03/11/2015

:00:00. > :00:00.any other MPS amasses in the crest of the governors and the officer up

:00:00. > :00:07.smack union. We must now move on. Before we come to the urgent

:00:08. > :00:13.question, I must advise the House that I have received a report from

:00:14. > :00:20.the tellers in the ILOG be for division number 104 on the Housing

:00:21. > :00:30.and planning Bill yesterday at 9:59pm and stop they have informed

:00:31. > :00:36.me that the number of those voting aye was harmoniously reported.

:00:37. > :00:44.Shocking! The member is easily shocked. As I was saying, until I

:00:45. > :00:51.was in such a gentlemanly fashion interrupted, and above those voting

:00:52. > :01:02.aye was reported as 228 instead of 218. The ayes were 218 and the noes

:01:03. > :01:14.worth 305. The House is now better informed. Urgent question. Yvette

:01:15. > :01:20.Cooper. To ask the development secretary to make a statement on

:01:21. > :01:33.humanitarian aid for refugees in Greece and the Balkans. The

:01:34. > :01:42.Secretary Of State For International Development. Thank you for giving me

:01:43. > :01:46.the opportunity to discuss this matter today. More refugees may be

:01:47. > :01:52.perilous journey across the Mediterranean into Europe last month

:01:53. > :01:55.than in the whole of 2014. In October, 218,000 people crossed the

:01:56. > :01:59.Mediterranean bring the total for the year so far to three quarters of

:02:00. > :02:03.a million. Greece and the Balkan states have borne the majority of

:02:04. > :02:06.that burden. Although the response to this has been led by the

:02:07. > :02:11.governments of those countries, the UK has led the way when it comes to

:02:12. > :02:13.supporting them and has been providing essential humanitarian

:02:14. > :02:19.assistance across Greece and the West Balkans. This was part of the

:02:20. > :02:23.EU ministers meeting I attended last Monday when we discussed this issue

:02:24. > :02:29.of migration. In September, anticipating the impact of colder

:02:30. > :02:33.winter months, we released ?11.5 million of life-saving aid for

:02:34. > :02:38.refugees in Europe in the Balkans and Turkey. This past weekend I

:02:39. > :02:45.announced a further additional ?5 million to support them with

:02:46. > :02:52.sleeping bags, hygiene kits, nappies, clean water for people in

:02:53. > :02:57.need increase in -- in need in Greece, Serbia and other countries.

:02:58. > :02:59.We are giving ?25 million to supporting refugees arriving in

:03:00. > :03:11.Europe but also those on their journey in North Africa. We continue

:03:12. > :03:19.to respond to the request made. There was contribution which is

:03:20. > :03:24.alongside this support my default is given in the Syria region over the

:03:25. > :03:29.past four years. A total of ?1.1 billion makes us the second-largest

:03:30. > :03:33.donor country and this support has enabled the vast majority of Syrians

:03:34. > :03:36.affected by this crisis and displaced to stay in the region

:03:37. > :03:40.rather than feel they need to make the journey to Europe. A tiny

:03:41. > :03:45.fraction of the total number of displaced Syrians have sought asylum

:03:46. > :03:49.in Europe and without the UK's humanitarian response, this number

:03:50. > :03:53.would have been higher. We continue to monitor the situation across

:03:54. > :04:00.Europe and we will consider further support us needs emerge. Can I thank

:04:01. > :04:05.the secretary for the work department is doing both in the

:04:06. > :04:09.region and in Greece and the Balkans. She will know that across

:04:10. > :04:15.Europe, we are simply not doing enough. Too many people are dying,

:04:16. > :04:20.too many children are suffering on Europe's soil and off Europe's

:04:21. > :04:26.shores. I stored on the shore in Lesbos and saw that dinghies coming

:04:27. > :04:32.in. They are offering discounts when the weather is worth -- worse, so

:04:33. > :04:36.more are arriving. More work is being done by the volunteers but

:04:37. > :04:44.there is not enough basic support to help. There were not enough rescue

:04:45. > :04:48.boats. We have the case of a family who were in the water for five hours

:04:49. > :04:55.and a baby pulled out by fishermen who then managed to resuscitate him.

:04:56. > :04:59.There wasn't enough shelter and support. There isn't enough

:05:00. > :05:04.blankets, enough basics imitation, toilets, taps and an aid worker told

:05:05. > :05:08.me they were worried about cholera in Europe. There aren't enough

:05:09. > :05:13.doctors or ambulances or even more looks to be able to help and this is

:05:14. > :05:17.what Save the Children said yesterday. I was stopped by a child

:05:18. > :05:22.shivering. Her hands and lips blue. Minutes later, we found three young

:05:23. > :05:26.men unconscious with hypothermia, forced to sleep for three days in a

:05:27. > :05:30.field to Kiefer papers. There were no tolerance for those queueing,

:05:31. > :05:35.Sophie sees mixed in the flowing streams of drinking water. This is

:05:36. > :05:40.in Europe, so we are all failing. Can I ask her to do three things.

:05:41. > :05:44.First, to go to Lesbos and to the Balkans herself to see what is

:05:45. > :05:50.happening, particularly to the camp which is just appalling and shall

:05:51. > :05:55.shame us all. Would she urge for more direct immediate humanitarian

:05:56. > :05:59.aid both from Britain and the wider Europe before more people die? Would

:06:00. > :06:03.she also ensure that the British boats can return to the

:06:04. > :06:08.Mediterranean to assist with the search and rescue said people don't

:06:09. > :06:16.drown? Winter is drawing in and this is on our conscience. We need to

:06:17. > :06:19.make sure there is action now. She raises some very important points

:06:20. > :06:24.which are ones that I and my department have spent many years

:06:25. > :06:29.working on very directly. She is right to set out the desperation

:06:30. > :06:33.that leaves so many of these people to try and make what can be a fatal

:06:34. > :06:40.journey in some cases from where they are in the Syrian region, to

:06:41. > :06:46.make their way to Europe. In relation to the points she has made,

:06:47. > :06:55.I can announce that having been in touch with front support and the UK

:06:56. > :06:57.will be deploying a new ships to help provide search and rescue

:06:58. > :07:11.facilities in the Mediterranean. We have had that request accepted, so

:07:12. > :07:20.VOS Grace will be deployed. Royal Navy ships have saved a thousand

:07:21. > :07:25.lives to date. She is right in relation to pressing other

:07:26. > :07:30.countries, other European partners to do more. We can be proud as a

:07:31. > :07:35.country of the work that we have done to help people affected by this

:07:36. > :07:39.crisis in Syria but also latterly, as they have also arrived in Europe.

:07:40. > :07:43.That has not just been the work that we have talked about in relation to

:07:44. > :07:46.save lives of the Mediterranean. We have provided a sign of the

:07:47. > :07:51.thousands of people and as I have set out, we are helping actively on

:07:52. > :07:59.the ground to key agencies like the Red Cross, also others. She is right

:08:00. > :08:03.to highlight that more needs to be done and that was the point I made

:08:04. > :08:07.in Luxembourg last Monday at an EU minister meeting. Britain cannot do

:08:08. > :08:12.this work on our own. We can be proud of the work that we are doing.

:08:13. > :08:17.No country in Europe has done more. We need other European member states

:08:18. > :08:25.to join us. I welcome the highlighting of this issue that she

:08:26. > :08:31.is bringing with her own efforts. I thank my right honourable friend for

:08:32. > :08:35.the work she is doing. Ten days ago, I was in costs as a member of a

:08:36. > :08:43.small delegation from the Council of Europe. -- First-tier Tribunal

:08:44. > :08:48.Immigration and Asylum Chamber. We could see how many of

:08:49. > :08:55.thinking that there was a place for them in Europe. There were people

:08:56. > :09:00.from Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Can't we do something to

:09:01. > :09:03.ensure these people are processed on the Turkish mainland without the

:09:04. > :09:10.need for them to risk their lives crossing the Aegean? Much of the

:09:11. > :09:14.discussion in Europe has turned to how we can work more effectively

:09:15. > :09:21.with Turkey. It is worth pointing out that Turkey has around half of

:09:22. > :09:24.the refugees who have left Syria. 2 million refugees. He is right to

:09:25. > :09:28.highlight that. We are working with Turkey and we have done work with

:09:29. > :09:31.them to help them in their humanitarian support and some of the

:09:32. > :09:35.work I have set out that we are doing within Europe more broadly is

:09:36. > :09:40.around registration and helping countries in Europe. Help and then

:09:41. > :09:46.process the refugees who are arriving on their shores. It is not

:09:47. > :09:54.enough to say that people have been cruelly misled. 570,000 migrants

:09:55. > :09:58.have crossed the Greek border this year and because of the onset of

:09:59. > :10:03.winter and the Russian bombardment, we are seeing a spike in arrivals.

:10:04. > :10:10.The mayor says there is no room on Lesbos to bury any more refugees. We

:10:11. > :10:15.note that 20 million is allocated and she has announced a ?5 million

:10:16. > :10:18.emergency fund and we will be deploying a new ships. What action

:10:19. > :10:21.will the British Government working with EU partners take to tackle the

:10:22. > :10:30.increasing activity of people smugglers, the people they want to

:10:31. > :10:36.resettle and can we have a progress check on this? Are there any other

:10:37. > :10:40.plans to increase the number and woman Secretary of State recognise

:10:41. > :10:45.that the Government will be commended for the money spent on the

:10:46. > :10:50.camps in Syria. We are seeing a crisis unfolding in Greece and the

:10:51. > :11:05.Balkans which shames the European family of nations.

:11:06. > :11:09.This is an issue of European credibility. We have a world

:11:10. > :11:15.humanitarian summit coming up next May. The UK is a country that has

:11:16. > :11:20.been at the leading edge of providing support to people affected

:11:21. > :11:25.by this crisis. But, it is important that, when we see people arrive on

:11:26. > :11:28.European shores that they are effectively taking care of. I have

:11:29. > :11:34.set out some of the work UK is doing. It is vital that other EU

:11:35. > :11:38.member states play their role alongside our efforts, too. In

:11:39. > :11:44.relation to people smuggling, some of the work that our ships in the

:11:45. > :11:47.Mediterranean has done is to not just save lives but to catch some of

:11:48. > :12:01.the potential people smugglers, too. That is why the dip plummet of the

:12:02. > :12:06.matter to later this will an important part of tackling this US

:12:07. > :12:09.crisis -- this crisis. And tackling the criminality at the heart of

:12:10. > :12:14.this. Many of these people have been conned into giving away their life

:12:15. > :12:17.savings and any running assets they have to be told that they can

:12:18. > :12:23.possibly make a new life for themselves in Europe. But it may

:12:24. > :12:26.never get them to where they want to get to. It is important that we

:12:27. > :12:31.tackle the criminality. That is why it is important that the vulnerable

:12:32. > :12:35.persons relocation scheme works as it does. We are enabling people to

:12:36. > :12:41.really cake without having to put their lives in the hands of a people

:12:42. > :12:45.smuggler in the first place. It is a safer, more secure route, but

:12:46. > :12:50.critically, it enables us to target the people who are most abominable

:12:51. > :12:54.in the camps and in the communities affected by this crisis who would

:12:55. > :12:59.probably never have either the means or the capacity to even begin a

:13:00. > :13:05.journey in the first place. We are on track. We said we would really

:13:06. > :13:09.cake and support up to 20,000 people over this Parliament to come to the

:13:10. > :13:12.UK and I can assure her that we are on track with our initial

:13:13. > :13:23.resettlement of 1000 people by Christmas. Could I ask my Right

:13:24. > :13:26.Honourable Friend, in following up the question from the Honorourable

:13:27. > :13:31.Member for Christchurch, what percentage does My Honourable Friend

:13:32. > :13:37.think are people who are fleeing for their lives, and what percentage are

:13:38. > :13:44.people who are fleeing to get a better lifestyle? One of the

:13:45. > :13:49.challenges, I think, that Europe has had in recent months is

:13:50. > :13:58.understanding in detail the drivers the Aida refugee flows. These points

:13:59. > :14:02.are not mutually exclusive. We are seeing some Syrians will not only

:14:03. > :14:07.fleeing what they believe to be an unstable region, but also, in many

:14:08. > :14:11.cases, they are very well educated and want to get on with their lives

:14:12. > :14:15.and have a better life for themselves in Europe. Those are the

:14:16. > :14:20.key drivers, instability and a search for opportunity. All of the

:14:21. > :14:24.work we're doing, whether in the humanitarian arena in the Syria

:14:25. > :14:29.region or indeed the doubling of the work we have done in the last two

:14:30. > :14:34.years on economic development, creating jobs and livelihoods in

:14:35. > :14:37.Africa, for example, that is why it is so important, because if people

:14:38. > :14:41.do not feel that they have a life and a future where they are, in

:14:42. > :14:48.today's modern world they will set off and find a better life and a

:14:49. > :14:50.better future somewhere else. We welcome the announcement of

:14:51. > :14:55.additional support, as winter approaches. I was interested in the

:14:56. > :15:02.list of provisions being made available by the UK Government.

:15:03. > :15:05.Tents and sleeping bags. It would be interest in to know that people will

:15:06. > :15:09.be supported so that they don't have to be sleeping out in the open in

:15:10. > :15:12.winter. The best thing is to move people to secure, safe accommodation

:15:13. > :15:17.so it would be helpful to know what help, support and advice to

:15:18. > :15:21.government is giving to a rival countries to move them to safe

:15:22. > :15:24.accommodation and ultimately whether this has to include some proportion

:15:25. > :15:28.of people coming here to the UK, and shouldn't it be that the UK takes a

:15:29. > :15:37.fair proportion of refugees, in proportion to the total number

:15:38. > :15:40.coming to the EU? Support we provide is driven very much by the needs set

:15:41. > :15:46.out to us by the agencies that we work with and the NGOs. I can

:15:47. > :15:53.confirm that we have provided tents, for example, in Croatia. And we are

:15:54. > :15:57.playing a role to ensure that the people arrive at reception centres,

:15:58. > :16:01.they are dealt with and processed properly, but as the Right

:16:02. > :16:03.Honourable Lady set out, there is an issue of scale here and it is an

:16:04. > :16:08.issue that Britain cannot solve on its own. It is worth emphasising to

:16:09. > :16:12.the House, also, that these countries were refugees are

:16:13. > :16:19.arriving, they are the ones leading the response in that country, so it

:16:20. > :16:24.is up to UN agencies and NGOs to work as part of a national response

:16:25. > :16:27.from each country. What Britain is also doing is supporting those

:16:28. > :16:31.countries, in order to have an adequate response. As a House is

:16:32. > :16:38.hearing today, there are real challenges, given the swell in the

:16:39. > :16:44.numbers of refugees arriving and the flow of them arriving on European

:16:45. > :16:49.shores. We talked about the UK taking its fair proportion. The

:16:50. > :16:52.reality is that we can be proud of the work the UK is doing to support

:16:53. > :16:56.refugees affected by the Syrian crisis, whether it is the work we're

:16:57. > :17:00.doing in the Mediterranean saving lives, whether it is the thousands

:17:01. > :17:04.who have had asylum here already, or the safe and secure relocation

:17:05. > :17:09.approach that we have two really cake people from the camps, or the

:17:10. > :17:13.kind of support that I have set out more closer to home today. No

:17:14. > :17:21.country in Europe is doing more than the UK. And I think the House should

:17:22. > :17:27.be proud of that. Could I thank the Right Honourable Lady for Castleford

:17:28. > :17:31.and ponder fact for raising this question. I agree with the points

:17:32. > :17:36.she has made. Can I thank My Honourable Friend for the work that

:17:37. > :17:39.she and the member for Watford are doing in this particular case. Can I

:17:40. > :17:43.urge the government to engage directly with the governments of

:17:44. > :17:50.those countries in which refugees are now, as winter comes. We cannot

:17:51. > :17:53.allow bureaucracy or any other impediment to get in the way of

:17:54. > :17:58.direct contact, offering support to the governments of Greece and other

:17:59. > :18:04.Balkan countries to ensure that no lives are lost, needlessly. I can

:18:05. > :18:08.assure him that we are doing just that. The problem he sets out is

:18:09. > :18:13.actually one that we commonly face when trying to help any refugees,

:18:14. > :18:18.wherever they are, and you only need to look at some of the challenges in

:18:19. > :18:22.Lebanon when many refugees are in so-called informal entered

:18:23. > :18:26.settlements, and that makes it harder for us to put in place water

:18:27. > :18:30.and sanitation, to get education to children in some of those camps than

:18:31. > :18:37.it otherwise would have been, when you compare it to the work that is

:18:38. > :18:41.going on in Jordan, which is broadly more government-driven from the word

:18:42. > :18:45.go. This is an issue that we are now facing closer to home on our own

:18:46. > :18:47.shores in Europe, but I can assure the honourable gentleman that we are

:18:48. > :18:55.working with those governments whilst urging other European

:18:56. > :18:59.partners to step up to the plate. One of the factors driving more

:19:00. > :19:04.refugees to Europe is the level of support for the UNHCR and world food

:19:05. > :19:08.rubber in neighbouring countries. What can be done to ensure that the

:19:09. > :19:11.levels of resource are there so that families who wish to stay in

:19:12. > :19:16.neighbouring countries can do so? I understand that the UNHCR does not

:19:17. > :19:22.enjoy in Greece and the Western Balkans as it does in countries

:19:23. > :19:29.surrounding Syria. What can be done to enhance the work of the UNHCR on

:19:30. > :19:35.the ground in Europe? Even now, the UN appeal is just over 40% funded

:19:36. > :19:39.for Syria. The inevitable consequence is that it is hard for

:19:40. > :19:43.the world food programme to meet all of the immediate needs that refugees

:19:44. > :19:48.have in the region, let alone looking ahead to try and provide

:19:49. > :19:53.some of the education that children need to drive some of the work on

:19:54. > :19:56.livelihoods for young men who are refugees as an alternative to

:19:57. > :20:03.setting on their journey towards Europe. He is absolutely right to

:20:04. > :20:10.flag up that is a Barrett issue. On the second point, I will write to

:20:11. > :20:17.him, Mr Speaker. -- that as direct issue. In my own constituency, I

:20:18. > :20:24.attended a church service a few weeks ago where local people brought

:20:25. > :20:27.inordinate amounts of goods to help the cause of refugees. What steps

:20:28. > :20:30.can government take to make sure that those items go to where they

:20:31. > :20:37.are most needed, but the biggest impact would be? Again, he

:20:38. > :20:43.highlights the huge generosity of the UK public in responding to the

:20:44. > :20:48.refugee crisis closer to home. I know of many NGOs helping to get

:20:49. > :20:54.some of those very kind offers that have come through from people on the

:20:55. > :20:58.ground so I would recommend to him that he looks on the part of our

:20:59. > :21:04.government website where we set out some of the key places where people

:21:05. > :21:11.can offer support, if they want, and that can help people to get

:21:12. > :21:16.practically more involved. The Right Honourable Lady raised this point

:21:17. > :21:20.today. I was in Lesbos recently. I found very similar things that she

:21:21. > :21:24.observed Allsop 94% of those presenting on the island are

:21:25. > :21:29.independently assessed to be refugees, not about being an

:21:30. > :21:33.economic migrant. They were clearly running from war and fear of death,

:21:34. > :21:38.instability for them and their children. Shameful that we as a

:21:39. > :21:42.country will not take any of the people in those camps at the moment.

:21:43. > :21:46.Last week I asked the Prime Minister and he dismissed my call for the UK

:21:47. > :21:50.Government to accept 3000 refugee children within Europe. He

:21:51. > :21:53.inaccurately claimed that there were worries that some of these would be

:21:54. > :21:59.taken from relatives. The UNHCR has confirmed that ease our children

:22:00. > :22:02.with no identifiable family. I will repeat, will the government worked

:22:03. > :22:07.with Save The Children to take in 3000 children, unaccompanied, who

:22:08. > :22:15.may otherwise face abuse, trafficking and exploitation? I set

:22:16. > :22:19.out clearly the approach the UK has taken to helping people affected by

:22:20. > :22:22.this crisis. Our approach is one that is safer and more secure and

:22:23. > :22:26.takes people directly from the camps. I have also set out how we

:22:27. > :22:30.have already provided asylum for several thousand people who have

:22:31. > :22:37.arrived in the UK, who have made that journey because of the crisis.

:22:38. > :22:41.In relation to the points on unaccompanied children, the point

:22:42. > :22:45.Prime Minister was trying to make was, if you look at the case of

:22:46. > :22:50.Jordan, around 80% of the children who originally arrived in Jordan

:22:51. > :22:56.unaccompanied were subsequently able to be reunited with broader family,

:22:57. > :23:00.so the point that the Prime Minister was quite rightly making was that it

:23:01. > :23:04.is very easy in this House to talk about numbers of children,

:23:05. > :23:07.emotively, but the reality is, we have to be extremely careful to make

:23:08. > :23:11.sure that we are not making decisions on their behalf, which

:23:12. > :23:15.fundamentally take them further away from the family that they may have

:23:16. > :23:24.wished to be reunited with. He makes a point very well, and I have

:23:25. > :23:27.responded to him, already. Obviously, in the European Union

:23:28. > :23:33.there is not agreement how to deal with these problems. As the

:23:34. > :23:36.excellent listener thought of talking through the Council of

:23:37. > :23:41.Europe which covers many more countries about an overall

:23:42. > :23:48.solution? We're having a range of discussions, to see how this

:23:49. > :23:54.situation can be better managed here in Europe. It is not just the

:23:55. > :23:58.challenge that we face in the Syrian region, frankly, to have the kind of

:23:59. > :24:02.support of the scale that is needed but is currently not being

:24:03. > :24:07.delivered. I see for myself some of the discussions amongst EU

:24:08. > :24:10.ministers. They are part of countries within the Schengen

:24:11. > :24:19.agreement region. There is very little agreement. And we need a

:24:20. > :24:23.better approach but there's no political prospect that I can see at

:24:24. > :24:27.the time, certainly last Monday, but achieving that. Therefore, whilst

:24:28. > :24:31.those discussions need to go on, the UK is right to be providing

:24:32. > :24:37.additional support on the ground, but clearly, we all need to keep the

:24:38. > :24:41.key objective in mind, which is to help Syrian refugees in the region.

:24:42. > :24:45.People are leaving the region because they are starting to see

:24:46. > :24:50.food rations, for example, from the world food programme, cut. They are

:24:51. > :24:56.worried about how their children will have an education, when so few

:24:57. > :25:01.children are able to be in school, in spite of the best efforts of a

:25:02. > :25:05.country like the UK, who was instrumental in setting up the no

:25:06. > :25:09.lost generation initiative. We are working with the World Bank to see

:25:10. > :25:16.how we can do better livelihood programmes. But there's no doubt

:25:17. > :25:23.that the answer to this is a political position in Syria, but

:25:24. > :25:30.also here in Europe, too. I would like to ask the Minister, who is

:25:31. > :25:35.usually sympathetic, but I don't like the way she has dismissed the

:25:36. > :25:39.concerns of children, those who have been separated from their

:25:40. > :25:45.relatives. I wonder if she has had any discussion with EU ministers,

:25:46. > :25:53.particularly about what happened in Italy, when 13,026 children who

:25:54. > :25:58.arrived unaccompanied last year, 2707 disappeared after arriving. I

:25:59. > :26:06.wonder what assessment is made aware these children are, and I would

:26:07. > :26:13.support the Save The Children request of 3000. It is not very much

:26:14. > :26:14.to ask for, surely, when 2000 unaccompanied children should begin

:26:15. > :26:32.refuge in the United Kingdom? She is making this important point

:26:33. > :26:38.clearly. The UK has worked with the Institutional -- International

:26:39. > :26:46.Institution For Migration. -- International Organisation For

:26:47. > :26:50.Migration. Sometimes very concerned and worried about even registering

:26:51. > :26:54.with the authorities in the country that they might reach, because they

:26:55. > :26:58.are worried they will not be able to continue on their journey. This is a

:26:59. > :27:03.conjugated situation but I can assure her that we are playing a key

:27:04. > :27:10.role in making sure we are getting support to refugees who arrived here

:27:11. > :27:14.in Europe, including children. I commend my right honourable friend

:27:15. > :27:19.for the effective way she is fulfilling the responsibilities of

:27:20. > :27:23.her office. The fact that the UK is second to the US and the amount of

:27:24. > :27:30.eight going into the region is testimony to her efforts. -- aid.

:27:31. > :27:35.The EU countries should continue to contribute to aid in the region like

:27:36. > :27:39.we are doing, we wouldn't have the skill of the problem that is

:27:40. > :27:48.presenting itself on the Turkey, Greece border. He is right. The cost

:27:49. > :27:54.that many European countries will now put into supporting refugees who

:27:55. > :28:01.felt they have had no chance but to set off on a life or death journey,

:28:02. > :28:06.is immense. It would have been far better, far more effective and far

:28:07. > :28:11.more value for money and enable support to get to many more people

:28:12. > :28:15.had it been put directly into the UN effort on the ground working with

:28:16. > :28:22.generous countries like Lebanon, like Jordan. You have taken so

:28:23. > :28:32.many. If we had worked with them more effectively, many of the

:28:33. > :28:36.refugees would have done what they wanted to have done which is to stay

:28:37. > :28:43.there and hope that in time they could rebuild their lives and

:28:44. > :28:48.possibly go back to Syria. The minister is right to be robust on

:28:49. > :28:56.the issue of criminology, sorry, criminality. The only way to deal

:28:57. > :29:03.with this is through Europe poll. We're not giving them more resources

:29:04. > :29:10.to deal with this? Will she tell the House today how many Syrian refugees

:29:11. > :29:14.have arrived in the UK following the Prime Minister's pledge? It is a

:29:15. > :29:21.simple question which is not being answered and it would be good to

:29:22. > :29:24.reveal this to the House. We are not going to give a running commentary

:29:25. > :29:30.on how many refugees have already been resettled here, not least

:29:31. > :29:35.because they need to be able to get the support and treatment and chance

:29:36. > :29:43.to get on with their new lives here without the glare of the media upon

:29:44. > :29:47.them. On his point in relation to Europol, I will make sure Home

:29:48. > :29:57.Office ministers write to him with further details. With the 3000

:29:58. > :30:04.unaccompanied minors and the words on those generalities, can I press

:30:05. > :30:09.her on the specifics of a man who fled Saddam Hussein's murderous

:30:10. > :30:14.regime 14 years ago and whose two daughters aged 14 and 15 are

:30:15. > :30:19.currently unaccompanied and seeking asylum in Germany. Can I ask her on

:30:20. > :30:23.this specific case, for her and her colleagues to meet with me, to cut

:30:24. > :30:29.through the bureaucratic claptrap that I have had from the Home Office

:30:30. > :30:35.on this case, so these children can be reunited with their parents in

:30:36. > :30:39.Wakefield? She raised this case with me and it is not one that I have

:30:40. > :30:44.been familiar with and I am very happy to look at the details and if

:30:45. > :30:50.necessary, meet with her. She sets out, this issue of many refugees is

:30:51. > :30:55.that many going to Germany. That is where there is an existing Syrian

:30:56. > :30:59.Dyas bra, which is why the flows there have been larger than they

:31:00. > :31:04.have been here to the UK although we have provided asylum to many of the

:31:05. > :31:14.Syrians have arrived. I will look at the case and be prepared to meet

:31:15. > :31:21.with her. We have been talking today about symptoms. The real cause as a

:31:22. > :31:27.minister knows, is the fact that 11 million Syrian people have had to

:31:28. > :31:30.flee their homes. 7 million internally displaced, 4 million

:31:31. > :31:36.refugees. What is the Government doing to stop the barrel bombing by

:31:37. > :31:39.the Assad regime, the brutality, the fact that 250,000 people have

:31:40. > :31:45.already died and many more will do as a result of Russian air strikes

:31:46. > :31:47.and barrel bombing? What are we doing about humanitarian corridors

:31:48. > :31:56.and protection of the population inside Syria? He has raised possibly

:31:57. > :32:00.one of the most important elements of the response to this Syrian

:32:01. > :32:05.crisis. It is incredibly important now get to people inside Syria. Many

:32:06. > :32:11.of our cross for supplies are going into the country from Turkey and it

:32:12. > :32:15.is only two years to get UN Security Council resolutions to do that

:32:16. > :32:19.effectively. The terms of the way forward, the action by the Russians

:32:20. > :32:26.are simply taking this further away from being able to reach a political

:32:27. > :32:30.long-term settlement in Syria. As we have set outcome we believe more

:32:31. > :32:40.action needs be taken against Eisele, which is perpetrating huge

:32:41. > :32:49.atrocities on the Syrian people. -- Isil. The Greek economy is in crisis

:32:50. > :32:54.but the Greek economy is at the front of this crisis. Will she agree

:32:55. > :32:59.with me that the Greek people have shown extraordinary resilience in

:33:00. > :33:03.the face of this pressure? I have seen the kindness of volunteers

:33:04. > :33:07.feeding 1000 people in Greek feeding stations. The pressure on public

:33:08. > :33:13.services means the Greeks are simply unable to process people waiting for

:33:14. > :33:16.transit papers while they are on islands like Lesbos. Will she worked

:33:17. > :33:21.to ensure that people desperate for travel papers do not have to wait

:33:22. > :33:26.four days in worsening weather in order to be able to move on? Feeding

:33:27. > :33:32.and housing people is one thing but making sure they are able to get the

:33:33. > :33:37.papers they need is another. She is right. It is not just about giving

:33:38. > :33:40.people the bare essentials to be able to survive day-to-day. We are

:33:41. > :33:47.providing support to those registration facilities she has

:33:48. > :33:52.talked about. This issue of host communities and their generosity is

:33:53. > :33:55.one that is right to mention. I have met communities in Lebanon and

:33:56. > :34:02.Jordan who have seen their population double in a matter of

:34:03. > :34:07.possibly 24 months. It puts huge strain on existing populations and

:34:08. > :34:11.why we are doing so much work with refugees but working with the

:34:12. > :34:16.communities that they have arrived in. Mr Speaker, you may not be aware

:34:17. > :34:23.but most of the refugees outside Syria are not living in camps like

:34:24. > :34:29.Jordan. They are in host communities and that is why so much of the work

:34:30. > :34:35.we have been doing is with local government and municipalities to

:34:36. > :34:40.cope with those pressures. I was on Lesbos three weeks ago volunteering

:34:41. > :34:44.at a camp and on the sure whether boats from Turkey coming. The

:34:45. > :34:48.conditions are appalling and the scale of the human suffering and

:34:49. > :34:52.tragedy is soul destroying. Every time we saw a boat, or we could do

:34:53. > :34:56.was hope and pray for a safe landing. There was a shocking lack

:34:57. > :34:59.of presence on the ground of official authorities and the larger

:35:00. > :35:08.international charities that one would expect when faced with such a

:35:09. > :35:14.crisis. The workers are overwhelmed. Will the Secretary of State consider

:35:15. > :35:17.working and visiting at Lesbos and working with authorities to provide

:35:18. > :35:21.British coordination systems and infrastructure at these camps

:35:22. > :35:25.because of the rest of Europe won't step up to the plate, she should

:35:26. > :35:31.bypass them and go to Greece directly? I have been the first

:35:32. > :35:36.person to get on a plane and spend a lot of time in the region seen for

:35:37. > :35:39.myself the issues in relation to refugees. I have no doubt that in

:35:40. > :35:45.relation to the European situation, that would be no different. Those

:35:46. > :35:51.visits are important and it was when I visited Lebanon that we decided to

:35:52. > :35:56.do the work to get children into school. It was clear there was so

:35:57. > :36:03.little facility she sets out, there is a scale of challenge on

:36:04. > :36:12.organisation on the ground. These are country led initiatives and that

:36:13. > :36:16.is the way they work. In spite of efforts by countries like the UK and

:36:17. > :36:21.UN agencies, there is more work to be done to enable them to cope with

:36:22. > :36:27.the flows of people who are arriving. It is white, alongside at

:36:28. > :36:44.work, as I have announced today, the work that the ship deployment will

:36:45. > :36:48.will make. We have discussed in this question the weight of refugees is

:36:49. > :36:52.falling on countries least able to cope. I wonder if the Secretary of

:36:53. > :36:57.State will tell the House if she has made any assessment about increasing

:36:58. > :37:06.the numbers of refugees that the UK is willing to take on? We have set

:37:07. > :37:10.out our scheme which is the responsible one stop he is right to

:37:11. > :37:15.point out this issue of where refugees are. The reality is 85 plus

:37:16. > :37:22.percent of displaced people in the world today, and we have a record

:37:23. > :37:26.number, they are in developing countries. The countries that are

:37:27. > :37:32.least able to cope rather than developed countries. For example,

:37:33. > :37:40.here in Europe, which is why the weight of our responses has been

:37:41. > :37:44.helping those countries in Africa, helping countries like Ethiopia,

:37:45. > :37:48.that a 700,000 refugees, which you don't see in the paper, but they

:37:49. > :37:55.still need assistance in dealing with, to be able to cope with that.

:37:56. > :38:00.Can I ask the Minister to consider further the response she gave to my

:38:01. > :38:05.right honourable friend, the chairman of the hair -- Home Affairs

:38:06. > :38:07.Select Committee? Transparency is important because the Prime Minister

:38:08. > :38:12.made a pledge and it was about specific numbers. It is important

:38:13. > :38:18.for public confidence that we do know how many people have arrived

:38:19. > :38:29.and will she think again about her reluctance to let the public know?

:38:30. > :38:33.We're had the Minister... I do apologise. The minister responsible

:38:34. > :38:40.for the relocation scheme was in the chamber earlier. I have no doubt he

:38:41. > :38:45.will be watching this series of questions. We will update the House

:38:46. > :38:49.but what we hadn't planned to do and would be doing is giving a

:38:50. > :38:54.day-to-day running commentary. I want to ask about the vulnerable

:38:55. > :38:57.persons relocation scheme. I am disappointed that the Minister for

:38:58. > :39:03.Syrian refugees has left the chamber. My point is this. I was at

:39:04. > :39:09.a meeting on Friday -- on Friday in Hull and there are people who are

:39:10. > :39:13.keen to take people on the scheme. A few days later, they then received a

:39:14. > :39:16.letter saying that the funding had been reduced by two thirds which

:39:17. > :39:20.means those local authorities are not in a position to be able to take

:39:21. > :39:24.those Syrian refugees that we all want to bring to this country. Can

:39:25. > :39:28.the Minister right to me and explain why the Home Office have done that

:39:29. > :39:33.and what effect that has on the thousands of refugees that we are

:39:34. > :39:40.expecting here by Christmas? I will follow this up with the Home Office

:39:41. > :39:46.and will respond with more details. Turkey is playing a critical role.

:39:47. > :39:50.They have taken 2 million refugees compared to the 20,000 the UK will

:39:51. > :39:58.take. As the Secretary of State had time to assess the impact of the

:39:59. > :40:02.victory? Does this lead to changes in regards to Turkey's attitudes to

:40:03. > :40:10.the camps in Turkey and what we the knock-on effects for the islands of

:40:11. > :40:12.Greece and the Balkans? The mandate for the Turkish governments means

:40:13. > :40:25.stability in terms of the partners we have been working with stop there

:40:26. > :40:28.is a huge and above refugees in its midst. To go back to the honourable

:40:29. > :40:35.member's question in relation to save savings, which I didn't answer

:40:36. > :40:42.at the time, we need to be very clear that whilst safes owns may

:40:43. > :40:48.seem appealing on the face of it, getting them in place effectively

:40:49. > :40:52.with a UN backing to that, enabling them to be delivered safely for

:40:53. > :40:59.people on the ground, is absolutely key. We would never want to put in

:41:00. > :41:02.-- to pull people in a position where they thought they were in a

:41:03. > :41:08.safe service and it proved to be fatally not the case. There is a

:41:09. > :41:11.certain amount of evidence where refugees are worried that if safes

:41:12. > :41:16.owns our setup, they may be forced back over the border into Syria and

:41:17. > :41:21.that is one of the reasons triggering some refugees to leave

:41:22. > :41:25.those camps and make the journey now towards Europe. I can assure the

:41:26. > :41:30.House that we are looking at all necessary and possible means to make

:41:31. > :41:33.sure we protect very vulnerable refugees but we also have a

:41:34. > :41:35.responsibility to make sure we don't put them in a situation that could

:41:36. > :41:46.put them in even more danger. Can I ask the leader of the if he

:41:47. > :41:49.will make a statement about the rationale which was applied in

:41:50. > :41:53.determining which members of the UK delegation should be reappointed

:41:54. > :41:58.the Parliamentary Assembly of the the Parliamentary Assembly of the

:41:59. > :42:03.Council of Europe? And you, Mr Speaker. Can I pay tribute to My

:42:04. > :42:08.Honourable Friend for the work he has done on the Council of Europe

:42:09. > :42:10.over the past few years? He will know that decisions about

:42:11. > :42:15.appointments to delegations is a matter for the different political

:42:16. > :42:17.parties and are places on the delegation are allocated in

:42:18. > :42:20.proportion to representation in Parliament. Normally, decisions are

:42:21. > :42:24.taken through the usual channels and approved wider leaders of the

:42:25. > :42:28.parties represented on the delegation. I appreciate My

:42:29. > :42:32.Honourable Friend's disappointment in the changes for this Parliament

:42:33. > :42:37.but I am sure that he will take advantage of his extra time in the

:42:38. > :42:42.Chamber by making more of his customarily pithy and perceptive

:42:43. > :42:46.contributions to the debate. It is most reassuring to have confirmation

:42:47. > :42:54.from My Honourable Friend that the issue of reappointment was not a

:42:55. > :43:01.stunned merit! -- based on merit. Can I ask My Honourable Friend what

:43:02. > :43:04.consultation has been carried out with the political parties as

:43:05. > :43:11.specified on page 174 of Erskine May? And why won't she confirmed

:43:12. > :43:13.that the real reason why three independently minded former

:43:14. > :43:19.ministers have been purged is because we voted in favour of a free

:43:20. > :43:28.and fair EU referendum, with a strict 28 day period of purdah

:43:29. > :43:34.recommended by the Council of Europe and our own electoral commission?

:43:35. > :43:37.This is being interpreted by Strasbourg as a direct interference

:43:38. > :43:41.by government and the work of the Parliamentary SMB. The Leader of the

:43:42. > :43:43.House said on Thursday he was aware of the desire of this House to

:43:44. > :43:48.express its opinion on the membership of the new delegation and

:43:49. > :43:54.had "no doubts the House will give the matter careful consideration".

:43:55. > :43:58.How is this to be facilitated? Will she assure that this House can

:43:59. > :44:02.expect its opinion before the list is transmitted by Mr Speaker to the

:44:03. > :44:06.Parliamentary Assembly? As the list cannot be considered until the 27th

:44:07. > :44:10.of November, does she agree that there's plenty of in which to do

:44:11. > :44:16.this 's but she recalled a speech made by our Prime Minister on 26th

:44:17. > :44:23.of May 2009, entitled "fixing broken politics"? In it, he says MPs should

:44:24. > :44:26.be more independent and select committee members should be elected

:44:27. > :44:30.by backbenchers and not appointed by the whips. He called for Parliament

:44:31. > :44:35.to be a real engine of accountability and not just a

:44:36. > :44:40.creature of the executive. Why do these fine words not apply to

:44:41. > :44:48.Conservative members of the Parliamentary Assembly? Six months

:44:49. > :44:54.into this role, I'm afraid I haven't suggested all of Erskine May, so I'm

:44:55. > :44:59.afraid I don't know what 174 refers to, but as he points out, I will

:45:00. > :45:05.make it my urgent duty to do so after this urgent question. I

:45:06. > :45:08.recognise My Honourable Friend is disappointed. He has been appointed

:45:09. > :45:13.by the leader of the Conservative Party on the last two occasions. The

:45:14. > :45:20.run now indeed new people added to the delegation. The written

:45:21. > :45:24.ministerial statement was made at 11:33am today. People can see that

:45:25. > :45:31.if it is of interest to the House. I could read it out I am sure that the

:45:32. > :45:35.House's time would be better served by moving onto more important

:45:36. > :45:39.legislation. Piece of paper is available in the vote office now.

:45:40. > :45:47.Far be it from me to intrude on private grief in the Conservative

:45:48. > :45:51.Party... As we in the Labour Party have elections for these posts. I

:45:52. > :45:58.recommend democracy to the party opposite. But, I must say, this

:45:59. > :46:00.smacks of a rather vindictive attitude by the government towards

:46:01. > :46:06.some of its own backbenchers. I have never agreed with the Honorourable

:46:07. > :46:10.Member for Christchurch on a single thing in the history of our time in

:46:11. > :46:17.this House. I am not entirely sure that he is always pithy. Nor am I.

:46:18. > :46:24.But he is an extremely assiduous parliamentarian, as are the members

:46:25. > :46:27.for Gainsborough and ambition who have also been removed and the only

:46:28. > :46:32.rationale that I can detect at work in these appointments is anyone who

:46:33. > :46:37.has disagreed with the Prime Minister is for the chop. It seems,

:46:38. > :46:42.to be honest, the deputy of the House doesn't understand the rules

:46:43. > :46:47.that govern this. The point of the Assembly is that its members are not

:46:48. > :46:49.government representatives but Parliamentary representatives.

:46:50. > :46:56.Indeed, the statute of the Council of Europe is clear, Article 25 a

:46:57. > :46:58.says the consultative Assembly so consist of representatives of eight

:46:59. > :47:02.member states, elected by its Parliament from among the members

:47:03. > :47:07.thereof, or appointed from among the members of Parliament, in such

:47:08. > :47:11.manner as it shall decide. The key point is that they are either

:47:12. > :47:16.elected, which has not happened in this case, or appointed in such

:47:17. > :47:21.manner as the Parliament decides, not in such manner as the Prime

:47:22. > :47:25.Minister decides. Does the deputy realise that the way the government

:47:26. > :47:27.has proceeded could well mean that the Assembly ends up questioning the

:47:28. > :47:33.British delegation for the first time ever? Secondly, does she

:47:34. > :47:36.realise, and accept, that the government has taken so long about

:47:37. > :47:41.this since the general election, that the six months grace period

:47:42. > :47:45.will have a rap and we will have no delegation from this Saturday on,

:47:46. > :47:50.until it is agreed by the Assembly -- will have elapsed. This at a time

:47:51. > :47:55.when the Assembly has important business to deal with, like the

:47:56. > :47:58.ongoing suspension and boycott of Russia and the human rights

:47:59. > :48:05.situation in Turkey, and all because the Prime Minister has stamped his

:48:06. > :48:08.little foot. The honourable gentleman says he rarely agrees with

:48:09. > :48:13.My Honourable Friend from Christchurch. It is a rare occasion

:48:14. > :48:17.when I disagree with My Honourable Friend from Christchurch. Coming to

:48:18. > :48:20.the point, I'm sure he recognises this is the same process that

:48:21. > :48:25.happened in the last five years and he will be aware, decisions are

:48:26. > :48:32.taken through the usual channels and approved by party leaders. I am not

:48:33. > :48:37.aware that his party leader has objected to the representation of

:48:38. > :48:47.the way this allegation has been put forward. I have a letter here from

:48:48. > :48:53.the Ukrainian delegation to the Council of Europe to the Prime

:48:54. > :48:59.Minister, representing the Georgian, Moldovan, polish and Baltic states.

:49:00. > :49:02.In international politics it comes down to the bishop showing in

:49:03. > :49:06.difficult circumstances to stop Mr Christopher choked is such a man who

:49:07. > :49:11.has earned our trust and his leadership deserves our highest

:49:12. > :49:16.esteem. The most important, it says, "it would be utterly regrettable if

:49:17. > :49:22.because of his actions during the coming crucial months, the Russian

:49:23. > :49:26.delegation will manage to have its credentials restored." I do not

:49:27. > :49:32.understand why the leader of the has not come here. I would suggest that

:49:33. > :49:39.the deputy reconsiders this position and the laser submission. It is

:49:40. > :49:43.utterly wrong. And the Prime Minister should be ashamed of

:49:44. > :49:50.himself. -- and delays the submission. My Honourable Friend is

:49:51. > :49:55.right to pay tribute to the member for Christchurch for his work on the

:49:56. > :49:59.Council of Europe, but there are new people, as happened as five years

:50:00. > :50:06.ago, and as a consequence, I don't think it is unreasonable to see

:50:07. > :50:09.change in this delegation as well. The urgent question of the

:50:10. > :50:15.Honorourable Member for Christchurch highlights the rationales deployed

:50:16. > :50:17.in determining the of such delegations. I would extend it

:50:18. > :50:23.further to committees and other groups. The SNP is

:50:24. > :50:27.uncharacteristically at one in relation to other members of this

:50:28. > :50:31.delegation. Such allegations should reflect the current make-up of this

:50:32. > :50:37.Parliament. To this end, I take this opportunity to express once more the

:50:38. > :50:40.disappointment of these SNP benchers are being excluded from

:50:41. > :50:45.participating in the joint committee on human rights. In this

:50:46. > :50:51.Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. I should say, in

:50:52. > :50:55.relation to any other such assemblies, committees or groups,

:50:56. > :51:02.can I ask the deputy Leader of the House that, if she could recognise

:51:03. > :51:08.the role of parties, regardless of size, that they make to this House,

:51:09. > :51:11.and indeed, we are all of course democratically elected members of

:51:12. > :51:15.Parliament. We have our part to play and this should be recognised and it

:51:16. > :51:21.should always be appropriately and fairly reflected in all that we do.

:51:22. > :51:26.The Honourable Lady is a new member of the Parliamentary Assembly that

:51:27. > :51:34.has been put forward as has another member of the Scottish National

:51:35. > :51:38.Party. All I will say on the matter about the joint committee on human

:51:39. > :51:42.rights is that was a unanimous recommendation from the committee of

:51:43. > :51:46.selection at which the SNP was represented and that was their

:51:47. > :51:55.recommendation, which this House eventually voted upon. Mr Speaker, I

:51:56. > :52:00.would have thought, after the rather ridiculous and mean-spirited attempt

:52:01. > :52:03.to get rid of you at the end of the last Parliament, the government

:52:04. > :52:07.would have learned a lesson about taking punishment attitudes to

:52:08. > :52:11.appointments. This is not simply a representation for the government in

:52:12. > :52:14.Europe, it is a representation for this House in a body that is going

:52:15. > :52:19.to become aggressively more important as Europe becomes more

:52:20. > :52:22.unstable and as matters such as the UNHCR become important to this

:52:23. > :52:27.Parliament. Can he therefore return to the House with a procedure for

:52:28. > :52:33.ratifying this so that the whole House can decide who represents it

:52:34. > :52:38.'s Mr Speaker, the convention has been that the representation is

:52:39. > :52:44.split up by political party is represented in this House, and the

:52:45. > :52:47.front of the school parties will take an approach is putting forward

:52:48. > :52:52.nominations. The Conservative Party takes it away and puts the decision

:52:53. > :52:58.of the leader of the political party. That is where the situation

:52:59. > :53:01.is. I want to say to my Right Honourable Friend, there was no

:53:02. > :53:07.attempt by the government in the last day of the last Parliament to

:53:08. > :53:16.remove the Speaker. I think it matters, Mr Speaker, that that is

:53:17. > :53:21.very firmly put on the record. I am not a member of delegation to the

:53:22. > :53:24.Council of Europe, but a member of the Nato Parliamentary Assembly, and

:53:25. > :53:29.I am pleased to say that I got the confidence of my colleagues in being

:53:30. > :53:32.re-elected to serve on that delegation. Isn't it time the

:53:33. > :53:40.Conservative Party recognised that we are now in the 21st-century and

:53:41. > :53:44.actually put confidence and trust in their backbench MPs, so that the

:53:45. > :53:46.individual members of Parliament decide who represents their party in

:53:47. > :53:57.international bodies, rather than a top down, Leninist, leadership-led

:53:58. > :54:01.structure? I don't want to lecture the Labour Party on the Rhone

:54:02. > :54:04.element of democracy. The Conservative Party has led the way

:54:05. > :54:09.in bringing democracy to the open. We were the first party to have the

:54:10. > :54:16.primary back in 2003, something the Labour Party runs away from,

:54:17. > :54:19.regularly. On the two fundamental problems here, one is the way the

:54:20. > :54:24.Conservative Party chooses its members and the second, that this

:54:25. > :54:29.House isn't deciding on the delegation, the Prime Minister is.

:54:30. > :54:33.Can this problem be solved by allowing the whole House, in a whole

:54:34. > :54:38.House election, to vote on who should represent us on this

:54:39. > :54:40.Assembly, and that Mr Speaker, not the Prime Minister, submits that

:54:41. > :54:47.list to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, in his

:54:48. > :54:50.name only? And could I remind the deputy lead of the House that whilst

:54:51. > :54:54.she is a member of the government, she's also, as part of duties, here

:54:55. > :55:00.to represent members of this House to the government, not always the

:55:01. > :55:05.government to this House? I take those duties very seriously. And the

:55:06. > :55:11.wise words that have been expressed today I'm sure will be listened to.

:55:12. > :55:13.But, nevertheless, that convention that has been followed on multiple

:55:14. > :55:18.occasions on appointing people has been followed in this case. There's

:55:19. > :55:20.nothing to suggest anything has been disorderly about that. Is my

:55:21. > :55:27.understanding that the Speaker will present the names. I thank the

:55:28. > :55:33.honourable gentleman for bringing this matter to the House for us all

:55:34. > :55:37.to have a contribution. I also agree that this House should be made up

:55:38. > :55:42.Parliamentary representatives that they have picked from this House. I

:55:43. > :55:50.share the concerns of the Honourable Lady for the SMB who put forward the

:55:51. > :55:53.issue of the 20 of human rights. Our parties have been part of that

:55:54. > :55:57.involvement. Could the deputy lead of the House perhaps just tell us in

:55:58. > :56:04.this House what steps have been taken to ensure that the House

:56:05. > :56:05.itself decide to the representatives will be, and the members will

:56:06. > :56:15.decide, and not just one person? I can't give him any assurances

:56:16. > :56:21.about the change of procedure. You should be aware that the honourable

:56:22. > :56:26.member has been appointed to the assembly. There are 27 members of

:56:27. > :56:40.Parliament and ten of them come from the 2015 intake. May I pay a tribute

:56:41. > :56:48.to my right honourable friend, the member for Christchurch? I represent

:56:49. > :56:51.a party and my honourable friend and I were in a lot of consultation over

:56:52. > :56:56.the last parliament over the suspension of the Russians. I think

:56:57. > :56:59.he did a terrific job on the Council of Europe. Many regard this as a

:57:00. > :57:03.jolly but if they had studied the work my right honourable friend did

:57:04. > :57:08.on that council delegation, they would realise what a serious

:57:09. > :57:11.organisation matters and it needs people with knowledge and wisdom and

:57:12. > :57:23.determination and that is what this house should be pointing to that

:57:24. > :57:27.delegation. I agree the work undertaken is of utmost importance.

:57:28. > :57:33.I want to reaffirm the appreciation I have for my honourable friend on

:57:34. > :57:40.the last ten years. A decision has been taken to bring people into the

:57:41. > :57:45.delegation. Can I congratulate the deputy leader on his first

:57:46. > :57:51.statement? Would the deputy leader welcome other urgent questions that

:57:52. > :57:58.facilitate the washing of dirty conservative lemon in public? I am

:57:59. > :58:03.sure we will be willing to help her. I thank the honourable gentleman who

:58:04. > :58:09.was my predecessor in this role. He will be aware of standing at the

:58:10. > :58:12.dispatch box. The question has been asked and hopefully the answer may

:58:13. > :58:15.not be the answer the honourable gentleman wanted to hear but I

:58:16. > :58:22.believe it has explained why the delegation is as it is. Can I

:58:23. > :58:26.recognise the contribution my honourable friend for Christchurch

:58:27. > :58:30.has made to the Council of Europe, in particular on the issue of

:58:31. > :58:36.migration. Can I encourage him not to be so downhearted because if he

:58:37. > :58:38.wants to re-examine the list, there are independent minded Conservative

:58:39. > :58:44.members of Parliament on the list and members of Parliament from these

:58:45. > :58:51.ventures who voted for the European referendum campaign. He was wrong to

:58:52. > :58:59.suggest that the list is just full of Conservative... He has also

:59:00. > :59:05.joined the Parliamentary delegation on behalf of the Conservative Party.

:59:06. > :59:10.I am sure he will be a robust voice in Strauss Borg, raising important

:59:11. > :59:21.issues on which all members of the Conservative Party are united. --

:59:22. > :59:25.during the replies, it was made clear to the House that your

:59:26. > :59:29.signature is required on this list of names before it goes to the

:59:30. > :59:33.Parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe. I wonder if you

:59:34. > :59:39.could advise the House, is it within your power to test the opinion of

:59:40. > :59:48.this house as to the suitability of the names on that list? The short

:59:49. > :59:54.cancer is, no. It falls to me to send to Strasbourg the list of those

:59:55. > :00:00.appointed to the Parliamentary assembly delegation, together with

:00:01. > :00:05.important documentation. These credentials can be transmitted a

:00:06. > :00:10.week before the opening of the session. I will consider the point

:00:11. > :00:18.made by the honourable gentleman and as he has made it, have essentially

:00:19. > :00:22.done so. Let me be clear that I interpret my duty as being too

:00:23. > :00:33.forward the names, not to offer a critique of them. On a different

:00:34. > :00:37.matter, it has been drawn to my attention that Steve O'Connell who

:00:38. > :00:40.is the London assembly member for certain and Croydon has been sending

:00:41. > :00:46.e-mails to my constituents in which he states that the member of

:00:47. > :00:49.Parliament for certain is happy to take up cases to do with rail

:00:50. > :00:55.services on behalf of my constituents. I seek your guidance

:00:56. > :00:59.and will give the member the benefit of the doubt. He is a new member and

:01:00. > :01:02.I want to have a good working relationship with him. Could you

:01:03. > :01:06.remind me, isn't there a good working relationship with him. Could

:01:07. > :01:18.you remind me, is an American house of? I assume... I apologise if I

:01:19. > :01:22.didn't hear him correctly. I assume he did notify the honourable member.

:01:23. > :01:27.I am grateful to him and thank him for giving me notice of this point

:01:28. > :01:32.of order. I confirm that it is a well-established convention.

:01:33. > :01:40.The interests of electors should be represented only by the constituency

:01:41. > :01:45.member and stop it is not possible or appropriate for me to ensure that

:01:46. > :01:49.this convention is enforced. It is best to leave it to the good sense

:01:50. > :01:55.of members to work out any problems between them. I know both honourable

:01:56. > :02:04.members and I feel every confidence that they can be relied upon to do

:02:05. > :02:09.just that. With your help from us, may I please seek your guidance? You

:02:10. > :02:13.have rightly said in the past that the criteria is that they are

:02:14. > :02:18.newsworthy and that people are talking about the issue in the dog

:02:19. > :02:27.and duck. As you will appreciate, I am sure my distinguished... Order.

:02:28. > :02:31.Let me just say this. The responsibility for determining

:02:32. > :02:39.whether a matter is warranted for exchange on the floor of this

:02:40. > :02:45.house, is that of the chair. I discharge that responsibility. I

:02:46. > :02:47.discharge it in situ a slave. The honourable gentleman is a

:02:48. > :02:50.distinguished member of this house and he knows that those decisions

:02:51. > :03:06.are not subject to questioning by members. He had a go but he made a

:03:07. > :03:11.bit of a mess of it. A user said you have to submit the names to the

:03:12. > :03:14.Council of Europe. You do not have to submit them immediately, given

:03:15. > :03:19.that the Council of Europe cannot act until the end of this month as

:03:20. > :03:23.we have already heard. It is possible to have a debate on a

:03:24. > :03:27.substantial motion that is not laid down by the Government. Would you

:03:28. > :03:39.consider delaying matters to see if such a debate occurs? The most

:03:40. > :03:45.sensible thing to say is that I will reflect on it. Rather than giving an

:03:46. > :03:49.instantaneous reaction, it would be better to reflect on it. He has

:03:50. > :03:53.raised a point that hasn't been raised in recent times and I think

:03:54. > :03:58.it warrants consideration and possibly on my part, consultation. I

:03:59. > :04:01.thank him for what he said. After that little array of points of

:04:02. > :04:08.order, I think we come now to the ten Minute Rule Motion. I beg to

:04:09. > :04:14.move to amend the planning list of building and conservation areas act

:04:15. > :04:23.1990, to include environmental performance, health and safety and

:04:24. > :04:27.maintenance costs. Also considering whether to include, retain all

:04:28. > :04:32.released a building from a list compiled or approved under the 1990

:04:33. > :04:38.act due to its architectural or historic interest, to make provision

:04:39. > :04:46.about excluding parts of building structures from such lists. I moved

:04:47. > :04:50.into a form which is a grade two listed building. Although there is a

:04:51. > :04:55.public footpath running between my house and the cow shed, I believe I

:04:56. > :04:59.would require listed building consent to put solar panels on the

:05:00. > :05:10.cow shed roof as it lies within what is called the curtilage. It is a

:05:11. > :05:15.corrugated metal building of no historical or architectural interest

:05:16. > :05:19.and smells strongly of manure. Because of this experience, I

:05:20. > :05:24.believe the requirement is a piece of red tape that these to be removed

:05:25. > :05:28.for the benefit of the planet. For the people who occupy listed

:05:29. > :05:34.buildings and to do nothing about the environment, to have their

:05:35. > :05:38.excuse of curtilage removed. To free up more space for solar panels and

:05:39. > :05:50.to fulfil our desire to be the greenest Government ever. We need to

:05:51. > :05:54.protect the planet. By including the elements of the building we wish to

:05:55. > :06:00.protect the listing, we will not put at risk the history we love and want

:06:01. > :06:06.to cherish. I am only looking to make changes to grade two buildings

:06:07. > :06:11.as Grade one and great to start protect deems deemed to be of

:06:12. > :06:15.exceptional interest and of particular importance. I have

:06:16. > :06:20.confidence that historic England have listed carefully all the

:06:21. > :06:29.important elements in those buildings. In 2015 in England, there

:06:30. > :06:37.were 376000 and -- 370 6999 listed buildings. Most of those were great

:06:38. > :06:45.too. In North Herefordshire, we have 4150 listed buildings of which 81

:06:46. > :06:51.Grade one, 233 great to Star and 3668 great too. Historic England's

:06:52. > :06:56.website says, any omission from the list description of a feature does

:06:57. > :07:03.not indicate that it is not of interest. Objects, structures and

:07:04. > :07:07.buildings are fixed to a listed building or within its curtilage may

:07:08. > :07:13.be protected by listing. These rules may mean that considerably more may

:07:14. > :07:17.be protected by the listing ban is obvious from the list entry alone.

:07:18. > :07:22.There can often be considerable uncertainty as to what is covered.

:07:23. > :07:27.This is from their website. It is a criminal offence to carry out works

:07:28. > :07:32.that require listed building consent without first obtaining the required

:07:33. > :07:36.consent. Ignorance of the buildings status cannot be used as a defence.

:07:37. > :07:42.The maximum penalty of carrying out works without permission is two

:07:43. > :07:47.years imprisonment or an unlimited fine. All to stop if you solar

:07:48. > :07:52.panels and some installation. I know that historic England understand the

:07:53. > :07:58.need for change because according to their website, as of the 26th of

:07:59. > :08:06.June 2013, some new list entries amended after that date may express

:08:07. > :08:11.exclude buildings from protection. It is time to roll that common sense

:08:12. > :08:14.out all great to buildings. Restrictions on listed status

:08:15. > :08:18.prevent environmentally friendly changes to these buildings that are

:08:19. > :08:21.necessary to protect our planet 's top older buildings can be

:08:22. > :08:26.enormously expensive to heat and have high maintenance costs. The

:08:27. > :08:32.owners must face up to their environmental and -- response busy

:08:33. > :08:35.and save energy, not just turn up the thermostat. Many of these

:08:36. > :08:41.buildings do not belong to wealthy people who can afford more oil. Even

:08:42. > :08:47.those who can doing the wrong thing. It is far better to insulated

:08:48. > :08:51.and save fossil fuel. We must make it easier for owners to make

:08:52. > :08:54.energy-saving changes whilst protecting the sections of their

:08:55. > :08:58.historic homes that are valuable. Owners will be able to spend more

:08:59. > :09:03.looking after the buildings and become more affordable to live in,

:09:04. > :09:08.thus opening the market to wider members of society. It is a question

:09:09. > :09:12.of balance. Opening up the opportunities for great to owners to

:09:13. > :09:16.do more for the environment while saving the features of importance to

:09:17. > :09:20.historic England. If I may use Buckingham Palace as an example

:09:21. > :09:25.although it is Grade one, the listing goes into detail about many

:09:26. > :09:30.fine features both externally and internally at Buckingham Palace. In

:09:31. > :09:34.reference to the roof, says, slate and leaded roof. Because the roof is

:09:35. > :09:37.mentioned in the listing, it should be protected and solar panels would

:09:38. > :09:42.therefore require listed building consent. However, many other great

:09:43. > :09:45.two listed buildings where the intruder is not going to anywhere

:09:46. > :09:50.near as much detail, should only have that which is listed protected,

:09:51. > :09:54.just the same as Buckingham Palace. But every listed building is large

:09:55. > :09:59.or expensive stop some homes happened to be within the curtilage

:10:00. > :10:05.of a listed building. This curtilage Cap Shaul is a lazy and bureaucratic

:10:06. > :10:11.device which is out of date. One of the most important points is it adds

:10:12. > :10:16.cost and workload too overstretched council planning departments,

:10:17. > :10:20.particularly at a time when they are under enormous pressure. Costs and

:10:21. > :10:23.constraints which determine attracting the valuable. As well as

:10:24. > :10:29.enforcement action which is time-consuming and risky and stop my

:10:30. > :10:31.right honourable friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, often

:10:32. > :10:36.talked about mending the roof when the sun is shining. He never says,

:10:37. > :10:39.we need to ask the Council of the listing building consent to be

:10:40. > :10:44.allowed to do so. We need to do more than simply meant the roof. We need

:10:45. > :10:48.to use it for solar panels and insulated roof and be free to do so

:10:49. > :10:52.without having to ask permission. It is time to change the curtilage

:10:53. > :10:56.requirements and we need to be precise in what want to preserve and

:10:57. > :10:59.stand-up for all that is good about our history and go forward

:11:00. > :11:14.protecting all that is good about our planet. I beg to move.

:11:15. > :11:20.The Ayes have it, the Ayes have it. And is prepared to bring in the

:11:21. > :12:02.bill? Planning, listed buildings and

:12:03. > :12:09.conservation areas amendment, 1990. Second reading, 11 to March. The

:12:10. > :12:12.clerk will now proceed to read the orders of the day. European Union

:12:13. > :12:23.approval is Bill, Lords, second reading. The question, oh, sorry. I

:12:24. > :12:27.call the Minister to move. Thank you, Madam vividly Speaker, I take

:12:28. > :12:32.to move that the bill be read a second time. The purpose of this

:12:33. > :12:36.bill is to approve two draft decisions of the Council of the

:12:37. > :12:42.European Union, for the UK to agree these at Council, Parliament must

:12:43. > :12:46.first give its approval of Article 252 of the Treaty on the functioning

:12:47. > :12:51.of the European Union, Article 352 allows the union to take out student

:12:52. > :12:54.to obtain the objectives set out in the treaty but for which there is no

:12:55. > :12:59.specific power given. The European Parliament must give its approval

:13:00. > :13:05.and unanimous support must be given by all other member states. Section

:13:06. > :13:13.eight of the European Union Act, 2011, provides that a minister may

:13:14. > :13:18.make an Article 35 to decision about draft decision is approved by an Act

:13:19. > :13:20.of Parliament. I am setting out this draft Council decision and will

:13:21. > :13:26.provide members with the opportunity to decide in debate to approve the

:13:27. > :13:30.measure is force of the First Division will enable the former

:13:31. > :13:35.Republic of Macedonia to be granted observer status in the agency, the

:13:36. > :13:38.UN's fundamental rights agency. The agency is a body of the EU body with

:13:39. > :13:43.the objective of providing assistance and advice on fundamental

:13:44. > :13:47.rights issues to the EU institutions and to member states when

:13:48. > :13:52.implementing union law. It carries out the same role for EU accession

:13:53. > :13:56.states with observer status. This does not extend to confidence of the

:13:57. > :14:03.agency. The proposal has been in existence since 2010 and cleared the

:14:04. > :14:07.UK Parliamentary scrutiny process in place at that time. The Greek

:14:08. > :14:11.presidency lifted its block on the decision in April, 2014 and a

:14:12. > :14:14.decision that emerged last year, with all of the memo states ready to

:14:15. > :14:19.vote in favour of the decision. The UK has the enter the scrutiny

:14:20. > :14:23.reserve pending approval by an Act of Parliament due to the crimes of

:14:24. > :14:26.the EU Act. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has been an EU

:14:27. > :14:33.candidate countries since 2005 but in recent years has been backsliding

:14:34. > :14:37.on reforms. A political crisis has been unfolding in the country over

:14:38. > :14:41.the last year which has raised concerns about the rule of law and

:14:42. > :14:46.adherence to democratic principles. A European Commission report issued

:14:47. > :14:49.in June set out a series of recommendations needed to return the

:14:50. > :14:52.country to the half to EU accession. This included reforms

:14:53. > :14:58.related to freedom of expression and the rule of law. Observer status at

:14:59. > :15:04.the agency could allow the country to have access to assistance on

:15:05. > :15:07.fundamental rights issues, they help tackle its reform challenges and

:15:08. > :15:13.provide assistance and help to the country on human rights issues. The

:15:14. > :15:17.second measure is a decision of the Council enabling the EU tripartite

:15:18. > :15:22.social summit to continue to operate. The summit is a meeting of

:15:23. > :15:25.representatives on the European social partner organisations, the

:15:26. > :15:29.commission and Council, and it meets on the eve of the European Council

:15:30. > :15:33.in spring and autumn, for high-level discussions between three parties on

:15:34. > :15:38.aspects of the European agenda for growth and jobs. The tripartite

:15:39. > :15:43.social summit was established by Council's decision in 2003. Under

:15:44. > :15:47.the Treaty of Lisbon agreed in 2007, the legal basis of the summit,

:15:48. > :15:54.Article 22 was repealed, and the decision to re-establish the new

:15:55. > :15:58.decision of the legal basis of the summit. This takes into account for

:15:59. > :16:04.changes in the usage and since the last decision. Given it also takes

:16:05. > :16:10.account of the name changes are among the employer organisations.

:16:11. > :16:14.The government is able to of the summit, of the need for jobs and

:16:15. > :16:18.growth can support the labour market reforms needed in other member

:16:19. > :16:23.states. Over the intervening decade, the apparent risk to the UK has

:16:24. > :16:28.emerged during the existence of the tripartite social summit. The final

:16:29. > :16:32.agreed text of the tripartite social summit measure has been published by

:16:33. > :16:41.the Council. It has received consent from the European Parliament. I will

:16:42. > :16:46.give way, yes. Can she tell us if there are any financial consequences

:16:47. > :16:49.of these decisions? I can assure my Right Honourable Friend there are no

:16:50. > :16:53.financial consequences as a result of these decisions. There are no

:16:54. > :17:01.financial implications for the UK for either decision. I can confirm,

:17:02. > :17:07.finally, that I do not consider that any of the bill's positions could

:17:08. > :17:12.have been the right set out in the European Commission of human rights

:17:13. > :17:15.and the smoke issue of compatibility of the bill with those rights. It is

:17:16. > :17:26.the intention of the bill to come forth on the day for assent. The

:17:27. > :17:32.question is that the bill now be read a second time. Nick

:17:33. > :17:37.Thomas-Symonds. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm grateful to the

:17:38. > :17:43.Minister for coming the House today to set out the provisions of this

:17:44. > :17:46.bill. People will find it surprising that a relatively uncontroversial

:17:47. > :17:51.measure like this has been introduced through primary

:17:52. > :17:54.legislation when tax credit cuts affecting 3.3 million working

:17:55. > :17:59.families was introduced through secondary legislation. Indeed, the

:18:00. > :18:03.situation is actually worse than that, because we are having time,

:18:04. > :18:08.today, on the floor of the House to debate this bill. Of course, we ran

:18:09. > :18:15.out of time on the welfare reform and work built. When the last

:18:16. > :18:18.grouping of 33 amendments was not reached, including issues as

:18:19. > :18:21.important as cuts to social housing rents and changes to support the

:18:22. > :18:28.mortgage interest scheme. Perhaps the greatest irony of all is that

:18:29. > :18:34.the government couldn't find more time to discuss and debate the

:18:35. > :18:38.abolition of child poverty targets. The issue of child poverty in

:18:39. > :18:45.Britain, no less, whilst this bill actually facilitates similar

:18:46. > :18:50.European-wide targets on poverty. Can I turn to the substantial

:18:51. > :18:55.measures in the Bill? I do, of course, well, the former Yugoslav

:18:56. > :19:00.Republic of Macedonia being an observer in the work of the European

:19:01. > :19:08.Union agency on fundamental rights. The work that is done by the FRA to

:19:09. > :19:11.fight racism, intolerance and xenophobia is crucial and I think it

:19:12. > :19:16.is a positive step that the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is to

:19:17. > :19:21.be an observer in its work. As regards the tripartite social summit

:19:22. > :19:25.ommer I was delighted to hear the minister talk in positive terms

:19:26. > :19:28.about it. It was almost as if, Madam Getty the Speaker, she had

:19:29. > :19:32.discovered her in a pro-European side. And how wonderful it was to

:19:33. > :19:37.hear her praising that body. Because, what this bill does, and

:19:38. > :19:42.let's be clear about it, is it continues the tripartite social

:19:43. > :19:47.summit. It gives it a more specific remit, around achieving the targets

:19:48. > :19:54.that are laid out in Europe 2020 agenda. I welcome that because it is

:19:55. > :19:59.important, it is an important forum for EU partners to the Scottish

:20:00. > :20:06.social and employment issues. And of course part of the Europe 2020

:20:07. > :20:11.agenda is recognising that the EU has a coordinating role to play in

:20:12. > :20:18.combating poverty by identifying best practice and national learning.

:20:19. > :20:23.Indeed, the target has been set of reducing the number of people

:20:24. > :20:30.threatened by poverty and social exclusion by at least 20 million, by

:20:31. > :20:36.2020. Perhaps the Minister would like to clarify what role the UK is

:20:37. > :20:39.going to play in this 2020 agenda, and how exactly the government

:20:40. > :20:45.proposes to report on poverty and child poverty, in an internationally

:20:46. > :20:51.comparable way, when the government has decided to abolish its own

:20:52. > :20:56.domestic child poverty targets. And it is a quite remarkable anomaly, if

:20:57. > :21:00.I may say so, that, given the international context which the

:21:01. > :21:05.Minister has set out, and given the recent tax credit cuts, that there

:21:06. > :21:10.should have been that abolition of the child poverty target. Let me put

:21:11. > :21:18.it simply, Madam Deputy Speaker. Why, exactly, is the government

:21:19. > :21:21.scrapping poverty targets at home and then promoting them abroad?

:21:22. > :21:27.Because that is precisely what the government is facilitating. There's

:21:28. > :21:32.no point members on the opposite benches shaking their heads. That is

:21:33. > :21:39.what the Europe 2020 agenda and the bill is about. It is great to see

:21:40. > :21:44.this pro-European moment, and even the member for working has come in

:21:45. > :21:49.to see it, how great it is to see. -- for working ham. I would put it

:21:50. > :21:56.finally, this week in conclusion. I will certainly give way to the

:21:57. > :22:01.honourable gentleman for Wokingham. As the main purpose of this bill is

:22:02. > :22:05.to propose new procedures to discuss unemployment and a lack of growth on

:22:06. > :22:10.the continent, but as party think that getting countries out of the

:22:11. > :22:13.euro on the wanted and could help them price themselves back into work

:22:14. > :22:19.and get rid of the dreadful unemployment that now lays like a

:22:20. > :22:25.pall over the south of our continent? It is in indication of

:22:26. > :22:28.some of the paucity of my teenage years that I can remember watching

:22:29. > :22:32.the TV in the mid-19 90s and seeing the member for Wokingham ploughing

:22:33. > :22:37.his year skip the furrow very finally, as he always does. In

:22:38. > :22:42.answer to his retching with regard to countries, that is a matter for

:22:43. > :22:45.the countries themselves. I wouldn't be seeking to dictate to them. It is

:22:46. > :22:50.a matter for the countries themselves. Can I finish on this

:22:51. > :22:59.point? I will give way to the honourable gentleman. I agree with

:23:00. > :23:03.some of what My Honourable Friend is saying but Greece was given a

:23:04. > :23:06.bailout but on very strict conditions which were imposed upon

:23:07. > :23:09.them, including restrictions on public sector workers taking

:23:10. > :23:14.industrial action, that sort of thing. These were not have his

:23:15. > :23:20.deciding these things for itself but having things imposed upon it by the

:23:21. > :23:22.European Union. I am grateful to My Honourable Friend for that

:23:23. > :23:28.intervention. I am sure, across the House, we have particular views of

:23:29. > :23:32.the conditions that were imposed and I know that the honourable gentleman

:23:33. > :23:36.does, too, and I thank him for raising that point. What I would say

:23:37. > :23:43.about the European Union, in relation to employment rights, is I

:23:44. > :23:47.would invite him to praise the work on equal treatment for part-time

:23:48. > :23:52.workers, unpaid leave, on fair pay for agency workers. And I really

:23:53. > :23:55.hope that, whilst hopefully today the House approves changes to the

:23:56. > :23:59.tripartite social summit, that we can also take as an indication that

:24:00. > :24:04.the government will not be signing away the employment rights that have

:24:05. > :24:09.gained, over many years, for working people in this country, through the

:24:10. > :24:12.EU, and that the decency of work will be a fundamental part of the

:24:13. > :24:20.Prime Minister's renegotiation in the next few months. I hope we will

:24:21. > :24:25.not detain the House for too long on this matter. Just a couple of points

:24:26. > :24:32.that I did want to raise. Firstly, in answer to the honourable

:24:33. > :24:36.gentleman, the reason we're having this debate is because in the EU Act

:24:37. > :24:41.of 2011, we foresaw issues that would be coming down the track that

:24:42. > :24:46.might be controversial, or not, but were worthy of copper scrutiny on

:24:47. > :24:53.the floor of this House. And so, -- proper scrutiny. We had plenty of

:24:54. > :24:56.debate. We did divide a few times but rarely on the floor of this

:24:57. > :25:00.House. Because we wanted to ensure that we had proper scrutiny of what

:25:01. > :25:04.was going on in our name, at European level. This is a provision

:25:05. > :25:10.of that Act that is coming through. I understand where he is coming from

:25:11. > :25:15.when he mentioned the comparison with tax credits, but equally, there

:25:16. > :25:20.is an argument there, that that's what previous tax credit changes

:25:21. > :25:26.have brought forward under statutory instruments. We foresaw this coming

:25:27. > :25:30.therefore be amended the Act as it was then to ensure that we could

:25:31. > :25:37.scrutinise these matters on the floor of this House. These two are

:25:38. > :25:42.not the world's most exciting, but we will see more of these measures

:25:43. > :25:47.coming forward and we'll have more and more time to talk about them. I

:25:48. > :25:53.have visited Macedonia. I am a fan of Macedonia. I have been a member

:25:54. > :25:57.of the European Parliament and seen how a neighbouring country has done

:25:58. > :26:02.everything it can to stop Macedonian accession to the EU, and seen what

:26:03. > :26:07.Macedonia itself has done, the massive strides it has taken towards

:26:08. > :26:14.European Union membership. I am pleased to see that it is able to

:26:15. > :26:15.become an observer in the work of the European Union agency for

:26:16. > :26:26.fundamental rights. I do have concerns, actually, and

:26:27. > :26:35.this is my only point on the Macedonian entry in this Approval's

:26:36. > :26:38.Bill. The European Union agency for fundamental rights does come from

:26:39. > :26:44.the European monitoring Centre on racism and xenophobia which had

:26:45. > :26:49.unbelievably difficult financial and administrative problems in the past,

:26:50. > :26:52.and I would like to check every now and again with the Minister to

:26:53. > :26:55.ensure the problems this organisation had in the past which

:26:56. > :26:59.actually lead to its name changed among other things have been

:27:00. > :27:06.completely changed and that it does what it is meant to do and does not

:27:07. > :27:12.duplicate other... I will give way. Thank you. I asked my honourable

:27:13. > :27:18.friend to define observer. Does that mean the European Union observes

:27:19. > :27:24.Macedonia? On Macedonia observes the European Union, for example, in

:27:25. > :27:33.human rights? Is that what it means? It is a bit of both,

:27:34. > :27:38.actually. I think you will find the agency has the following main tasks,

:27:39. > :27:42.to collect, analyse and disseminate reliable information regarding the

:27:43. > :27:47.situation of fundamental rights in the European Union. It also has to

:27:48. > :27:51.formulate and published conclusions and opinions on specific topics on

:27:52. > :27:53.its own initiative at the request of the European Parliament and

:27:54. > :27:57.commission promoting dialogue with civil society and others to raise

:27:58. > :28:01.public awareness of fundamental rights. We have a debate on going in

:28:02. > :28:05.this country about where those rights should lie and what sort of

:28:06. > :28:11.legislation should police them but Macedonia has had that debate in its

:28:12. > :28:16.own pile meant and has applied to join the agency, willing to pay

:28:17. > :28:24.appropriately to it and I do not see why we should step in its way. As I

:28:25. > :28:28.said, the European Union agency for fundamental rights has had a number

:28:29. > :28:32.of issues. It serves an important function in that member state voting

:28:33. > :28:37.rights could potentially be suspended based on any report's

:28:38. > :28:45.findings, from this particular agency. It has, you know, teeth, in

:28:46. > :28:49.no uncertain terms. It has a decent operating budget in over 20 million

:28:50. > :28:55.euros per year. But Macedonia has taken its own choice and I think it

:28:56. > :29:01.is right to go down that route if it so chooses to. I do want to talk,

:29:02. > :29:07.very briefly, about the draft decision on a tripartite social

:29:08. > :29:15.Summit for growth and employment. They're both a new Council decision

:29:16. > :29:20.attached, or following, Lisbon, which others the number of meetings

:29:21. > :29:23.to be increased of this body, from ones to twice per year and for the

:29:24. > :29:30.attend. The European Council is attend. The European Council is

:29:31. > :29:35.allowed to host and facilitate the meeting and so this should not be

:29:36. > :29:42.too much of a cost. But my questions on this are more about the direction

:29:43. > :29:45.of travel of both this organisation, it duplication, its purpose of being

:29:46. > :29:54.questions about what this does. questions about what this does.

:29:55. > :29:57.Because this is not the economic and social committee, which actually in

:29:58. > :30:02.the past I have called for the abolition of, because there is a

:30:03. > :30:07.huge amount of costs, some members belong to one of three groups,

:30:08. > :30:15.employers, employees and various other interests. The employers' grip

:30:16. > :30:22.on the social and economic committee has businessmen and people from

:30:23. > :30:25.lobbies -- group. Members of trade Unions, affiliated to the

:30:26. > :30:29.Confederation, and a third group made up of lobbies from civil

:30:30. > :30:32.society, most of which I paid for by the European Commission to lobby the

:30:33. > :30:38.European Commission in different ways, to get the European Commission

:30:39. > :30:44.to do more. Many European countries have that, but it is not that. Not

:30:45. > :30:50.at all. This is a separate beast and it is a question of who are the

:30:51. > :30:57.European Union's social partners? A list of their social partners,

:30:58. > :31:01.organisations consulted called 154 of the future of the Treaty on

:31:02. > :31:06.European Union, and that includes business Europe.

:31:07. > :31:10.# Business Europe. Quite an interesting organisation. Not

:31:11. > :31:18.surprisingly they have a view on the referendum we may be having here.

:31:19. > :31:27.They get a small sum of money, 456,000, almost 457 -- 457 thousand

:31:28. > :31:31.euros as payment under a grant received for a project running over

:31:32. > :31:37.a couple of years of which the total budgeted cost was 1.2 million euros.

:31:38. > :31:43.The members of Business Europe to include the CBI here in the United

:31:44. > :31:48.Kingdom. That is one of the ways the CBI does receive some money from the

:31:49. > :31:54.European Union. It also includes the other organisations, the European

:31:55. > :32:05.Trade Union Confederation mentioned previously. There is also, and

:32:06. > :32:07.actually the European Trade Union Confederation received 4 million

:32:08. > :32:14.euros from European institutions and spent over 1 million euros of that

:32:15. > :32:19.lobbying... Happy to give way to my honourable friend. Given the sums

:32:20. > :32:22.mentioned, is it not possible these organisations may be more kindly

:32:23. > :32:26.disposed towards the European Union because they have received these

:32:27. > :32:33.substantial sums? I would like to think they would not be but I would

:32:34. > :32:37.like to think, if I was a leading light in the CBI order the trade

:32:38. > :32:41.union Confederation, that you would want to make sure you are in a

:32:42. > :32:47.position where you would not be accused of being biased in one way

:32:48. > :32:52.or the other. And actually receiving money from the European Commission,

:32:53. > :32:56.that you then spend lobbying the European Commission for the European

:32:57. > :33:00.Commission to do things, whether that be business organisations

:33:01. > :33:03.lobbying for liberalisation or trade union organisations lobbying for

:33:04. > :33:08.workers' writes on whatever that might be, it does seem it is almost

:33:09. > :33:15.market in this area. I will give way. Thank you for giving way and

:33:16. > :33:19.answering my question but just recently there has been some

:33:20. > :33:22.controversy about the BBC receiving some millions of pounds from the

:33:23. > :33:29.European Union for educational purposes, no doubt educating us all

:33:30. > :33:36.about the rule of the European Union. Does he not think that for

:33:37. > :33:40.organisations which are meant to be independent and impartial, to take

:33:41. > :33:45.sums of money, large sums, from the European Union, that may have some

:33:46. > :33:51.influence on them? Again I would like to think, I mean, I followed

:33:52. > :33:55.very much what the gentleman and my friends and colleagues have been

:33:56. > :33:59.doing on the Scrutiny Committee in this area where they have had a long

:34:00. > :34:03.and ongoing dialogue with the BBC from when I was a member over the

:34:04. > :34:08.last five years into this mandate of this Parliament, and I would like to

:34:09. > :34:13.think that the BBC, and I hesitate looking in this direction at my

:34:14. > :34:17.Scottish National Party colleagues, because I have a feeling they may

:34:18. > :34:21.have a view on partiality in the BBC when it comes to certain matters...

:34:22. > :34:26.I will certainly give way. In the opinion of the honourable gentleman,

:34:27. > :34:29.does the BBC find it more difficult than an organisation -- when an

:34:30. > :34:32.organisation like the EC gives the money doesn't find it more difficult

:34:33. > :34:39.in terms of human rights, when it is taken away like the UK Government?

:34:40. > :34:44.This is straying quite far away from a very narrow bill if we are going

:34:45. > :34:50.to talk about the BBC. For Disney, Madame Deputy Speaker, -- forgive

:34:51. > :34:54.me. I did kind of provoke that reaction from my SNP colleague. I

:34:55. > :34:57.wanted to prove the point that actually when you raise questions

:34:58. > :35:02.about the partiality of an organisation either by its funding

:35:03. > :35:05.or its action, you may be devaluing that organisation's input to

:35:06. > :35:10.anything important like perhaps a European referendum going forward.

:35:11. > :35:17.And so going back to the point about who are the EU social partners that

:35:18. > :35:20.we wish to be speaking about and with in this dialogue we are

:35:21. > :35:26.facilitating in this particular European Union (Approvals) Bill, as

:35:27. > :35:31.I say, the European Trade Union Confederation received 4 million

:35:32. > :35:35.euros from them in 2014 and spent over 1 million of that lobbying the

:35:36. > :35:41.EU institutions for more or less legislation in its own ways. The

:35:42. > :35:47.European Centre Of Employers And Enterprises Providing Public

:35:48. > :35:51.Services also in 2013 spent 120,000 euros lobbying the European Union

:35:52. > :35:59.and received 155,000 euros from the European Union direct to DG

:36:00. > :36:06.employment. I wonder about the added value of this social dialogue that

:36:07. > :36:09.would be going on at the tripartite social Summit for growth and

:36:10. > :36:18.employment. Like many things in the European Union, its apple pie in the

:36:19. > :36:24.title... Who could possibly be against a tripartite social Summit

:36:25. > :36:26.for growth? But if actually it delivers very little and the only

:36:27. > :36:30.people there are speaking people paid by the European Commission to

:36:31. > :36:35.then talk to the European Commission about these matters, then we have, I

:36:36. > :36:40.think, a significant issue because the conversation is an ever

:36:41. > :36:45.decreasing circle. The EU social partners have agreed to a number of

:36:46. > :36:51.things in the recent past. There were important matters they wish to

:36:52. > :36:55.discuss. To negotiate an autonomous framework agreement on active ageing

:36:56. > :37:00.and an intergenerational approach, something we need to discuss,

:37:01. > :37:03.obviously, at a national level let alone at a European level. To step

:37:04. > :37:09.up efforts to improve the implication of their autonomous

:37:10. > :37:13.framework agreements with specific focus on the eight ten member states

:37:14. > :37:18.with that has been identified as insufficient. This is a group that

:37:19. > :37:21.will lobby for more European regulation and harsher on the

:37:22. > :37:24.mentation of directives. To highlight the importance of more

:37:25. > :37:30.public and private investments. I would imagine my colleagues on the

:37:31. > :37:34.opposite benches would have, I would like to have, a conversation,

:37:35. > :37:38.especially under their new leadership, about that. It also says

:37:39. > :37:43.in order to reach, and I read from the programme, to reach optimal

:37:44. > :37:48.growth, to boost job creation and revive the EU industrial base.

:37:49. > :37:52.Another part of the joint working programme is to prepare joint

:37:53. > :37:57.conclusions, things we would all wish to see promoting better --

:37:58. > :38:03.promoting better family life and gender equality to reduce the gender

:38:04. > :38:06.pay gap. I cannot believe there would be a member of this House that

:38:07. > :38:11.would not want to achieve that but I do wonder whether, having a group of

:38:12. > :38:15.people paid for by the European Commission indirectly to turn up at

:38:16. > :38:20.the summit once every six months to speak about these things, having

:38:21. > :38:24.done so for quite some time without any concrete achievements, and in

:38:25. > :38:29.fact maybe some of those ideals are going into reverse actually, that

:38:30. > :38:34.perhaps we should be asking questions about the validity of

:38:35. > :38:43.supporting such a social Summit for growth and employment. It also, and

:38:44. > :38:47.not until quite recently did this become controversial, but it also,

:38:48. > :38:56.one of the objectives, is to develop a mobility package and to address

:38:57. > :39:01.loopholes and enforcement issues on work and to promote mobility of

:39:02. > :39:06.apprentices. We are having a debate in this country now about mobility

:39:07. > :39:11.and indeed the freedom of movement of workers and others and it is

:39:12. > :39:16.quite interesting we are at one point promoting a debate and there

:39:17. > :39:22.is a big debate going on amongst our European partners on this very

:39:23. > :39:28.issue, whilst also funding a summit of the worthy and the good, to speak

:39:29. > :39:33.about the same thing. I will happily give way to my honourable friend. I

:39:34. > :39:36.am sure he will recall the great constitutionalist Walter Badger

:39:37. > :39:40.distinguished there were two parts to the Constitution, the decorative

:39:41. > :39:43.and the effective. Would he suggest this body is one of the more

:39:44. > :39:50.decorative rather than the more effective parts of the European

:39:51. > :39:55.Union constitution? I probably would, yes. I hate to beat around

:39:56. > :39:59.the bush. I don't think it is worth funding this organisation. I think

:40:00. > :40:03.it is to petition for adjudication's six. Considering how

:40:04. > :40:09.many other ways the bodies that comprise this would that have -- how

:40:10. > :40:12.they have other opportunities at a much higher and more direct little

:40:13. > :40:16.to influence the thinking of the European Commission member states

:40:17. > :40:22.and others, I really do wonder about the value of this, which is obvious

:40:23. > :40:25.they why I am on my feet now to ask the Minister as to why, actually,

:40:26. > :40:36.when we have an opportunity to stop this from happening, to cut this

:40:37. > :40:37.duplication from... When we have an opportunity to remove some money

:40:38. > :41:05.from the budget from being spent, The article states that the EU will

:41:06. > :41:08.set up social dialogue while respecting the optometry of these

:41:09. > :41:12.organisations. Can these organisations truly be autonomous

:41:13. > :41:19.and EU funded at the same time? Will they not just be a taxpayer funded

:41:20. > :41:23.eco-chamber? What authority they had until now on the old decision was

:41:24. > :41:30.based upon an old article treaty to host these summits up to this point.

:41:31. > :41:35.If Article 152 states that the European Union should respect the

:41:36. > :41:41.diversity of national systems, given that our national system is not to

:41:42. > :41:44.have this particular type of summit system, can the government guarantee

:41:45. > :41:48.that the outcome of these meetings will not have any effect on the

:41:49. > :41:52.European Commission's work programme, the very work programme

:41:53. > :42:01.that it wants, this summit, wants to have some input into? And is there

:42:02. > :42:04.an estimate for how much these meetings every six months will cost

:42:05. > :42:07.and whether the UK presidency of the and whether the UK presidency of the

:42:08. > :42:18.EU in 2017 will choose to host this? As I mentioned, a number of

:42:19. > :42:20.questions on this area. I know that the European Union for social

:42:21. > :42:25.affairs and inclusion has a regular dialogue with all the parties that

:42:26. > :42:29.would come to this summit. There are other bodies in the European Union

:42:30. > :42:34.that do exactly the same as this. And at a time when, actually we have

:42:35. > :42:38.had votes in this place where I think we have been nearly unanimous

:42:39. > :42:42.about wanting to cut out duplication of spending at a European level to

:42:43. > :42:46.make sure that the massive contribution we make as a country to

:42:47. > :42:53.the European Commission, to Europe, is spent in a wise fashion...

:42:54. > :42:57.Considering I have a bit of form in this area having been a member of

:42:58. > :43:01.European limit for ten years and raised many budgetary questions

:43:02. > :43:03.about these very things, I wonder about the value of us are proving

:43:04. > :43:17.this bill today. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. It's

:43:18. > :43:20.interesting that the clauses in this bill that we are discussing and

:43:21. > :43:25.debating today underlined some of the positive work of the European

:43:26. > :43:30.Union and I'm sure that members across the house will be debating

:43:31. > :43:34.this, particularly as we debate our future in that union. Can I first of

:43:35. > :43:42.all associate myself with some of the comments made by the member

:43:43. > :43:46.about child poverty? And also discussing the tax credits last week

:43:47. > :43:52.I think he made some excellent points. Today we draft the decision

:43:53. > :44:00.about the Republic of Macedonia becoming an observer on the European

:44:01. > :44:04.agency for rights, and Madam Deputy Speaker I would like to touch

:44:05. > :44:08.firstly on the first of these relating to Macedonia and the agency

:44:09. > :44:13.for fundamental rights. Can I say this first of all and I'm sure

:44:14. > :44:17.members across the house will agree, I think European Union expansion in

:44:18. > :44:22.2004 was one of the great triumphs of the European Union. It was a

:44:23. > :44:26.triumph for Europe and a triumph for the United Kingdom as well and our

:44:27. > :44:32.contribution to that, it has been good for us ever since. On that

:44:33. > :44:37.point, although they are not there and a great deal of work is yet to

:44:38. > :44:40.be done, I look forward to joining Macedonia and the other countries of

:44:41. > :44:45.the Western Balkans into the into being -- into the European Union and

:44:46. > :44:50.I hope that this is a step along the way. We have a great deal of work to

:44:51. > :44:57.do but I think plugging that gap between Greece and Croatia will be a

:44:58. > :45:02.welcome one. Can I also say that giving Macedonia observer status may

:45:03. > :45:07.not help in the way it needs help at the moment. Earlier on the

:45:08. > :45:10.Honourable member for Pontefract and Castleford brought forward the issue

:45:11. > :45:14.to this house of refugees and I and others have made the point that the

:45:15. > :45:18.countries who are least able to deal with the influx and the weight of

:45:19. > :45:23.refugees in Europe are those who are taking the greatest strain, not

:45:24. > :45:28.least Macedonia. If we look at the current refugee crisis, there are

:45:29. > :45:35.areas that are front-line states that can be helped in this regard.

:45:36. > :45:38.More help would be if the UK could take its fair share of refugees but

:45:39. > :45:43.that doesn't seem to be forthcoming any time soon. I think also having

:45:44. > :45:53.access to the work of some of these EU agencies would also help. What

:45:54. > :45:57.help the UK is providing with fundamental rights in reference

:45:58. > :46:02.particular to the crisis the Western Balkan nations are facing. On the

:46:03. > :46:07.issue of the tripartite summit, I'm sure members across the house will

:46:08. > :46:11.agree with me when we look at the impact the European Union has made

:46:12. > :46:18.over the years on social issues, and this mission will be picked up by my

:46:19. > :46:29.honourable friend, the member for South Persia. This will play a

:46:30. > :46:34.role... Surely it can any be a good thing. Such an approach, an approach

:46:35. > :46:39.that includes trade unionists and businesses and all others can be a

:46:40. > :46:44.good thing and something where the European Union has led the way.

:46:45. > :46:49.Finally on this and more broadly, I think that this issue we are looking

:46:50. > :46:53.at today we see where the European Union brings added value to our

:46:54. > :46:57.day-to-day lives. It helps with the promotion of fundamental rights and

:46:58. > :47:02.it is particularly pertinent we are debating this with the refugee

:47:03. > :47:06.crisis. I also think these issues underscore the need for us to remain

:47:07. > :47:12.a part of the European Union and this bill underlines that. There is

:47:13. > :47:16.another issue here, though, Madam Deputy Speaker. This is an issue

:47:17. > :47:20.that was touched upon by the member for Daventry. It underlines the

:47:21. > :47:25.scrutiny that this Parliament has over European Union legislation as

:47:26. > :47:31.well. I often think that politicians from this place and elsewhere in the

:47:32. > :47:34.European Union can be a little bit lazy sometimes when we hide behind

:47:35. > :47:42.decisions that the European Union has made. We have to ramble a role

:47:43. > :47:45.that the UK Parliament has to play and I would like to see an increased

:47:46. > :47:46.role for the devolved administrations as well in that

:47:47. > :48:00.process. What does he think would happen if

:48:01. > :48:05.we said no? If the people say no... Well, we will have to see if the

:48:06. > :48:10.people say yes or no but I think the scrutiny... What would happen if

:48:11. > :48:17.this Parliament suddenly decided to vote this down. Is he seriously

:48:18. > :48:20.suggesting that as a possibility? I can only speak for our side of the

:48:21. > :48:28.house and I know that on our side of the house we will not be voting no.

:48:29. > :48:31.I know that he cannot speak for his side of the house, in fact the

:48:32. > :48:39.leaderships can barely do that at the moment! At least we are unified

:48:40. > :48:43.on this side of the house... But we can be lazy when we look at European

:48:44. > :48:47.Union decisions, we have to have a more honest approach, we have to be

:48:48. > :48:55.more critical and be more open where we have backed European Union

:48:56. > :49:01.decisions. On that point, we will be backing this today. Thank you, Madam

:49:02. > :49:06.Deputy Speaker. I think we've just had a wonderful illustration of why

:49:07. > :49:09.our democracy doesn't work on any European subject. He pretends not to

:49:10. > :49:13.have understood my question. What would happen if the United Kingdom

:49:14. > :49:18.Parliament suddenly voted against a solemn decision on the European

:49:19. > :49:22.Union? He is not prepared to countenance that idea, he just said

:49:23. > :49:25.I don't want to. But a lot of our constituents would like us to, they

:49:26. > :49:31.would like us to stand up to the European Union and try to change it.

:49:32. > :49:37.We are invited to agree to a change of arrangements over how we debate

:49:38. > :49:42.and consult and tried to grapple with the huge problem of mass

:49:43. > :49:47.unemployment, austerity, which is so visible in the south of our

:49:48. > :49:53.continent, largely brought about by the Euro scheme... Today all we get

:49:54. > :49:59.is this nonsense that there are one or two things that the European

:50:00. > :50:03.union does that is fine so we will not grapple with the others. Where

:50:04. > :50:07.are the voices against European Union austerity? He is right to

:50:08. > :50:11.raise the point but does he agree with me that devolved

:50:12. > :50:16.administrations should also be given greater scrutiny as part of this

:50:17. > :50:20.process as well? Madam Deputy Speaker, that is another debate for

:50:21. > :50:23.another day. We're not here to debate the relative powers of the

:50:24. > :50:29.different parts of the United Kingdom. At the moment the member of

:50:30. > :50:35.the European Union is the United Kingdom. We have precious few hours

:50:36. > :50:38.left to make major changes to things that really matter on the continent

:50:39. > :50:44.and I wish to explore briefly what we can do to engage with the problem

:50:45. > :50:47.of mass unemployment, with the huge migrations of people who are unhappy

:50:48. > :50:51.with their lot in other countries in the European Union and what we can

:50:52. > :50:55.do about the austerity policies that are deep and vicious in parts of the

:50:56. > :50:59.European Union and visited on countries like Greece, Spain and

:51:00. > :51:05.Portugal by the European Union and the euro itself. I give away.

:51:06. > :51:10.Forgive me for taking the gentleman back to the beginning of his speech

:51:11. > :51:17.but he said that he would like to vote today on something. Does he

:51:18. > :51:27.have anything specific in mind or hissy just looking for a fight with

:51:28. > :51:30.the European Union? I was just using the illustration that there are

:51:31. > :51:35.large areas where this Parliament is not allowed to vote against

:51:36. > :51:40.something that is from the European Union. It could be as the result of

:51:41. > :51:47.a treaty that some government side years ago. Doesn't the opposition

:51:48. > :51:52.see it? We are losing our democracy. We are losing our right

:51:53. > :51:56.to disagree with European decisions. We are losing our right to assert to

:51:57. > :52:00.do things differently. I can think of at least 100 things that I wish

:52:01. > :52:03.were better and different to come from the European Union, because I

:52:04. > :52:07.think they get in the way of the prosperity and better wages and

:52:08. > :52:11.better lifestyles for my constituents and the people in my

:52:12. > :52:17.country, but that is not the point. The issue we are debating today is,

:52:18. > :52:21.can we threw this bill have any impact on this hugely important

:52:22. > :52:26.issue of the breakdown of employment, the denial of

:52:27. > :52:30.opportunity to half the young people in large swathes of the south of our

:52:31. > :52:34.continent and the impact that the Euro scheme is having on the

:52:35. > :52:38.prosperity and the future life prospects of people. I find it

:52:39. > :52:41.extraordinary that an opposition which is full of passion and

:52:42. > :52:45.sometimes rightly so for anyone in Britain who doesn't have enough

:52:46. > :52:49.income cannot bring themselves to say a single word for the tens of

:52:50. > :52:53.millions of people in our continent that are being very badly affected

:52:54. > :52:58.by this dreadful scheme. All those young people out of work, how would

:52:59. > :53:02.they like to represent people where the young people and their

:53:03. > :53:13.constituency knew they only had a 1 in two chance of having a job. The

:53:14. > :53:23.right honourable gentleman's political hero Margaret Thatcher...

:53:24. > :53:31.I had a great admiration for the late Prime Minister and I gave her a

:53:32. > :53:35.lot of advice. Some might say not to surrender those powers under the

:53:36. > :53:39.European Union act for the very reason that the rights on gentleman

:53:40. > :53:44.has correctly identified. Although she accepted a lot of my advice, she

:53:45. > :53:48.did not accept it on two very important things, one for majority

:53:49. > :53:55.voting in the European Union and the other the poll tax on the

:53:56. > :54:01.community... I don't think we have time to explore what would have been

:54:02. > :54:07.better on those. If they insist on whitewashing this through as I'm

:54:08. > :54:10.sure he will come of this body doing something useful for a change. It's

:54:11. > :54:19.quite obvious as my honourable friend has already instanced,

:54:20. > :54:22.although they discuss a number of fundamental issues that matter to

:54:23. > :54:27.people across the European Union but especially in the euro area, they

:54:28. > :54:30.have been unsuccessful to date. Clearly this social committee has

:54:31. > :54:36.not been a voice against austerity policies increase, Portugal or Spain

:54:37. > :54:39.that has had any resonance. Clearly they have not been a voice for more

:54:40. > :54:43.employment. Clearly they have not been a voice for dealing with the

:54:44. > :54:46.problem that a lot of southern countries are locked in a currency

:54:47. > :54:52.union with Germany at the wrong exchange rate and it has put them

:54:53. > :54:56.into poverty and unemployment. He is making a fantastic speech as a Greek

:54:57. > :55:03.nationalist against the evils of a European Parliament and of

:55:04. > :55:07.anti-austerities. We are seeing great progress in this debate and if

:55:08. > :55:13.the European Union is achieving one thing, it is achieving that. If he

:55:14. > :55:18.was interested in my views and had read any of them, he would know that

:55:19. > :55:23.I have consistently over the years wanted more work, better paid work,

:55:24. > :55:29.people to own shares and homes. I believe in prosperity not austerity,

:55:30. > :55:33.which I readily try to remind you. I want that for our continent. We are

:55:34. > :55:38.beginning to stray a little wide of the detail for this bill. In

:55:39. > :55:46.summary, Mr Deputy Speaker, I urge our ministers to make sure of two

:55:47. > :55:52.things. One, that there is no extra cost to British taxpayers. And two,

:55:53. > :55:56.if they can come to start putting on the agenda of Europe the scandal of

:55:57. > :55:59.unemployment, the scourge of austerity, the dreadful mess that

:56:00. > :56:05.the euro is making of the economies to the south, because they are our

:56:06. > :56:07.friends and a potential market and I don't want -- want them to be our

:56:08. > :56:19.country. SNP will support this bill for the

:56:20. > :56:24.reasons most eloquently set out earlier by the member for North East

:56:25. > :56:30.Fife. We will support it in practice as these are sensible and

:56:31. > :56:34.straightforward matters. We also support the principles behind this

:56:35. > :56:38.legislation. We support the work of the EU and the important role it

:56:39. > :56:42.plays to the fundamental rights agency in protecting our rights as

:56:43. > :56:46.European citizens. I particularly look forward to the opportunity of

:56:47. > :56:53.going through the lobby alongside many of our honourable member

:56:54. > :56:55.opposite, United in filled support of the work the European

:56:56. > :57:02.institutions are playing in this area. It would be remiss of me not

:57:03. > :57:08.to comment on the fact that it is a little ironic that as other

:57:09. > :57:11.countries are knocking on the door of the EU, looking to benefit from

:57:12. > :57:16.it what it does on our behalf, that this Government is committed to

:57:17. > :57:22.providing the means for the UK to leave the more successful at union

:57:23. > :57:27.of states in the world today. Secondly, the SNP wholeheartedly

:57:28. > :57:31.support the work to improve dialogue between European institutions and

:57:32. > :57:34.employers and workers representatives through the

:57:35. > :57:38.tripartite social summit for growth and employment. Working in

:57:39. > :57:42.partnership with trade unions and employers is fundamental to

:57:43. > :57:48.improving our economic foundations and driving economic growth. If

:57:49. > :57:56.only, Madam Deputy Speaker, this Government took this advice the

:57:57. > :58:01.current trade union Bill. I agree with President Junker who recently

:58:02. > :58:05.stated he desires a recovery based on social fairness. This summer or

:58:06. > :58:12.play a key role in delivering this and that is why it will our support

:58:13. > :58:20.today. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for squeezing the end. That

:58:21. > :58:27.brings me to one of 2.I wish to make. The purpose of this bill is to

:58:28. > :58:31.bill the requirement of section eight of European Union Act 2011,

:58:32. > :58:37.which requires the EU proposals on the basis of the previous function

:58:38. > :58:40.of the European Union approved by an act of Parliament before the UK

:58:41. > :58:44.Government can support them in the EU Council. That is presumably why

:58:45. > :58:52.this bill is so vastly oversubscribed. What I wanted to

:58:53. > :58:57.contrast was the lack of interest that people see in this debate, as

:58:58. > :59:03.evidenced by the relatively sparse attendance in the chamber. Yet, the

:59:04. > :59:07.usual channels have chosen to advocate a timetable Bell, we could

:59:08. > :59:18.speak until seven o'clock, I could speak until seven o'clock and be

:59:19. > :59:21.perfectly in order. This open ended timing, because there is no

:59:22. > :59:27.regulation that says its second reading house to take even a half

:59:28. > :59:31.day, what is next Monday Scottish members are expected to cram in

:59:32. > :59:36.Government amendments and a third reading of the Scotland Bill and I

:59:37. > :59:41.think the contrast between these two timetables indicates a total lack of

:59:42. > :59:44.respect of the Government 's for prioritising business and the

:59:45. > :59:47.timetable this house in accordance with the interests sure about

:59:48. > :59:54.members wanting to speak and contribute. What the front bench of

:59:55. > :59:58.the Government takes that on board. Doesn't it also illustrates the

:59:59. > :00:01.official opposition never had anything to say on the European

:00:02. > :00:07.Union and never wants to see anything, but shouldn't they have a

:00:08. > :00:12.view on a? The right honourable member, I would say the back of this

:00:13. > :00:17.bill is so full of motherhood and apple pie and things even the right

:00:18. > :00:21.honourable member found difficult to disagree with in terms of his speech

:00:22. > :00:27.rather illustrates that even the ranks of Euroscepticism could come

:00:28. > :00:32.to cheer this particular piece of legislation. I give way to one of

:00:33. > :00:38.the few relatively few Labour members here. The honourable member

:00:39. > :00:44.for walking as a raised these objections. I praised the work of

:00:45. > :00:49.the European Union had done in improving workers rights and I would

:00:50. > :00:55.say that without the European Union we wouldn't have it workers' writes

:00:56. > :01:01.we have in this country today. Can I say, I think my estimation of the

:01:02. > :01:07.opposition is they are unified in that this unity and they have raised

:01:08. > :01:12.recent case being the Trident recent case being the Trident

:01:13. > :01:15.missile system on the River Clyde. I must congratulate the official

:01:16. > :01:19.opposition and how the relish the aspect of this unity. This is an

:01:20. > :01:23.outbreak of debate and discussion during the Labour Party that during

:01:24. > :01:27.the Blair years was never allowed so we should relish the freedom of

:01:28. > :01:32.speech the opposition now have, even if there are very few of them here

:01:33. > :01:37.to exercise that freedom. I am grateful to the honourable

:01:38. > :01:44.gentleman, who is always amusing and before he goes into the party

:01:45. > :01:48.political point scoring, he was making a significant constitutional

:01:49. > :01:52.point about the power of this house over our own schedules and

:01:53. > :01:56.timetables. Does he agree with me that we should return the control of

:01:57. > :02:05.our own agenda to this house and take it off the Government? I have

:02:06. > :02:10.to say, as somebody who has been in Government, your views on such

:02:11. > :02:17.matters can undergo a transition. I do think that a number of things,

:02:18. > :02:20.and we saw it a bit earlier today about the representation on the

:02:21. > :02:25.Council of Europe were I would think across the parties and across the

:02:26. > :02:29.benches of this house it would be wise to insist on greater control

:02:30. > :02:33.and discretion and I think the Government then if it's from that.

:02:34. > :02:37.They may not have realised initially but this perhaps might be a good

:02:38. > :02:41.illustration and it is a number of mechanisms by which it could be

:02:42. > :02:45.done. I don't think the honourable gentleman should underrate party

:02:46. > :02:49.politics. Most of us have engaged in it at some time or another. My

:02:50. > :02:55.second point concerns the explanatory notes which accompany

:02:56. > :02:58.this bill. In the European conventions on human rights, prithee

:02:59. > :03:02.tell made the following statement under section 19 18 of the Human

:03:03. > :03:06.Rights Act. In my view the provisions of the European Union 's

:03:07. > :03:11.approval spill are compatible with Convention rights. One of the

:03:12. > :03:15.reasons this bill was relatively noncontroversial as we recognise and

:03:16. > :03:19.welcome the progress of Macedonia is making in terms of observation of

:03:20. > :03:24.the agency for fundamental rights in Vienna. It does occur to me that

:03:25. > :03:30.this is another illustration in welcoming this development of how

:03:31. > :03:34.foolhardy it would be for the Government to proceed with its plans

:03:35. > :03:37.to withdraw in some form or other from the European convention. We

:03:38. > :03:43.would find ourselves when debating this sort of issue in an invidious

:03:44. > :03:47.position, but not just debating these issues in making

:03:48. > :03:51.representations across a range of issues. As First Minister of

:03:52. > :03:53.Scotland I didn't have to just signed certificates saying

:03:54. > :03:58.legislation was in accordance with the European convention, every act

:03:59. > :04:04.of a Scottish minister has to conform to the convention on human

:04:05. > :04:09.European convention. There are occasions when it can be

:04:10. > :04:13.inconvenient, even frustrating. Significantly, my experience has

:04:14. > :04:19.told me that is actually a very good and useful check on the actions of

:04:20. > :04:22.governments. LA today in this chamber who witnessed the most

:04:23. > :04:26.astonishing display of arrogance from dispatch box of the Government

:04:27. > :04:30.where the Minister in the justice questions, when asked about this

:04:31. > :04:34.specific point about withdraw from the European conventions, with a

:04:35. > :04:38.side on the basis that it is up to this house and the Government

:04:39. > :04:40.whether or not to be in the convention and for the devolved

:04:41. > :04:45.authorities to administer it once the decision is made. I think the

:04:46. > :04:51.Government will find that sort of attitude comes back to apply some

:04:52. > :04:56.severe retribution to them. It is the sort of arrogance of which this

:04:57. > :05:01.Government might be noted but it certainly does them no credit or

:05:02. > :05:04.good whatsoever. The devolved authorities, in Scotland, Northern

:05:05. > :05:07.Ireland and Wales, are not in accordance with the Government view

:05:08. > :05:11.on the European Convention and the energy of proceeding with that view

:05:12. > :05:15.and watering down our commitment to that convention in some form is

:05:16. > :05:17.going to be unacceptable to the devolved nations and I should

:05:18. > :05:22.suggest the Government think again. My last point is this. Given the

:05:23. > :05:27.lack of interest and participation in this debate in this house, the

:05:28. > :05:30.very reasonable proposition was put forward by my colleagues that

:05:31. > :05:37.perhaps the Scottish Parliament should be given more scrutiny power

:05:38. > :05:40.over the European Council of European Parliament decisions, seems

:05:41. > :05:44.to be an excellent one. If people don't have the appetite to

:05:45. > :05:49.scrutinise in this chamber, then why not send the legislation through

:05:50. > :05:57.Parliament and assemblies were that appetite and desire exists? I give

:05:58. > :06:01.way. I'm grateful to the honourable gentleman forgiving way and it

:06:02. > :06:04.should be noted that as the right honourable gentleman said and there

:06:05. > :06:08.was indeed nods from the Government side, which should be taken as

:06:09. > :06:15.encouragement for Scotland to take that scrutiny forward. Not just

:06:16. > :06:19.that, but this is an excellent example of how someone can pursue

:06:20. > :06:22.duties as a select committee chair and contribute massively on the

:06:23. > :06:29.floor of this chamber. If we all followed his example then this place

:06:30. > :06:34.and that Parliament would be a better place indeed. With that,

:06:35. > :06:37.Madam Deputy Speaker I bring my remarks to a close, at an wants to

:06:38. > :06:47.tempt me with another 30 interventions. Would-be Leader of

:06:48. > :06:52.the House, I shall respond. I would like to thank all members for their

:06:53. > :06:57.contributions to this debate this afternoon. The bill affords, or 60

:06:58. > :07:03.approved to draft Council decisions:. The first, as been

:07:04. > :07:06.discussion breaks to the participation of the former Yugoslav

:07:07. > :07:11.Republic of Macedonia as an observer in the work of the European Union

:07:12. > :07:14.agency for fundamental rights. The former Yugoslav Republic of

:07:15. > :07:17.Macedonia objective is to become a member of the European Union but it

:07:18. > :07:21.needs to implement reform priorities are set out by the commission. The

:07:22. > :07:24.Government wants to encourage the former Yugoslav Republic of

:07:25. > :07:29.Macedonia on the part of the form and grab it observer status in the

:07:30. > :07:32.agency. It is consistent with this approach. The decision will allow

:07:33. > :07:35.the agency to collect and disseminate data on the human rights

:07:36. > :07:41.situation in the country and a lobby for former Yugoslav Republic of

:07:42. > :07:44.Macedonia to participate in the activities of the agency. The former

:07:45. > :07:48.Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia should be supported to increase its

:07:49. > :07:52.human right awareness and promotion of fundamental rights within the

:07:53. > :07:58.country. The second measure relates to the G S S. The summit has met for

:07:59. > :08:04.a number of years and this draft decision seeks to establish the

:08:05. > :08:11.legal basis for the summit. . To be clear, this decision does not cover

:08:12. > :08:16.research restate there are no research restate there are no

:08:17. > :08:23.financial implications, as has been noted and highlighted by Mike

:08:24. > :08:29.honourable friend. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. But there must be

:08:30. > :08:34.financial implications because EU civil servants will be working and

:08:35. > :08:41.someone will probably be appointed to supervisor this activity. That is

:08:42. > :08:45.a financial implication. There are no new financial implications, as I

:08:46. > :08:48.referred to in my opening remarks. I was quite clear about that and on

:08:49. > :08:57.that basis I commend this bill to the house. The question is the Bill

:08:58. > :09:05.Brady second time. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the

:09:06. > :09:10.contrary, "no" the ayes have it. The question is on the order paper, As

:09:11. > :09:16.many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". I

:09:17. > :09:20.think the ayes have it. The ayes habit. We now come to the national

:09:21. > :09:34.insurance contribution rate ceiling bill. The question is as on the

:09:35. > :09:39.order paper. Does the Minister wish to speak? In that case, the question

:09:40. > :09:44.is as on the order paper. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To

:09:45. > :09:50.the contrary, "no" the ayes habit. The ayes habit. We now come to next

:09:51. > :09:55.bill. National insurance contribution rate ceiling bill. Not

:09:56. > :10:03.amended in the public bill committee to be considered. No amendments on

:10:04. > :10:10.consideration. Third reading. Minister to move third reading?

:10:11. > :10:15.Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I move the bill now be read historic

:10:16. > :10:19.time. We have reached the third stage of the house's deliberations

:10:20. > :10:27.on national insurance rate ceiling bill. This is part of a manifesto

:10:28. > :10:32.commitment not to include national insurance contributions. During the

:10:33. > :10:37.second reading, honourable members were reminded of the Government's

:10:38. > :10:42.strong record of reducing the burden of national insurance contributions

:10:43. > :10:49.on employers. In the budget 2011 the Chancellor of the Exchequer amends

:10:50. > :10:53.and above inflation increase. In 2014 week introduced the deployment

:10:54. > :10:58.allowance to support businesses and charities across the UK by

:10:59. > :11:02.increasing decreasing their bill by up to ?2000 every year. This has

:11:03. > :11:24.already benefited over 1 million employers. This would be increased

:11:25. > :11:29.to ?3000 from next April. . This exemption will be extended to cover

:11:30. > :11:34.apprentices under 25, supporting employers to help young people with

:11:35. > :11:39.valuable workplace skills. The bill before the chamber today legislates

:11:40. > :11:44.the Government's commitment to rates for the duration of this Parliament.

:11:45. > :11:48.Honourable members will be aware of the commitment in the manifesto was

:11:49. > :11:53.not to increase the main rates of income tax, value added tax on

:11:54. > :11:57.national insurance contributions. The Finance Bill contained

:11:58. > :12:00.legislation to deliver this for VAT and income tax in the manifesto was

:12:01. > :12:01.not to increase the main rates of income tax, value added tax on

:12:02. > :12:04.national insurance contributions. The Finance Bill contained

:12:05. > :12:13.legislation to deliver this for VAT and income tax amounts must not

:12:14. > :12:20.exceed the existing rates. Second it has been the convention that the

:12:21. > :12:24.level of the upper earnings is aligned with the level of the higher

:12:25. > :12:33.rate threshold for income tax. This bill formally increases to the upper

:12:34. > :12:38.earnings of the mode that cannot exceed the level of the higher rate

:12:39. > :12:41.threshold for income tax. Both the restriction on national insurance

:12:42. > :12:45.contributions rates rises and changes to the upper earnings come

:12:46. > :12:50.into force on Royal assent of this bill and apply until the start of

:12:51. > :12:52.the tax year following the date of the first parliamentary general

:12:53. > :12:59.election to take place at the Royal assent. This bill provides certainty

:13:00. > :13:04.for employers and employees that the rates that affect millions of

:13:05. > :13:09.employees and employers across the UK will not rise for the duration of

:13:10. > :13:14.this Parliament and the upper limit will not exceed a higher rate

:13:15. > :13:18.threshold for income tax. Do I take it he agrees with me that more jobs

:13:19. > :13:23.would be a very good thing and better paid jobs is a good thing, so

:13:24. > :13:27.whilst he is saying there would be any increases, he is not presumably

:13:28. > :13:33.ruling out cutting taxes on jobs, because the less you taxi more jobs

:13:34. > :13:38.you might have? To be clear, this is a cap, not the freeze. I am grateful

:13:39. > :13:43.to them about my right honourable friend for allowing me to make that

:13:44. > :13:47.point. Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank the honourable

:13:48. > :13:52.members who participated in the debates we have had on this bill,

:13:53. > :13:56.both on the floor on the second reading and at committee. It is not

:13:57. > :14:00.a bill that has detained the house for any great length of time but I

:14:01. > :14:04.am grateful for those contributions. This bill does demonstrate the

:14:05. > :14:07.Government's commitment for factories on the duration of this

:14:08. > :14:21.Parliament and I commend it to the house. The question is the bill be

:14:22. > :14:24.third time. 'S this bill and at the Northern Conservative manifesto

:14:25. > :14:33.pledge not to increase manifesto and this Parliament. The bill contains

:14:34. > :14:37.only three substantive clauses and as we have heard no amendments have

:14:38. > :14:49.been tabled for consideration in the. Setting the additional

:14:50. > :14:56.percentage to 2% for the duration of this Parliament. Close to the Bill

:14:57. > :15:01.freezes the lake of employer national contributions by accepting

:15:02. > :15:08.the second of payable by employers at 38%. This also fixes the class

:15:09. > :15:12.one A and one B contributions. Clause three links the upper

:15:13. > :15:17.earnings limit to the higher income tax threshold by setting out it

:15:18. > :15:23.shall not exceed the weekly special for that tax year. This means

:15:24. > :15:27.employees start playing class one national insurance contributions

:15:28. > :15:34.when there income tax which is the higher threshold, then after the

:15:35. > :15:52.raid is 2%. My Labour colleagues are not opposed to A just a many

:15:53. > :15:56.pre-election pledges the Chancellor has chosen to implement. Without

:15:57. > :16:01.wishing to repeat what has already been said, I do emphasise the

:16:02. > :16:04.importance of implementing legislation for the Government to

:16:05. > :16:08.keep its own election pledges. Surely they should do that anyway.

:16:09. > :16:13.The Chancellor also seemed to share my sentiments back in 2009 when he

:16:14. > :16:17.stated, no other Chancellor in the long history of the office has felt

:16:18. > :16:22.necessary capacity law to show he has the political will to implement

:16:23. > :16:25.his own budget. Indeed, he went on to suggest only two conclusions

:16:26. > :16:33.could be drawn from such an occurrence. Either the Chancellor

:16:34. > :16:35.has lost confidence in himself to stick to his resolution or else he

:16:36. > :16:38.feels everyone else has lost confidence in his ability to keep

:16:39. > :16:40.his word. I thought the last Labour Government enacted legislation to

:16:41. > :16:44.bring the budget deficit down because they could not trust

:16:45. > :16:50.themselves with the money and they were perhaps wise to do that. He

:16:51. > :16:52.makes an important point however I am stating what the current

:16:53. > :16:56.Chancellor has stated. I do question which of the scenarios the

:16:57. > :16:59.Government feels is indeed applicable here. The Government has

:17:00. > :17:03.argued during the passage of this bill legislation is required to

:17:04. > :17:08.ensure the market has confidence in the Government to keep its election

:17:09. > :17:11.promises. That begs the question why the Chancellor thinks the electorate

:17:12. > :17:16.and businesses simply will not trust his word. In addition, the

:17:17. > :17:20.Government promised, before the 2010 General Election, not to raise VAT

:17:21. > :17:24.but then did quite the opposite. Indeed in the last Parliament the

:17:25. > :17:34.Chancellor raised taxes 24 times despite waxing lyrical about a low

:17:35. > :17:37.tax, high pay economy and the director of the ISS said indeed of

:17:38. > :17:39.the most recent budget, the figures are quite clear. This was a

:17:40. > :17:42.tax-raising budget. On the other hand, he has perhaps lost confidence

:17:43. > :17:46.in himself, not surprising given he has missed all of his deficit

:17:47. > :17:51.targets over the last five years. Moving on, I feel legislating in

:17:52. > :17:54.this manner is only a political Government to convince the

:17:55. > :17:59.electorate and market the Government is not increasing taxes when they

:18:00. > :18:06.are in fact expected to raise ?5.1 billion by 2018 rising by 2021.

:18:07. > :18:12.Putting that to one side, I must once again stress my concern is that

:18:13. > :18:17.the Government is severely limiting its options. Should the economy took

:18:18. > :18:21.a turn for the worst. It has been stated that this is a world in which

:18:22. > :18:25.debt levels are too high, productivity growth too weak and

:18:26. > :18:30.financial risks too threatening. The feeble recovery we have seen thus

:18:31. > :18:35.far is built on private debt and it is a ticking time bomb. The ISS are

:18:36. > :18:39.in fact predicting house prices will rocket across the UK, most

:18:40. > :18:46.drastically in London, leading to levels of household debt exceeding

:18:47. > :18:50.that of 2008 at the credit crunch. I harbour grave concerns with these

:18:51. > :18:54.warning signs that the Government is simply not paying attention and my

:18:55. > :18:57.fears are shared by many commentators including the director

:18:58. > :19:01.of the ISS said it would be extreme to tie your hands for such a long

:19:02. > :19:05.period of time. Particularly worrying is the fact that the

:19:06. > :19:11.Chancellor's spending plans are predicated on a rise on revenue

:19:12. > :19:15.yield as the honourable member for Dundee highlighted at Second

:19:16. > :19:19.Reading. Should this yield be less due to an economic downturn, what

:19:20. > :19:23.will the Chancellor do? He cannot raise the 80 or national insurance

:19:24. > :19:31.contributions are according to his own legislation. -- he cannot raise

:19:32. > :19:35.VAT or national insurance contributions. At the committee

:19:36. > :19:43.stage, the Minister did assure that the measures before us today would

:19:44. > :19:46.not damage the fund or the NHS but he did go on to caveat such an

:19:47. > :19:50.assurance was predicated on the Government making difficult choices

:19:51. > :19:53.on public spending and identifying savings in the welfare budget. Of

:19:54. > :20:00.course I fear what he actually meant by this is that the Government tax

:20:01. > :20:03.credit work penalty on which, for from the legislating their election

:20:04. > :20:06.promises, they ripped them up within months of taking office. To

:20:07. > :20:10.conclude, we will not be opposing this bill as we also committed to

:20:11. > :20:12.capping national insurance contributions and head of the

:20:13. > :20:17.General Election however I would like to stress I do not feel this

:20:18. > :20:20.legislation is an effective use of precious parliamentary time and

:20:21. > :20:28.resources and I do hope the Minister will bear that in mind for the

:20:29. > :20:32.future. Madame Deputy Speaker, if the European Union legislation was

:20:33. > :20:37.undersubscribed, this is even less subscribe. Such an important piece

:20:38. > :20:41.of legislation, or perhaps we will understand it is not really

:20:42. > :20:48.necessary at all? The bill is designed to prevent any increase in

:20:49. > :20:51.the wrecked of past one A and one B national insurance contributions

:20:52. > :20:57.paid by employees and employers by the generation of this Parliament,

:20:58. > :21:03.as the Ben Stokes point. He will -- as the minister said. He also said

:21:04. > :21:09.about the higher rate threshold for some of the personal income

:21:10. > :21:11.allowance. As I said at Second Reading and unhappy to put on record

:21:12. > :21:15.again today, there is absolutely nothing wrong with any Government at

:21:16. > :21:18.all providing certainty in the tax code for the duration of their time

:21:19. > :21:24.in office and let's be extremely clear indeed, we do not need

:21:25. > :21:28.legislation to do that. Legislation is simply a gimmick. I also said at

:21:29. > :21:31.the Second Reading these proposals should not have come as a surprise

:21:32. > :21:35.because as the Minister has just repeated they were in the

:21:36. > :21:39.Conservative manifesto. In many ways, this small three clause bill

:21:40. > :21:44.is utterly pointless, but the real feeling with it is that it

:21:45. > :21:47.represents a wasted opportunity. In July of this year the financial

:21:48. > :21:51.Secretary for the Treasury commissioned the office of tax

:21:52. > :21:57.simply application to review the interplay between Income Tax and he

:21:58. > :22:02.said he would like the OTS to look at the income, costs and benefits

:22:03. > :22:07.and to set out the necessary steps to achieve that. This bill does

:22:08. > :22:12.nothing to help deliver the perceived benefits of course

:22:13. > :22:17.alignment and nor does it offer any real progress towards simplification

:22:18. > :22:21.overall. John Whiting, the tax director from the office of tax

:22:22. > :22:26.simplification, who gave evidence at the Committee stage, he argued the

:22:27. > :22:29.maintenance of rate levels could represent a simple addition of the

:22:30. > :22:32.system as it removed some uncertainty, but he also accepted

:22:33. > :22:38.that if the Government was to make changes to other taxes to compensate

:22:39. > :22:42.for the tax lock, this would actually represent a complication in

:22:43. > :22:49.the tax system overall. The measure also introduces an inherent

:22:50. > :22:52.inflexibility. Jonathan Portis from the National Institute has been

:22:53. > :22:58.quoted before and in particular his comment that the pledge not to

:22:59. > :23:00.increase the main taxes considerably reduces flexibility if things turn

:23:01. > :23:04.out differently than expected, and that is why he said he had no doubt

:23:05. > :23:09.the Treasury and Bank of England officials were tailoring their hair

:23:10. > :23:16.out. But I have asked the question before, about what discussions with

:23:17. > :23:23.the the chancellor has had, if any, with the central bank, about these

:23:24. > :23:26.proposals? i explained at Second Reading the complexity of the next

:23:27. > :23:33.resume, and I will not go through that again. The complications of the

:23:34. > :23:37.employer, employee, clause one, clause four, small profits

:23:38. > :23:41.thresholds and more and operate limits, but in all of these limits

:23:42. > :23:44.and thresholds are different and the rates paid above and below the

:23:45. > :23:50.various thresholds are different. Surely this bill should have been

:23:51. > :23:53.the opportunity to iron out these inconsistencies, another wasted

:23:54. > :24:00.opportunity to make the whole system far more straightforward. Again, and

:24:01. > :24:05.I'll so said it at this -- I also said it at the Second Reading, to

:24:06. > :24:08.avoid the gaps in the national insurance record and ensure they

:24:09. > :24:12.could qualify for the basic retirement pension and bereavement

:24:13. > :24:16.benefits, but as yet there appears to be no answer to the question as

:24:17. > :24:22.to whether more or fewer people will make additional voluntary

:24:23. > :24:26.contributions as a result of this so-called tax lock. It is also the

:24:27. > :24:33.case, and this is the point alluded to by the honourable lady from

:24:34. > :24:36.Salford, that most receipts are paid into the national insurance fund

:24:37. > :24:40.which is separate from all of the other revenues raised by taxation.

:24:41. > :24:42.It is used exclusively to pay for contributory benefits and soul of

:24:43. > :24:44.the other revenues raised by taxation. It is used exclusively to

:24:45. > :24:47.pay for contributory benefits and soak the revenue yield does not rise

:24:48. > :24:50.in the heroic way planned, can we expect to see cuts directed at the

:24:51. > :24:56.contributory benefits people have already paid for? And imported

:24:57. > :25:01.question, given the Minister was asked in Committee on the NI fund

:25:02. > :25:05.and doubly important given the Centre for Policy Studies reported

:25:06. > :25:13.in 2014 that the surplus in the fund had fallen from ?53 billion in 2009

:25:14. > :25:16.to ?29 billion in 2013. They warned that as a result of persistent

:25:17. > :25:22.negative earnings growth, fund exhaustion could transpire as early

:25:23. > :25:27.as 2016. This was echoed by the Treasury's on figures which have

:25:28. > :25:33.shown the fund is able to cover 71% of liabilities -- was able in 2009,

:25:34. > :25:36.but fell to 25% in 2014 and it is being speculated and perhaps the

:25:37. > :25:44.Minister can confirm this, that the fund may fall below the minimum

:25:45. > :25:47.recommended by the Government's actuaries Department this year. So

:25:48. > :25:54.this measure may actually be storing up problems for the future. And we

:25:55. > :25:56.still do not know, Madame Deputy Speaker, for certain what

:25:57. > :26:00.behavioural change may be likely from these measures. Nor have we

:26:01. > :26:04.heard any confirmation yet as to the consequences for step wood spending

:26:05. > :26:08.and other taxes that flow from this measure. We know the level of

:26:09. > :26:11.discretionary consolidation, tax rises on cuts, being planned by the

:26:12. > :26:19.Minister. We know how they are meant to be paid for, but the entire

:26:20. > :26:25.spending plan is predicated on bringing in ?129 billion next year,

:26:26. > :26:34.rising to ?152 billion in 2020, 2021. This is a forecast rise in

:26:35. > :26:39.revenue of a yield leading up to 4.7%. The one question the Minister

:26:40. > :26:43.must answer, even at this late stage, given the arbitrary freeze,

:26:44. > :26:48.should the forecast you'll be significantly less than expected,

:26:49. > :26:53.will other taxes rise, and if so, which once? Will the Chancellor take

:26:54. > :26:58.the axe to yet further spending, perhaps pensions? Will borrowing

:26:59. > :27:02.rise and the deficit reduction forecasts simply be abandoned,

:27:03. > :27:06.delivering the same failure we saw in the last parliament? Finally,

:27:07. > :27:07.Madame Deputy Speaker speaker, probably the most important

:27:08. > :27:21.question. a is used exclusively to pay for

:27:22. > :27:26.contributory benefits. Can he give a cast iron guarantee the legislation

:27:27. > :27:33.is not the start of an attack on the contributory principle which applies

:27:34. > :27:37.to this in the UK? I welcome that the manifesto pledge and I am very

:27:38. > :27:44.pleased that for five years we know there will be no increases in the

:27:45. > :27:47.major tax rates. I have listened carefully to bleed Labour Party's

:27:48. > :27:56.response and one of the worries was what happens if there is a downtown

:27:57. > :28:01.and the economy hit a bad time, a world recession. As I am sure she

:28:02. > :28:07.knows, it is common policy between the major parties, if that happens,

:28:08. > :28:10.normally you borrow more. If your revenues have fallen because people

:28:11. > :28:14.have lost their jobs and not earning so much and your costs have gone up

:28:15. > :28:19.because more people out of work, something we don't see happening, it

:28:20. > :28:26.is quite sensible to borrow a bit more to help the economy through the

:28:27. > :28:29.difficulties. Fortunately, the current official forecast an

:28:30. > :28:32.external forecast say we can look forward to several years of

:28:33. > :28:44.continuing progress and growth, as we have had since 2009. So this

:28:45. > :28:51.issue, we cluster will not arise. Is not we now have the fiscal charter

:28:52. > :28:56.and given Scotland role in the quarter comparison, if forecasts

:28:57. > :29:00.begin to fall over a period of time it is not necessarily the case the

:29:01. > :29:05.automatic stabilisers make it is not necessarily the case the automatic

:29:06. > :29:09.stabilisers may kick in the case. I think you would make a judgment that

:29:10. > :29:13.the time, fortunately we don't have to make that judgment. Should we get

:29:14. > :29:17.into that awful position and sure there will be a lot of debate in the

:29:18. > :29:20.house and he and I may share that same view we may have a difference

:29:21. > :29:25.of view but we would have to judge it on the merits of the case. There

:29:26. > :29:29.is a general here and it asserts me through on this bit of a house that

:29:30. > :29:34.we regard more people in jobs as a very good thing and we want to

:29:35. > :29:37.promote better pay, particularly for those whose pay is still valuable

:29:38. > :29:42.and needs topping up by benefits. I'd buy into the Government's

:29:43. > :29:50.version we want more people and better paid less benefits pop

:29:51. > :29:54.needing to paid. We have had objections during the course of the

:29:55. > :29:58.afternoon's proceedings on this and the preceding bill that not enough

:29:59. > :30:03.time has been allocated to debate tax credits. I recall we have had

:30:04. > :30:07.three major debates on tax credits recently as three votes at the house

:30:08. > :30:11.has always came to be seen in view of each of those occasions. This is

:30:12. > :30:16.another opportunity and I know opposition members haven't come and

:30:17. > :30:24.and it seems to me quite within the remit of this bill that tax credit

:30:25. > :30:28.is another part of this equation and I see this bill is an important part

:30:29. > :30:35.of the Government's strategy in making work pay. I would add, as we

:30:36. > :30:41.regard what is a good thing, and across all parties in the house do,

:30:42. > :30:44.we don't want to be taxing good things. Unfortunately we live in it

:30:45. > :30:51.world where we need a lot of revenue so we end up taxing some good things

:30:52. > :30:55.as well as things. The when you have the chance to shift the balance

:30:56. > :31:00.surely it makes sense to tax the good things, legwork and earnings,

:31:01. > :31:05.less so people have more opportunity for jobs and keeping more money, and

:31:06. > :31:10.you find less desirable things you are more prepared to tax, as well of

:31:11. > :31:15.course having to run its sensible value for money governments of the

:31:16. > :31:18.overall demands are not too great. The danger of one went down the

:31:19. > :31:24.route of opposing this bill is it would become all too easy apparently

:31:25. > :31:27.to put an extra one or 2% on a national insurance, people wouldn't

:31:28. > :31:30.notice it, you might say, but it would have two immediate adverse

:31:31. > :31:39.effects. The first would be fewer jobs because it is a direct tax on

:31:40. > :31:42.jobs and the second effect its employees would be worse off and

:31:43. > :31:52.under our skin we would need to find more money for tax credits. In

:31:53. > :31:57.conclusion, I think it is excellent that the party intends to keep its

:31:58. > :32:01.clear promises which I fully support and have campaigned on to keep these

:32:02. > :32:06.tax rates down. We must see it as part of this wider debate and this

:32:07. > :32:11.today is another opportunity to debate national insurance in the

:32:12. > :32:15.context of tax credits. If we keep taxes down or reduce them more,

:32:16. > :32:20.there is more scope to deal with the tax credit problem. With the move of

:32:21. > :32:32.the house I would like to respond to the points raised by right member

:32:33. > :32:37.Macs in this short debate. Can I quickly reiterate the main purpose

:32:38. > :32:41.of this bill which is introducing the final aspects of the five-year

:32:42. > :32:44.tax law. This is for the proof of the Government's commitment to

:32:45. > :32:48.provide certainty on tax rates for the duration of this Parliament and

:32:49. > :32:52.commitment to low levels of taxation be made in the Conservative

:32:53. > :32:57.manifesto for the general election which resulted in a Conservative

:32:58. > :33:01.majority will stop that commitment was the rates of income tax, value

:33:02. > :33:09.added tax and national insurance contributions would not increase.

:33:10. > :33:13.The Finance Bill introduced measures for VAT and income tax on this bill

:33:14. > :33:16.delivers on the commitment for national insurance contributions.

:33:17. > :33:20.This provides certainty for employees and employers that for the

:33:21. > :33:23.duration of this Parliament national insurance contributions will not

:33:24. > :33:28.rise and the upper earnings limit will not exceed the higher rate

:33:29. > :33:32.threshold for income tax. In terms of some of the points raised, we

:33:33. > :33:37.have heard the argument it is not necessary to legislate for this, but

:33:38. > :33:39.I do remind the house that this was a Conservative Party manifesto

:33:40. > :33:46.commitment, that we do legislate, and we are fulfilling that manifesto

:33:47. > :33:57.commitment. The point was also raised that concerns that measure

:33:58. > :34:06.might restrict flexibility for future governments and I think the

:34:07. > :34:09.point might right honourable friend made in the circumstances that would

:34:10. > :34:13.apply there is a very good one and I don't think there is anyone who

:34:14. > :34:18.would be advocating in the teeth of the recession we be putting these

:34:19. > :34:23.rates up. Fiscal credibility is of course a very important and we will

:34:24. > :34:27.see our determination on that demonstrators on the date of the

:34:28. > :34:31.spending review on the 25th of November, but it is important we

:34:32. > :34:36.bring borrowing down, but we don't believe the way we should do that is

:34:37. > :34:41.by putting up national insurance contribution rates. This bill

:34:42. > :34:49.prevents us from doing that. In terms of contributory benefits,

:34:50. > :34:52.future funding and contributory benefits, should national insurance

:34:53. > :34:56.receipts proving conversion is a matter for the Chancellor and the

:34:57. > :35:00.decision would have to be made at the relevant fiscal event based on

:35:01. > :35:04.the latest objections at the time and take into account national

:35:05. > :35:09.insurance rates ceiling bill we are introducing. The Government

:35:10. > :35:13.recommends a whopping balance of 16 benefit expenditure for the national

:35:14. > :35:17.insurance fund. This provision to top up the fund from the

:35:18. > :35:23.Consolidated fund to maintain the balance at this level of the 2015

:35:24. > :35:32.taxi at the top of ?9.6 billion has been provided for in legislation.

:35:33. > :35:36.Let me make these points, this Government is committed to meeting

:35:37. > :35:44.other commitments in terms of the state pension and in terms of

:35:45. > :35:49.spending on the NHS. The honourable member for Dundee East raises

:35:50. > :35:55.concerns the projections might not be what is predicted. These

:35:56. > :35:59.predictions in terms of national insurance contribution rates are

:36:00. > :36:02.made by the Office for Budget Responsibility, an independent

:36:03. > :36:09.body. I can understand why he might have concerns in general about the

:36:10. > :36:13.projections for tax revenues, giving he fought a referendum not very long

:36:14. > :36:17.Sea oil were going to be very much Sea oil were going to be very much

:36:18. > :36:22.more considerable than they have turned out to be. In those

:36:23. > :36:26.circumstances I can understand his sensitivity to fight the receipts

:36:27. > :36:38.might not be what he had anticipated. What I will say to him

:36:39. > :36:42.if this is based upon independent assessment and it is nothing like

:36:43. > :36:48.the fiscal risk the Scottish Nationalist party were offering to

:36:49. > :36:56.the Scottish people just over one year ago. I will give way. Has the

:36:57. > :37:01.Minister forgotten that North Sea oil revenues go to HM Treasury and

:37:02. > :37:05.the recent fall in income from the North Sea proves the point to the

:37:06. > :37:14.Treasury but its forecasts can be on? First of all, the proposition

:37:15. > :37:19.made by the independence movement was much more optimistic in terms of

:37:20. > :37:23.receipts and the position we were taking at the time of the

:37:24. > :37:29.referendum. Most important of all, the United Kingdom is more easily

:37:30. > :37:33.able to absorb a volatile oil price and an independent Scotland would

:37:34. > :37:38.be. The point I would have thought anyone looking at this fairly with

:37:39. > :37:44.house to accept. I will certainly give way. I want to be tempted by

:37:45. > :37:50.the Minister. However genuinely he puts it, other than to say he was

:37:51. > :37:53.wrong and the UK Government's barrel price forecast was higher than the

:37:54. > :37:58.one used in Scotland. But that is not the point. I understand the

:37:59. > :38:03.technical answers the Minister has given completely, what can he please

:38:04. > :38:06.answer the specific question. Does that offer a threat to the

:38:07. > :38:11.contributory principle which comprises many of the benefits

:38:12. > :38:19.people in the UK received? First of all, let's be clear. The OBE are's

:38:20. > :38:24.projection for oil prices, the ones the Government uses, were much more

:38:25. > :38:30.cautious than the independence movement had and frankly the black

:38:31. > :38:36.hole that would be an independent Scotland's finances had they

:38:37. > :38:40.succeeded in obtaining independence would have been very considerable

:38:41. > :38:43.and it is about time that those who campaign for independence was

:38:44. > :38:49.straightforward with the British and Scottish people about what has

:38:50. > :38:55.happened. Turning to the specific question, in terms of this bill,

:38:56. > :38:59.there's a bill makes no change to the structure of national insurance

:39:00. > :39:02.contributions that would undermine the contributory principle. I am

:39:03. > :39:09.very happy to make that explicit to the honourable gentleman. With those

:39:10. > :39:15.remarks, Madam Deputy Speaker, I hope that is helpful to the house

:39:16. > :39:21.and I hope the house will support the bill in front of us. The

:39:22. > :39:25.beside the time. As many as are of beside the time. As many as are of

:39:26. > :39:32.the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no" I think the ayes

:39:33. > :39:39.havoc. The ayes habit. We come out of the money resolution access to

:39:40. > :39:45.medical treatment innovation bill. I beg to move that for the purposes of

:39:46. > :39:49.any act resulting from this bill. It is expedient to authorise the

:39:50. > :39:58.payment of money provided by Parliament from any increase is

:39:59. > :40:01.attributable to the act. The the access to medical treatment

:40:02. > :40:05.innovation bill on Friday the 16th of October with a housekeeper at his

:40:06. > :40:11.second reading. If I may, I wanted to pay to my honourable friend for

:40:12. > :40:15.what I know has been the huge amount of what he is put in to try and get

:40:16. > :40:20.the build three point one it can enjoy majority support in this and

:40:21. > :40:25.the other house and for his open approach to dealing with all the

:40:26. > :40:31.stakeholders with an interest in it. I want to reiterate what I said at

:40:32. > :40:36.the second reading, that whilst the Government supports the intention

:40:37. > :40:41.behind the bill to promote access to medical innovation, indeed it is an

:40:42. > :40:44.intention that sets within a might ministerial responsibilities, the

:40:45. > :40:47.mechanisms of any particular bill need to be considered on their

:40:48. > :40:51.merits and we are neither supporting the opposing this bill, but working

:40:52. > :40:55.with those with an interest in it and the sponsors to do what we can

:40:56. > :40:58.to try and get it to a place it could contribute to landscape up

:40:59. > :41:05.medical innovation that we're putting in place. This money order

:41:06. > :41:08.or as is conventional, is not a symptom of a signal of Government

:41:09. > :41:13.support or otherwise for the bill, it is merely a convention of the

:41:14. > :41:16.house. We have put forward this resolution to allow the bill to

:41:17. > :41:19.progress the committee stage, reflecting that convention and the

:41:20. > :41:29.will of the house for further debate and they're very huge

:41:30. > :41:37.Is it in order for a Government to be neutral on a bill if the payroll

:41:38. > :41:42.bill is wept for that, point of order? I think that is a matter for

:41:43. > :41:47.the Government rather than for the chair. Thank you, Madame Deputy

:41:48. > :41:51.Speaker. The bill debate at second reading raised a very large number

:41:52. > :41:55.of issues which clearly need to be addressed and no doubt will be

:41:56. > :41:57.addressed in committee and of easily one cannot second guess where that

:41:58. > :42:02.committee gets two or indeed what the shape of any subsequent bill,

:42:03. > :42:07.should it return to the floor of the House, may look like. The cost

:42:08. > :42:12.associated with this bill in its current ship arise from the

:42:13. > :42:20.maintenance and creation of a database, the HS CIC. In terms of

:42:21. > :42:24.the costing, early discussions with the HSCIC, who you will I'll be

:42:25. > :42:33.doing on data stream is crucial to operation of the NHS -- who, Madame

:42:34. > :42:39.Deputy Speaker, you will be aware are involved with. I will give way

:42:40. > :42:45.happily. Thank you for giving way. My honourable friend has inferred

:42:46. > :42:49.sort of broad Government support for this bill, perhaps not this

:42:50. > :42:53.particular means. In support of that position can the Minister provide

:42:54. > :43:00.evidence, any evidence, to suggest that litigation is inventing doctors

:43:01. > :43:05.from innovating when it comes to medical science and practices

:43:06. > :43:09.generally? That is the premise upon which this bill is based. My

:43:10. > :43:14.honourable friend makes a very good point, that is the premise on which

:43:15. > :43:20.the bill brought forward by the noble Lord in the other House

:43:21. > :43:24.earlier in the last Parliament was predicated, fundamentally. And it

:43:25. > :43:32.is, he is right. Quite a controversial proposition, that fear

:43:33. > :43:39.of medical... Is putting clinicians off. Received through the

:43:40. > :43:43.consultation, some clinicians do feel it is a problem but I think it

:43:44. > :43:47.is fair to say very few saw it as the principal problem or is the

:43:48. > :43:50.principal obstacle. A number of clinicians made the point that

:43:51. > :43:58.several things have been mitigating in recent decades to slow down the

:43:59. > :44:03.rate of innovative prescribing and indeed other procedures in surgery

:44:04. > :44:11.and others. Not least increasing central control from NHS England of

:44:12. > :44:15.procurement, a very tight procurement, and guidelines which, I

:44:16. > :44:18.will just finished, as well as a sense of an increasingly litigious

:44:19. > :44:23.society which is just one of the factors that has been cited in a

:44:24. > :44:28.multiple range of barriers to innovation. I will happily give way.

:44:29. > :44:33.Thank you for giving way. Does the Minister not recognise the concern

:44:34. > :44:38.of the Association of medical research bodies and many within the

:44:39. > :44:42.profession of what this opens up? The position when I started 30 odd

:44:43. > :44:46.years ago was that doctors could do what they liked. We have spent

:44:47. > :44:53.decades protecting people, slimming down the ethics paperwork to run

:44:54. > :44:56.trials and I do not see that this is necessary. I think this is

:44:57. > :45:01.dangerous. The problem is that people think it is about access to

:45:02. > :45:05.new drugs. It actually is not. Any drug that is licensed we can

:45:06. > :45:10.prescribe. This is that any doctors can just try what they like and I

:45:11. > :45:14.think that is quite scary. The honourable lady makes a series of

:45:15. > :45:18.interesting points. I think the criticisms would apply perhaps more

:45:19. > :45:22.to the bill brought forward in the other House, but just to confirm,

:45:23. > :45:27.this bill has nothing at all to do with clinical research. It is to do

:45:28. > :45:32.with clarifying the freedoms that, she is right in saying this, that

:45:33. > :45:35.clinicians enjoy today. Clinicians, Madame Deputy Speaker, are free to

:45:36. > :45:40.prescribe any treatment they feel is appropriate on the basis of clinical

:45:41. > :45:46.evidence for their own patients and the very specific problem that the

:45:47. > :45:49.Government recognises, and whether or not this bill is the appropriate

:45:50. > :45:56.mechanism to deal with it is one thing, it is in order for clinicians

:45:57. > :45:59.to feel confident in making an innovative prescription or a

:46:00. > :46:03.adopting an innovative procedure, our view is the biggest barrier is

:46:04. > :46:06.actually information for clinicians on what innovative procedures are

:46:07. > :46:10.out there already being used by other clinicians, and it Israeli

:46:11. > :46:16.with that in mind that the registry which I think was originally

:46:17. > :46:22.proposed -- it is really with that in mind. It was originally intended

:46:23. > :46:25.in the original bill, as a registry of innovative practices that

:46:26. > :46:30.clinicians adopted under the procedures in this bill, which

:46:31. > :46:33.merely clarify the existing protections already afforded by

:46:34. > :46:37.medical negligence law, that that registry would be a helpful

:46:38. > :46:41.innovation in itself. The Government view is that in fact as we build an

:46:42. > :46:47.infrastructure for the provision of information to clinicians, to

:46:48. > :46:48.support both off label use of medicines and access to latest

:46:49. > :46:53.information on innovative treatments, that registry could

:46:54. > :46:56.provide a much more interesting function of providing at the click

:46:57. > :47:00.of a mouse to clinicians and up-to-date registry on innovative

:47:01. > :47:03.medicines available for off label and other treatments that other

:47:04. > :47:08.clinicians are already using. So it has nothing to do with the research

:47:09. > :47:14.at all but is purely to do with supporting innovative prescribing by

:47:15. > :47:18.clinicians, in the terms of, yes, in this bill, providing information. A

:47:19. > :47:20.different title of bill and a different structure. Providing

:47:21. > :47:24.information to clinicians on innovations they may consider which

:47:25. > :47:29.is very different to the original bill structured and put forward by

:47:30. > :47:33.Lord Saatchi. Thank you for giving way again but is it not the case

:47:34. > :47:37.this undermines the structures of clinical research we have, where the

:47:38. > :47:41.patient is protected by ethics, by re-search being reviewed, whereas

:47:42. > :47:45.this allows a couple of doctors to say we will give you address for

:47:46. > :47:49.your cancer and that can get put on a database? I think that is

:47:50. > :47:55.quite... A lot of the profession are anxious about this. I want to make

:47:56. > :48:00.two thing is absolutely clear. Firstly, this bill has absolutely no

:48:01. > :48:03.impact on clinical research and we have been very clear about that in

:48:04. > :48:07.the department. If it in anyway change the basis on which clinical

:48:08. > :48:11.procedure in this country is readily to that would be a very serious

:48:12. > :48:14.matter because we lead the world in terms of our controls on research

:48:15. > :48:20.and it is vital we do not affect those. I will just finish this

:48:21. > :48:27.point, if I may. The second point really is important. If this bill

:48:28. > :48:32.was to undermine patient or public trust and confidence in our NHS, in

:48:33. > :48:36.our research medicine and enter our clinical trials infrastructure, that

:48:37. > :48:40.would be a very serious concern and I flagged in the second reading that

:48:41. > :48:44.I do have some concerns. I have to say some of those are related to the

:48:45. > :48:47.way this debate is conducted. I am not making comment about her

:48:48. > :48:51.intervention but I think it is important we exclude people what

:48:52. > :48:56.this bill does and does not do. If we mislead people, then it is not

:48:57. > :49:02.surprising we will get a lot of unnecessary fear, but I think it is

:49:03. > :49:05.really important we clarify that this had nothing to do with clinical

:49:06. > :49:07.research. I will give way. I thank the Minister for giving way. On that

:49:08. > :49:11.point would he accept, however, the Association for medical research,

:49:12. > :49:16.charities, the Academy of the Royal medical colleges, the BMA, an aide

:49:17. > :49:20.to Z of organisations involved with medical research, they are very

:49:21. > :49:25.clear this does undermine protest at the end of medical research and I

:49:26. > :49:29.think the Minister should at listen to and acknowledge those concerns --

:49:30. > :49:35.A to Z. I have listened and acknowledge those at Second Reading.

:49:36. > :49:39.This bill is merely a debate. There is no changing of the law. The

:49:40. > :49:42.debate is what is upsetting people at the moment and I think it is

:49:43. > :49:46.important we carry it out in a way clear to people what this bill does

:49:47. > :49:50.and does not achieve. But, yes, I am concerned that both the passage of

:49:51. > :49:54.the spill and the conduct of the debate and any legislation that may

:49:55. > :49:57.or may not survive the process of parliamentary scrutiny does not in

:49:58. > :50:03.any way undermine public or patient trust and confidence in both

:50:04. > :50:05.clinical research or mainstream medicine and where that to happen I

:50:06. > :50:15.would be very concerned the Government would be unable to

:50:16. > :50:19.support it -- the passage of this bill. I made that clear to my

:50:20. > :50:23.honourable friend and that is the number one consideration, public

:50:24. > :50:30.trust and confidence in our NHS and clinical research infrastructure. If

:50:31. > :50:35.I can just finish, very briefly, OK. Thanks for his generosity. He is

:50:36. > :50:38.being very kind today. Can I just add to the voice of my honourable

:50:39. > :50:44.friend who spoke previously and suggests it is not just those but

:50:45. > :50:47.also many of the cancer bodies and communities who are really concerned

:50:48. > :50:53.about the spill. I mean, can I bring him back, if I made, briefly, the

:50:54. > :50:56.pursuit of justice starts with evidence and there is no evidence

:50:57. > :51:01.that litigation is deterring doctors from innovating. This bill, in many

:51:02. > :51:06.respects, addresses a nonexistent problem and if it is not necessary

:51:07. > :51:13.to legislate it is necessary to not legislate. As my honourable friend

:51:14. > :51:17.knows, I have a lot of respect for his logic and his position, so let

:51:18. > :51:22.me just be very clear again. As I tried to see earlier, I accept that

:51:23. > :51:26.if one was setting out a list of the biggest barriers to the optic of

:51:27. > :51:34.innovation, fear of negligence would not be number one on the list but it

:51:35. > :51:39.is equally true -- the barriers to innovation. It has been put to us

:51:40. > :51:43.that it is a consideration and I think it is important the point he

:51:44. > :51:46.is making, that the mechanism is proportionate to that obstacle and I

:51:47. > :51:50.could not agree more it has to be proportionate and I signalled at the

:51:51. > :51:54.second reading and will do so again here that for the Government is the

:51:55. > :52:00.most interesting part of this bill in many ways is the access to

:52:01. > :52:02.information on innovation in innovative treatments for clinicians

:52:03. > :52:07.who already have the freedom to innovate and the second part of the

:52:08. > :52:11.bill as we understand it and we have taken substantial legal advice on

:52:12. > :52:15.this does not in any way change the law on medical negligence. I think

:52:16. > :52:19.we would struggle if it did, but what it does is set out a clear

:52:20. > :52:22.pathway for doctors seeking to enjoy the freedoms that are already in law

:52:23. > :52:26.to make it very clear what the procedure would be. You may say

:52:27. > :52:29.those are fairly marginal improvement plan and do they really

:52:30. > :52:37.merit the time in the House. Well, it is not for me, Madam Speaker, to

:52:38. > :52:39.judge what is and is not an appropriate use of Parliament time

:52:40. > :52:42.but I understand honourable member is trying to tackle, with a small

:52:43. > :52:46.measure, something we all have an interesting, increasing access to

:52:47. > :52:50.innovative medicine and I think that focus which is reflected in the new

:52:51. > :52:56.title of the bill and the new structure could be an interesting

:52:57. > :53:00.mechanism. We have looked at what the costs may be of putting such a

:53:01. > :53:05.database together. The figure I have given is based understanding that

:53:06. > :53:08.further significant scoping work would obviously be acquired where

:53:09. > :53:14.the bill to become law including consideration of the moderation of

:53:15. > :53:18.the data flow and the searching capability before the centre was

:53:19. > :53:23.able to provide a Bossel costed solution. Until proposed options and

:53:24. > :53:25.variables undergo additional policy refinement, including the

:53:26. > :53:29.development of proper specification, it is not possible to offer a

:53:30. > :53:33.further estimate of supporting costs. The affordability of any

:53:34. > :53:35.specific proposal and future investment in technology more

:53:36. > :53:38.generally will also need to be considered in light of the

:53:39. > :53:41.forthcoming spending review settlement and the work of the

:53:42. > :53:45.National information board who are putting in place a broader framework

:53:46. > :53:49.for the flow of information in the NHS. Medical practitioners are

:53:50. > :53:55.already required to comply with the guidance on records, record-keeping,

:53:56. > :53:59.from the -- and therefore the recording of information for front

:54:00. > :54:03.line staff is based on existing practice DOS no additional costs are

:54:04. > :54:06.foreseen for practitioners or their own organisations. Officials are

:54:07. > :54:10.currently drafting an impact assessment which will seek to

:54:11. > :54:13.examine the estimated impact of the bill and better understand the

:54:14. > :54:18.likely costs and benefits of the proposals. The database proposed by

:54:19. > :54:21.the bill, should it survive parliamentary scrutiny, we think

:54:22. > :54:24.could result in improving the flow of information to clinicians on the

:54:25. > :54:31.range of innovative treatments already out there and available,

:54:32. > :54:33.including potentially off label uses of medicines which I know the House

:54:34. > :54:37.is interested in in connection with another bill. The biggest barrier,

:54:38. > :54:41.in our view, to the floor of innovation through the system is the

:54:42. > :54:48.lack of incentives, the lack of proper reward for innovation, to do

:54:49. > :54:52.with the way we reward patterns of activity rather than necessarily the

:54:53. > :54:56.production of health and health care, and data and information is

:54:57. > :55:00.one of the biggest barriers in that. Potentially, subject to whatever

:55:01. > :55:04.scrutiny and change the bill may undergo in Committee, we think that

:55:05. > :55:07.is a potential prize worth winning but I appreciate the Committee of

:55:08. > :55:16.the Pack house will need to go through that bill in some detail. --

:55:17. > :55:21.of the House. Questions as on the order papers. I will not get in the

:55:22. > :55:26.House for long as my honourable friend set out our concerns with

:55:27. > :55:30.this bill in the Second Reading. I will see in summary, however, the

:55:31. > :55:35.opposition believes this bill to be at best a necessary and at worst a

:55:36. > :55:40.danger to patients. It is opposed by a number of royal colleges including

:55:41. > :55:45.the Royal College surgeons of, pathologists, and of paediatrics and

:55:46. > :55:49.child health. There is strong opposition from a number of medical

:55:50. > :55:52.charities including Cancer Research UK, Alzheimer's UK and the British

:55:53. > :55:57.Heart Foundation. There is also strong opposition from bodies such

:55:58. > :56:01.as the welcome trust, the patients' Association and the one for medical

:56:02. > :56:04.accidents. Given the range and depth of concern I do not understand how

:56:05. > :56:08.the Minister can be so comfortable supporting this bill even though he

:56:09. > :56:11.contends he is not. I would ask him to reconsider today the Government

:56:12. > :56:15.position and we will see whether the point raised from the honourable

:56:16. > :56:18.member is in fact correct very shortly and whether the Government

:56:19. > :56:25.are indeed as neutral on this bill as they currently state. I

:56:26. > :56:27.understand part of the bill to which the resolution primarily relates

:56:28. > :56:34.give the Secretary of State the power to set up a database.

:56:35. > :56:39.But I just wanted to see will be familiar with the procedures of the

:56:40. > :56:43.house. Here in situations where the Government is opposed to a private

:56:44. > :56:47.members bill, once the house has given it a second reading, it is

:56:48. > :56:51.convention the Government issues a money resolution. The committee

:56:52. > :57:00.should not concern itself with that and this is not a signifier of

:57:01. > :57:03.Government support. I am grateful to the Minister for clarifying that. We

:57:04. > :57:12.shall see shortly if that is the case or not. The position set out by

:57:13. > :57:16.the shadow secretary of state at the second reading was that we consider

:57:17. > :57:21.this unnecessarily because under section 25 for the health and social

:57:22. > :57:26.care act 2012 the NHS England do have the power to direct the health

:57:27. > :57:31.and social care information Centre for the operation of the system for

:57:32. > :57:36.the collection and analysis of information. I also note a leaf

:57:37. > :57:40.recent letter in which she said under section 25 for the health and

:57:41. > :57:45.social care act he has power to direct the health and social care

:57:46. > :57:54.centre for the collection and analysis of that. I understand the

:57:55. > :57:59.Minister was my argument is it is a OK for the Secretary of State to

:58:00. > :58:02.give his express power and it is not of the opinion of many of the

:58:03. > :58:07.medical College and at the Royal sergeants. We believe this bill aims

:58:08. > :58:12.to address a problem, the fear of litigation, that does not exist and

:58:13. > :58:16.is not evidenced by the profession. We know there is a risk this

:58:17. > :58:20.approach will undermine the methodical and reasoned approach to

:58:21. > :58:26.research that already exists and we also note in the context of the ?30

:58:27. > :58:31.billion a challenge that the NHS currently faces, this may prove to

:58:32. > :58:37.be a step in the wrong direction, giving the finances that are

:58:38. > :58:41.currently taxing us all. We will be voting against this bill and no

:58:42. > :58:45.doubt we will see in due course what the Government make of it when they

:58:46. > :58:54.have considered their research on the costs. I rise to thank the

:58:55. > :58:59.Government for bringing forward the money resolution on my private

:59:00. > :59:03.members bill, as is the convention of this place. In number of

:59:04. > :59:12.colleagues have raised concerns on this bill, the opposition justice

:59:13. > :59:13.delete delete my little just then. Many of the briefings seem to be

:59:14. > :59:19.concerned about the previous concerned about the previous

:59:20. > :59:23.iteration of the bill that came through three readings of the other

:59:24. > :59:28.place I haven't changed at all for this bill, yet this bill is

:59:29. > :59:31.massively different from that of the bill brought forward by Lord Saatchi

:59:32. > :59:38.in the House of Lords. The bill has two elements. It proposes a database

:59:39. > :59:42.of innovation be established for medical registered practitioners to

:59:43. > :59:46.use when the innovate or depart from standard medical practice, and

:59:47. > :59:49.doctors and surgeons will tell you, as we have heard already, they

:59:50. > :59:59.regularly innovate. I'll happily give way. I would never question my

:00:00. > :00:06.honourable friends intentions, however to quote the summary, they

:00:07. > :00:10.do not see the need for this and do not believe the bill will achieve

:00:11. > :00:16.its aim of encouraging innovation and as it stands it is unnecessary

:00:17. > :00:18.and may adversely impact on patients and medical research. This is

:00:19. > :00:26.supported by the Council research UK amongst others and. Does that not

:00:27. > :00:31.cause my honourable friend some pause for thought before proceeding

:00:32. > :00:37.with this bill? The I have to say to my honourable friend, yes, it does.

:00:38. > :00:41.I have been talking to these organisations from the very

:00:42. > :00:45.beginning since taking these ideas from the Saatchi bill and I will

:00:46. > :00:49.continue to talk to every organisation that wishes to talk to

:00:50. > :00:59.me about this. If that was a bid to be on the bill committee to offer an

:01:00. > :01:03.alternative view to help me pick through the details of this bill and

:01:04. > :01:08.to do, then I welcome his approach to do, then I welcome his approach

:01:09. > :01:13.because I have had a of people who are not able to come onto the

:01:14. > :01:19.committee who I believe would have added great value to this process

:01:20. > :01:23.and this bill. I gave an example in the second reading of this bill were

:01:24. > :01:27.a surgeon had innovated and saved the life of his patient, however was

:01:28. > :01:33.unable to quickly communicate this to his other peers. There was no

:01:34. > :01:38.comprehensive means of doing so. This database actually has been

:01:39. > :01:41.called for quite many of the medical colleges and this is acknowledged in

:01:42. > :01:49.the briefings he would have read from them. It is important because

:01:50. > :01:55.of the spread of innovation itself because this database wouldn't just

:01:56. > :01:59.include the successes of any innovation but also the failures as

:02:00. > :02:03.well. This allows a best practice to spread quickly and other registered

:02:04. > :02:06.medical practitioner is to learn from any innovation. It would not be

:02:07. > :02:11.a rebel to patients and would be held by the health and social care

:02:12. > :02:16.information Centre, which is where this money resolution is pointing

:02:17. > :02:20.towards. It does not cover research and would not hamper recruitment to

:02:21. > :02:24.clinical trials. Nothing in the bill allows doctors to bypass processes

:02:25. > :02:30.and requirements set by the trust in order to undertaking any that of

:02:31. > :02:36.treatments. Commissioners would find any treatment if not funded by the

:02:37. > :02:41.NHS and individual innovation is, as we all know, incredibly important,

:02:42. > :02:47.but it is not a suitable substitute for medical research, was usually

:02:48. > :02:55.test the effectiveness of treatment and a systematic way. I hope the

:02:56. > :03:00.successful would lead to research projects are in this particular

:03:01. > :03:05.speciality, thereby encouraging more clinical trials. The second part of

:03:06. > :03:08.controversial part of the bill, controversial part of the bill,

:03:09. > :03:10.gives a registered medical practitioner is a supplementary

:03:11. > :03:15.method of demonstrating they have added responsibility while. It

:03:16. > :03:22.closely mirrors the current test closely mirrors the current test

:03:23. > :03:25.used and brings forth the test to enable doctors to demonstrate they

:03:26. > :03:30.have acted responsibly before they entered the courtroom. It does not

:03:31. > :03:36.change the common law. Happily give way. May start by briefly seeing as

:03:37. > :03:42.though respect the good intentions behind this bill and that of my

:03:43. > :03:46.honourable friend, what can I suggest to him that perhaps as last

:03:47. > :03:53.point misses the more fundamental point that it is the concern, the

:03:54. > :03:56.fear, litigation that may deter doctors and medical professionals

:03:57. > :04:03.are generally from innovating. It is that fear that drives and may

:04:04. > :04:10.prevent an ovation. Does he accept that at least is a valid concern? I

:04:11. > :04:15.am not convinced that is the case because doctors and medical

:04:16. > :04:21.practitioners innovate on a daily basis across the whole of the

:04:22. > :04:23.National Health Service. They may have a consideration of litigation

:04:24. > :04:35.in the back of their mind but that is what makes them act responsibly.

:04:36. > :04:40.I don't quite see what my honourable friend point. In my bill they still

:04:41. > :04:47.have to demonstrate the acted responsibly and if they haven't they

:04:48. > :04:51.will still be beyond the true force of the General medical Council and

:04:52. > :04:54.current laws. I argue there are extra safeguard and might bill to

:04:55. > :04:58.protect patients from medics who peddle misguided or dangerous

:04:59. > :05:02.treatments. Any dog that needs to act responsibly and in the best

:05:03. > :05:07.interests of their patients and must be able to demonstrate this as they

:05:08. > :05:12.have two now, mainly in the court of law, if it gets to that point.

:05:13. > :05:19.Secondly, listing any innovation on the database also means it has two

:05:20. > :05:23.main successes and failures have to be listed. If you were a rogue

:05:24. > :05:27.doctor, having the rest of your peers being able to see the exact

:05:28. > :05:34.result of innovation, would you not be exposing yourself to peers? My

:05:35. > :05:37.bill has massively evolved from Lord Saatchi's Medical Innovation Bill,

:05:38. > :05:41.where many of the criticisms levelled against the come. I've been

:05:42. > :05:45.working with the Department of help to ensure this bill achieves its

:05:46. > :05:49.central aim. I know I have a long road ahead of me, should we get

:05:50. > :05:54.through committee stage and I fully intend to what everybody who wishes

:05:55. > :05:59.to suggest and offer constructive help to get the point where we do

:06:00. > :06:14.have a of innovation that can help best practice spread across the NHS.

:06:15. > :06:21.I have a deal not to jump up and down, I apologise. Thank you very

:06:22. > :06:27.much, Mr Deputy Speaker. There are many ways for a surgeon to share

:06:28. > :06:32.experience if they have carried out an operation in the heat of the

:06:33. > :06:36.moment to save someone's life. The B M J publishes things on a weekly

:06:37. > :06:41.basis and can actually share interesting cases. The danger of

:06:42. > :06:48.this is the database is being used as a fig leaf to make it sound like

:06:49. > :06:52.the access to innovative treatments. The honourable member talk about how

:06:53. > :06:57.a doctor would have to prove it was safe. If you are the first person

:06:58. > :07:03.Devon liquorice for cancer, you have not method of proving it is safe.

:07:04. > :07:07.That is the basis of research. We have phase one trials which on a

:07:08. > :07:12.small group of patients who undergo treatment, for they consented,

:07:13. > :07:16.knowing what they are taking on based on what our preclinical

:07:17. > :07:21.research is. We moved to phase two, which is larger and then phase three

:07:22. > :07:26.which is multiple hospitals. We have that process to avoid a couple of

:07:27. > :07:32.doctors in the canteen saying, I think that's not a bad idea, I'll

:07:33. > :07:36.back you if you back to me. And patients then been given something

:07:37. > :07:43.that is dangerous. It is not that the honourable member's bill would

:07:44. > :07:46.undermine research in that way, but that patients and the public feel

:07:47. > :07:51.they are guinea pigs to any old treatment that someone wants to have

:07:52. > :07:56.a bash at, that will in time undermine research. It has taken

:07:57. > :08:02.decades to get to the level of and balances that we have at the moment.

:08:03. > :08:06.It has been streamlined and we have single ethical permissions that that

:08:07. > :08:10.are carried out, once for the whole country and then recognised in all

:08:11. > :08:16.health boards and in all areas. That has made it a lot easier but it is

:08:17. > :08:20.absolutely crucial that patients who sign up to two key treatment know

:08:21. > :08:24.that there has been a degree of rigour before that drug is given to

:08:25. > :08:31.them. Any middle of the night, someone bleeding to death, of course

:08:32. > :08:37.a surgeon can innovate and every operation is slightly different. But

:08:38. > :08:39.here we're talking about access to medical treatments, predominantly

:08:40. > :08:43.toward drugs and it will be drugs that have not had sufficient

:08:44. > :08:47.preclinical workup and I think that is of concern to the research

:08:48. > :08:53.charities, concern to the Royal colleges, of which I am a member,

:08:54. > :08:57.because of patient safety. The absolute concern isn't even the

:08:58. > :09:01.secondary impact on research, it's the impact on patient safety. Of

:09:02. > :09:08.people finding they are being given something totally unproven. I give

:09:09. > :09:16.way. I agree with everything she says. I think the problem with the

:09:17. > :09:22.bill is it also undermines the carefully constructed jurisprudence

:09:23. > :09:26.around negligence and it is purely unintentional, I am sure, but I

:09:27. > :09:30.think it is quickly dangers of bill for that reason. I thank the

:09:31. > :09:35.honourable member for his comments. Of course it is and the title and it

:09:36. > :09:38.will gather support from people who think it means getting access to

:09:39. > :09:44.drugs we don't currently get access to. It is not that any doctor can

:09:45. > :09:49.prescribe anything, we can't, we can prescribe drugs that are and

:09:50. > :09:51.recognised and have a basic gleaming basic safety profile. The main thing

:09:52. > :09:55.we opened the bidding in Westminster we opened the bidding in Westminster

:09:56. > :10:01.is access to expensive treatments which innovative and brand-new, but

:10:02. > :10:04.that is not about our right as a doctor to prescribe them, it is

:10:05. > :10:08.about who is good to pay for them and the problem is some of them are

:10:09. > :10:12.expensive. The Minister refers to that, that that would still be an

:10:13. > :10:19.issue. So in what sense with the commissioning group have evidence to

:10:20. > :10:24.allow a doctor to give a drug that has absolutely no basis because

:10:25. > :10:28.obviously it was mentioned that this would have to be funded. I think

:10:29. > :10:32.this is really a bit of a mess of what the problem is trying to

:10:33. > :10:37.answer. People think it means we will get only access to new drugs

:10:38. > :10:41.that have been for what, but they should be taken forward in the

:10:42. > :10:45.correct path to protect patients, to protect doctors, to know what we are

:10:46. > :10:50.doing is right, not some random thing that has been on a database

:10:51. > :10:54.that somebody try something once and it seemed to work. We know we have a

:10:55. > :10:59.placebo effect, we know there are random effects.

:11:00. > :11:04.I would just like to support everything the honourable lady has

:11:05. > :11:08.just said. There has been research in cancer care for over ten years

:11:09. > :11:15.and the reason why we work to GP standards, why we are accountable to

:11:16. > :11:23.the FTA is that those safeguards are in place for a reason and that is

:11:24. > :11:27.firstly to protect the patient. -- FDA. I thank the honourable lady for

:11:28. > :11:37.her comments. When I did my thesis in the late 80s looking at breast

:11:38. > :11:40.Cancer, I remember speaking at a conference in America where people

:11:41. > :11:44.were presenting their research and at that time it was thought you had

:11:45. > :11:51.to put a toxin on the back of an antibody to work. They were putting

:11:52. > :11:54.rice and on it which is what was used in the Bulgarian umbrella

:11:55. > :12:00.murder and surprise, surprise almost all of their patients died. That was

:12:01. > :12:07.something they got around by going to Mexico and by going to prisons in

:12:08. > :12:10.America it is not that anything a doctor thinks might work might be

:12:11. > :12:16.good for patients and we have developed over time a safe system

:12:17. > :12:24.and I think we give that away at our peril -- they were putting ricin on

:12:25. > :12:29.it. This is bad legislation. This is legislation that is unnecessary and

:12:30. > :12:39.in fact could undermine central protection for our patients. That is

:12:40. > :12:41.why an absolute A to Z of royal colleges and research organisations

:12:42. > :12:45.oppose this and the list goes on. I am afraid this is the time this

:12:46. > :12:49.House has to bring this legislation to an end. I have also been very

:12:50. > :12:54.concerned about the selective misquoting of a number of bodies

:12:55. > :12:57.about this legislation. In many of the medical Royal colleges the

:12:58. > :13:01.object to being selectively quoted over this bill and I will just quote

:13:02. > :13:05.from one of them. This is the president of the Royal College of

:13:06. > :13:18.physicians who would like to put the views of the Royal College of

:13:19. > :13:20.Positions on record. We do not support the progression of the

:13:21. > :13:22.access to medical treatments Bill through Parliament. The primary

:13:23. > :13:23.objective, to create a parallel innovation process, may result in

:13:24. > :13:26.unforeseen consequences that negatively impact on patient safety.

:13:27. > :13:30.It may further undermine and overcomplicate the establishing

:13:31. > :13:35.existing process for conducting innovation, damaging the UK's

:13:36. > :13:39.innovation process. As the RCP has previously stated at previous

:13:40. > :13:43.readings of this bill and the medical innovation bill, it is

:13:44. > :13:47.unclear how the legislation will improve upon the existing innovation

:13:48. > :13:51.process or address the real barriers to conducting innovation. The RCP

:13:52. > :13:56.does not support the bill's progress through Parliament. I think we also

:13:57. > :13:58.need to be clear that the minister does not need to have this

:13:59. > :14:04.legislation in order to bring forward the kind of processes we

:14:05. > :14:10.would also port in this House to facilitate communication between

:14:11. > :14:15.research bodies about genuine innovations -- we would all support.

:14:16. > :14:18.The processes by which patients can understand which trials are out

:14:19. > :14:22.there they can benefit from, for them to know that. I know when I

:14:23. > :14:26.started in medicine 24 years ago many of the children I treated at

:14:27. > :14:30.that time were dying as a result of leukaemia. Those children to deal

:14:31. > :14:37.with the same conditions would survive not as a result of a series

:14:38. > :14:40.of unconnected anecdotal "have a go" treatments, but because of the

:14:41. > :14:44.medical research that built the foundation for the treatments they

:14:45. > :14:49.now benefit from, and our patients today and our constituents today in

:14:50. > :14:53.themselves will want to contribute to the research that benefit future

:14:54. > :14:59.generations, but they cannot do so through some unconnected database of

:15:00. > :15:02.anecdotal treatments. A series of anecdotes does not constitute

:15:03. > :15:08.evidence and we need to be very careful of that, and I thank my

:15:09. > :15:11.honourable friend, because I do understand he comes from a place of

:15:12. > :15:20.good intentions, but I simply do not agree with this bill. Briefly, I

:15:21. > :15:26.also have concerns about the bill brought forward by the honourable

:15:27. > :15:30.member and while I am very much of the principle you need quick and

:15:31. > :15:33.affordable access for new patients, new developments and initiatives to

:15:34. > :15:37.improve access should be encouraged, so long as they do not

:15:38. > :15:40.impact negatively upon patient safety and I think that is what the

:15:41. > :15:46.honourable lady has said and other members as well. There are questions

:15:47. > :15:51.and concerns raised by a number of UK charities and I can repeat those.

:15:52. > :15:55.The British Heart Foundation, Cancer UK, Alzheimer's research UK, to name

:15:56. > :16:03.but a few. We need to be careful we do not confuse intention with

:16:04. > :16:07.outcome. The medical research charities who represent a large

:16:08. > :16:09.number of prominent and well respected charities are expressing

:16:10. > :16:13.their concern the bill may inadvertently discourage patients

:16:14. > :16:18.from contributing in robust research studies. These are all vitally

:16:19. > :16:21.important, Mr Deputy Speaker, and we have to say on the floor of this

:16:22. > :16:27.House we are concerned about bringing forward a bill and

:16:28. > :16:34.legislation which has not been, with respect, perhaps fully thought out.

:16:35. > :16:37.Further concerns include the vagueness of certain definitions,

:16:38. > :16:40.one that could be described as exceptional medical treatments.

:16:41. > :16:45.There are concerned put forward by the well UK charities and that

:16:46. > :16:50.definition was one of the many concerns. I would describe the bill

:16:51. > :16:54.as loose, not definitive, unclear, and with great respect of the

:16:55. > :16:57.Honourable gentleman and I have all had great respect for him we need to

:16:58. > :17:01.go back to the drawing board on this one. The unintended consequences, a

:17:02. > :17:07.question of whether this bill is really messy -- consequences

:17:08. > :17:11.question whether. I would like to reiterate my support for innovation

:17:12. > :17:15.in principle, but I think innovation is something that should be

:17:16. > :17:21.encouraged but I want the House to note the comments of many in this

:17:22. > :17:26.House. We do not want this bill, however well intended, to have

:17:27. > :17:31.unintended negative consequences. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I,

:17:32. > :17:40.too, wholly support the purpose of the actual bill itself, the proposed

:17:41. > :17:42.bill, and the well intentions the well-intentioned but I declare an

:17:43. > :17:47.interest in cancer as chair of the all-party group on cancer. I return

:17:48. > :17:51.to the issue very briefly and I appreciate time is running short.

:17:52. > :17:59.The issue of evidence. Parliamentary scrutiny demands evidence. This is

:18:00. > :18:01.based on the false premise is that doctors are somehow deterred from

:18:02. > :18:07.innovating because of the fear of being sued in negligence. I am not

:18:08. > :18:12.aware of such evidence. Doctors can and do innovate, without this

:18:13. > :18:16.proposed law. The innovative response to the Ebola crisis, for

:18:17. > :18:22.example, is one example of that. I have to say the Lord in the other

:18:23. > :18:26.place, a leading supporter of this bill, he wrote in the Daily

:18:27. > :18:30.Telegraph in April of last year, I am not aware of cases where doctors

:18:31. > :18:34.are sued for negligence because they have innovated in the treatment they

:18:35. > :18:37.offer rather than following generally accepted medical

:18:38. > :18:43.standards. A member of the public then quizzed him on the evidence

:18:44. > :18:47.available and he simply replied, I am not prepared to be cross-examined

:18:48. > :18:53.further. The Lord did not cite a single case to support his position.

:18:54. > :18:59.Surely the pursuit of justice starts with evidence. With respect, this

:19:00. > :19:03.sort of judicial paternalism has no place in the modern world.

:19:04. > :19:08.Nowadays, the public expect and deserve better. I am informed by the

:19:09. > :19:12.joint editors of the reading text Clinical Negligence that they are

:19:13. > :19:17.not aware of any evidence to support that particular case. Doctors are

:19:18. > :19:26.sued for pure practice, not for innovative practice. -- poor

:19:27. > :19:30.practice. Supporters of the bill need to find that evidence and

:19:31. > :19:34.identify the cases were doctors are sued for such practice. There cannot

:19:35. > :19:40.be any informed debate until this information is provided. So far they

:19:41. > :19:43.have not provided a shred of evidence to support their position.

:19:44. > :19:48.Mr Deputy Speaker, this bill addresses a nonexistent problem. If

:19:49. > :19:55.it is not necessary to legislate, it is necessary not to legislate. More

:19:56. > :19:59.so, there is a GT not to pass bad law. This bill, like the medical

:20:00. > :20:03.innovation bill before it, proposes a law that is not only unnecessary

:20:04. > :20:11.but would also turn out to be bad law. Most grateful. I will be very

:20:12. > :20:15.brief. It may be the honourable member who spill this is is

:20:16. > :20:19.beginning to think he had a lucky Friday in getting a Second Reading

:20:20. > :20:24.because when one looks in detail at the bill, there are a number of

:20:25. > :20:28.flaws to it. I think I have to do is to quote one paragraph from what the

:20:29. > :20:32.action against medical accidents say because that is a very reputable

:20:33. > :20:36.organisation I have worked closely with. They say they believe the

:20:37. > :20:41.proposed changes will have serious unintended consequences per

:20:42. > :20:45.patients and patient which a number of members have dealt with, causing

:20:46. > :20:53.confusion about the law -- for patients and patient safety. The

:20:54. > :20:56.last of these points concerns me. Many leading QCs in the field of

:20:57. > :21:01.medical negligence have raised concern about this. If people have

:21:02. > :21:03.been injured by negligent medical treatment they must have re-dress

:21:04. > :21:06.and that has been withdrawn substantially through the last bill

:21:07. > :21:10.when it came through here. It is only right we try to preserve that

:21:11. > :21:13.and are clear about preserving it. Not only for the individuals

:21:14. > :21:18.involved, because the standards of medical practice are enhanced and

:21:19. > :21:23.improved by attacking them when on those rare occasions they fall below

:21:24. > :21:30.standard and for those reasons, Mr Deputy Speaker, I would oppose this.

:21:31. > :21:35.Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It is not for me, obviously, to defend the

:21:36. > :21:38.bill. It is the honourable gentleman's bill and a private

:21:39. > :21:43.member's bill. I would like to deal with two or three points raised on

:21:44. > :21:47.the Government view of clinical research and patient safety which

:21:48. > :21:51.are very important. The honourable lady made an impassioned plea that

:21:52. > :21:56.we would undermine patient safety. I would like to be at a rate that this

:21:57. > :22:01.bill in Norway has any impact on our clinical research, approvals

:22:02. > :22:08.infrastructure which is world class and a much prized jewel in our

:22:09. > :22:11.crown. It is merely dealing with, and by saying merely I don't mean to

:22:12. > :22:21.undermine the impact, but it is dealing with -- in no way. Doctors

:22:22. > :22:24.are already free to prescribe medicines, they have sovereignty in

:22:25. > :22:27.prescribing treatment for their patients where they believe there is

:22:28. > :22:31.good clinical evidence and she made the point about the importance of

:22:32. > :22:36.evidence and the bit about this bill that I and we and the Government

:22:37. > :22:40.think it is of particular interest is the mechanism for accelerating

:22:41. > :22:44.the giving of evidence for clinicians on currently available

:22:45. > :22:47.innovations for innovative medicines and off label use of existing

:22:48. > :22:51.medicines and I think it is worth just bearing in mind the House's

:22:52. > :22:55.interest in accelerating off label used through the provision of

:22:56. > :22:59.information. Patient protection and safety are absolutely key and we

:23:00. > :23:04.will do nothing that undermines that. The honourable lady for Totnes

:23:05. > :23:08.raised a range of concerns which are all legitimate but I think the place

:23:09. > :23:12.to address them is that Committee and I would again reiterate that

:23:13. > :23:15.nothing in this bill in any way interferes with our UK clinical

:23:16. > :23:20.research infrastructure. Lastly, just to say that in answer to the

:23:21. > :23:31.honourable member opposite's point about testing whether or not the

:23:32. > :23:33.Government supports this bill, let me be very clear. The Government

:23:34. > :23:36.neither opposes nor supports this bill. We are prepared to work with

:23:37. > :23:38.the sponsors to get it into a place it supports the environment we would

:23:39. > :23:41.like to see. In testing this afternoon the will of the House I

:23:42. > :23:43.can tell you the Government always support a money resolution even on

:23:44. > :23:46.bills it is blatantly opposed to, that is the convention. You will be

:23:47. > :23:49.testing and proving nothing other than we will stick to the convention

:23:50. > :23:54.of always supporting the money resolution on a bill. We noted the

:23:55. > :24:04.question. As many as are of the opinion, say 'aye'. To the contrary,

:24:05. > :24:57.'no'. Division. Clear the lobbies. -- we now put the question.

:24:58. > :25:08.Order. The question on the order paper. As many as are of the

:25:09. > :32:05.opinion, say 'aye'. To the contrary, 'no'.

:32:06. > :37:35.The order. The ayes to the right, 281, the noes the left 227.

:37:36. > :37:51.The ayes to the right 281, the noes to the left 227. The ayes have it.

:37:52. > :37:54.We now come to enter national immunities and of value added tax.

:37:55. > :37:59.With the leave of the house I would like to put these three together.

:38:00. > :38:05.Motions number seven, eight and nine. The questions are as of the

:38:06. > :38:11.order paper. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary,

:38:12. > :38:29."no". The ayes have it. The question is this how stood now I joined.

:38:30. > :38:33.As we have a bit of time on our hands we can wait for summer

:38:34. > :38:52.silence. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I am

:38:53. > :38:55.grateful for the opportunity to bring the adjournment debate before

:38:56. > :39:00.the house today on the matter of support for children, young people

:39:01. > :39:04.and young carers of military personnel and veterans. I am

:39:05. > :39:07.grateful to see so many members living up to Remembrance Sunday on

:39:08. > :39:14.these benches who have chosen to remain. As we approach Remembrance

:39:15. > :39:18.Sunday, and should not need to remind the house but across these

:39:19. > :39:22.islands communities and politicians will seek to commemorate the

:39:23. > :39:27.following. More often than not we will seek to commemorate the fallen,

:39:28. > :39:32.yet in this house and through the office of my honourable friend the

:39:33. > :39:38.member for East Kilbride, I was grateful in a recent adjournment on

:39:39. > :39:42.a debate on mental health for Armed Forces veterans, it became clear to

:39:43. > :39:46.me and those watching the debate that the glaring omission from

:39:47. > :39:51.public policy coming from this house on the practice for those who

:39:52. > :39:55.through their family connection software directly due to their

:39:56. > :40:00.relationship with the Armed Forces and the impact on both the personnel

:40:01. > :40:05.and veterans. During the debates, during an intervention which I am

:40:06. > :40:09.grateful the Minister of the moment took, I'm sure they did not

:40:10. > :40:13.appreciate me that they know the Ministry of the things it would have

:40:14. > :40:18.led to the adjournment debate we are now having. A debate on the support

:40:19. > :40:23.to be offered the life of children, young people and young carers of

:40:24. > :40:28.family's of military personnel and veterans. Forgive me for continuing

:40:29. > :40:32.to reiterating the name of the debate, it is critical, given some

:40:33. > :40:38.of the glaring omissions and public policy to which we have today. At

:40:39. > :40:45.this time, academics continue to explore the impact, effect on the

:40:46. > :40:49.outcome of the participation in combat on the services. I will

:40:50. > :40:54.mention I am grateful to all Watson who during the debate led by my

:40:55. > :41:01.honourable friend for East Kilbride took the opportunity after hearing

:41:02. > :41:06.that debate to talk on a range of research and information relating to

:41:07. > :41:11.this very issue. Critically, I am grateful to all for highlighting the

:41:12. > :41:16.lack of research on the live lives and experiences of children within

:41:17. > :41:19.the wider military family. That includes the Ministry of Defence. I

:41:20. > :41:29.will give way. It is always a pleasure to be

:41:30. > :41:32.involved in these debates, Mr Deputy Speaker. I commend the honourable

:41:33. > :41:42.member from Westonbirt insurer for this debate. For my own charity that

:41:43. > :41:47.looks after those personnel and veterans in my constituency, there

:41:48. > :41:53.are 300,000 in Northern Ireland X veterans that are receiving --

:41:54. > :41:57.former veterans and families receiving an actor. Does he agree it

:41:58. > :42:07.is not just those veterans but their wives and children who are

:42:08. > :42:11.suffering? I think he stole some of the thunder from the rest of my

:42:12. > :42:16.speech quite frankly, and I do agree. In terms of the impact on the

:42:17. > :42:19.spouses, the partners and the children of those in active service

:42:20. > :42:25.and those were our veterans. I am more than delighted to, yes. I hope

:42:26. > :42:32.I can add to the thunder of the speech. I am sure he was going to go

:42:33. > :42:35.on to mention the great work in my constituency in Newport in

:42:36. > :42:40.Shropshire, in combat stress, where we are doing a great job assisting

:42:41. > :42:43.those who need to reintegrate into society, not just those from the

:42:44. > :42:48.Second World War, but from the Falklands War, the Iraq, if Ghana

:42:49. > :42:54.stand campaign and others. Would he join me in paying tribute to all

:42:55. > :42:58.those who do such a great job -- the Iraq campaign and the Afghanistan

:42:59. > :43:03.campaign. I do. Paying tribute to all families, no matter what that

:43:04. > :43:07.service was. Coming from a family with a long service record including

:43:08. > :43:12.my family and my brother, I do that for all of our veterans. What I

:43:13. > :43:17.would like to go on to Mr Speaker is the Ashcroft review. Even in the

:43:18. > :43:22.recent Ashcroft Review, we find the only mention of children is relating

:43:23. > :43:26.-- relating to those service personnel with children is only six

:43:27. > :43:33.times in a document of 200 pages, to the impact -- only go back this is

:43:34. > :43:42.only mention sexting is in a document of 200 pages, reference to

:43:43. > :43:46.children. For the usual eight deployment, the mention of those

:43:47. > :43:49.children left at home, there is no mention. There is no mention of the

:43:50. > :43:54.military children become carers to parents left at home on a parent

:43:55. > :43:58.returning from active duty. No mention of a child isolated both

:43:59. > :44:02.from their family and their peers, no mention of the increased

:44:03. > :44:07.likelihood of emotional detachment, no mention of limited access to

:44:08. > :44:11.services outside of the military family and no mention that children

:44:12. > :44:17.and young people may be providing practical day-to-day care within the

:44:18. > :44:21.family setting. No mention of the child experiencing difficulty in

:44:22. > :44:26.school due to external caring roles, to bullying, no mention of the

:44:27. > :44:29.destabilising impact of the three-month deployment or that

:44:30. > :44:33.subsequent eight-month deployment, as I already mentioned, and no

:44:34. > :44:39.mention of the impact of the constant moving on the life chances

:44:40. > :44:43.of children in a military family. It is indeed a sad litany. I am

:44:44. > :44:47.delighted to give way. I thank the honourable gentleman. He has raised

:44:48. > :44:52.a very important issue and is speaking with great eloquence. Does

:44:53. > :44:55.he not agree with me that some of the more forward-looking and

:44:56. > :44:59.progress of local authorities have alighted on the issue of children's

:45:00. > :45:03.services within the context and commitment, as he will know in

:45:04. > :45:07.Scotland as well as the rest of the UK, to the military covenant, the

:45:08. > :45:14.profile of which has been raised significantly in the last four or

:45:15. > :45:17.five years? I am grateful to welcome any local authority and am grateful

:45:18. > :45:22.of 32 councils of Scotland have taken the step to become either

:45:23. > :45:27.veterans' champions ought to promote the issue of veterans across there

:45:28. > :45:31.and I can only commend every council and bar, district or local, within

:45:32. > :45:38.the counties of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to follow the exact

:45:39. > :45:44.same set. -- every council and Boro. The research looks at the multitude

:45:45. > :45:49.of pre-and post-effects on health including poster mattock stress

:45:50. > :45:52.disorder, pre-deployment stress, mental health reintegration and the

:45:53. > :45:59.military family that is for a spouse or partner -- post traumatic stress.

:46:00. > :46:03.There is limited literature in the united kingdom on the issues faced

:46:04. > :46:08.by military children and young people, and even less so on military

:46:09. > :46:15.children and young people in a caring role. Let's look at some of

:46:16. > :46:19.those issues statistically. The Ministry of Defence estimates there

:46:20. > :46:22.are around 120,000 military children and young people, both overseas and

:46:23. > :46:26.here in the UK, although these figures do not state whether they

:46:27. > :46:32.are full-time military children and young people, or whether they

:46:33. > :46:37.include the children and young people of those who are importantly

:46:38. > :46:43.most recognised, the military reserve is -- reserves, increasingly

:46:44. > :46:48.capability of the UK .my guess I will have way. This is a complex and

:46:49. > :46:51.very important issue. With the honourable gentleman agree with me

:46:52. > :46:54.it is vitally important we also consider issues of service personnel

:46:55. > :46:58.who have been made redundant and the impact that would have on their

:46:59. > :47:05.families and children? My honourable friend raises yet another complexity

:47:06. > :47:08.of the issue on the impact -- of the military life impact on children and

:47:09. > :47:12.crucially those service personnel who have been made redundant, and

:47:13. > :47:15.many have in recent years, and I can only hope the Minister will take

:47:16. > :47:19.that on board in any response to the debate today and I am grateful to my

:47:20. > :47:25.honourable friend for mentioning it. I would go on, Mr Deputy Speaker.

:47:26. > :47:30.Taking the published figures, these children and young people represent

:47:31. > :47:35.10% of the UK's under 18s population. That is a substantial

:47:36. > :47:39.amount. In relation to mental health research, it shows children in

:47:40. > :47:49.adolescent mental health conditions are common... And for military and

:47:50. > :47:54.non-military children alike. Records from 2013 in the Office of National

:47:55. > :48:00.Statistics indicate that in the UK there is 13.6 million children and

:48:01. > :48:02.young people. A charity has identified mental health effects

:48:03. > :48:07.between ten and 20% of all children and your people. Furthermore, these

:48:08. > :48:11.statistics show 12% of five to 16-year-old young people have a

:48:12. > :48:24.diagnosed mental health condition. Or a conduct disorder, 7% for

:48:25. > :48:32.emotional -- her physical and 5% for emotional. If they were the impact

:48:33. > :48:34.of perinatal health problems among military families is

:48:35. > :48:38.disproportionately much higher than the rest of the population.

:48:39. > :48:43.Organisations dealing with these problems, with the problems of

:48:44. > :48:45.higher than average domestic violence amongst service personnel

:48:46. > :48:51.and families with all the pressures, I think one of the

:48:52. > :48:55.biggest foyers of social workers dealing with child protection and

:48:56. > :48:58.child mental health issues around and do some very good work, but

:48:59. > :49:03.under huge pressure, because just the sorts of problems not -- they

:49:04. > :49:08.are just the sort of problems not taken as seriously as they may be?

:49:09. > :49:12.That intervention goes to the heart of the subject matter and its

:49:13. > :49:16.complexity. Domestic abuse is a huge example will eat my issue within

:49:17. > :49:19.military life as within many other aspects of ordinary life and I am

:49:20. > :49:24.sure the minister again will take that on board when replying to the

:49:25. > :49:29.House in terms of this debate. To contextualise the figures I have

:49:30. > :49:32.briefly mentioned, these show the potential that over 12,000 military

:49:33. > :49:38.children and young people may or will have a problem with their own

:49:39. > :49:43.mental health. In addition, research for the USA shows there is an 11%

:49:44. > :49:46.increase of children and young people who access mental health

:49:47. > :49:54.services when one or both parents are deployed into combat. Mr Deputy

:49:55. > :49:57.Speaker, the issue of young carers in military families requires

:49:58. > :50:02.further explanation. They are typically children between the ages

:50:03. > :50:08.of five and 24 years of age who helped to look after a relative or

:50:09. > :50:12.who has a condition such as a disability, illness, mental health

:50:13. > :50:18.condition or a drug or alcohol problem. Who is serving, or has

:50:19. > :50:23.served, in the Armed Forces. A condition or disability which in all

:50:24. > :50:29.likelihood may have appeared during active service. Why do we need to

:50:30. > :50:34.support them? 13,000 of the UK's young carers care for over 50 hours

:50:35. > :50:40.a week, young adult carers aged between 16 and 18 years of age are

:50:41. > :50:44.twice as likely to be not in education, employment or training.

:50:45. > :50:49.Figures from the Ministry of Defence itself has shown 2130 military

:50:50. > :50:56.personnel were severely or very severely physically injured between

:50:57. > :51:03.2001 and 2014 in combat action. The current ratio of one child for

:51:04. > :51:07.nearly two and a half veterans, that cannot be maintained. Figures from

:51:08. > :51:12.the ministry again, the Ministry of Defence, show an increase of 19% of

:51:13. > :51:19.veterans being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder from

:51:20. > :51:24.2013. Estimated ratio of military dependent child of one child again

:51:25. > :51:27.to nearly two and a half veterans -- the estimated. The impact on

:51:28. > :51:33.children and young people must be recognised not only by the House but

:51:34. > :51:39.it must be recognised in policy and in its implementation to improve

:51:40. > :51:44.their lives. I am mindful, Mr Deputy Speaker, of ongoing and leading work

:51:45. > :51:47.being undertaken, as I am a Scottish constituency member, of the work in

:51:48. > :51:51.Scotland, and I am along with my colleagues grateful to the

:51:52. > :51:56.leadership of our Government in Edinburgh and the Cabinet Secretary

:51:57. > :52:00.for infrastructure, investment and cities and veterans, a veteran

:52:01. > :52:05.himself, Keith Brown. Critically in the appointment of the Scottish

:52:06. > :52:09.veteran's commissioner who in their transitions in Scotland report on

:52:10. > :52:11.the 27th of March this year highlight the myriad of issues

:52:12. > :52:16.impacting those in military service and their families and, like the

:52:17. > :52:20.Scottish commission, I welcome the steps taken by the Ministry of

:52:21. > :52:28.Defence in implementing some of the Ashcroft Review recommendations. I

:52:29. > :52:31.will give way. I am grateful to my honourable friend forgiving way. He

:52:32. > :52:37.rightly mentions the Scottish Government role in trying to deal

:52:38. > :52:41.with -- for giving way. Other honourable mentions have mentioned

:52:42. > :52:45.third sector organisations in their constituency. In my constituency it

:52:46. > :52:48.is Cathcart Parish Church who have set up a veteran centre to support

:52:49. > :52:52.veterans and their families. Will he agree with me that the church is

:52:53. > :52:55.actually equally as crucial in helping deal with the complexity of

:52:56. > :53:03.problems military personnel and their families face? My honourable

:53:04. > :53:06.friend is correct. And it is not just based organisations, but

:53:07. > :53:09.voluntary and third sector organisations the length and breadth

:53:10. > :53:13.of these islands play a crucial role in the support to veterans and to

:53:14. > :53:18.their families. Esther Deputy Speaker, I am hopeful the Ministry

:53:19. > :53:22.of Defence must recognise -- Mr Deputy Speaker. As a member of this

:53:23. > :53:26.house representing a Scottish constituency, there is little or no

:53:27. > :53:29.abolishment of the challenges facing services personnel and their

:53:30. > :53:33.families outside of England in terms of the policy context and that this

:53:34. > :53:38.debate offers the opportunity for the Government to rectify the

:53:39. > :53:42.position in which it finds itself. It seems lacking knowledge of

:53:43. > :53:47.services, not only in Scotland, but in Wales, as I am sure my honourable

:53:48. > :53:52.friend would agree, in Northern Ireland. I can at least take some

:53:53. > :53:54.comfort I am aware the Secretary of State for Defence, and I even know

:53:55. > :53:58.the Minister will be meeting with the Cabinet Secretary shortly to

:53:59. > :54:01.discuss matters of common interest, and I do hope that given the

:54:02. > :54:06.opportunity the Minister will take the occasion to advise the

:54:07. > :54:12.Department of the different approaches, in differing

:54:13. > :54:16.jurisdictions, which may offer some comfort and support to children,

:54:17. > :54:22.young people and young carers in families of military personnel and

:54:23. > :54:27.veterans. Critically, Mr Deputy Speaker, I would ask the Minster to

:54:28. > :54:30.consider the recommendations of the Ashcroft Review and the Ministry of

:54:31. > :54:33.Defence documents which are predominantly based on policy and

:54:34. > :54:40.service delivery late models in England and Wales to those... To the

:54:41. > :54:45.exclusion of those service families choosing to settle in Scotland --

:54:46. > :54:48.delivery models. And, yes, indeed in Northern Ireland. The ministry must

:54:49. > :54:53.recognise the different policy geography in which it and the

:54:54. > :54:57.service families find themselves. Especially, Mr Deputy Speaker,

:54:58. > :55:03.religion housing, health care, employment, social care and

:55:04. > :55:07.education policies. These all impact children in the military family. The

:55:08. > :55:11.sooner this is recognised, the sooner children across the service

:55:12. > :55:17.will reap the benefits of a transition from their own military

:55:18. > :55:22.life to their new civilian life when a parent ends their military career

:55:23. > :55:27.through discharge and, yes, through redundancy. I am grateful, Mr Deputy

:55:28. > :55:34.Speaker, that the organisations and individuals who have informed this

:55:35. > :55:36.debate, grateful to them, and based on their recommendations I leave

:55:37. > :55:40.plausible recommendations for the UK Government to improve the support

:55:41. > :55:44.offered to children, young people and young carers of military

:55:45. > :55:49.personnel and veterans. First, support for the research to

:55:50. > :55:54.understand the service children and young people across the UK in

:55:55. > :55:58.partnership with devolved governments, utilise strengths

:55:59. > :56:03.within the military and civilian communities, critically learning

:56:04. > :56:07.from the other devolved administrations including Scotland,

:56:08. > :56:12.support military young carers to maintain good academic and emotional

:56:13. > :56:15.health and well-being outcomes, critically linking to different

:56:16. > :56:21.policy approaches such as the curriculum for excellence in

:56:22. > :56:25.Scotland which does lead the way in a more person centred approach.

:56:26. > :56:30.Furthermore, to consider the creation, I would even say to a

:56:31. > :56:33.digital health passport, to support health transitions through the