secretary, I

asked the Inspectorate of

Constabulary to look at the

recording of police crime to make

sure that police forces were doing

it properly and indeed, some changes

were made as a result of that so we

now see the better recording of

crime. We also see £450 million

extra being made available to the

police but what have we also seen

over the last few years? The

creation of the National Crime

Agency, our police forces taking

more notice of helping to support

vulnerable victims, doing more on

modern slavery, doing more domestic

violence, taking issues seriously

that they were not taking seriously

before.

Mr Speaker, if you ask the

Inspectorate and look at unrecorded

crime and they tell you what is

going on, the least you could do is

act on what they tell you. Mr

Speaker, if I could quote something

at the Prime Minister, it might

sound familiar to her, "The first

duty of the government is to protect

the public and keep them safe. I

have to say to the government they

are not putting enough focus on

police resources". If you cast their

rise to the bar back benches of the

Conservative Party, she will see the

member for Shipley. That is what he

said about her government and what

it is doing. Gun crime, Mr Speaker,

has increased by 20% in the last

year. The Chief Constable of

Merseyside said recently, "Have I

got sufficient resources to fight

gun crime? No, I haven't"

got sufficient resources to fight

gun crime? No, I haven't". Does the

Prime Minister think he is crying

wolf?

The right honourable gentleman

can't get away from the fact that

what the government is doing is

protecting police budgets, in fact,

not just protecting police budgets,

but increasing with £450 million

extra. What we are also doing is

ensuring that our police have the

powers that they need to do the job

that we want them to do. I seem to

remember the right honourable

gentleman does not have that good

record when it comes to increasing

the powers for the police to do

their job.

their job.

Mr Speaker, since 2015,

direct government funding to the

police has fallen by £413 million.

The Chief Constable of the West

Midlands, Dave Thompson, said, "The

current flat cash settlement for

policing means force budgets will

fall in real terms"

policing means force budgets will

fall in real terms". As well as

police cuts, other public service

cuts are clearly contributing to the

rise in crime. 3600 youth workers

have lost their jobs. 600 youth

centres have closed and been boarded

up. Probation service cut and

privatised. Re-offenders committing

more offences. When it comes to

tackling crime, prevention and cure

our two sides of the same coin. So

why is the government cutting both

prevention and cure?

I have to say

to the right honourable gentleman,

we have put in place various pieces

of work on anti-knife crime, on

serious violence, on issues like

domestic violence but I come back to

the point I made in the last

response, the Leader of the

Opposition, the right honourable

gentleman voted against changing the

law so that anyone caught carrying a

knife for a second time would face a

custodial sentence. He has called

for much shorter sentences for those

who break the law and he might want

to reflect on the fact that when

there was a Conservative mayor in

London, knife crime went down. Now

there is a lay-by mayor in London,

knife crime is going up.

Jeremy

Corbyn.

-- and labour mayor in

London.

Mr Speaker, I am very clear

that crime is of course wrong but

the way you deal with it is by an

effective probation service, is by

community service orders, is by the

rehabilitation of offenders. And

what she said goes to the heart of

the Prime Minister's record. She, Mr

Speaker, was Home Secretary physics

years. Crime is up, violent crime

rising, police numbers down and

Chief Constable saying they no

longer have the resources to keep

communities safe. After seven years,

seven years of cuts, will the Prime

Minister today admit that her

government's relentless cuts to

police, probation services and

social services have left us less

safe? The reality is, you can't have

public safety on the cheap.

public safety on the cheap.

Well,

the right honourable gentleman

really needs to reflect on what

Labour would be doing if they were

in government. You can only pay for

our public services if you have a

strong economy and what would we

see, what would we see with the

Labour Party? Well, we don't need to

ask ourselves what we would see with

the Labour Party because the Shadow

Chancellor's adviser told us that

the weekend. He said this, "We need

to think about the obvious problems

which might face a radical Labour

government, such as capital flight

for a run on the pound"

government, such as capital flight

for a run on the pound". That's what

Labour would do, bankrupt Britain

and the police would have less money

under Labour than under the

Conservatives.

Conservatives.

Thank you Mr Speaker.

Travelling around the country and

meeting people from diverse

communities, members of the Jewish

and Muslim community have raised the

point for the coroner's act to

specifically take into account

people's faith considerations, as in

their faith, loved ones must be

buried within 24 hours. Will the

Prime Minister join me and the

honourable member for Maidstone and

faith communities to look at this

important matter.

Can I say to my

honourable friend, I would like to

thank him for raising this point

because he's doing so on behalf of

communities across the country and

he does so from a unique position

with his own experience and

understanding of these issues. It is

important that we take into account

specific requirements of someone's

faith, especially when they have

lost a loved one and are grieving

and I know that although, as he will

be aware, coroners are an

independent judicial office, I

understand the Ministry of Justice

is speaking to the Chief coroner

about this point, to see what more

can be done and I am sure my right

honourable friend the Lord

Chancellor will be happy to meet and

discuss this issue further with my

honourable friend.

Yesterday it was announced that ten

Royal Bank of Scotland branches in

Scotland have been -- that were

earmarked for closure are to be

reprieved, news for which I am

grateful, on the back of community

pressure under the leadership shown

by the Scottish National Party.

On three occasions I have asked the

Prime Minister at Prime Minister 's

questions to bring Ross McEwan

entered ten Downing St. For the

Prime Minister to accept

responsibilities given that we on

RBS. Well the Prime Minister Colin

Ross McEwan and join us and call for

all the branches to remain open? --

call in Ross McEwan?

As I have said

before of course it is important for

customers, especially those

vulnerable, to be able to call on

the services they need. I welcome

the decision from the Royal Bank of

Scotland, and commercial decision

for them. But if the right

honourable gentleman is so keen on

ensuring that communities and people

perhaps in remote communities have

access to the services they need,

they should ask himself why it is

the Scottish government has been

such a failure in ensuring people in

remote communities have broadband

access to online banking. They need

to get their act together because

quite simply Scotland under the Nats

is getting left behind.

Mr Speaker,

that was pathetic. The Prime

Minister hasn't answered. We have

saved the banks. Yesterday we

celebrated the achievements of the

suffragette movement, which was

about democracy, equality and

fairness for women. However today in

the United Kingdom, 3.8 million

women are not receiving the pension

they are entitled to. A vote in this

house last November received

unanimous cross-party support, 288

to zero, calling on the Government

in London to do the right thing.

Will the Prime Minister do her bit

for gender equality, and end the

injustice faced by 1950s women?

I

say to the right honourable

gentleman that as people are living

longer it is important that we

equalise the retirement leader

pension age between men and women

and we are doing that and doing it

faster -- Villa pension age between

men and women. We are giving greater

protection to the women involved and

an extra £1 billion has been put in

to ensure no one will see their

pension entitlement changed by more

than 18 months. That was a real

response to the issue that was being

addressed, but I think if he wants

to talk about equality, then he has

to recognise the importance of the

equality of the state pension age

between men and women.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I never

thought I would see the day when

where I read the Leader of the

Opposition follows -- where I lead.

There is clearly hope for them yet.

LAUGHTER

Last year the Government advertised

for the post of disability

Commissioner. Lord Shinkwin, my

noble friend, applied for the

position and was appointed. Yet only

a few weeks later he was told by the

equality and human rights commission

that the post had been abolished

altogether. Was the Prime Minister

consulted about that decision? Does

she agree with the decision to

abolish that post, and if not can I

urge her to urge the commission to

reinstate the post of disability

Commissioner and reinstall Lord

Shinkwin to his rightful place on

it?

Can I thank my honourable friend

for raising this point? Firstly, can

I say I have known the noble Lord,

Lord Shinkwin, for many years and he

has been a valiant champion for the

rights of disabled people over those

years and I think his own experience

and the example he set in his work

in public life, and particularly in

the other place, are a fine example

of how disabled people can actually

be standing up, speeding up, and

ensure they are taking their

rightful place in public life --

speaking up. The HRC is an

independent body and it was their

decision to abolish the disability

Commissioner. The question is what

is being done to help disabled

people and how can we ensure we are

helping disabled people? That is why

we are committed to tackling the

injustices that disabled people

face. We are spending over £50

billion a year on benefits to

support disabled people and people

with health conditions, a record

high. But of course we do want to

ensure and I would urge the HRC to

ensure that in their work they are

paying proper attention to the needs

and rights of disabled people,

because that is an important part of

their remit.

Mr Speaker, my

constituent's son was killed by a

learner driver taking a lesson. With

one in four young drivers being

involved in an accident within the

first two years of starting to

drive, and 400 deaths or serious

injuries on our roads involving

young drivers each year, will the

Prime Minister meet with me and my

constituents to hear their story and

consider the introduction of a

graduated licensing system for the

UK as they have another countries?

The honourable lady has obviously

raised an important issue and I will

certainly look at the request that

she has made. And I will also ask

the Department for Transport to look

at this as an issue. As she says

there are too many people who suffer

a loss and tragedy at the hands of

learner drivers in these

circumstances and we will certainly

look at that.

The Royal Marines are the most

adaptable of our elite infantry,

central to our amphibious capability

and they provide much of our special

forces. Does the Prime Minister

agree with me that producing them

further at this stage would be

inconsistent with this Government's

strong record on defence and

security?

Can I say to my honourable friend

that the Royal Marines do indeed

play a vital role in defending our

country and I pay tribute to them

for all that they do.

Detecting the UK is of course our

priority and as my honourable friend

will know, we have in place a

review, and organising defence

programme, about ensuring the

defence capabilities we have meet

the rapidly changing and evolving

threats that we face. I think that

is the right thing for us to do, but

of course any comments that have

been made, any suggestions made,

about cuts to defence or purely

speculative. I would remind my

honourable friend and other members

of this House that in fact we are

committed to increasing our spending

on defence.

In offering him best

wishes for his birthday on Sunday, I

call Mr Dennis Skinner.

I didn't

know about that.

LAUGHTER

I don't celebrate things like that.

I don't think you should celebrate

age.

Anyway...

LAUGHTER

There are another group of people

that need help, and they are the

people who work in the National

Health Service. And what they told

me last week was the best period

that they ever experienced was in

the Labour Government when they had

the money increased from £33 billion

in 1997

in 1997 to £100 billion in 2010.

That was a golden period. Why did

they do it? How did they do it? The

Chancellor of the Exchequer but 1%

on the national insurance, and in

hypothecation terms it went directly

to the health service, and it is

called long-term stability. Under

this Government they don't know

whether they are coming or going. It

is high time this Government did the

same as we did between 97 and 2010.

Yes, and happy birthday, Dennis.

Can I say to the honourable

gentleman, he says why were the

Labour Party in that position of

being able to spend more on public

services. I will tell him. Because

the Conservative Government had left

the golden economic legacy.

a golden economic legacy.

Regardless of how popular you are...

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The

Conservative lead District Council

have refused the proposed expansion

of the enormous logistics part in --

Logistics Park in my constituency.

Given the Prime Minister's recent

welcome remarks about sustainable

developments, will she please

arrange for me to meet the relevant

Government ministers to discuss the

creation of a national planning

framework for the future location of

these enormous Logistics Park 's?

My

honourable friend has raised an

important point, and obviously it is

a matter of considerable interest to

his constituents. Of course we need

the right balance between enabling

development and growth to take place

while continuing to protect and

enhance our natural environment. And

the purpose of the planning system

is to contribute to achieving that

sustainable development, but

regarding the very specific issue

about these logistics parks, I'm

sure one of the ministers from

housing and communities and local

Government, indeed possibly my right

honourable friend the Housing

Secretary, will be happy to meet and

discuss it with them.

Is the Prime Minister were ever

Universal Credit claimant forgets

their username or password they must

attend a face-to-face interview at

the job centre to have them reset?

The Secretary of State can't give a

date when this will be fixed so will

the Prime Minister to commit to know

for the job centre closures until

Universal Credit claimants can

access basic online functions as a

available with HMRC?

I'll ask the

Secretary of State responsible to

look carefully at identifying a date

when that change will be made.

Mr Speaker, according to statistics

around 3400 people in my

constituency last year were

diagnosed with cancer. Cancer

survival rates have meant there are

7000 people alive today who may not

have been if the rates of 2010 were

still in place. Does my right

honourable friend see this as a

testament to the NHS and that she

recognised...

Well, I absolutely

agree with my honourable friend. It

is very good news there are 7000

more people alive today. Cancer

sufferers alive today, than would

have been had we simply continued in

the way we were in 2010. I am very

happy to join him in welcoming the

news. Cancer survival rates have

increased year-on-year. Of course,

we want them to increase even

further.

Last year we had 7 million more

diagnostic tests than in 2010 and

290,000 patients started treatment

for cancer, 57,000 more than in

2010, but he is absolutely right. We

should welcome the improvement that

has been made, we should

congratulate and thank the NHS staff

for all they have been doing, but

there is more for us to do and that

is why we are backing up our plans

for cancer with a further £600

million to implement the cancer

strategy for England.

The Prime Minister, as we have just

heard, continues to be in denial

about the rising level of crime and

following police numbers. Despite

her repeated assurances budgets have

not been protected for my local

police force, with 80 million and

1000 police officers lost already.

Will she meet with me and a

delegation of small businesses that

do so much for my local economy yet

have seen significant rises and

Brechins in crime as a result of

these Tory cuts?

-- break-ins.

Obviously I will look at his request

but for those concerned about the

way in which policing is being

undertaken in their area, they

should actually speak to the local

police, who make operational

decisions about what is happening.

We protected overall police spending

and we continue to protect it, and

indeed more money is being put into

the police. I remind the honourable

gentleman that it was a Labour

Shadow Home Secretary who said that

the police budgets could be cut by

10%.

NHS figures show that in the

south-west NHS funding, the growth

in NHS funding, is 2.2% less than

the national average. It is also

true that it is more challenging in

the south-west with an ageing

demographic and sparsity. Does the

Prime Minister agree with me that

providers in the south-west, that

they deserve their fair share of NHS

funding, and will she take action to

address this inequality?

Let me say to my honourable friend

that the National for me which is

the basis for calculating funding

does take into account a large

number of factors including being

rural and the demographics which

other factors he has suggested needs

to be considered. NHS Curnow saw an

increase in their funding this year

and will see a further increase in

their funding next year, taking

funding to over £760 million. This

is part of our commitment to

ensuring we are putting extra

funding in the NHS but of course, we

continue to look at ensuring the

distribution of that funding takes

account of all the factors that need

to do.

Leila Moran.

Thank you, Mr

Speaker, under the 1824 rate --

vagrancy act, rough sleeping is

illegal and the act was used nearly

2000 times last year to drag

homeless people before the courts.

Scotland and Northern Ireland have

already repealed it is so will the

Prime Minister support my bill that

consigned this heartless Dickensian

law to the history books across the

whole of the UK?

What we are doing

is recognising we need to take

action in relation to rough

sleeping. That is why we are putting

more money into projects to reduce

rough sleeping and indeed, projects

like housing first, which are being

put into place in a number of places

in the country to ensure that we can

provide for those rough sleeping.

None of us want to see rough

sleepers on the street. That is why

the government is taking action.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Today is the

anniversary of the signing of the

Maastricht Treaty. We have come a

very long way. May I congratulate my

right honourable friend on her

approach to the customs union? May I

also mention the fact that in the

liaison committee last December, I

warned her about ultimatums from the

EU and again in my question only

last week. Would she be given to be

very robust when discussing these

matters in the Brexit committee as I

am sure she will be, in order to we

repudiate any of these EU threats?

I

can assure my honourable friend the

first, I suspect that at the time

that the legislation was going

through in this house, there were

not many who would have thought that

my honourable friend would be

standing up recognising the signing

of the anniversary of the Maastricht

Treaty. I suspect he only feels able

to do so because we are coming out

of the European Union and I can

assure you we will be robust in our

arguments. As I have said right from

the very beginning, we will hear

noises find all sorts of things

being said about positions being

taken. What matters is the positions

we take in the negotiations, as we

sit down and negotiate the best

deal. We have shown we can do that.

We did it in December and we are

going to do it again.

Thank you, Mr

Speaker. Kirklees Council, who serve

my constituency, have already had

their budget cut by nearly £200

million, with a possible £45 million

of cuts to come. Which of the

following things would the Prime

Minister recommend they cut next?

Care for an older person with

dementia, emptying the bends,

providing hot school meals for

vulnerable children, libraries,

leisure centres or museums, or

supporting the 24% of children

living in poverty? Your choice,

Prime Minister.

I would have thought

that the honourable lady should have

been welcoming the improvements that

have taken place in her

constituency. She should have

welcomed them any more children who

are in good for outstanding schools

as a result of this government -- be

many more children. She should have

welcomed the extra help landing and

more people...

The Prime Minister is

in the middle of giving her answer,

order, members must not shout at the

Prime Minister when she's giving her

answer. OK.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Recent reports have suggested the

European Commission is asking that

we enter into certain limited

legally binding agreements in

relation to bits of our exit in

isolation. Could the Prime Minister

confirm it remains the government's

policy that nothing is agreed until

everything is agreed and therefore,

we will only enter into a legally

binding agreement in relation to the

entire exit agreement and not just

part of it as Jamaat

my honourable

friend is right and it was reflected

in the joint report that was

published in December that nothing

is agreed until everything is

agreed. The negotiations that are

now taking place firstly, to put

greater detail into the definition

of the implementation period, and we

expect to do that by the March

European Council. Alongside that,

there is looking at the legal basis

of the withdrawal agreement which of

course will have to come to this

parliament for agreement for both

the withdrawal agreement and the

implementation built in due course.

At that stage, I would expect to

have the future relationship set out

in a way so people are able to look

at the whole package when they come

to make the decision.

Sir Vincent

cable.

The Prime Minister knows that

one of the key objectives of

American trade negotiators in any

future deal after Brexit is to

secure access for American companies

to business in the NHS. Can she give

an absolute guarantee that in those

negotiations, the NHS will be

excluded from their scope? And can

she confirmed that in her

conversations with President drunk,

she has made it absolutely clear to

him that the NHS is not for sale

question mark -- with President

Trump.

I want to say to the right

honourable gentleman that we are

starting the discussions with the

American administration, firstly

looking at what we can do to

increase trade between the US and UK

already, even before a possibility

any free trade agreement and he does

not know what they are going to say

their requirements for the free

trade agreement, we will go into the

negotiations to get the best

possible deal for the UK.

possible deal for the UK.

Mr

Speaker, a recent report by open

doors highlights the top countries

that suffer horrific persecution

against Christians. We need to take

action and send a signal to other

nations. These are countries that

are often associated with luxury

holidays. Will the Prime Minister

consider it a marking a specific

fixed percentage of international

aid to go towards tackling religious

persecution?

Yes, well, I have to

say to my honourable friend that

this is an issue that I of concern

to many members of this house and I

was pleased a matter of weeks ago to

meet Father Daniel from

meet Father Daniel from miniver and

Idlib, who talked about the very

real persecution is congregation

were suffering and had suffered in

the past. He presented me with a

Bible which was burned, which had

been rescued when a church had

actually been set on fire. This is a

real issue. We are, all of our aid

is distributed on the basis of need

to ensure civilians are not

disconnected against on the basis of

race, ethnicity or religion. --

discriminated against. We are

working with governments, the

international community and the UN

to support the rights of minorities

and that our aid reaches those in

need but we will of course further

explore Whatmore support we can give

-- what more support we can give to

work against persecution of

religious minorities.

The Prime

Minister will be aware that all free

trade agreements involve some custom

checks and therefore infrastructure

at frontiers which would be

completely incompatible with

maintaining an open border between

Northern Ireland and the republic.

As the Cabinet subcommittee has

apparently today finally got around

to discussing this, could the Prime

Minister explain to the house why

she is so opposed to the UK

remaining in a customs union with

the EU when not only would this be

better for the British economy than

a vague deep and special

partnership, whatever that is but

would help to ensure that the border

remains as it is today which is

everybody wants? Wright UK is

leaving the European Union. That

means we are leaving the single

market. We are leaving the customs

union.

If we were full members of

the customs union, we would not be

able to do trade deals around the

rest of the world and we are going

to have an independent trade policy

and do those deals. He asks me about

customs arrangements but I have to

say to him that I suggest he looks

to the paper that was published by

the government last summer.

Thank

you Mr Speaker. Headway, the brain

injury charity, says that a family

recent had to pay £1500 over 15

weeks for hospital car parking

charges, Clic Sargeant said families

that have children with Baghdad to

pay £100, despite the government

misses, hospital staff, nurses and

Borders have to pay car parking

charges, given unanimous motion last

week in the House of Commons, will

my honourable friend address this

social injustice and abolish

hospital car parking charges once

and for all?

I recognise this is an

issue my honourable friend has been

campaigning on for some time. As he

says in his question, we have of

course set strong guidance -- sent

strong guidance to hospital trusts

on the issue of car parking charges

and we of course look to ensure that

those are being met. Of course,

individual hospitals are taking

their own decisions in relation to

this matter but I think it is right

the government has set very clear

guidelines to hospitals as to how

they approach this.

Mr Speaker, the

Prime Minister has done much to

tackle modern slavery but my

constituent was trafficked here as a

child, sold at least once on the

long journey and then forced to work

in the dark in a cannabis factory

for years. Now the Home Office is

proposing to send him back to

Vietnam. Will the Prime Minister

intervened, not just in this case

but in this complex and confused

area of the law?

I recognise as the

honourable lady says that there are

cases which are complex in terms of

the legal application. My right

honourable friend the Home Secretary

has heard the case the honourable

lady as set out and I'm sure we will

look at that particular issue, both

the individual case but also the

wider point that the honourable lady

is making. I am sure we all want to

ensure that actually, as we know,

the best possible solution for this

is people like her constituent not

to be trafficked into the UK in the

first place to be working in