10/11/2015

:00:00. > :00:00.the turf for a new innovation Centre in Glasgow can stop Scotland punches

:00:00. > :00:00.above its weight with 11% share compared to 8% share of the

:00:07. > :00:14.population and I hope it continues to do so. Statement, the Minister of

:00:15. > :00:20.State for Europe. Minister David Liddington. I would like to make a

:00:21. > :00:24.statement upon the Government's EU re-negotiation. As the House knows,

:00:25. > :00:28.this Government was elected with a mandate to renegotiate the UK's

:00:29. > :00:33.relationship with the European Union had a van in-out referendum by the

:00:34. > :00:38.end of 2017. Since July, technical talks have taken place in Brussels

:00:39. > :00:41.to inform our analysis of the legal options for reform. Today, the prime

:00:42. > :00:46.list has written to the President of the European Council to set out the

:00:47. > :00:50.changes that we wanted to see. -- the Prime Minister has written. We

:00:51. > :00:54.have laid out a statement with a copy of that letter and hard copies

:00:55. > :00:59.are available in the vote office. I would like to offer the House some

:01:00. > :01:03.further detail. The Prime Minister's speech three years ago

:01:04. > :01:06.set out a vision for the vision of the European Union. Three years on,

:01:07. > :01:10.the central argument he made them remains more persuasive than ever.

:01:11. > :01:17.The European Union needs to change. And increasingly others to have

:01:18. > :01:19.recognised this. A fortnight ago, Chancellor Merkel said British

:01:20. > :01:27.concerns were German concerns as well. The purpose of the Prime

:01:28. > :01:29.Minister's letter today is not to describe the precise means including

:01:30. > :01:34.the detailed legal amendments to bring in our reforms into effect,

:01:35. > :01:40.that is a matter for the negotiation itself. What matters to us is

:01:41. > :01:42.finding solutions. This agreement must be legally binding and

:01:43. > :01:49.irreversible and where necessary have foreseen the treaties. There

:01:50. > :01:53.are four main areas in which we are seeking reform. Economic governance.

:01:54. > :01:56.Measures that the euro zone countries need to take to secure the

:01:57. > :02:02.long-term future of their currency will affect all members of the EU.

:02:03. > :02:06.These are real concerns demonstrated by the proposal we saw this summer

:02:07. > :02:11.to bailout Greece using contributions which also would have

:02:12. > :02:15.come from non-euro members. As the Prime Minister and the Chancellor

:02:16. > :02:20.have set out, never of principles should underpin any long-term

:02:21. > :02:23.solution of this, as well as involving a safeguard mechanism to

:02:24. > :02:28.ensure these principles are respected and enforced. We believe

:02:29. > :02:33.these principles should include recognition that the EU has more

:02:34. > :02:36.than one currency, that there should be no discrimination and no

:02:37. > :02:41.disadvantage for any business on the basis of currency, that taxpayers in

:02:42. > :02:45.non-euro countries should never be financially liable for supporting

:02:46. > :02:48.Eurozone members, that only changes the Eurozone needs to make such as

:02:49. > :02:53.the creation of a banking union should never be compulsory for

:02:54. > :02:58.non-euro countries. Financial stability and supervision should be

:02:59. > :03:01.a key area of competence for national institutions like the Bank

:03:02. > :03:07.of England for non-euro members. Just as those matters have become a

:03:08. > :03:11.key area of competence for Eurozone institutions like the European

:03:12. > :03:17.Central Bank. Any issues which affect all member states must be

:03:18. > :03:28.discussed and decided by all member states. Second, we want to see an

:03:29. > :03:34.even more determined focus upon improving Europe's competitiveness.

:03:35. > :03:39.Unemployment and youth unemployment in Europe is still too high. Frankly

:03:40. > :03:43.speaking, less Europe is able to raise its game in terms of

:03:44. > :03:50.competitiveness, the challenges we all face from global competition and

:03:51. > :03:53.digital technology mean we face a serious risk of the next generation

:03:54. > :03:56.of European Union who will not be able to afford the living standards

:03:57. > :04:02.or social protection on the public services which are our citizens take

:04:03. > :04:05.granted today. We welcome the European Commission's focus on

:04:06. > :04:10.competitiveness. Legislative proposals have been cut by 8% and

:04:11. > :04:17.more regulatory appraisals taken off the table this year than ever

:04:18. > :04:22.before. Progress has been made towards a single digital market, a

:04:23. > :04:27.capital market's union and in last month's commission, trade strategy.

:04:28. > :04:32.We need to go further. The burden from existing regulation remains too

:04:33. > :04:37.high. Just as we secured a first ever real terms cut in the EU

:04:38. > :04:41.budget, so we should set a target to cut the total burden on business.

:04:42. > :04:46.This should be part of a clear strategic commitment, bringing

:04:47. > :04:53.forward all the various proposals, promises and agreements on European

:04:54. > :04:56.competitiveness. Third, sovereignty. As the Prime Minister said that

:04:57. > :05:03.Bloomberg and as we have stressed many times since, in the UK and in

:05:04. > :05:10.other member states or so, too many people have felt the EU is something

:05:11. > :05:13.done to them. In his letter, my right honourable friend makes three

:05:14. > :05:18.proposals to address this. First, we want to end the UK's obligation to

:05:19. > :05:22.work towards an ever closer union as set out in the treaties. For many

:05:23. > :05:26.British people, this simply reinforces the sense of being

:05:27. > :05:32.dragged against our will towards a political union. Second, we want to

:05:33. > :05:36.enable national parliaments to work together to block a new -- unwanted

:05:37. > :05:41.legislation, building on the arrangements already in the

:05:42. > :05:44.treaties. Third, we want to see the EU's commitment to subsidiarity

:05:45. > :05:52.imprimatur with proposals to achieve that. If powers don't need to reside

:05:53. > :05:57.in Brussels, they should be returned to Westminster. As the Dutch have

:05:58. > :06:05.said, the ambition should be Europe where necessary, but national where

:06:06. > :06:09.possible. Fourth, I want to turn to the issue of welfare and

:06:10. > :06:13.immigration. As the Prime Minister made clear in his speech last

:06:14. > :06:18.November, we believe in an open economy which includes the principle

:06:19. > :06:22.of free movement to work. I am proud that people from every country can

:06:23. > :06:28.find their community here in the UK. But the issue is one of scale and

:06:29. > :06:32.speed. The pressure which the current level of inward migration

:06:33. > :06:38.puts upon our public services is too great and has a profound effect also

:06:39. > :06:43.on those member states whose most highly qualified citizens have

:06:44. > :06:47.immigrated. The Prime Minister's letter sets out our proposals to

:06:48. > :06:51.address this. We need to ensure that when you could resolve admitted to

:06:52. > :06:53.the EU, free movement will not apply until the EU, free movement will not

:06:54. > :06:57.apply until their economies have converged much more closely with

:06:58. > :07:02.existing member states. We need to crack down on all abuse of free

:07:03. > :07:07.movement and this includes tougher and longer re-entry bands for

:07:08. > :07:10.fraudsters and people who collude in sham marriages and stronger powers

:07:11. > :07:16.to deport criminals to stop them coming back and to prevent them from

:07:17. > :07:19.entering in the first place. It includes dealing with the situation

:07:20. > :07:24.whereby it is easier for an EU citizen to bring a non-EU spouse to

:07:25. > :07:30.Britain for a British citizen to do the same. We must also reduce the

:07:31. > :07:34.fact of drawing migrants to the UK to take low skilled jobs, exposing

:07:35. > :07:41.their salary to be subsidised by the state from day one. We have proposed

:07:42. > :07:44.that people come to Britain should negotiation -- would contribute for

:07:45. > :07:49.four years before they qualify for in work benefits or social housing.

:07:50. > :07:55.And that we should end the practice of sending child benefit overseas.

:07:56. > :07:59.The Government is open to different ways of dealing with these issues

:08:00. > :08:06.but we do need to secure a range and is that deliver on our commitments

:08:07. > :08:12.to fair and controlled migration. Let me say something briefly about

:08:13. > :08:16.the next steps. There will now be a process of formal negotiation with

:08:17. > :08:22.the European institutions and all 27 European parlours, leading to

:08:23. > :08:26.substantive discussions with counsel. The Prime Minister's aim is

:08:27. > :08:32.to conclude an agreement at the earliest opportunity, but his

:08:33. > :08:37.priority is to ensure that these substances right. It is progress on

:08:38. > :08:43.the substance in this we negotiation that will determine the timing of

:08:44. > :08:46.the referendum itself. The Government fully recognises the

:08:47. > :08:52.close interest from members on all sides of this house. We cannot

:08:53. > :08:56.provide a running commentary on an ongoing negotiation but we will

:08:57. > :09:02.continue to engage fully with the wide range of Parliamentary enquiry

:09:03. > :09:07.is, now numbering 12 across both houses come into the renegotiation.

:09:08. > :09:12.Documents will be submitted for scrutiny in line with normal

:09:13. > :09:16.practices and the Foreign Secretary, I and other ministers will continue

:09:17. > :09:21.to appear before the relevant select committees. The Referendum Bill

:09:22. > :09:28.itself will return to this house before long. The Prime Minister has

:09:29. > :09:34.said and he repeated this morning, that should his concerns fall on

:09:35. > :09:39.deaf ears, the rules nothing out. He also believes that meaningful reform

:09:40. > :09:44.in the areas that I have described would benefit our economic and our

:09:45. > :09:49.national-security, provide a fresh supplement the UK's manager of the

:09:50. > :09:54.European Union and offer a basis on which to campaign to keep the United

:09:55. > :09:59.Kingdom as a member of a reformed European Union. It is that which

:10:00. > :10:07.remains the Government's objective. I commend this statement to the

:10:08. > :10:11.House. 1-macro let me begin by thanking the Minister for updating

:10:12. > :10:16.the House and for giving me advanced site of today's statement. The

:10:17. > :10:20.decision on whether to -- whether the UK remains a member of the

:10:21. > :10:26.European Union is the biggest decision this country will take for

:10:27. > :10:31.a generation. We on the side are clear that Britain is a more

:10:32. > :10:32.powerful, prosperous and secure country by being members of the

:10:33. > :10:42.European Union. We want to see Britain play a full

:10:43. > :10:47.role in shaping a better Europe which deepens its single market,

:10:48. > :10:53.which offers more hope and jobs to its young people, which uses its

:10:54. > :10:58.collective strength in trade with the rest of the world and which

:10:59. > :11:04.stands together to combat the urgent security problems that we face. We

:11:05. > :11:08.do not stand for the nationalism that says we would be better off out

:11:09. > :11:13.and a Brecht said that would sleep written we can empower and influence

:11:14. > :11:18.and diminished in the eyes of the world. The Prime Minister has set

:11:19. > :11:22.out in his speech this morning and in the letter to the president of

:11:23. > :11:29.the European Council his negotiating agenda. As we have already heard

:11:30. > :11:34.from comments to date from his own backbenchers, the problem be Prime

:11:35. > :11:39.Minister faces in doing this and the reason he has been so reluctant to

:11:40. > :11:43.put his position down on paper until now is that there is nothing he can

:11:44. > :11:48.renegotiate which will satisfy the large numbers of honourable and

:11:49. > :11:54.Right Honourable members sitting behind him who want to take Britain

:11:55. > :12:01.out of the EU at all costs. They are desperate to be disappointed and

:12:02. > :12:04.they are here in the house today. They -- they're only role in this

:12:05. > :12:09.debate is to push for demands that they know will not be met. The

:12:10. > :12:15.agenda published today raises important issues, including some

:12:16. > :12:20.which were in our own manifesto, such as the protection for the

:12:21. > :12:23.rights of non-Eurozone countries and the rights of national parliaments.

:12:24. > :12:30.It also includes other ideas, which are already in train. But can I ask

:12:31. > :12:35.the Minister to respond to some specific questions? It is right that

:12:36. > :12:40.we press for guarantees for non-Eurozone members in the future,

:12:41. > :12:45.our manifesto argued for this, it is in our interest, but does the

:12:46. > :12:51.Minister agree that it would be a mistake for Britain to volunteer or

:12:52. > :12:56.embrace some kind of second-class or associate membership of the EU while

:12:57. > :12:59.still paying the full costs of membership? That would be an outcome

:13:00. > :13:04.which would weaken Britain rather than strengthen our position. Why is

:13:05. > :13:08.there so little in this agenda about jobs and growth for the future when

:13:09. > :13:10.the problem Europe has been struggling with has been low growth

:13:11. > :13:17.and high unemployment for some time? When the Minister talks about

:13:18. > :13:23.reducing the burden on business, can he guarantee that nothing in this

:13:24. > :13:27.agenda reduces the hard one unemployment rights which have been

:13:28. > :13:32.agreed over the years, including rights to paid leave, for part-time

:13:33. > :13:36.workers, and fair pay for temporary and agency workers? Does the

:13:37. > :13:42.Minister accept it would be a huge mistake to try to build support for

:13:43. > :13:47.a reformed EU on the back of a bonfire of workers' writes? On free

:13:48. > :13:51.movement, we know a retreat from earlier statements and hence from

:13:52. > :13:57.the Prime Minister that he would seek an end to the principle of free

:13:58. > :14:02.movement, can the Minister tell the house on the issue of access to in

:14:03. > :14:06.work benefits, as the Prime Minister set on the four-year timescale for

:14:07. > :14:11.access to such benefits, or is this subject to negotiation at the

:14:12. > :14:17.European Council? Could he also tell us whether this will be through a

:14:18. > :14:23.change in EU legislation or in the way the system works here in the

:14:24. > :14:30.UK? Does he agree that those who want to reject this agenda as too

:14:31. > :14:34.little, many of them behind him, and who are determined to take Britain

:14:35. > :14:38.out of the EU, it is for them to state clearly to the British people

:14:39. > :14:49.what being out would mean for our jobs, trade, investment, employment

:14:50. > :14:52.rights, and national security. The EU of course faces big challenges in

:14:53. > :14:58.recovering from the Eurozone crisis, offering more hope for the

:14:59. > :15:02.future, dealing with the urgent and immediate refugee crisis that it

:15:03. > :15:08.faces. But we believe that these challenges are best met by Britain

:15:09. > :15:12.playing a leading role in the future of the EU and using our power and

:15:13. > :15:19.influence with others to overcome them. There is a broader case far

:15:20. > :15:24.beyond these points today about Britain's place in the world and in

:15:25. > :15:29.the EU, and that has to be made. Our history is not the same as many

:15:30. > :15:33.other member states, and perhaps we will never look at these issues

:15:34. > :15:40.through precisely the same eyes. But that is not the same as wanting to

:15:41. > :15:46.leave. Reform is essential, it should be an ongoing process, not a

:15:47. > :15:51.single event. On this side of the house, we will keep giving for a

:15:52. > :15:55.Britain engaged with the world, using its power and influence to the

:15:56. > :15:59.maximum, and not walking away from a partnership that we have been

:16:00. > :16:00.members of the 40 years and which has brought many benefits to the

:16:01. > :16:15.people and economy of this country. He asked me four questions, if I can

:16:16. > :16:21.deal with them in turn. On relations between EU and non-EU members, we do

:16:22. > :16:27.indeed need to have as part of this negotiation safeguards against any

:16:28. > :16:30.risk of caucusing by Eurozone countries who, if they chose to act

:16:31. > :16:35.as a caucus, could command and automatic qualified majority within

:16:36. > :16:41.Council of ministers meetings. There will be some issues which derives

:16:42. > :16:45.directly from -- where Eurozone countries will want to talk about

:16:46. > :16:50.such matters amongst themselves, but it will be really important that we

:16:51. > :16:54.have a deal that allows the Eurozone to do the work of integration they

:16:55. > :16:58.will need to do but which properly safeguard the integrity of the

:16:59. > :17:08.single market and decision-making across the board at 28. He teased me

:17:09. > :17:12.a bit about the views of some of my honourable friend. When I have

:17:13. > :17:16.appeared before some of the committees of this house, I have

:17:17. > :17:18.found members on his side of the house who are equally committed to

:17:19. > :17:38.British withdrawal from the EU. This is a matter... The Labour Party

:17:39. > :17:44.leader, the Right Honourable member for Islington North, has not in the

:17:45. > :17:50.past been renowned for his enthusiasm for the EU. This has cut

:17:51. > :17:55.across party divisions for as long as EU membership has been an issue

:17:56. > :18:00.in the UK, and people hold honourable, principled views both

:18:01. > :18:04.for and against British membership in both parties, and that is likely

:18:05. > :18:12.to always be the case. The ask about low growth, I think what the

:18:13. > :18:17.Government is not only saying but what this Government has led and

:18:18. > :18:19.helped shape within the EU since 2010 has demonstrated the

:18:20. > :18:24.seriousness with which we take this issue. I know that the Prime

:18:25. > :18:31.Minister was personally involved in the negotiation that clinched the

:18:32. > :18:36.deal on a free trade agreement, which is proving immense value to

:18:37. > :18:40.British industry. It is the British Government which has helped to

:18:41. > :18:44.energise the debate towards a digital single market across Europe,

:18:45. > :18:49.something that will give SMEs and large companies increased

:18:50. > :18:55.opportunities. I would say to him in regard to workers' writes, nobody on

:18:56. > :19:09.my side of the house wants to make a bonfire of workers rights, but we

:19:10. > :19:13.also need to have in mind the reality that other countries that

:19:14. > :19:16.have chosen to go for a much more regulated approach to the employment

:19:17. > :19:21.market have often tragically suffered much higher levels of

:19:22. > :19:29.unemployment than we have in the UK. For example, keeping the UK's opt

:19:30. > :19:32.out from the working time directive is something that we will fight very

:19:33. > :19:37.hard to make sure is entrenched by this renegotiation. On freedom of

:19:38. > :19:42.movement, the Prime Minister made his views very clear, our objective

:19:43. > :19:45.is to better control migration from within the EU, there are different

:19:46. > :19:49.ways in which we could achieve that, we think we can do it by reducing

:19:50. > :19:52.the incentive is of our welfare system, and that is where my right

:19:53. > :19:56.honourable friend set out the proposals he made and repeated

:19:57. > :20:02.today. Others in the EU have concerns, that is why we say to

:20:03. > :20:05.them, if that is what you think, but forward alternative proposals that

:20:06. > :20:12.deliver the same result. It is the outcome of the measures, controlled,

:20:13. > :20:17.fair, properly managed migration, that is the end that we seek. On

:20:18. > :20:21.what is meant by out, the Prime Minister said again this morning

:20:22. > :20:26.that he did not think either the Swiss or Norwegian models would be

:20:27. > :20:30.right for the UK. I think it is the case that the question of what out

:20:31. > :20:37.might mean is something that will be a key element in the forthcoming

:20:38. > :20:40.referendum debate. A very large number of members are seeking to

:20:41. > :20:45.catch my icon that was entirely to be expected. To have any chance of

:20:46. > :20:55.accommodating them, brevity will be of the essence. Would he agree that

:20:56. > :20:58.the big issue which will be settled in this forthcoming referendum is

:20:59. > :21:02.how best this country will protect its national interests and security

:21:03. > :21:06.in the modern world, to enhance our prosperity for the next 30 or 50

:21:07. > :21:13.years, and will he seek to ensure that we do not lose sight of that

:21:14. > :21:16.and we address current events? Whilst the Prime Minister is

:21:17. > :21:21.embarking on important negotiations, and I wish him success on

:21:22. > :21:25.competitiveness in particular, will he ensure that when we are

:21:26. > :21:29.negotiating the benefit rights of those foreign nationals who work

:21:30. > :21:32.alongside British people in employment in this country, we

:21:33. > :21:37.remember the interests of the 2 million or so British nationals who

:21:38. > :21:44.live and work in the U and do not wish to see those governments start

:21:45. > :21:54.to disk and eight against our nationals in their tax and benefit

:21:55. > :21:57.system? The answer is yes on his second point, we always have the

:21:58. > :22:02.interest of British people at the heart of our thinking about any area

:22:03. > :22:09.of policy, and we will certainly continue to treat the National

:22:10. > :22:15.economic and security interests of the UK at the core objective of

:22:16. > :22:19.every aspect of the negotiation. I also thank the Minister for making

:22:20. > :22:25.an oral statement to the house and 4/ of his statement. What difference

:22:26. > :22:29.a year makes, just last year, Scots were being told we voted yes to

:22:30. > :22:35.independents, we would be getting chucked out of the EU, and now we

:22:36. > :22:40.could not be closer to the exit. The Minister said earlier on that there

:22:41. > :22:46.would be a process of formal negotiation with the Europeans. Will

:22:47. > :22:50.he commit to us today to consult with the devolved administrations as

:22:51. > :23:00.a formal part of that negotiation's he also said Europe, where

:23:01. > :23:04.necessary, National, where possible. Will that include devolving the

:23:05. > :23:12.powers where appropriate back to the devolved administrations's finally,

:23:13. > :23:19.will be Minister tell us what in Scotland's agenda for reform has

:23:20. > :23:23.been included in this today? Of course we were voting to give

:23:24. > :23:29.additional devolved powers to Scotland only yesterday in this

:23:30. > :23:37.house, I can say to the honourable member that I spoke to Fiona Hyslop

:23:38. > :23:42.this morning, the question of the reform and renegotiation is on the

:23:43. > :23:49.agenda is the first item at every meeting of the joint ministerial

:23:50. > :23:53.committee on Europe, which I chair, and which includes ministers from

:23:54. > :23:56.all the devolved administrations. I am visiting Edinburgh tomorrow, I

:23:57. > :24:01.will have further conversations with the Scottish Government of the type

:24:02. > :24:05.that he urges, and I said to Fiona Hyslop this morning, I remain always

:24:06. > :24:11.open to listen to the views and make sure that the UK Government takes

:24:12. > :24:13.full account of the interests of all three of the devolved

:24:14. > :24:22.administrations as we take this forward.

:24:23. > :24:29.The minister is not correct in thinking that the legal mechanisms

:24:30. > :24:35.for delivery of these proposals is not part of the solution. Does he

:24:36. > :24:40.not accept that treaty change is needed for virtually every

:24:41. > :24:48.proposal? Furthermore, that treaty change is not on offer's --? So how

:24:49. > :24:57.are the legally irreversible changes going to be made when even the legal

:24:58. > :25:00.expert from the European Commission says the Danish and Irish presidents

:25:01. > :25:05.are not valid? How will he sell this pig in a poke?

:25:06. > :25:14.We think that some, but not every aspect of the package of reforms we

:25:15. > :25:21.are seeking will need treaty change. We are looking at models including

:25:22. > :25:27.those used by Denmark and Ireland in the past. The technical talks that

:25:28. > :25:31.have taken place in Brussels involving senior British officials

:25:32. > :25:35.have also been involving representatives of the institutional

:25:36. > :25:42.legal services. We are working closely, alongside the current heads

:25:43. > :25:46.of the legal services of the institutions and we believe that on

:25:47. > :25:51.every one of the issues that I have listed in my statement, we can

:25:52. > :26:02.indeed find the appropriate legal way forward. Willie at knowledge

:26:03. > :26:06.that the EU citizens living here contribute far more through their

:26:07. > :26:10.taxes than they receive in services or social security payments? The

:26:11. > :26:17.problem with Social Security is not the EU but we have lost the

:26:18. > :26:23.contributory principle from our system and the answer is to

:26:24. > :26:30.reintroduce that? I would agree with him that it is important that in the

:26:31. > :26:34.debate about migration controls, that we don't stray into

:26:35. > :26:39.stigmatising people from elsewhere in Europe or any other part of the

:26:40. > :26:44.world who are obeying the law and contributing to live in this

:26:45. > :26:47.country. I think that the point he makes about the contributory

:26:48. > :26:52.principle could apply to policy pursued under successive footage

:26:53. > :26:57.Government of all political strikes. I draw his attention back to Article

:26:58. > :27:00.153 of the treaty, which does make it clear that it is for member

:27:01. > :27:06.states rather than the EU to define the fundamental principles of the

:27:07. > :27:11.Social security systems. It would be rather odd and contradictory if we

:27:12. > :27:18.were to say there is only one model for social security and it is

:27:19. > :27:23.compatible with that. The Minister has described different legal

:27:24. > :27:31.mechanisms for achieving our objectives within this. Could he

:27:32. > :27:36.tell us what they are? No. These are discussions that are a matter for

:27:37. > :27:40.the detailed negotiations that are now underway. The technical talks

:27:41. > :27:52.have helped to give us a menu of options. In respect of particular

:27:53. > :27:58.reforms, we would be able to reply -- rely on treaty change,

:27:59. > :28:02.protocols, political commitment and that many of options is now going to

:28:03. > :28:06.be available to the heads of Government as they embark on the

:28:07. > :28:11.political negotiation. The purpose of the technical talks has been to

:28:12. > :28:19.ensure that people are informed about those solutions available and

:28:20. > :28:24.they don't have to start that work from scratch when they are in the

:28:25. > :28:28.leader's meeting. We believe that if powers don't need to reside in

:28:29. > :28:33.Brussels, they should be returned to Westminster. Could he tell the House

:28:34. > :28:36.which current treaty provisions he intends to use for that purpose and

:28:37. > :28:45.if it doesn't have one, will he negotiate a new one? I have

:28:46. > :28:50.described areas in which we are seeking change. If the honourable

:28:51. > :28:54.lady would like to look at what the Prime Minister said in his speech

:28:55. > :29:01.this morning, she will see that he spoke in terms of making more of a

:29:02. > :29:05.reality of the principles of subsidiary rarity and

:29:06. > :29:10.proportionality and establishing an agreed mechanism within the EU

:29:11. > :29:15.system, so we don't just look at new proposals coming out of the

:29:16. > :29:19.commission, but we have a means by which to review regularly the

:29:20. > :29:27.existing exercise of competences and decide where competences currently

:29:28. > :29:33.exercised at EU level no longer need to be exercised at that level. Don't

:29:34. > :29:37.we have to control our own borders in order to fulfil the conservative

:29:38. > :29:40.popular promised to cut net migration by more than two thirds in

:29:41. > :29:44.this parliament and shouldn't we decide what the rules are and apply

:29:45. > :29:51.them fairly to the whole world, not distinguishing between Europe and

:29:52. > :29:56.non-Europe? The Prime Minister has been completely consistent in saying

:29:57. > :30:03.that he accepts the basic principle of freedom of movement for workers,

:30:04. > :30:06.but that that should not become a freedom to choose the most

:30:07. > :30:14.attractive welfare system anywhere in the European Union. We do believe

:30:15. > :30:22.that given that, something like 40% of people here from elsewhere in the

:30:23. > :30:28.EU are receiving benefits or tax credits of some kind action on that

:30:29. > :30:31.front will have a significant effect upon the core factor which our

:30:32. > :30:38.welfare system exercises at the moment. I think the Minister for his

:30:39. > :30:43.statement and for advanced copy. The Minister has put much store by

:30:44. > :30:46.treaty change but since the Council of ministers and the European

:30:47. > :30:51.Commission are like on things fundamental to them constantly break

:30:52. > :30:55.their own solemn word and treaties, why should we put any confidence or

:30:56. > :31:06.faith or trust in any changes that they agreed to? I think where

:31:07. > :31:09.matters are the subject of treaty change, they become binding as well

:31:10. > :31:14.as in international law and there has been occasions, particularly

:31:15. > :31:19.with regard to the single market aware British interests have been

:31:20. > :31:24.safeguarded by the fact that there are provisions in the treaties

:31:25. > :31:28.against discrimination, against any one country's products are missing

:31:29. > :31:33.the market. We went through the European process in order to secure

:31:34. > :31:37.the lifting of the beef exporting banned. There is a stronger element

:31:38. > :31:45.of protection there, than the honourable gentleman thinks. Further

:31:46. > :31:50.to that, would he agree that the creation of the single market for

:31:51. > :31:55.services would be a big prize for British business creating many jobs

:31:56. > :31:59.and that can only be achieved by being within the European Union? I

:32:00. > :32:03.think that my right honourable friend makes a powerful point. We

:32:04. > :32:10.have a single market which in terms of goods is working pretty well, but

:32:11. > :32:13.a single market which terms of services is woefully undeveloped,

:32:14. > :32:18.despite the fact that in every European economy as we look to the

:32:19. > :32:21.future, it is going to be for this services sector is that the new

:32:22. > :32:28.growth and the new jobs are going to come from. We need to seek

:32:29. > :32:32.determined action in that area. The Prime Minister hate the lip service

:32:33. > :32:35.to the EU's crisis of competitiveness rather like his

:32:36. > :32:42.predecessor 15 years ago. Nothing changed. The own officials grow

:32:43. > :32:48.weary of initiatives have failed to tackle Euro sclerosis. Can the

:32:49. > :32:53.Minister spell out the detail of the plans to make the EU more

:32:54. > :32:56.competitive? There is one thing that doesn't change that is the nature of

:32:57. > :33:06.the gentleman's interventions on this subject. The agenda on

:33:07. > :33:10.competitiveness is one which the Prime Minister, the Chancellor, the

:33:11. > :33:15.Business Secretary and I have spoken upon frequently and I am happy to

:33:16. > :33:20.send the honourable member a sheaf of speeches if you would like that.

:33:21. > :33:26.We have three things. It is about cutting the cost of unnecessary red

:33:27. > :33:31.tape and regulation on all business. It is about deepening the

:33:32. > :33:34.single market, especially in digital and services where it is an

:33:35. > :33:39.developed at the moment and it is about forging new ambitious

:33:40. > :33:45.free-trade agreements with other countries and other regions of the

:33:46. > :33:49.world to benefit both them and us. These opportunities that British

:33:50. > :33:54.business has urged us to take and these opportunities which this is

:33:55. > :33:59.determined not just to follow but are leading the European debate.

:34:00. > :34:05.Will my right honourable friend avoid using up his limited arguing

:34:06. > :34:10.power to obtain symbolic changes, like removing the words come ever

:34:11. > :34:14.closer union? Given that they have never been invoked by the European

:34:15. > :34:20.Court against Britain or to require any other member state to move in

:34:21. > :34:24.and integration list direction or drop from the constitutional treaty.

:34:25. > :34:28.Will he focus on getting back powers which are not required to run a

:34:29. > :34:32.common trading area so that this Parliament can make more of our own

:34:33. > :34:41.laws and hold our lawmakers to accounts? My right honourable friend

:34:42. > :34:50.has always said that what he is seeking is a deal on reform which is

:34:51. > :34:52.substantive and which it will be challenging to negotiate. I don't

:34:53. > :34:59.want any member of the House to think that this is a set of reforms

:35:00. > :35:05.that are going to fall easily into our laps. It is going to mean some

:35:06. > :35:11.tough negotiation ahead. I think that the importance of the words on

:35:12. > :35:16.ever closer union are that they do encapsulated the fact that the EU at

:35:17. > :35:21.the moment is insufficiently flexible and still thinks in terms

:35:22. > :35:23.of a single destination in terms of integration for all its member

:35:24. > :35:29.states. As the Prime Minister said this morning, we need to see a much

:35:30. > :35:34.greater acceptance of the diversity of Europe at the moment, readiness

:35:35. > :35:37.to live and let live and accept that some countries will want to

:35:38. > :35:41.integrate more closely but others will wish to stand from that. The

:35:42. > :35:50.decisions of each group should be properly respected. The Minister

:35:51. > :35:57.said that the agreement must be legally binding and irreversible.

:35:58. > :36:03.Can he clarify what he means by irreversible? Will it mean in the

:36:04. > :36:07.terms of the John Major opt out on the social chapter which will have

:36:08. > :36:10.reversed by the Tony Blair governments? That no future

:36:11. > :36:18.democratic elected Government will be able to reverse a decision taken

:36:19. > :36:24.at this time by this Government? Obviously, as Parliament is

:36:25. > :36:29.sovereign and not least in the fact that the EU law only has direct

:36:30. > :36:36.effect in the UK because of acts of parliament, the decisions of this

:36:37. > :36:41.house, that is something that limits the irreversible and 80 of any

:36:42. > :36:50.Government decision. What we are keen to avoid happening again, is

:36:51. > :37:00.the sort of thing that happened over the EFSM earlier this year. In their

:37:01. > :37:04.heat of the Eurozone, winner deal -- when a deal suddenly appeared to be

:37:05. > :37:09.at risk and it came up for discussion is in a meeting where

:37:10. > :37:13.only only 90 member governments were gathered together, that is not the

:37:14. > :37:24.way we can do business in the future. My right honourable friend

:37:25. > :37:29.must know this is pretty thin. Much less than people had come to expect

:37:30. > :37:33.from the Government. It takes out a few words from the pre-eminent ball

:37:34. > :37:36.but does nothing about the substance of the treaties. It deals with

:37:37. > :37:41.competition for which the European Commission itself as the proposal.

:37:42. > :37:47.It fails to restore control of our borders. It seems to me that its

:37:48. > :37:54.whole aim is to make Harold Wilson's negotiation reasonable. It

:37:55. > :37:58.has to have a full list of powers that will be restored to the UK and

:37:59. > :38:08.for this Parliament, not vacuously to parliaments plural. I think the

:38:09. > :38:12.problem with the idea of a unilateral national Parliamentary

:38:13. > :38:18.veto which my honourable friend advocates, is that it would mean

:38:19. > :38:23.that, for example, the most protectionist parliament in any one

:38:24. > :38:29.member state could veto every deregulatory, every single market

:38:30. > :38:33.measure which the UK believed was profoundly in the interests of our

:38:34. > :38:38.people and our prosperity. Such a unilateral veto would be

:38:39. > :38:41.incompatible even with the arrangements that Norway and

:38:42. > :38:49.Switzerland have with the European Union at the moment. I would just

:38:50. > :38:55.say that I think if we had had the privilege and responsibility of

:38:56. > :38:57.sitting at Council Minister's meetings in Brussels, a

:38:58. > :39:04.responsibility that he may enjoy at some stage in a future in his

:39:05. > :39:11.career, then he would, I think, be less sanguine about the unambitious

:39:12. > :39:15.nature of what we are proposing. What we are proposing is going to

:39:16. > :39:23.require some tough negotiating indeed. It is ridiculous that the

:39:24. > :39:26.Prime Minister is putting the referendum to the British people,

:39:27. > :39:32.that he can't explain what the British people are voting for. If

:39:33. > :39:35.they are voting out and it is not Norway and not Switzerland, what is

:39:36. > :39:46.at the British people are voting for? I think that would be a

:39:47. > :39:50.question for those who are campaigning for out when the

:39:51. > :39:54.referendum comes, to make clear. There are a number of studies that

:39:55. > :40:02.have been published on what various alternative options for engagement

:40:03. > :40:07.with Europe would look like. We are relentlessly focused upon securing a

:40:08. > :40:08.successful outcome to this negotiation and delivering the

:40:09. > :40:16.reformed Europe that British people want to see. The commitment will be

:40:17. > :40:20.nothing of a rhetorical gesture unless it is backed by a radical

:40:21. > :40:24.shake-up of the way the EU takes decisions. Does the Minister agree

:40:25. > :40:28.that mostly EU legislation is stitched up between the commission,

:40:29. > :40:33.the European Parliament and member states behind closed doors and the

:40:34. > :40:39.impenetrable process known as tri- log and cis acting as a ratchet?

:40:40. > :40:41.What proposals does the Government have for halting and reversing that

:40:42. > :40:53.ratchet? The Prime Minister said this morning

:40:54. > :40:59.that we need a new mechanism in the EU's system for working which guards

:41:00. > :41:02.against that ratchet that he described and provides for the

:41:03. > :41:08.opportunity of reviewing and reallocating powers that do not need

:41:09. > :41:12.to be exercised at a European level. I think the pamphlet recently

:41:13. > :41:18.published by the member for Chichester does provide some very

:41:19. > :41:25.constructive and imaginative suggestions as to how we might take

:41:26. > :41:32.that forward. The Prime Minister's letter welcomed the new EU trade

:41:33. > :41:36.Chatterjee, but the Government carry out an assessment on how these deals

:41:37. > :41:40.would be affected by his wider demands for economic reform? In his

:41:41. > :41:44.answer, and the Minister confirm it is his understanding of the recent

:41:45. > :41:48.remarks by the US trade representative that if the UK were

:41:49. > :41:49.to leave the EU, we would not be able to negotiate an independent

:41:50. > :42:05.trade deal with the United States? I heard what was said. He is a

:42:06. > :42:09.senior official in the current United Straits administration, so

:42:10. > :42:18.one has to take it seriously. On the general point, we see further moves

:42:19. > :42:25.forward in free deals as an important element in securing the

:42:26. > :42:29.reformed EU that we want. The potential deal with the United

:42:30. > :42:34.States is the most ambitious and far reaching in its consequences, but I

:42:35. > :42:37.welcome the fact that the commission in its strategy is also talking

:42:38. > :42:42.about forging new trade deals with some of the emerging economies and

:42:43. > :42:50.with our good allies and partners in Australia and New Zealand. As we

:42:51. > :42:54.mark the 750th anniversary of the first English Parliament and some of

:42:55. > :42:59.our continental partners are newcomers to this concept, can I

:43:00. > :43:05.suggest that unless we return powers to this Parliament, that this

:43:06. > :43:09.exercise will not be worth its while, for it is in this Parliament

:43:10. > :43:14.that authority ultimately should reside on the half of the British

:43:15. > :43:19.people? Can he explain to us how this new arrangement whereby groups

:43:20. > :43:22.of national parliaments acting together can stop unwanted proposals

:43:23. > :43:36.is going to work? I share his love of English history,

:43:37. > :43:44.but I caution him against seeing Simon the Montford as a true born

:43:45. > :43:50.Englishman. The direct answer to his question is that treaty is already

:43:51. > :43:57.provide for a mechanism whereby a group of national parliaments can

:43:58. > :44:01.demand and secure a review by the commission of a measure that the

:44:02. > :44:05.commission is bringing forward. We think one option that we should be

:44:06. > :44:09.looking at is turning such an arrangement above a certain

:44:10. > :44:18.threshold into an outright veto, a red card rather than a yellow card.

:44:19. > :44:24.Speaking as the chair of the PLP's pro-EU group, which has 210

:44:25. > :44:29.members, including the leader of the Labour Party, we are united behind

:44:30. > :44:33.staying in a Europe which is reforming and progressive. The

:44:34. > :44:38.minister has said that if the Prime Minister does not get his way, he

:44:39. > :44:44.leaves nothing out, so if we leave Europe, what does that mean for the

:44:45. > :44:50.EU? When the negotiations are over, the Government is going to make it

:44:51. > :44:53.-- make its assessment and recommendation clay. It will set out

:44:54. > :45:00.in detail its reasons for coming to that view. Including it assessment

:45:01. > :45:09.of what alternative options there might be on those. I don't think he

:45:10. > :45:12.has anything to fear. Our focus remains on a successful outcome to

:45:13. > :45:16.these negotiations that we believe will deliver a reformed Europe that

:45:17. > :45:23.is what the British people want to see. The clarity and ambition of the

:45:24. > :45:32.reforms that the Minister has outlined demonstrate there is a job

:45:33. > :45:36.of work to do. They also remind us just how important British

:45:37. > :45:41.leadership of the EU has been, such as the introduction of a single

:45:42. > :45:45.market in 1980 and the extension of it hopefully soon, because of the

:45:46. > :45:51.conclusion of these reforms. Does he agree that our real ambition is to

:45:52. > :45:55.restate Britain's leadership in conjunction with other nation states

:45:56. > :46:01.so that we can bring about an innovative, modern and responsive

:46:02. > :46:06.economy which will benefit us all? I agree, if we look back at the EU's

:46:07. > :46:10.history, we can take pride in the fact that two of its biggest

:46:11. > :46:16.achievements, building a single market across Europe and enlarging

:46:17. > :46:20.the EU to embrace the new democracies of Eastern and Central

:46:21. > :46:24.Europe, were things that were achieved very much by British

:46:25. > :46:30.leadership and in particular by the personal drive of Margaret Thatcher

:46:31. > :46:35.on both counts. What he says is important and the Government shares

:46:36. > :46:41.the spirit in which he posed his question. I am relieved that the

:46:42. > :46:46.Prime Minister has outlined his negotiating stance and I wish him

:46:47. > :46:49.every success in securing it, because I want him to be able to

:46:50. > :46:53.bang the drum enthusiastically for our EU membership. Will the Minister

:46:54. > :47:01.confirm that if meaningful reform is secured, the PM and the EU will not

:47:02. > :47:05.have to deliver fully on all the issues set out in his letter,

:47:06. > :47:11.including, for instance, in work benefits? For the primaries to two

:47:12. > :47:19.argue in favour of our membership, the benefits which were set out in

:47:20. > :47:24.the review. We will need to have a satisfactory outcome which meet our

:47:25. > :47:31.requirements on all four areas of policy which I have described. Our

:47:32. > :47:33.position on welfare and migration remains as the prime ministers about

:47:34. > :47:40.in November and he repeated this morning.

:47:41. > :47:45.I note the constraints suggested by the Prime Minister that free

:47:46. > :47:49.movement of peoples is not working and will never work will stop even

:47:50. > :47:55.Sweden and Germany are realising this today. Would not a Visa system

:47:56. > :48:06.for all the fairer and safeguard our borders? We always keep our visa

:48:07. > :48:14.arrangements under review, but I would ask my honourable friend to

:48:15. > :48:18.think about the consequences for the way in which both business and

:48:19. > :48:25.tourism operate between us and our neighbours in other democracies in

:48:26. > :48:29.Europe, were there to be visas of the sort he is describing. It would

:48:30. > :48:37.have to reply -- apply in reverse to British tourists. Progress is

:48:38. > :48:40.leisurely, some might even describe it as lethargic. Because I like

:48:41. > :48:45.guessing games and want to encourage members to think, let me suggest to

:48:46. > :48:49.members that if they could model their contributions on those of the

:48:50. > :48:50.members for Wokingham and Birmingham Edgbaston, progress would be

:48:51. > :49:03.altogether speedier. In his statement, he used the phrase

:49:04. > :49:09.salary to be subsidised by the state, how will the Government

:49:10. > :49:12.French aid between a salary subsidised by the state for

:49:13. > :49:18.foreigners and tax credits for UK citizens? These are matters that

:49:19. > :49:23.will be addressed during the negotiation.

:49:24. > :49:32.Would he agree that in ensuring a full permanent access to the single

:49:33. > :49:36.market without joining the euro is a key objective for our future

:49:37. > :49:41.economic health and would be a key sign that our continued membership

:49:42. > :49:46.of a reformed EU itself the best of both worlds, prosperity and

:49:47. > :49:50.flexibility? I think he put that very well, and getting that is

:49:51. > :49:58.exactly what the Prime Minister is seeking. I was pleased to read that

:49:59. > :50:02.the Prime Minister hopes to be able to campaign with all his heart and

:50:03. > :50:11.soul to keep Britain in the EU. But any negotiation requires parities.

:50:12. > :50:13.What are his priorities? They are the four policy objectives that he

:50:14. > :50:21.set out this morning that I repeated in my statement today. After all the

:50:22. > :50:25.statements made by the Prime Minister, my right honourable

:50:26. > :50:29.friend, the Foreign Secretary, the former Foreign Secretary, the

:50:30. > :50:35.pledged to make national parliaments, restore the primacy of

:50:36. > :50:37.national parliaments, to get a fundamental opt out from the Charter

:50:38. > :50:45.of fundamental rights, to restore our borders, is that the sum total

:50:46. > :50:53.of the Government's position in this renegotiation? Is not the onus on

:50:54. > :50:58.those who advocate that we should stay in the EU to explain why we

:50:59. > :51:04.should put up with being a second tier country in an increasingly

:51:05. > :51:11.centralised European Union, paying more and more and losing more and

:51:12. > :51:15.more control? On the particular point of the Charter of fundamental

:51:16. > :51:19.rights, the Prime Minister referred to that in his speech, this is an

:51:20. > :51:25.issue that we will be seeking to address through the forthcoming

:51:26. > :51:30.British Bill of Rights. I think that he underestimates how demanding and

:51:31. > :51:35.far reaching the proposals that we have made will be. The Danish Prime

:51:36. > :51:39.Minister said this morning, responding to the Prime Minister's

:51:40. > :51:43.speech, what he proposed was a good basis for concrete negotiations but

:51:44. > :51:51.it will be difficult, and I hope we succeed because we need a strong UK

:51:52. > :51:53.in the EU. How will be Minister ensure that investment is not

:51:54. > :51:59.impacted by the uncertainty that will proceed the referendum,

:52:00. > :52:03.Berrigan mind that we in Northern Ireland have a unique situation with

:52:04. > :52:09.the land border with the South of Ireland that will continue to be

:52:10. > :52:14.part of the EU? She is right, it is one of the reasons why I regard it

:52:15. > :52:19.as an important responsibility on my part to keep very close contact with

:52:20. > :52:25.what the devolved administrations are thinking. At the moment, there

:52:26. > :52:30.are no signs that the flow of foreign direct investment is drying

:52:31. > :52:34.up, in fact it is still the case that the UK gets a bigger share of

:52:35. > :52:44.third country direct investment into the EU than any other member state.

:52:45. > :52:47.Given that he has conceded that several elements of the Prime

:52:48. > :52:51.Minister's letter would require treaty change, can he tell us what

:52:52. > :52:55.is his best estimate of the length of time that change would take, even

:52:56. > :53:03.if miraculously it would be immediately agreed? I don't blame

:53:04. > :53:09.him for asking what is a legitimate question, but this is something that

:53:10. > :53:17.we will be talking about in the context of the negotiations. It is

:53:18. > :53:19.true that each member state will have its own constitutional

:53:20. > :53:29.arrangements for ratifying any new treaty. Can the Minister tell us if

:53:30. > :53:33.the prime and Eszterhas told him the date by which he is going to make up

:53:34. > :53:38.its mind and tell us which way he is going to go in this referendum? Why

:53:39. > :53:44.is it he cannot set out, if we are voting to leave, just exactly what

:53:45. > :53:47.it is we are voting for? The Prime Minister will make his position

:53:48. > :53:52.clear at the end of the negotiations. It would seem odd to

:53:53. > :53:57.embark on a process of negotiations and declare what the outcome would

:53:58. > :54:03.be at the beginning. Can the Minister explain whether we or

:54:04. > :54:10.Europe can decide how many migrants should come to the UK? We are

:54:11. > :54:16.seeking a situation in which we have tougher rules against the abuse of

:54:17. > :54:20.freedom of movement by criminals, Forster 's and others, and also to

:54:21. > :54:30.reduce significantly the poor fact that our welfare system provides at

:54:31. > :54:32.present. You referred to working together to block unwanted European

:54:33. > :54:37.legislation. The fishing industry has been subject to European

:54:38. > :54:43.registration, more red tape and bureaucracy, less fishing boats,

:54:44. > :54:45.be in control of local fishing be in control of local fishing

:54:46. > :54:50.waters, not the EU. What is being waters, not the EU. What is being

:54:51. > :54:56.done to help our fishermen? We have demonstrated through actions our

:54:57. > :55:00.support for the UK's fishing communities in the reform of the

:55:01. > :55:05.common fisheries policy that British ministers helped to secure last

:55:06. > :55:08.year. That has led to a ban on the practice of discarding, something

:55:09. > :55:12.that British ministers and Government of all colours had been

:55:13. > :55:17.seeking for decades will stop and to a shift towards more local and

:55:18. > :55:22.regional management than was the case in the past. What has not been

:55:23. > :55:26.included in the statement is far more important than what has been

:55:27. > :55:30.included, nothing about regaining control over our trade deals with

:55:31. > :55:35.the rest of the world, nothing about regaining control over farming or

:55:36. > :55:39.over fisheries or over regional aid or state aid or ending free movement

:55:40. > :55:44.of people. Does he agree that today will be looked back on as the day

:55:45. > :55:48.when it became clear that the renegotiation amounts to no more

:55:49. > :55:52.than tinkering around the edges and fundamentally, on great areas of

:55:53. > :55:53.policy, this country will still finish up being told what to do by

:55:54. > :56:09.the rest of the EU? On two counts, first, because my

:56:10. > :56:13.honourable friend and estates the significance of the reforms that my

:56:14. > :56:18.right honourable friend the Prime Minister has proposed and secondly

:56:19. > :56:26.because if the decision of the British people, and it is for the

:56:27. > :56:30.British people, if they decide to stay within a reformed European

:56:31. > :56:35.Union, then the responsibility of this and any future British

:56:36. > :56:39.Government will be not to be passive, but to lead the debate

:56:40. > :56:48.within Europe and to secure outcomes that benefit the prosperity of the

:56:49. > :56:52.British people. Could I ask again what specifically from Scotland's

:56:53. > :56:58.agenda for EU reform has been mentioned in the negotiations? The

:56:59. > :57:04.last time I spoke to Scottish ministers about their proposals,

:57:05. > :57:09.they were keen on measures to deepen the single market in services and

:57:10. > :57:12.digital which would provide major benefits to Scotland and to take

:57:13. > :57:17.forward more trade deals with countries around the world. I would

:57:18. > :57:22.remind the honourable gentleman that greater access for the Scotch

:57:23. > :57:26.whiskey industry is up to foreign market and something the United

:57:27. > :57:36.Kingdom Government consistently puts at the forefront of its own input in

:57:37. > :57:41.the Brussels discussions. If the result of the EU Referendum Bill two

:57:42. > :57:46.BN jawing, it must not be on the basis of a force prospective. Will

:57:47. > :57:52.he give us an assuredness that any changing agreements will not be

:57:53. > :57:59.legally binding and not be subject to a fudge after the referendum is

:58:00. > :58:07.over? We need to have outcomes which make sure that whatever package of

:58:08. > :58:11.reforms can be achieved are legally binding and irreversible for the

:58:12. > :58:19.reasons that my honourable friend gives. There has been a lot of

:58:20. > :58:23.speculation about an early referendum. Without a running

:58:24. > :58:27.commentary, will the Minister set out the essential steps and

:58:28. > :58:34.timetable to make it possible to hold a referendum next year? It

:58:35. > :58:38.would need to have the Referendum Bill on the statute book and we

:58:39. > :58:44.would need to have a conclusion of European negotiations. When both

:58:45. > :58:49.those criteria have been fulfilled, we then need to allow time for

:58:50. > :58:53.secondary legislation appointing a specific date to go through both

:58:54. > :58:58.Houses of Parliament and after that has been completed, for the ten

:58:59. > :59:11.weeks or more minimum campaign period to be gone through. Is not in

:59:12. > :59:13.the national interests of our continental European partners to

:59:14. > :59:19.support the Prime Minister in seeking to reduce in work benefits,

:59:20. > :59:24.so in turn to reduce and stop the brain drain out of Europe? I

:59:25. > :59:34.completely agree with my honourable friend and I do think it is a tragic

:59:35. > :59:39.to when we find many highly qualified, very well educated men

:59:40. > :59:43.and women who feel they have no option but to take an unskilled

:59:44. > :59:49.low-paid job in another European country because they cannot find

:59:50. > :59:54.work at home. The long-term answer to this challenge must in large part

:59:55. > :59:59.to lie in the ability in national governments and the European Union

:00:00. > :00:05.to generate resurgent economic growth and add to opportunities for

:00:06. > :00:10.employment. Can that I cheer the minister by ensuring pro-reform

:00:11. > :00:13.members on the side of the House welcome his statement today? Can he

:00:14. > :00:18.set out what the Government's position will be in the event of an

:00:19. > :00:22.out vote because from this side of the House, we still have memories of

:00:23. > :00:25.the 90s and we don't want to see this Prime Minister marching out

:00:26. > :00:36.into the rose garden and inviting the member from Woking to shut up or

:00:37. > :00:40.put up. I am grateful for the honourable gentleman's kind thoughts

:00:41. > :00:48.but I always strive to continue to be cheerful in this job. The answer

:00:49. > :00:53.is that the result of the referendum is going to be regarded by the

:00:54. > :00:56.Government as binding. This is a sovereign decision for the British

:00:57. > :01:01.people as a whole to take and I am proud of the fact that it is my

:01:02. > :01:05.party and a Conservative Government that is giving the British people

:01:06. > :01:13.the right to take that decision finally. It has never been a matter

:01:14. > :01:18.of no immigration but wanting controlled immigration. What

:01:19. > :01:25.evidence is there that reducing access will stop button number of

:01:26. > :01:34.people coming to this country? I think the fact that 40% of people

:01:35. > :01:39.from elsewhere in the EU, living in the UK are in receipt of benefits or

:01:40. > :01:44.tax credits of some sort and it indicates that that is one of the

:01:45. > :01:50.major contributors to the pool factors. In the Prime Minister's

:01:51. > :01:55.speech this morning, he intended to scrap the Labour Human Rights Act.

:01:56. > :01:59.Is he a post to it because it was a Labour Government that implemented

:02:00. > :02:05.it or is he opposed to human rights on a more fundamental level? I am

:02:06. > :02:09.sorry if she was shocked by that sentence but it was something that

:02:10. > :02:16.was in the Conservative Party manifesto back in May. I have to say

:02:17. > :02:23.that she is entitled to defend the Blair Government's Human Rights

:02:24. > :02:30.Act, but this country enjoyed a long tradition of respect for human

:02:31. > :02:33.rights well before the Human Rights Act was enacted by the Blair

:02:34. > :02:43.Government and I am confident the UK will have a tradition when that has

:02:44. > :02:47.been replaced. I am proud to work -- walk through the division of breeze

:02:48. > :02:50.in support of the EU membership and does my right honourable friend

:02:51. > :02:58.think it is completely lacking credibility of the most of the

:02:59. > :03:02.parties opposite, to have fought for the right of the British people to

:03:03. > :03:07.have a say on the EU member ship and are now fighting the concept of

:03:08. > :03:15.reform? I think my honourable friend is right and I think that some of

:03:16. > :03:19.the honourable members opposite grossly underestimate the sense of

:03:20. > :03:23.resentment amongst many men and women in this country at having seen

:03:24. > :03:26.the treaty after treaty go through changing the balance of powers in

:03:27. > :03:35.Europe that the British people are never asked to have their say. It is

:03:36. > :03:38.sad that Christopher Columbus when he set out, didn't know where he was

:03:39. > :03:43.going and when he got there, didn't know where he was and when he got

:03:44. > :03:49.back, didn't know where he had been. Isn't the are facing the same

:03:50. > :03:52.question his holographic negotiation strategy and is the Minister not

:03:53. > :03:57.concern that in personalising this, as the Prime Minister's we

:03:58. > :04:02.negotiation, that would get a Prime Minister referendum on a question

:04:03. > :04:11.that the people see as something between a figment and a figleaf? The

:04:12. > :04:17.Government was elected on a manifesto reform and referendum. I

:04:18. > :04:22.enjoyed the joke but Christopher Columbus is remembered for having an

:04:23. > :04:28.achievement in navigation and discovery and having symbolised the

:04:29. > :04:33.opening of a new age. I hope this we negotiation is the start of a new

:04:34. > :04:40.age of greater flexibility, democracy and competitiveness for

:04:41. > :04:42.Europe. Some minutes ago, I heard my right honourable friend explained

:04:43. > :04:46.that the Bill of Rights would deal with our obligations under the

:04:47. > :04:51.Charter of fundamental rights. Can he explain whether he intends to

:04:52. > :04:55.legislate notwithstanding our obligations under the EU or does the

:04:56. > :04:58.Government have some other plan as yet unannounced to deal with

:04:59. > :05:07.voluntary subjection to the European Court of justice? The European Court

:05:08. > :05:11.of Justice has involved trade and the single market and has produced

:05:12. > :05:14.judgments that have been to the advantage of British interests. If

:05:15. > :05:21.you have a single market, you need to have some kind of independent

:05:22. > :05:25.arbiter between disputes. I can only say that he would need to contain

:05:26. > :05:31.his understandable impatience is a bit longer. My right honourable

:05:32. > :05:34.friend the Justice Secretary intends to announce details on the way

:05:35. > :05:40.forward in replacing the Bill of Rights and the implications of that

:05:41. > :05:44.policy. I welcome the statement today. There are some reasonable

:05:45. > :05:49.things that the Minister has set out to the House. There are many MPs on

:05:50. > :05:52.the side of the House who work constructively with him to get the

:05:53. > :05:56.best in the UK and to face down some of the abuses we have seen from his

:05:57. > :06:03.own side in a statement today. They are people that could recognise Lee

:06:04. > :06:09.leave the UK -- European Union without regard for this country. I

:06:10. > :06:13.have had the pleasure of vigorous and robust concessions --

:06:14. > :06:19.discussions with my honourable friends as well as the members

:06:20. > :06:23.opposite. Can I say, there are differences, passionately and

:06:24. > :06:27.honourably held differences of views across the House and all parties

:06:28. > :06:31.about the UK's relationship with Europe. I hope we can continue to

:06:32. > :06:40.take forward this debate in a spirit of mutual respect for people whose

:06:41. > :06:43.views may differ from our own. The debate around whether the Bush

:06:44. > :06:47.people should vote to remain or leave the EU has been encouraged by

:06:48. > :06:51.some in terms of the certainty of remaining against the uncertainty of

:06:52. > :06:54.leaving. Does my honourable friend agree that with the current

:06:55. > :06:58.uncertainty in Europe around the Eurozone and the impact of the

:06:59. > :07:06.migrant crisis, that voting to remain is as much a leap in the dark

:07:07. > :07:10.as voting to leave? I think that might honourable friend should wait

:07:11. > :07:14.until the conclusion of the negotiations because then I think we

:07:15. > :07:22.will have much greater clarity over the nature of the choice of British

:07:23. > :07:26.people. The Minister will be aware that the financial Secretary

:07:27. > :07:35.promised a negotiating level to achieve a 0 rate of VAT on feminine

:07:36. > :07:39.hygiene products. Will this be placed among the Prime Minister's

:07:40. > :07:47.other demands? It should not be a second-class issue on the European

:07:48. > :07:51.agenda. There was a clear pledge to the House from this dispatch box and

:07:52. > :07:59.the Government is going to pursue that. In part one of the letter on

:08:00. > :08:03.economic governance committee stays there are two sorts of members in

:08:04. > :08:07.the bureau and outside. Does my right honourable friend agree that

:08:08. > :08:09.many of the country currently outside the euro other than

:08:10. > :08:14.ourselves are likely to remain in that position for many years to come

:08:15. > :08:19.and therefore it is in the wider interests of the whole EU that the

:08:20. > :08:23.European Union accepts that reality and enters into our negotiations in

:08:24. > :08:29.an understanding of that fact? He makes an important point. There will

:08:30. > :08:36.be some EU member states that will be part of the single currency and a

:08:37. > :08:42.significant number that will be outside the single currency. Those

:08:43. > :08:44.who are in the Eurozone will lead to integrate their fiscal economic and

:08:45. > :08:48.political arrangements more closely and indeed this past ability of the

:08:49. > :08:52.current union is on the matters in the interests of the United Kingdom

:08:53. > :08:57.even though we are not going to join it. Getting that relationship right

:08:58. > :09:01.between Euro ins and Euro outs is a European challenge and something of

:09:02. > :09:09.our newbie -- something of our renegotiation for that reason. The

:09:10. > :09:13.Minister's statement consisted largely of significant chunks quoted

:09:14. > :09:17.from the Prime Minister's letter to President task. One of the things he

:09:18. > :09:21.did not repeat was the closing of that. The Prime Minister said," I am

:09:22. > :09:26.ready to campaign with all my heart and soul to keep Britain inside a

:09:27. > :09:31.reformed European Union. " Why did the Minister today not include that?

:09:32. > :09:45.Is it because instead of campaigning with his heart and soul with his

:09:46. > :09:55.party leader, he plans to lead Ukip? I remain confident of a successful

:09:56. > :10:02.outcome and join enthusiastically with my right honourable friend, the

:10:03. > :10:10.Prime Minister in request of a reformed European Union. May I thank

:10:11. > :10:27.him for his statement. I am pleased to see that rule nothing out

:10:28. > :10:32.features like -- features heavily. Free trade, immigration and benefits

:10:33. > :10:36.control, sovereignty of Parliament, economic governments and the removal

:10:37. > :10:41.of other closer union. Would he agree that the best way to achieve

:10:42. > :10:48.these aims is simple and that is to vote to leave?

:10:49. > :10:56.I let him blurted out, but the question suffered from the

:10:57. > :11:03.disadvantage of being too long. It would be good to avoid that in

:11:04. > :11:07.future. I say that to be helpful. No, I agree with the Prime Minister

:11:08. > :11:14.when he said that we would get the best of both worlds by continued

:11:15. > :11:24.membership of a reformed EU which provided us with the amplified power

:11:25. > :11:28.for our own economic and security objectives through international

:11:29. > :11:34.work, which which was also a Europe more committed in the future than

:11:35. > :11:41.now to democratic accountability, to acceptance of its own diversity, and

:11:42. > :11:44.to economic competitiveness. Yesterday the Irish Prime Minister

:11:45. > :11:49.and Taioseach was in Downing Street, he spoke about his concerns of the

:11:50. > :11:54.impact and exit would have. Does he accept this is shared by many people

:11:55. > :11:57.in Britain? What is the Government proposing to do? We have a close

:11:58. > :12:09.relationship with Ireland. It is true that the quality of that

:12:10. > :12:14.relationship, the reconciliation in Northern Ireland, has in part been

:12:15. > :12:17.brought about in the context of the fact that the UK and Ireland have

:12:18. > :12:25.worked closely together as partners within the EU. We will be listening

:12:26. > :12:29.to all our friends across Europe, as well as to the views of leaders in

:12:30. > :12:34.Northern Ireland, but this is a matter for the people of the UK to

:12:35. > :12:43.decide, just as the Irish people many times have voted whether or not

:12:44. > :12:48.to accept new EU treaties. I wish to thank him for making the statement,

:12:49. > :12:53.commend him on the way he goes about making them and the wakey engages

:12:54. > :12:58.with the house, and welcome the evolution of the and policies within

:12:59. > :13:02.the statement. My constituents will make their mind up on two things,

:13:03. > :13:10.whether we control our borders and the ability to trade with the

:13:11. > :13:19.world. What is his assessment of the ability of the EU to conclude future

:13:20. > :13:25.free-trade deals? It is sometimes complex and challenging to get an

:13:26. > :13:28.agreed negotiating position across 28 countries and give the mandate to

:13:29. > :13:34.the commission to negotiate collectively on our behalf, but the

:13:35. > :13:40.leveraged that derives from negotiating as a market place of 500

:13:41. > :13:46.million people is very significant, it makes other governments even of

:13:47. > :13:50.large countries more willing to endure the political hassle that

:13:51. > :13:55.they themselves faced with their own is this interests in order to bring

:13:56. > :14:01.about free trade agreements that I believe are a win-win for both sides

:14:02. > :14:04.of. Given that the Government has rejected the principle of a double

:14:05. > :14:08.majority in the referendum, will he accept the result if England votes

:14:09. > :14:13.narrowly to leave but is outvoted by the rest of the UK voting to stay

:14:14. > :14:20.in? Will his backbenchers, who have not asked a single supportive

:14:21. > :14:30.question, except it? It is the UK that is the member state of the EU.

:14:31. > :14:36.I remind him that his party in May was against giving the people of

:14:37. > :14:44.Scotland or anywhere else in the UK the chance to vote on their future

:14:45. > :14:55.in Europe. I respect him very much indeed, but does he seriously

:14:56. > :15:00.believe that the grudging enjoined, National where possible, reiterated

:15:01. > :15:06.in the Donald Tusk letter and in his speech today, is a sufficiently

:15:07. > :15:14.ambitious lodestar for the UK negotiations? It is one important

:15:15. > :15:20.and significant element in that negotiation, it is not the whole

:15:21. > :15:26.story. I welcomed the statement today. It is an important step on

:15:27. > :15:32.the journey towards fundamental reform. Given the unsustainable

:15:33. > :15:37.migration flows, does he agree it is important to ensure that businesses

:15:38. > :15:41.from the EU must first reside here and also contribute before they

:15:42. > :15:46.qualify for in work benefits and social housing? Will he make this an

:15:47. > :15:56.urgent priority? That is exactly the objective that the Prime Minister

:15:57. > :16:01.set out in his speech today. Does he agree that it is in both our and the

:16:02. > :16:07.EU's interests to trade more freely with high growth potential

:16:08. > :16:11.Commonwealth economies? If the EU continues to move Glace Ely on this

:16:12. > :16:12.issue, we should build more agreements with the Commonwealth on

:16:13. > :16:23.our own? The Commonwealth countries,

:16:24. > :16:32.important though they are, account for only 17% of global GDP, taken

:16:33. > :16:38.together. I agree with his emphasis on the need to forward's forge

:16:39. > :16:41.free-trade agreements on emerging economies as well as with developed

:16:42. > :16:47.economies, but I caution against thinking that it would be somehow

:16:48. > :16:51.quicker and easier to strike such a deal if it were big UK with 65

:16:52. > :17:00.million people negotiating rather than the EEC with 500 million -- PE

:17:01. > :17:05.you. At this time of renegotiation, those who have their mind set on

:17:06. > :17:11.what they are going to do are almost irrelevant, but would he sent a

:17:12. > :17:23.message to those Europhiles, like Professor Fixx, who gave evidence,

:17:24. > :17:28.who felt that no matter what is achieved, if nothing changes, we

:17:29. > :17:37.will opt to leave? The Prime Minister is clear that he believes

:17:38. > :17:40.that serious reforms are essential. If the British people are to believe

:17:41. > :17:50.their future lies in membership of the EU. If we vote to leave, how

:17:51. > :17:59.long will a legally binding except take? Days, weeks, months or years?

:18:00. > :18:02.He is understandably inviting me to speculate about a post-referendum

:18:03. > :18:06.outcome when the Government is focused upon what is happening

:18:07. > :18:13.during the election. I would suggest he might like to study Article 50 of

:18:14. > :18:17.the treaty on EU, sub sections two and three, which will give him more

:18:18. > :18:23.detail. I am sure it is in the library! I expect the Minister of

:18:24. > :18:31.State could reproduce it backwards in Sanskrit and probably did so when

:18:32. > :18:35.he won University Challenge. I thank the Minister for his statement and

:18:36. > :18:40.the fortitude he has shown. Would he agree that the crisis in the

:18:41. > :18:44.Eurozone sees the need for the Eurozone countries to move together,

:18:45. > :18:47.but the key for our negotiations have to be that Europe needs to do

:18:48. > :18:54.less but better? Peep at the point well and said

:18:55. > :19:09.simply, and I agree. The EU is very slow at concluding

:19:10. > :19:13.important free-trade deals around the world, which can harm our

:19:14. > :19:16.international competitiveness. Is the Government still committed to

:19:17. > :19:23.negotiating a means to fast-track important free-trade deals in

:19:24. > :19:28.Europe? We believe that Europe needs to take forward with much greater

:19:29. > :19:34.energy and determination the work in securing free-trade deals. We think

:19:35. > :19:41.that the recently published strategy by the commission demonstrates a new

:19:42. > :19:48.and raised level of ambition, which we welcome, but we want to see the

:19:49. > :19:51.agenda turbo-charged. Will he agree with me that when we find ourselves

:19:52. > :19:55.in the position as a sovereign parliament where we cannot even

:19:56. > :20:00.reduce the level of VAT on women's sanitary products, the EU has too

:20:01. > :20:06.much power, and will he join me in criticising those who say that they

:20:07. > :20:09.will stay in at any price, because they undermine our renegotiation

:20:10. > :20:16.is? Without a walk away position, there can be no meaningful

:20:17. > :20:23.negotiation. The Government is clear that we need to see some very clear

:20:24. > :20:26.agreed reforms in order to make the recommendation to the British people

:20:27. > :20:32.that the Prime Minister said he wishes to do. But also, that the

:20:33. > :20:35.British people will need to see serious reform if they are to be

:20:36. > :20:41.persuaded to vote in favour of continued membership. Beyond that,

:20:42. > :20:45.Europe as a whole would benefit from the sort of reforms that we are

:20:46. > :20:48.advocating, because there are too many jobless young people in Europe

:20:49. > :20:54.who need greater European competitiveness and in many European

:20:55. > :20:57.countries we are seeing a sense of dissatisfaction and alienation from

:20:58. > :21:04.the way in which decisions are taken in Brussels. He was correct when he

:21:05. > :21:09.said at the beginning that we have a mandate to renegotiate, fax to us

:21:10. > :21:14.securing a Conservative victory at the general election. Does he agree

:21:15. > :21:17.that the reforms need to be permanent and irreversible as well

:21:18. > :21:19.as sufficient, otherwise my residents and elsewhere will vote to

:21:20. > :21:37.leave? I'd agree. Does he agree that the referendum at

:21:38. > :21:41.the end of these big stations must be final and that there can be no

:21:42. > :21:49.question of second chances or further renegotiation if people

:21:50. > :21:54.choose to leave? Yes, this decision that the British people make will be

:21:55. > :21:58.binary, as the Prime Minister has said, this is the most important

:21:59. > :22:02.vote for the future of this country that any of us who are of voting age

:22:03. > :22:08.will take part in during our lifetimes. The idea that somehow you

:22:09. > :22:14.can go away and think again is at odds with reality and with the

:22:15. > :22:22.procedure spelt out in the treaties. Time for desert. May I thank the

:22:23. > :22:28.excellent Europe Minister for making the statement and for his long

:22:29. > :22:33.tenure in office and the way he has managed to change position so many

:22:34. > :22:36.times? On occasion, I almost leave him. Would he thank the Prime

:22:37. > :22:45.Minister for his honesty in coming forward with a package that makes it

:22:46. > :22:48.clear that, if the package is successful, we will still be in a

:22:49. > :22:53.political union and we will still have free movement? That allows

:22:54. > :22:58.Eurosceptics to say, no longer do we have to pretend there will be a

:22:59. > :23:03.substantial negotiation, we can campaign to get out, and will he

:23:04. > :23:07.passed my thanks on? I am always happy to pass on compliments, I have

:23:08. > :23:12.to confess that I would have been somewhat surprised had almost

:23:13. > :23:15.anything that I said been enough to set the site him, but I am sure we

:23:16. > :23:31.will have these debates in the future. Order. I have received a

:23:32. > :23:35.report from the tellers in the no lobby, about the Scotland Bill

:23:36. > :23:42.yesterday, informing me that the number of those voting no was

:23:43. > :23:59.erroneously reported as 269 instead of 289. The ayes were 56, the noes

:24:00. > :24:07.289. Order. We come now to the presentation of Bill. Coroners and

:24:08. > :24:15.Justice act 2009, duty to investigate Amendment Bill. Second

:24:16. > :24:16.reading what they? 29th of January. Order, we come to the ten minute

:24:17. > :24:27.rule motion. I beg to move that leave the given

:24:28. > :24:31.to bring in a bill to establish a target for the relocation of central

:24:32. > :24:35.Government functions, offices and staff from London to other parts of

:24:36. > :24:38.the UK to make provision for implementation, altering and

:24:39. > :24:45.performance reporting against such targets and for connected purposes.

:24:46. > :24:49.This bill would ensure more balanced economic growth across the country,

:24:50. > :24:52.drink new jobs and greater prosperity to areas who have

:24:53. > :24:57.struggled, reduce pressure on the overheat of London economy and save

:24:58. > :25:03.billions to help reduce the deficit. They should also be seen as a part

:25:04. > :25:05.of the debate about devolution and improving public services, because

:25:06. > :25:13.they would improve policy-making, reform public services by getting

:25:14. > :25:18.Government to work together, there would bring Government closer to the

:25:19. > :25:22.people and enable civil servants to see what life is like for people in

:25:23. > :25:28.Dudley and elsewhere. This would move the vast majority of civil

:25:29. > :25:31.servants from departmental's non-departmental bodies from

:25:32. > :25:35.London, 100,000 jobs from the capital to the rest of the country,

:25:36. > :25:40.distributing wealth more fairly, making a huge contribution to the

:25:41. > :25:43.regeneration of 50 city and town centres, benefiting London by making

:25:44. > :25:48.more than 20 million square feet of real estate available for new is the

:25:49. > :25:56.start-ups or for conversion into desperately needed homes. They would

:25:57. > :25:57.benefit the taxpayer by saving an initial ?10 billion and ongoing

:25:58. > :26:08.annual savings of 725 million. We live in one of the most

:26:09. > :26:12.centralised countries in the world. According to the OECD, central

:26:13. > :26:18.government control 70% of government expenditure compared to 35% in

:26:19. > :26:22.France and 19% in Germany. Unlike most other economies, only 2% of

:26:23. > :26:26.taxation is raised at a local level and government finance, business,

:26:27. > :26:30.broadcasting, media, culture and the arts or all concentrated here in

:26:31. > :26:34.London. As a result investment in growth has been concentrated in the

:26:35. > :26:39.capital and stifled elsewhere. The economic outputs of seven out of

:26:40. > :26:42.eight of the UK's largest cities consistently performed below the

:26:43. > :26:47.national average whereas in Germany all eight of the largest cities

:26:48. > :26:51.outside Berlin outperform the national average and there is a

:26:52. > :26:54.similar picture in Sweden, Italy and France. The historical North-South

:26:55. > :26:58.divide has been reinforced with the dominance of Finance and the

:26:59. > :27:00.weakness of manufacturing which has benefited the capital of the region

:27:01. > :27:05.is hard. These factors have is hard. These factors have

:27:06. > :27:08.distorted public -- government policy for decades and exacerbated

:27:09. > :27:12.the decline of traditional industries and hampered the region

:27:13. > :27:18.abilities to get new jobs to replace them. Since the 1940s to have been

:27:19. > :27:21.six attempts to decentralise government departments, most

:27:22. > :27:25.recently the Lyons review in 2004 and the Smith review in 2010. For

:27:26. > :27:31.example, hundreds of civil servants moved to Sheffield in 1979 to move

:27:32. > :27:35.to run the newly created Manpower services commission. The NSC and the

:27:36. > :27:39.training agency brought many jobs to the city and David Fletcher said the

:27:40. > :27:43.bulk of those jobs in some shape or form are still here. Some jobs do,

:27:44. > :27:47.and go but it has given us a platform to build for growth.

:27:48. > :27:50.Elsewhere there was Cecil transfers to Bootle, Bristol, the Northwest

:27:51. > :27:55.and bid and burdens so there were some success but this proposal is

:27:56. > :27:59.more radical. The proportion of the country's civil servants located in

:28:00. > :28:07.the capital actually increased every year between 2010 and 2015. There

:28:08. > :28:11.are now 79,000 civil servants and 63,000 staff from non-departmental

:28:12. > :28:16.public bodies based in London. Despite deep cuts elsewhere in the

:28:17. > :28:23.country, there are now 5000 words civil servants in the capital, in

:28:24. > :28:28.2013. The capital's civil servants occupied almost 30 million square

:28:29. > :28:33.feet of space. The equivalent of 57 London gherkins. The average annual

:28:34. > :28:38.cost is 806 to ?7 a square metre. More than twice the national average

:28:39. > :28:42.of ?406. Worse still, newly created public bodies and the Government

:28:43. > :28:45.digital service, health education in England and the Government

:28:46. > :28:48.communications service of all been located in London and have not been

:28:49. > :28:53.joined up with the wider public sector. When I was there in the last

:28:54. > :28:57.Labour government, I am sure I had meetings with fewer than 30 of the

:28:58. > :29:01.thousand or so civil servants who worked there. E-mail and video

:29:02. > :29:06.conferencing, the rest could have been based anywhere in Britain. The

:29:07. > :29:09.civil service, let's move all posts that don't require regular

:29:10. > :29:14.face-to-face contact with ministers in addition to all 24 of the newly

:29:15. > :29:20.created non-departmental bodies, all 43 regulators, inspectorates and

:29:21. > :29:24.ombudsman and all bodies with the localism or regeneration been Mick

:29:25. > :29:29.HS2, visit Britain ordered the other agencies to other parts of the

:29:30. > :29:31.country. Between seven and a half thousand and 10,000 civil servants

:29:32. > :29:37.would remain in London but flexible meeting space and room is available

:29:38. > :29:40.when needed. You can even have more ministers from different

:29:41. > :29:44.departments, private policy people in one building, imagine what that

:29:45. > :29:46.could do for cross departmental working and getting ministers and

:29:47. > :29:51.departments collaborating more closely. Across the country, civil

:29:52. > :29:54.servants and local and regional government offices should share

:29:55. > :29:59.buildings and work together more effectively as well. Towns and

:30:00. > :30:02.cities could bid or submit proposals to host departments, church services

:30:03. > :30:12.and save money, but wouldn't it make sense for example... Transported to

:30:13. > :30:18.Birmingham in the south of the country, the CMS to Manchester where

:30:19. > :30:25.you have got the BBC, world beating sport teams and facilities and Defra

:30:26. > :30:35.in Norwich. Doncaster, Grimsby, Burrow, whole... -- imagined, and of

:30:36. > :30:39.course to Chesterfield. Imagine how much easier it would be to improve

:30:40. > :30:43.the skills and boost spending on science and technology in the

:30:44. > :30:46.Midlands if you had central government civil servants, local

:30:47. > :30:49.government offices and universities and industry working closely

:30:50. > :30:52.together in the same place. Imagine how the quality of policy-making

:30:53. > :30:56.would improve if central government civil servants were based in the

:30:57. > :30:59.regions, seeing it first hand and on a daily basis the problems they were

:31:00. > :31:02.trying to solve. This should be part of the devolution debate taking

:31:03. > :31:07.place not just in Scotland and Wales but the regions are thing and also.

:31:08. > :31:12.Local authorities, businesses and MPs in the West Midlands are working

:31:13. > :31:15.hard to put a bid together and negotiate a devolution deal but

:31:16. > :31:18.think how much more powerful the regions could be if central

:31:19. > :31:23.government departments were playing the full role. According to analysis

:31:24. > :31:26.by the new local government network, the traditional ways of organising

:31:27. > :31:31.public services in rigid and independent central departments

:31:32. > :31:35.suffer the local -- separate from the local government departments is

:31:36. > :31:37.less effective when there is less money to spend, and ageing

:31:38. > :31:43.population and more complex needs. We need to find new ways of working.

:31:44. > :31:50.For example the NHS faces a ?30 billion funding gap by 2030. The

:31:51. > :31:57.centrally managed work programmes failing to get sustainable jobs...

:31:58. > :32:03.Still face serious skill shortages in many parts of the country. The

:32:04. > :32:07.answer to that I think is empowering local people based on sophisticated

:32:08. > :32:11.understanding of local community's needs, local expertise,

:32:12. > :32:15.collaboration between central and local government departments in the

:32:16. > :32:20.health service to make those needs. That is clearly much more

:32:21. > :32:25.intelligent, overlapping traditional way also those like health and

:32:26. > :32:28.unemployment. Devolution and decentralisation will put local

:32:29. > :32:31.people in charge and remove layers of bureaucratic rules and

:32:32. > :32:34.prescriptions so we can develop a former government were flexible,

:32:35. > :32:39.innovation and adaptation to needs become the norm and not the

:32:40. > :32:44.exception. Finally, this would also help address the huge problem of

:32:45. > :32:45.disengagement and distrust of London and Westminster institutions. It

:32:46. > :32:50.makes a massive difference when people can see decisions being made

:32:51. > :32:54.locally to meet their needs, cut through the cynicism that many

:32:55. > :33:09.people feel about politics. My experience as minister of the West

:33:10. > :33:11.Midlands taught me that when you to local people, when funds are

:33:12. > :33:13.devolved and when central government and local authorities, businesses,

:33:14. > :33:15.universities work together and are empowered to implement the answers,

:33:16. > :33:17.decisions are taken more quickly and the solutions are more effective.

:33:18. > :33:19.When you look at our brilliant nuclear station complex in

:33:20. > :33:21.Birmingham, one of the biggest city centre redevelopment programmes in

:33:22. > :33:24.the country, the runway extension which we got much more quickly in

:33:25. > :33:26.the Midlands and has been the case with airport development projects

:33:27. > :33:31.elsewhere in the country, the new JL are planned, all of these huge

:33:32. > :33:35.redevelopment projects, would never have got off the drawing board

:33:36. > :33:39.without government departments letting local authorities and the

:33:40. > :33:41.private sector and others in the West Midlands exercise their

:33:42. > :33:46.leadership and use their expertise to transform the region. Those show

:33:47. > :33:51.what regions are capable of doing. Imagine what were could do to

:33:52. > :33:53.transform the country if central government departments were

:33:54. > :33:57.decentralised and the functions would devolve. Madam Deputy

:33:58. > :34:00.Speaker, let's transform the way government works, to transfer the

:34:01. > :34:06.country so that as we emerge from the recession, and the economy grows

:34:07. > :34:09.again, we won't make the mistakes of the past. Don't leave any community

:34:10. > :34:14.behind. We will build a stronger economy right across the country

:34:15. > :34:22.with better skills, new industries, jobs and open opportunities for

:34:23. > :34:25.people in all parts of Britain. The quest... The question is that the

:34:26. > :34:31.honourable member has leave to bring in the Bill as many of that opinion

:34:32. > :34:36.say aye, of the country know. The ayes have it. Who will prepare and

:34:37. > :34:41.bring in the Bill? Alison McGovern, Nicholas Brown, Adrian Bailey,

:34:42. > :34:47.Andrew Quinn, Caroline Flint, Chris Evans, Ian Wright, Diane Johnson,

:34:48. > :35:29.John Mann, Liam Byrne, Helen Jones and myself. Ian Austin.

:35:30. > :35:36.Government departments decentralisation target Bill. Second

:35:37. > :35:45.reading, what they? 22nd of January. Programme motion, minister to

:35:46. > :35:51.move... Kevin Brennan. Thank you. I don't want to detain the House or

:35:52. > :35:54.divide the House on this matter but I figured it's important to put on

:35:55. > :35:58.record that we did seek more time for today's many stages of the Trade

:35:59. > :36:04.Union Bill that has been further truncated by a lengthy statement on

:36:05. > :36:09.Europe. Suffice to say, if the Government continues to use

:36:10. > :36:11.programme motions in this way, and insert statements in order to

:36:12. > :36:16.truncate debate on very controversial matters, it will only

:36:17. > :36:19.serve to weaken this place and its ability to scrutinise legislation

:36:20. > :36:25.and strengthen the other place it I am sure will be very keen to

:36:26. > :36:31.scrutinise this legislation further when it arrives down there after

:36:32. > :36:36.today's proceedings. Thank you. Like the member for Cardiff West, we also

:36:37. > :36:42.saw additional time. This is a highly controversial Bill, with much

:36:43. > :36:48.media interest and at the Bill Committee there were 50 divisions

:36:49. > :36:52.where every cause of this Bill was up for debate. The timetable today

:36:53. > :36:57.does not lead to the whole house having the same scrutiny on every

:36:58. > :37:01.Clause. Ideally we would have wanted more protected time to discuss all

:37:02. > :37:07.of these bills so we can debate all because as in this Bill. Just

:37:08. > :37:11.briefly because I do want us to use the time to the purpose to which it

:37:12. > :37:14.was intended, but the honourable gentleman knows full well that when

:37:15. > :37:18.it comes to his own contributions, what matters is quality not

:37:19. > :37:23.quantity. He didn't have the advantage of joining us on the Bill

:37:24. > :37:26.Committee. But he no doubt was informed by the person who

:37:27. > :37:30.represented the opposition in that Bill Committee that the Bill

:37:31. > :37:33.Committee finished early. We did not use the full amount of time that was

:37:34. > :37:48.allocated under the programme motion. I believe that this Bill has

:37:49. > :37:53.received proper scrutiny. If I am allowed to, thank you... I was just

:37:54. > :37:56.thinking that the opposition here are protesting somewhat too much.

:37:57. > :38:02.Looking at the amendments that have been tabled today, I was absolutely

:38:03. > :38:05.amazed by the lack of amendments on very important parts of the Bill

:38:06. > :38:11.that may have been discussed at Committee, while you may not have

:38:12. > :38:15.had time, you had time to put in the amendments, and they were not put in

:38:16. > :38:20.and we are not today debating very significant part of the Bill but I

:38:21. > :38:25.think should be. -- that I think should be. The question is the Trade

:38:26. > :38:31.Union Bill programme motion as on the order paper. As many of that

:38:32. > :38:35.opinion, say I'd... On the contrary note. The ayes have it, the ayes

:38:36. > :38:41.have it. The clock will now proceed -- the court will now proceed to

:38:42. > :38:47.read the orders of the day. As amended in the Public Bill Committee

:38:48. > :38:51.to be considered... We begin with amendment 15 with which it will be

:38:52. > :38:55.convenient to consider the associated amendments and new

:38:56. > :39:02.clauses listed in Mr Speaker's provisional selection. Chris

:39:03. > :39:08.Stephens... Thank you. I beg to move the amendments in my name and those

:39:09. > :39:22.my honourable friend 's and those are amendments 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,

:39:23. > :39:29.20, 21, 22, 14, 34, 31, 32, 33, new Clause ten which I begin my remarks.

:39:30. > :39:34.Before I do, I do want to pay tribute to the member for Cardiff

:39:35. > :39:39.South and Karen ours who led for the Labour Party in the Bill Committee,

:39:40. > :39:45.I thought with great diligence. I welcome the member for Cardiff West

:39:46. > :39:50.in his place. I also pay tribute to the Conservative members of the Bill

:39:51. > :39:55.Committee who were trying to defend the indefensible. I pay tribute to

:39:56. > :40:00.the Labour members for Newport East, Cardiff Central, Gateshead,

:40:01. > :40:04.Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland and Sunderland Central.

:40:05. > :40:07.However I think the star of the show and probably be some type of the

:40:08. > :40:13.Bill Committee came from Mike honourable friend, who had commented

:40:14. > :40:16.that the minister presented in the Bill with great moderation but was

:40:17. > :40:27.entirely disingenuous. This is a catch all amendment that

:40:28. > :40:31.limits the Bill from applying to the public sector throughout the UK

:40:32. > :40:34.without the consent of the Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly, Northern

:40:35. > :40:40.Irish assembly, neither of London and other public bodies in England.

:40:41. > :40:43.To protect our approach of working in partnership with unions, we took

:40:44. > :40:48.the view that Scotland should be excluded from the entire trade union

:40:49. > :40:51.Bill, however, having heard the representations from other political

:40:52. > :40:58.parties and indeed from many across the trade union and labour movement

:40:59. > :41:01.we have restricted the extent of the Bill from applying without consent

:41:02. > :41:06.to each situation and authority who will be impacted by the changes

:41:07. > :41:09.contained within this Bill. I will. On the point of local authorities I

:41:10. > :41:17.think it is arrogant for the government to impose this on local

:41:18. > :41:20.authorities without the negotiations on the Chekhov system. Kilmer I

:41:21. > :41:24.thank the honourable gentleman for his intervention, he like many

:41:25. > :41:27.others in this place was the leader of a local authority and he will

:41:28. > :41:31.know that he would have been negotiating with the trade unions on

:41:32. > :41:36.issues like the facility time to make sure that agreements are made

:41:37. > :41:39.in time to make sure that grievances are having time to avoid these sorts

:41:40. > :41:43.of issues going to tribunal and I agree with him that it is arrogant

:41:44. > :41:49.and I think it is out of order for UK Government to make decisions in

:41:50. > :41:52.respect of facility time, Chekhov for example, which has been opposed

:41:53. > :41:57.by many local authorities across the UK. Proposals in this Bill have the

:41:58. > :42:00.potential to undermine the effective engagement of trade unions across

:42:01. > :42:06.Scottish workplaces and indeed across the UK, and in particular the

:42:07. > :42:10.public sector. The Scottish Government is working on a response

:42:11. > :42:12.with the fare worst invention, have shown a commitment to building a

:42:13. > :42:17.stronger, more collaborative approach to the relationship between

:42:18. > :42:20.trade unions, employees and employers. Become a nation of the

:42:21. > :42:24.provisions in this Bill will affect employees right to strike, changing

:42:25. > :42:32.the ablation ship between negatively and leading to greater confusion

:42:33. > :42:35.amongst employees. This will undoubtedly hit Scottish business,

:42:36. > :42:39.especially across the public services in Scotland and elsewhere

:42:40. > :42:43.in the UK. As with many bills from this house the devil is reserved in

:42:44. > :42:45.the detail and with a lot of the details still to be set out in

:42:46. > :42:51.regulations we are unaware of what else could be coming down the line.

:42:52. > :42:55.Moreover there will be no formal opportunity at this stage for the

:42:56. > :42:58.Scottish Government are indeed any other authority to influence such

:42:59. > :43:03.regulations even though they were directly impacted on them. According

:43:04. > :43:06.to witness evidence, Madam Deputy Speaker, there is concern that the

:43:07. > :43:09.Bill could lead to a concert is crisis. If the devolved

:43:10. > :43:14.administrations refused to implement the content of the Bill, the Bill

:43:15. > :43:18.potentially cut across devolved areas and could lead to confusion

:43:19. > :43:22.and conflict of interest in its application to existing and new

:43:23. > :43:27.contracts due to the ongoing local government reforms in other areas

:43:28. > :43:31.and indeed in the evidence sessions David Prentice the general secretary

:43:32. > :43:35.of Unison have made the comment that the new combined authorities of

:43:36. > :43:39.England will have a lot of expenses of powers except the power to

:43:40. > :43:45.determine Chekhov and facility arrangements. The first minute of

:43:46. > :43:49.Scotland's Nicholas Turgeon has stated in a programme for and

:43:50. > :43:55.42015-2016, my government will vigorously oppose any legislation

:43:56. > :44:00.that seeks to undermine the rights of unions to fairly and reasonably

:44:01. > :44:04.represent their members. The Welsh First Minister has echoed these

:44:05. > :44:09.concerns when he wrote to the game is over concerns about the trade

:44:10. > :44:16.union Bill, stating that this should be a matter for the National

:44:17. > :44:20.Assembly for Wales. The Scottish Government maintains positive and

:44:21. > :44:24.stable industrial relationships in Scotland, underlined by the strong

:44:25. > :44:29.partnership with the Scottish Government and the ST UC, who

:44:30. > :44:34.recently reaffirmed a memorandum of understanding signed in May 2015.

:44:35. > :44:38.The memorandum also pledged the Scottish Government to work with the

:44:39. > :44:41.ST UC to oppose Conservative austerity and demanding further

:44:42. > :44:49.powers for Scotland. The Scottish Government use trade unions as

:44:50. > :44:53.partners in maintaining democracy in the society and workplace and the

:44:54. > :44:55.existence of good employment practices, it is a key contributor

:44:56. > :45:04.to economic repetitive this and social justice. I will. He has made

:45:05. > :45:07.the case for the Scottish Government, within the committee,

:45:08. > :45:10.was there any evidence whatsoever put forward by the government of any

:45:11. > :45:17.public body expressing a view different from that of the Scottish

:45:18. > :45:21.Government? I thank the honourable gentleman for giving way and he is

:45:22. > :45:29.right, there is no evidence presented at the Bill committee from

:45:30. > :45:32.a public body in support of this Bill, we heard from the Tory

:45:33. > :45:37.Taliban, the taxpayers Alliance have supportive of some of these measures

:45:38. > :45:40.but no public body. The restriction, Madam Deputy Speaker, will ensure

:45:41. > :45:43.that none of the provisions within this Bill will apply without consent

:45:44. > :45:47.of the relevant authorities. Within this grouping we have placed

:45:48. > :45:54.amendments to the application of the most... I will. Constituent of mine

:45:55. > :45:58.in heart will welcome the protection, many of them

:45:59. > :46:02.hard-working commuters, will welcome the protection against unjustified

:46:03. > :46:04.strikes. While London should have a veto over these measures when they

:46:05. > :46:12.will not have a say under this proposals. The honourable gentleman

:46:13. > :46:16.refers to unjustified strikes, I am not aware of any unjustified

:46:17. > :46:20.strike. There seems to be a notion presented by the Conservative Party

:46:21. > :46:24.in the Conservative benches that low turnouts are due to lack of support.

:46:25. > :46:30.I think that is just not the case. The case being advanced by the

:46:31. > :46:33.government, in this issue, seems to suggest that trade union officials

:46:34. > :46:36.and trade union stewards in the workplace developed after the ballot

:46:37. > :46:45.result mystical powers of persuasion. Almost Jedi like powers

:46:46. > :46:49.of persuasion. As everyone with the hands means that this is the strike

:46:50. > :46:54.you looking for. That frankly is a nonsense. I have to say to you. What

:46:55. > :46:58.was interesting in the Bill committee that the honourable

:46:59. > :47:00.his passenger transport groups were his passenger transport groups were

:47:01. > :47:04.very concerned about aspect of the Bill and they were very concerned

:47:05. > :47:09.about the aspects in relation to agency workers, untrained agency

:47:10. > :47:15.workers with respect to transport. I gave way to the member. Thank you

:47:16. > :47:18.Madam Deputy Speaker, I am grateful to the honourable gentleman

:47:19. > :47:23.forgiving way. Will he agree with me that if the Conservative Party were

:47:24. > :47:26.so interested in having having more people take part in strike ballots

:47:27. > :47:31.they will allow Telecom in voting and they will allow secure workplace

:47:32. > :47:35.balloting to? I will come to that point, I was curious that the Bill

:47:36. > :47:38.committee were advised that the balloting was and secure and secure

:47:39. > :47:46.and I will come onto that later on in my contribution. We have placed

:47:47. > :47:49.these amendments, amendment 15 at various applications are close to

:47:50. > :47:52.that introduced a 50% turnout requirement for industrial action

:47:53. > :47:56.ballots, in addition to the current requirement for the majority vote in

:47:57. > :47:58.favour of action. The government proposals will undermine

:47:59. > :48:01.constructive employment relations throughout the United Kingdom.

:48:02. > :48:07.Effective negotiations between unions and employers rely on equal

:48:08. > :48:10.bargaining power. The ability of unions to organise lawful industrial

:48:11. > :48:14.action ensures that employers take the views of their workforce

:48:15. > :48:19.seriously and engage in genuine negotiations. The statutory

:48:20. > :48:21.threshold make it very difficult for unions to organise industrial

:48:22. > :48:26.action, especially in larger workplaces and those with more

:48:27. > :48:30.dispersed workforces. As a result the legislation is expected to have

:48:31. > :48:33.a wide-ranging impact on the ability of trade union members to take

:48:34. > :48:39.industrial action in defence of their jobs. Their working conditions

:48:40. > :48:44.and their livelihoods. It is in the employers and employees interests

:48:45. > :48:47.for this to be solved quickly and amicably. The government's proposals

:48:48. > :48:50.mean that disputes are more likely to become a protracted. The

:48:51. > :48:55.introduction of ballot thresholds would mean that unions take more

:48:56. > :48:57.time in the run-up to ballots to ensure the necessary turnout, this

:48:58. > :49:04.will inevitably divert time and effort away from finding an amicable

:49:05. > :49:09.settlement. I give way. I thank the honourable gentleman. This is one of

:49:10. > :49:12.these bills that the Tories were -- that the Tories when they have

:49:13. > :49:15.trouble bring forward. But a lot of this is because the Mayor of London

:49:16. > :49:20.has not been able to handle the industrial situation and as a result

:49:21. > :49:24.of that the bring in this Bill and undermine industrial relations in

:49:25. > :49:28.this country. I am very sympathetic to that point of view because I

:49:29. > :49:31.think it is absolutely right, there seems to be a view from the Mayor of

:49:32. > :49:36.London that is not the same attitude that is displayed by other public

:49:37. > :49:40.sector bodies across the UK. I give way to the member from Sunderland. I

:49:41. > :49:45.thank the honourable member, on the Bill committee wasn't the evidence

:49:46. > :49:48.given that actually this would not solve that problem, the particular

:49:49. > :49:52.problem that London has because most of the disputes taking place in

:49:53. > :49:57.recent years, particularly in rail, would have gone ahead anyway. The

:49:58. > :50:00.reason they would have gone ahead is because they would have meant the

:50:01. > :50:04.special is that they are trying to put in place. I think the honourable

:50:05. > :50:09.member wanted in. I am most grateful to the honourable gentleman. Is it

:50:10. > :50:13.not the case that the Conservative Mayor of London has not actually met

:50:14. > :50:18.the unions in the transport sector in London at all during his tenure?

:50:19. > :50:22.With not a better method be to have proper industrial lesions,

:50:23. > :50:27.negotiations and dialogue rather than sabre rattling? I do agree with

:50:28. > :50:32.that, and I am sure there will be an opportunity for the elected of

:50:33. > :50:37.London to pass judgment on that. I will give way. I am very grateful to

:50:38. > :50:41.the honourable gentleman. I was not a member of the Bill committee, he

:50:42. > :50:44.had been talking about the application of high officials for

:50:45. > :50:48.industrial action, but consideration was given to the potential for it a

:50:49. > :50:54.high official was put in place, what the consequence might be for Wales

:50:55. > :50:56.cat union action? Because trade union leaders are unwilling to take

:50:57. > :51:03.a vote because they are fearful of not meeting a settled. Thank you.

:51:04. > :51:07.There was no evidence presented that this would ultimately be the case,

:51:08. > :51:13.actually what the specials did open up was the impact it would have on

:51:14. > :51:17.workers and trying to progress a dispute, particularly on issues

:51:18. > :51:20.where shift changes are introduced, for example. Women workers try to

:51:21. > :51:24.progress the dispute because impact on them or that it would on male

:51:25. > :51:30.workers, so the Bill committee did not touch on those issues. According

:51:31. > :51:32.to the office of National the office of National number of days lost to

:51:33. > :51:41.industrial action earlier fallen dramatically over the last 30 years,

:51:42. > :51:47.since 2010, on average 640,000 days have been lost to industrial action

:51:48. > :51:53.compared to 7,213,000 days lost per year in the 1980s. In 2014 there are

:51:54. > :51:58.only 155 stoppages as a result of industrial action, with 55% of

:51:59. > :52:04.stoppages taking place in the private sector and 45% taken place

:52:05. > :52:08.in the public sector. Most industrial action is short lived,

:52:09. > :52:15.mud and dignity Speaker, in 2014 64% of all stoppages lasted for one or

:52:16. > :52:20.two days and accounted for the figures given earlier, 93% of the

:52:21. > :52:26.work took part in industrial action. Other amendments, Madam Deputy

:52:27. > :52:28.Speaker,... I will give way. I am grateful. I would like to ask a

:52:29. > :52:38.question which I would like to have the answer to. If there was,... Is

:52:39. > :52:45.the first set of amendments were accepted, such that the Scottish

:52:46. > :52:50.Government had a say in the give its consent, would you drop your, with

:52:51. > :52:54.the Scottish Government... I am interested to know whether the SNP

:52:55. > :52:58.would drop the other amendments as they would have a say in their own

:52:59. > :53:06.parliament. Collective-bargaining indeed. I think it is important that

:53:07. > :53:11.public bodies across the United Kingdom have your say and consent in

:53:12. > :53:15.whether this Bill and provisions of this Bill should be passed. I also

:53:16. > :53:20.believe that if any public body gives their consent, that consent

:53:21. > :53:24.can be taken away on a future occasion and I think the Mayor of

:53:25. > :53:28.London, the example was given earlier, maybe perhaps the best

:53:29. > :53:32.example of that. I will give way to the honourable gentleman. Thank you

:53:33. > :53:36.for giving away one more time. I thought it was very good that he

:53:37. > :53:40.illustrated the difference in the strike rates and lost is over the

:53:41. > :53:43.past 30 years, and with the honourable member agree with me that

:53:44. > :53:48.industrial lesions have improved in the past 30 years, unions are much

:53:49. > :53:53.more effective and cooperative and yet the Tories over there are stuck

:53:54. > :53:55.in an ideological argument of 30 years ago, and they should move

:53:56. > :54:01.forward instead of using a sledgehammer. I do agree with that

:54:02. > :54:04.and I think the more seasoned veterans of the house will probably

:54:05. > :54:11.know what I mean when I say that this is Keith Joseph says three.

:54:12. > :54:14.This is an ideological attack against the largest group in civic

:54:15. > :54:21.society who stands up against explication. I will give way. Very

:54:22. > :54:24.kind of him to give way. He was a very wily performer in the Bill

:54:25. > :54:28.committee. He talks about Keith Joseph and we are not in the real

:54:29. > :54:32.world, and I just remind him he had evidence right at the beginning of

:54:33. > :54:39.the session from the chief executive of reader buses, and what a vote of

:54:40. > :54:43.70% of the staff of his firm 50% of all buses in London were stopped.

:54:44. > :54:49.Think of the disruption that stopped for real people out there in the

:54:50. > :54:55.real world. That was more to do with the number of people who were

:54:56. > :55:00.balloted in the number of fellow workers who then came out to support

:55:01. > :55:05.them. That was the key issue. There are other issues, as the honourable

:55:06. > :55:07.member knows, there was other evidence of employee intimidation

:55:08. > :55:10.and blacklisting that was going on and I think that is something that

:55:11. > :55:17.will become to greater clauses in the Bill that the government do need

:55:18. > :55:22.to answer. Martin dignity Speaker, we have among other amendments,

:55:23. > :55:27.these restrictions, particularly around the issues of facility time.

:55:28. > :55:32.Facility time is a good thing. We have now heard from the Royal

:55:33. > :55:35.College of Nursing who are not known as the most militant trade union,

:55:36. > :55:44.who believe that the current Bill should lead to ?100 million, ?100

:55:45. > :55:48.million lost to the NHS because of workplace issues, going forward to

:55:49. > :56:00.tribunal and all the rest of it. Public bodies should have the right

:56:01. > :56:05.to test the arguments presented at the committee that the tax payers

:56:06. > :56:10.should be protected. Trade union members are taxpayers. They are

:56:11. > :56:20.voters. And trade union members... I will give way. Does the evidence of

:56:21. > :56:25.the Royal College Of Midwives contrast spectacularly with the

:56:26. > :56:31.Government evidence from 2020? You did not even know what facility time

:56:32. > :56:37.was. Yellow mac that is incorrect. I had never heard of this

:56:38. > :56:44.organisation. Under the skilful analysis of the honourable member, I

:56:45. > :56:48.asked a question when she mentioned her concerns about patient care

:56:49. > :56:54.under existing law, are a trade union is obliged to provide cover?

:56:55. > :57:00.The witness had not heard of that either. As has just been said, I did

:57:01. > :57:07.not know what facility time was. I will give way. Thank you. I am

:57:08. > :57:12.trying to develop a complete. I would like to ask a question about

:57:13. > :57:18.thresholds and the consideration the Government gave for wildcat actions.

:57:19. > :57:22.In terms of facility time, what evidence does the Government have

:57:23. > :57:25.about the potential for wildcat actions because there is less time

:57:26. > :57:32.for trade unions to deal with workplace disputes? Wildcat action

:57:33. > :57:37.was not discussed. What was discussed was the social media

:57:38. > :57:43.provisions which could lead to wildcat tweeting. There was no

:57:44. > :57:50.discussion about that action in that sense. I do want to touch briefly on

:57:51. > :57:59.the labour amendments which are similar... I would give way. You

:58:00. > :58:06.mentioned the RCN, but what about their employers? Trade unions's

:58:07. > :58:12.ability to engage with us is limited. It is potentially

:58:13. > :58:17.undermined. It is actually undermining what has been put

:58:18. > :58:22.through. To go back to what Keith Joss of said, he has argued you

:58:23. > :58:34.should let managers manage. They should butt out. That is absolutely

:58:35. > :58:40.true. The honourable member was president of a good trade union.

:58:41. > :58:45.With the honourable member agree with me that trade unionists are

:58:46. > :58:49.real people and it is not just trade unions and trade unionists who

:58:50. > :58:55.object to this Bill? The Government has significantly failed to give any

:58:56. > :59:01.significant employer support for these proposals. Many public and

:59:02. > :59:06.private sector employees in fact vociferously object to this Bill and

:59:07. > :59:13.see it as completely unnecessary. The last time I looked in the

:59:14. > :59:18.mirror,, yes, I was. Just to be the finish of the section in relation to

:59:19. > :59:24.mandates, I am pleased to see the Labour Party amendments in this

:59:25. > :59:30.regard which seeks to restrict the application of provisions related to

:59:31. > :59:34.facility time and Chekhov. Once again, they go alongside the

:59:35. > :59:41.substantive arguments and what will come out is that there is no mandate

:59:42. > :59:46.-- mandate across the public sector. I will move onto Klaus two, which is

:59:47. > :59:56.in my name and in name of my honourable friends on these benches.

:59:57. > :00:00.It is all the stranger that the Tory party have always talked about

:00:01. > :00:03.regulation and red tape, but here today are bringing in more

:00:04. > :00:08.regulation and red tape. They are talking the arteries of commerce.

:00:09. > :00:20.This is tawdry dinosaur behaviour, going back to the 1970s. -- tawdry

:00:21. > :00:28.dinosaur behaviour. Until it comes to the trade union movement, there

:00:29. > :00:36.is a laissez faire attitude. The new clause two will allow for... It is a

:00:37. > :00:41.prime example of the unnecessary bureaucracy and competition of this

:00:42. > :00:44.Bill that powers have been given to the certification Officer for the

:00:45. > :00:50.monitoring of picketing, which is guaranteed to find failings and... I

:00:51. > :00:54.thank the honourable member for that intervention. It goes wider than

:00:55. > :00:58.that, because the trade unions will be expected to make a contribution

:00:59. > :01:03.to the Certification Officer but will not be able to meet a

:01:04. > :01:09.conversion when it comes to Chekhov. The new clause will ensure that

:01:10. > :01:13.employers have a duty to ensure that union members are able to vote

:01:14. > :01:17.without fear of interference or constraint. This is the same duty

:01:18. > :01:28.imposed on trade unions and if an employer fails to comply... I will

:01:29. > :01:32.give way. Does the honourable gentleman share my feelings of irony

:01:33. > :01:37.that the Government has stated that trade union members are not allowed

:01:38. > :01:41.and will not be allowed to vote via electronic ballot, whereby they

:01:42. > :01:47.consider that this was perfectly legitimate for voting in the London

:01:48. > :01:52.mayoral selection? I do agree. That came out in the committee. We were

:01:53. > :01:56.told by the Conservative members that e-balloting is unsafe and

:01:57. > :01:59.unsecured. What that means for the Conservative candidate of the Mayor

:02:00. > :02:04.of London, I do not know. But what did come out in the Bill committee

:02:05. > :02:10.is that a trade union could e-mail an employer in relation to

:02:11. > :02:17.picketing. Presumably, that is safe and secure. I will give way. I thank

:02:18. > :02:26.the honourable gentleman for giving way. Could he say something about

:02:27. > :02:31.having to register with the police. I think we are coming on to that at

:02:32. > :02:35.a later stage in the Bill, but the point that the honourable gentleman

:02:36. > :02:39.makes again is the capacity for increased blacklisting that could

:02:40. > :02:43.take place across this Bill and I do agree with him. Could I just move on

:02:44. > :02:50.and make some progress's I do apologise. This new clause will

:02:51. > :02:55.modernise the law promoting democracy and inclusion. A word that

:02:56. > :02:58.is often used by the Conservatives in support of this Bill is

:02:59. > :03:04.modernisation. Currently, all ballots in elections must be

:03:05. > :03:06.conducted by post. Unlike major companies and other membership

:03:07. > :03:12.organisations, including political parties, trade union members are not

:03:13. > :03:14.allowed to vote online. The Government has consistently

:03:15. > :03:18.described this Trade Union Bill as an attempt to modernise trade

:03:19. > :03:23.unions, however, it has not allowed trade unions to modernise into the

:03:24. > :03:26.21st-century by using electronic and workplace balloting. The Government

:03:27. > :03:33.argues that the introduction of thresholds and strike balloting

:03:34. > :03:39.democracy stifles the possibility of workers' voices being heard. This

:03:40. > :03:44.would allow for secure workplace valeting and balloting by electronic

:03:45. > :03:50.means, as our amendment calls. Online balloting is more accessible.

:03:51. > :03:54.Today, most people use electronic devices every day to transact and

:03:55. > :03:59.communicate. We as MPs either as online ballots. Ballot papers are

:04:00. > :04:06.usually sent out to members' home addresses. This can be bad,

:04:07. > :04:10.especially when junk mail comes through our doors and they are

:04:11. > :04:17.easily dumped in the business. An online basis would be more

:04:18. > :04:20.efficient. While using only postal ballots could prolong the length of

:04:21. > :04:26.the dispute, as it simply takes longer. According to the latest off,

:04:27. > :04:32.figures, 83% of people now have access to broadband and 66% of

:04:33. > :04:35.household owned a smartphone. These figures are higher amongst those of

:04:36. > :04:45.working age and are said to rise rapidly. A recent survey of over 18

:04:46. > :04:50.'s found that over 42% of respondents felt online voting would

:04:51. > :04:59.increase confidence. I will give way. Would he agree with me that in

:05:00. > :05:03.the route to Christmas, people will be engaging electronically,

:05:04. > :05:07.purchasing goods and materials? A lot of people here think there is

:05:08. > :05:11.something fundamentally wrong with that process. Isn't it ridiculous?

:05:12. > :05:17.Isn't it's just a ruse to say we do not want to engage with the trade

:05:18. > :05:23.unions? I thank the honourable member for that and agree with him

:05:24. > :05:26.entirely. Perhaps it is because Conservative members fear the

:05:27. > :05:32.inevitable visits of three ghosts on Christmas Eve. Perhaps that is one

:05:33. > :05:40.of the reasons. I thank you for giving way. Would you agree that

:05:41. > :05:46.there has not been a single security breach and all of the ballots run?

:05:47. > :05:52.Yes, I do agree with that. That evidence came out in the Bill

:05:53. > :05:57.committee. I will turn no to workplace balloting. It is

:05:58. > :06:04.unavailable, secure option which increases 14 in the workplace. We

:06:05. > :06:10.wish workplace bias to be used for statutory recognition ballots. These

:06:11. > :06:16.are secure and overseen by the qualified, independent persons. The

:06:17. > :06:21.individuals and balloting agencies permitted to act for these are

:06:22. > :06:25.generally received as those which act as scrutineers in industrial

:06:26. > :06:30.action ballots and other statutory union elections and ballots. An

:06:31. > :06:34.analysis of this report indicates that turnout will be significantly

:06:35. > :06:41.higher in ballots were all workers voted in the workplace. Average

:06:42. > :06:47.turnout was 88% and the combination ballots was 86.9%. The average

:06:48. > :06:50.turnout in postal only ballots was according to the TUC, there was no

:06:51. > :06:57.evidence of workers feeling intimidated interval and bought --

:06:58. > :07:03.voting a particular way. All three complaints, five were laid by a

:07:04. > :07:08.unions and one by an employer. None of the claims were upheld. We are

:07:09. > :07:11.told electronic voting is not safe. Thousands of private sector,

:07:12. > :07:19.voluntary and political organisations use electronic voting

:07:20. > :07:23.every year. We manage over 2000. We therefore conclude online voting is

:07:24. > :07:26.no less secure than postal balloting. It said there are risks

:07:27. > :07:32.associated with electronic voting, but these are similar to the risks

:07:33. > :07:36.associated with any secure, electronic process. Many of the

:07:37. > :07:42.risks are also be same nature of those related to postal voting. PSU

:07:43. > :07:48.is not about online safety and security. The SU as they are hoping

:07:49. > :07:52.people will be bothered to buy this stamp, put it on an envelope and

:07:53. > :07:57.walked to the letter box. That is the issue, not security. Would you

:07:58. > :08:01.agree? I do agree. One of the increasing problems with postal

:08:02. > :08:06.balloting is not with postal boxes will stop our postboxes have

:08:07. > :08:15.produced by 17% in Scotland in the last year. I do apologise. Thank

:08:16. > :08:19.you. I would just like to ask whether my honourable friend would

:08:20. > :08:23.agree that with this Bill, we risk of throwing away a huge amount in

:08:24. > :08:30.terms of positive industrial relationships established by trade

:08:31. > :08:34.unions. The work they do. The media likes conflict, but actually, the

:08:35. > :08:38.bread and butter tasks of trade unions is about spotting issues

:08:39. > :08:45.before they become problems, and the quote giving it to me by Merseyside

:08:46. > :08:52.Fire Brigade union saying that their employer has described them as their

:08:53. > :08:54.best, lowest paid managers, such as their contribution to positive

:08:55. > :08:59.industry relations. Would you agree with me that we are at risk of

:09:00. > :09:05.losing that? I do agree with all of that. This Bill is ideological.

:09:06. > :09:11.There is no question about that. It is an ideological attack on the

:09:12. > :09:16.largest section of society who stand up against exploitation. The

:09:17. > :09:21.honourable gentleman keeps talking about this Bill been ideological. Do

:09:22. > :09:25.you think it is ideological for people who send their children to

:09:26. > :09:31.schools in my constituency who cannot get childcare because there

:09:32. > :09:35.has been a very low turnout for a ballot and an unjustified strike? Do

:09:36. > :09:37.you think it is an delightful that hard-pressed communities in my

:09:38. > :09:42.constituency who want to get to work but cannot because of strikes with

:09:43. > :09:51.low thresholds? The problem with that analysis is that it is based on

:09:52. > :09:56.ignorance. The simple facts are but when there is a low turnout, a trade

:09:57. > :10:02.union has to make a calculation. I'm looking at the on to -- honourable

:10:03. > :10:05.gentleman from Blaydon. He will tell you that trade unions have on

:10:06. > :10:12.occasion not proceeded to industrial action if they do not feel they have

:10:13. > :10:15.support. The real test and the biggest gamble a trade union must

:10:16. > :10:20.take when it decides to take industrial action is how many people

:10:21. > :10:22.participate in industrial action. Because people do not participate,

:10:23. > :10:32.it falls on by. Thank you for giving way. I think

:10:33. > :10:34.the contribution from the member opposite highlights the fact that we

:10:35. > :10:40.have such a lack of understanding of the role of trade unions and a lack

:10:41. > :10:44.of understanding of working people in the workplace who are working

:10:45. > :10:49.just to pay their bills. That lack of understanding shows why this Bill

:10:50. > :10:54.is so wrong. I think it also shows complete

:10:55. > :11:02.ignorance on print -- on the printable of solidarity. Many of the

:11:03. > :11:08.people, in a second, I will speak first, the principle of solidarity

:11:09. > :11:12.where people who are affected by industrial action which the

:11:13. > :11:17.honourable member has described, many people affected will be fellow

:11:18. > :11:22.trade union members, possibly,... I will give way to the honourable lady

:11:23. > :11:26.first, I did promise that. Thank you very much forgiving way. Would you

:11:27. > :11:32.agree that the average time lost to strike action in the last year was

:11:33. > :11:37.less than a third of a second per member of the workforce? Yes, and

:11:38. > :11:41.that evidence again came out in the Bill committee. What is the great

:11:42. > :11:44.industrial chaos that is happening in this country that means that the

:11:45. > :11:52.government should intervene? There is none. For entertainment purposes

:11:53. > :11:55.I will take another. I should try and entertain the honourable

:11:56. > :12:01.gentleman. If the honourable gentleman believes that turnout is

:12:02. > :12:04.so high in all of these industrial action is why is he so concerned

:12:05. > :12:10.about having a threshold that four out of ten of trade unionists

:12:11. > :12:21.actually turn out to vote? If you have high turnouts what is the

:12:22. > :12:26.problem with that? Here is the... Again... Order! Order! No shouting

:12:27. > :12:31.out. If members want to make an intervention, make an intervention.

:12:32. > :12:35.No shouting out. And will give the honourable member the benefit of my

:12:36. > :12:39.trade union experience. There is a localised dispute affecting a local

:12:40. > :12:47.issue, in my experience permits go through the roof. The issue with low

:12:48. > :12:52.turnouts are when they are national and UK wage disputes, those issues

:12:53. > :12:56.can lead to low turnouts but the key test is how well the trade union is

:12:57. > :13:00.organised, in my experience, in terms of that because you will find

:13:01. > :13:03.that if there is a UK wide dispute there will be some parts of the UK

:13:04. > :13:09.where the turnout will be a lot higher than others. We are also

:13:10. > :13:12.told, Madam Deputy Speaker... I will give way. I thank the honourable

:13:13. > :13:16.gentleman. I thought it was worth repeating a point that was made

:13:17. > :13:22.earlier by the honourable gentleman for heart smear, and he may not have

:13:23. > :13:27.been listening to. He mentioned commuters and I think yourself and

:13:28. > :13:35.my honourable friend for Sunderland Central made the point that the

:13:36. > :13:40.transport strikes that are often paraded in aid of this legislation

:13:41. > :13:44.would all cross the threshold and are all legitimate strikes. That is

:13:45. > :13:53.absolutely right, they would have passed the threshold. I will give

:13:54. > :13:58.way. I thank the honourable member. Referring to the intervention made

:13:59. > :14:02.from the other side on this issue, is the genuine motivation is to get

:14:03. > :14:05.turnout as high as possible then wouldn't the government be putting

:14:06. > :14:10.forward every possible means to make members of trade unions be able to

:14:11. > :14:14.vote in balance by workplace ballots, by the balloting, every

:14:15. > :14:18.possible means, were actually what they are doing is the absolute

:14:19. > :14:22.opposite? I do agree with that and that is why we have submitted this

:14:23. > :14:27.new clause because if the government are so concerned about participation

:14:28. > :14:32.then they would allow for the balloting and secure workplace

:14:33. > :14:34.balloting, secure workplace balloting is secure enough for

:14:35. > :14:37.recognition agreements then surely it is secure enough for the other

:14:38. > :14:41.issues that trade union members must decide upon. Madam Deputy Speaker we

:14:42. > :14:47.are told that we cannot have online voting until 2020, that was part of

:14:48. > :14:53.the evidence of the Bill committee. Members have claimed that the online

:14:54. > :14:58.voting could not be achieved before 2020 but the speaker commission said

:14:59. > :15:02.that while online voting in general are -- at local elections, not for

:15:03. > :15:05.trade union or any other ballots. The commission reported on evidence

:15:06. > :15:12.from the open rights group who argues that online balloting in the

:15:13. > :15:17.contest -- context of the general election is far less balance than

:15:18. > :15:20.trade union voting, and these ballots are counted by the scrutiny

:15:21. > :15:24.in private. Warranty are concerned... Thank you, the

:15:25. > :15:33.honourable gentleman has been very generous. Does he agree that trade

:15:34. > :15:37.unions actually prevent a significant amount of sickness

:15:38. > :15:40.absence in the workplace? I was personally a shop steward in the

:15:41. > :15:43.hospital for another of years and by fostering good relationships between

:15:44. > :15:47.trade union members and management I am confident that be significantly

:15:48. > :15:53.reduced that burden upon the workplace. Yes I do and I trade

:15:54. > :15:57.union experience, and I would have to say the best education I had was

:15:58. > :16:01.from the trade union movement. Particularly around issues like

:16:02. > :16:05.that, issues were someone would have a condition which comes under the

:16:06. > :16:12.scope of the equalities act, for example, so yes I do and I agree

:16:13. > :16:16.with every word of that. I will give way to my honourable friend. Thank

:16:17. > :16:20.you, as they said you have been very generous. The honourable member

:16:21. > :16:24.would agree there have been important point made in terms of the

:16:25. > :16:29.double latte of a threshold and not allowing online voting for secure

:16:30. > :16:34.workplace voting. Without being flippant, does the honourable member

:16:35. > :16:38.think the government here has assessed the risk of secure

:16:39. > :16:41.workplace balloting when it comes to electronic voting? There could be

:16:42. > :16:46.the risk that SNP members are allowed to vote after all because it

:16:47. > :16:51.may not be secure enough. Indeed I look forward to that test

:16:52. > :16:55.happening, that experiment I think the speaker described, takes place.

:16:56. > :16:59.The open rights group are also concerned that online voting in

:17:00. > :17:03.general elections would not justify the extra expense of developing new

:17:04. > :17:07.systems well the technology in -- is in its infancy as tannins are

:17:08. > :17:12.already comparatively high. This argument does not apply to trade

:17:13. > :17:14.union ballots were postal balloting is more expensive. In the general

:17:15. > :17:18.election voting the technology already exists and has been well

:17:19. > :17:24.used for over a decade by private companies, political parties and

:17:25. > :17:28.membership associations. I will give way. I thank the honourable member

:17:29. > :17:34.for giving way. He and I have shared many an anecdote about this, we're

:17:35. > :17:39.both on the committee and elsewhere. During the committee he will recall

:17:40. > :17:43.that I raise a number of concerns -- that the open rights group had made

:17:44. > :17:49.in order to cover prudence in the use of Internet voting. Has he will

:17:50. > :17:55.accept that in any great detail? And what would his comments be? The

:17:56. > :17:58.honourable Desmond was right, I was furious when I googled my name and

:17:59. > :18:08.got a link to his website, it was the exchange we had in the Bill

:18:09. > :18:14.committee. That's why I was furious when I googled my name. The open

:18:15. > :18:17.rights group and I do highlight to highlight to the honourable member,

:18:18. > :18:23.the open rights group said trade union ballots to not apply in these

:18:24. > :18:28.cases because there is a digital safety and scrutiny and all the rest

:18:29. > :18:33.of it. Trade union ballots should be subject to pay the regulation, we

:18:34. > :18:37.are told, that elections to private businesses are NGOs. If the

:18:38. > :18:40.government were genuinely concerned about levels of electronic -based

:18:41. > :18:44.elections in the private sector they would legislate for all of the

:18:45. > :18:49.bodies to be required to use postal only ballots, they should also read

:18:50. > :18:55.on the election for the mere of London for their candidate using a

:18:56. > :19:00.postal only ballots in that case. Madam Deputy Speaker, the amendments

:19:01. > :19:07.are in a similar vein in respect to balloting, I can be broadly

:19:08. > :19:10.supportive as their intentions mirror our amendment. We are asking

:19:11. > :19:16.members of the house to vote for our cattle amendments to make this

:19:17. > :19:24.Bill, this Draconian Dickensian Bill a little bit better. Thank you.

:19:25. > :19:34.Excuse me, the question is that amendment 15 be made. I would like

:19:35. > :19:39.to see if I may 2.5, 67 and nine. In overall terms as despite the coming

:19:40. > :19:43.from this Bill think we can all agree that we have moved a very long

:19:44. > :19:52.way in industrial relations towards consensus and away from what we saw

:19:53. > :19:55.in the 1980s. The trade union act of 1984 for compulsory action ballots

:19:56. > :19:59.to be put in place to receive statutory immunity was a very

:20:00. > :20:02.significant step, although it did cement the rather odd situation that

:20:03. > :20:07.we have in this country that there is technically no right to strike,

:20:08. > :20:12.rather we give unions in certain circumstances statutory immunity

:20:13. > :20:16.from the civil wrong of inducing a breach of the employed contract.

:20:17. > :20:22.That being acid may I think we can all agree that voting before a

:20:23. > :20:26.strike is vital and that voting itself should be carried out in a

:20:27. > :20:29.free and fair manner that reduces as far as possible any chance of

:20:30. > :20:36.coercion or threat of intimidation to the voter. It is certainly the

:20:37. > :20:38.case that this Bill addresses for the return of requirements but it

:20:39. > :20:42.does not address the question of how the ballot itself is physically

:20:43. > :20:47.conducted and this is now being put to the test by the opposition in the

:20:48. > :20:53.amendments which argued for secure workplace ballots and suggests

:20:54. > :20:56.incrementing electronic voting for ballot for strike action. I have to

:20:57. > :21:01.say that my first observation is that these two contests do not

:21:02. > :21:04.necessarily sit well together. Namely if the opposition believes

:21:05. > :21:08.that electronic voting is the future and the way to go then why are the

:21:09. > :21:14.also proposing returning votes to the place of work? The problem is

:21:15. > :21:19.more profound, and that the security of a postal vote sets to a person's

:21:20. > :21:24.home does remove a large area of risk in terms of intimidation that

:21:25. > :21:30.could attach to returning votes to the workplace. The benefits of the

:21:31. > :21:34.1984 ballots and the use of post where hard-won and I would say have

:21:35. > :21:39.been of great benefit to working people, not perhaps the union

:21:40. > :21:43.organiser or the militant activist but the everyday working man and

:21:44. > :21:46.woman who has benefited from being able to calmly reflect on the merits

:21:47. > :21:52.of a strike ballot in the safety of their own home. I give way. I thank

:21:53. > :21:55.the honourable member. He has referred to intimidation when people

:21:56. > :22:00.cast their ballot, does he have any real examples of where there has

:22:01. > :22:07.been intimidation in ballots? I am not here to accuse anyone, I am here

:22:08. > :22:12.to talk about... If the honourable lady thinks that the 1984

:22:13. > :22:16.legislation was put in place because there were no instances of

:22:17. > :22:19.intimidation at that time then I think we need to go back to the

:22:20. > :22:23.history books, which I am not intending to do today. I am not

:22:24. > :22:27.saying that postal ballots will always be free from intimidation,

:22:28. > :22:30.particularly at several members of the same family were at the same

:22:31. > :22:35.place of work, I do also appreciate that the opposition in course of

:22:36. > :22:40.seven requires that fought in the workplace are private and free from

:22:41. > :22:45.unfairness. But the question is how far does that go? Does it cover only

:22:46. > :22:50.the voting room at the factory premises? What about beyond the

:22:51. > :22:53.factory gates and the pickets? I am concerned that this could be a

:22:54. > :22:58.retrograde step. I give way. I am very grateful. He has quoted

:22:59. > :23:02.intimidation in the workplace. Let's have some evidence to back that up,

:23:03. > :23:08.he is casting it out there and making experience. Give as evidence.

:23:09. > :23:11.We are looking at the optimum way of voting and I do note that the

:23:12. > :23:17.opposition provides for the possibility of a combination of

:23:18. > :23:21.voting methods to be used but I note that the combination is to be

:23:22. > :23:25.selected by the union, and unless I have read this wrong, and someone

:23:26. > :23:28.could want to put me right, this could imply that workplace only

:23:29. > :23:32.ballots could effectively be reintroduced by the back door and

:23:33. > :23:37.again I would see this as a step backwards and not to be supported.

:23:38. > :23:40.On the issue of electronic voting it could be said that this is where

:23:41. > :23:45.society is heading, and that point was made very strongly by the SNP

:23:46. > :23:49.member and that union more should take the lead on an issue that with

:23:50. > :23:52.the generally adopted. I have not seen the most recent opinions of the

:23:53. > :23:58.electoral commission on electronic voting but I recall that they have

:23:59. > :24:01.serious concerns about security a few years ago. Could the Minister

:24:02. > :24:06.please advise the house to what extent he has discussed this with

:24:07. > :24:10.the electoral commission and also if he has refused the rule of the

:24:11. > :24:13.certification Officer with that of the electoral commission in the

:24:14. > :24:16.conduct of balance. And in that regard if in the future we did wish

:24:17. > :24:19.to move towards electronic voting generally, could this be effective

:24:20. > :24:23.for unions under existing legislation such as the provisions

:24:24. > :24:28.of section 54 employment lesions act 2004? In other words are the

:24:29. > :24:32.electronic voting amendments required at all? If only because of

:24:33. > :24:35.technological changes I think this has been a useful debate to hold but

:24:36. > :24:39.I am not yet convinced that the security side that these proposals

:24:40. > :24:47.are the correct way to go at the current time. Madam Deputy Speaker,

:24:48. > :24:54.and can I declare my interest as a member of the musicians union and

:24:55. > :24:59.Unite, and also draw the house's attention to my entry in the

:25:00. > :25:04.register of members interests. This group contains our new clauses,

:25:05. > :25:08.five, six, seven, eight and nine and also amendment seven, eight and nine

:25:09. > :25:11.which stand in my name and that of my rate honourable friends. It is

:25:12. > :25:15.good to return to the trade union Bill after a jam-packed committee

:25:16. > :25:18.stage and it is clear from reading the proceedings that it did not

:25:19. > :25:21.provide sufficient time. The minister said earlier that the

:25:22. > :25:25.proceedings finished early. He neglected to tell the house that the

:25:26. > :25:28.proceedings had run late the night before because the government were

:25:29. > :25:32.afraid there was not enough time to conclude proceedings so that was a

:25:33. > :25:38.fact that he missed out from his exhalation.

:25:39. > :25:45.Despite that, my honourable friend is on the committee did a remarkable

:25:46. > :25:49.job and I want to pay tribute. Those who were on the committee will

:25:50. > :25:55.forgive me if I praise my Cardiff neighbours. My honourable friend the

:25:56. > :25:59.MP for Cardiff South. He meticulously unpicked the Bill from

:26:00. > :26:03.the front bench. And my honourable friend, the member for Cardiff

:26:04. > :26:10.Central, who described whose status as a new member has brought her to

:26:11. > :26:14.amend this expertise in order to expose this Bill as an attack on the

:26:15. > :26:19.inability of trade unions to perform their proper role on behalf of their

:26:20. > :26:25.members, coupled with an attempt to use a mandate acquired from 38% of

:26:26. > :26:28.those who voted in the general election in order to interfere with

:26:29. > :26:34.the funding of its main opposition party in Parliament. I know that

:26:35. > :26:40.they are Cardiff constituents will be proud of my honourable friend 's

:26:41. > :26:45.opposition is. I hope I can add a little to the efforts on behalf of

:26:46. > :26:50.the working people and democracy. Thank you very much for giving way.

:26:51. > :26:55.Another part of this Bill is how it is an oppressive Bill. It also

:26:56. > :26:58.affects women. Three quarters of trade union members are women and

:26:59. > :27:03.will be affected by this or press of Bill. The only aggression they talk

:27:04. > :27:08.about is coming from this Government affecting the rights of working

:27:09. > :27:13.people. My honourable friend is absolutely right. I remember as a

:27:14. > :27:17.young boy, how my mother's trade union helped her when she had a

:27:18. > :27:20.hernia as a result of lifting tables as a dinner lady. Without her trade

:27:21. > :27:25.union, she would not have got the support she needed. She might have

:27:26. > :27:28.lost her job. That is the kind of experience that honourable members

:27:29. > :27:34.often do not understand about what trade unions actually do. Talking

:27:35. > :27:39.about women, who do we seriously think is most affected when schools

:27:40. > :27:46.close because of ballots with low support? We heard in committee of

:27:47. > :27:50.how in 2011, school closures affected millions of appearance, in

:27:51. > :27:54.most cases with a vote of well under 40%. Trade Union Bill I take it from

:27:55. > :28:01.that, you want higher turnout in ballots and will support our ballot.

:28:02. > :28:08.I thank you for your support. I give way. Thank you. Does my honourable

:28:09. > :28:13.friend agree that the worst aspect of this Bill is the way it has been

:28:14. > :28:16.applied retrospectively? 5 million long-standing union members will

:28:17. > :28:20.have the political subscription cancelled without their permission

:28:21. > :28:29.or that of their union? No wonder they want to scrap the Cuban rights

:28:30. > :28:35.act. -- Human Rights Act. She is absolutely right. The retrospective

:28:36. > :28:38.element of this piece of legislation is particularly pernicious and

:28:39. > :28:41.governments should refrain from retrospective legislation. Time

:28:42. > :28:46.periods have been put in place. Quite frank, I cannot believe the

:28:47. > :28:51.period is recommended by officials. When I was an official, any time

:28:52. > :28:54.period for consultation or any major change to any system involving

:28:55. > :28:58.business would have been at least a period of 18 months. So I am shocked

:28:59. > :29:04.if officials won month is sufficient. And that is the advice

:29:05. > :29:08.they have given to ministers. The Government has often used a rhetoric

:29:09. > :29:14.of fairness when trying to conceal the salad attack they are making on

:29:15. > :29:18.workers rights. Does the member agree with me that bring in forward

:29:19. > :29:24.proposals to replace striking staff with agency staff is Draconian? A

:29:25. > :29:29.measure that was banned almost ten years before I was even born. She is

:29:30. > :29:34.absolutely right and she will have a chance to develop that further when

:29:35. > :29:37.we discussed that matter after the 2.5 hours of this section of the

:29:38. > :29:47.debate, when that very matter will be before us. I will make little

:29:48. > :29:52.progress. We have just heard the honourable gentleman for a

:29:53. > :29:58.Huntingdon tell us that people could then vote in the safety of their own

:29:59. > :30:02.homes. With my honourable friend comment on this? Because I think

:30:03. > :30:07.this is an absolute slur on trade unions and employers. Because it is

:30:08. > :30:11.implying that it is not safe being able to vote electronically in the

:30:12. > :30:16.workplace, and in some way, unions and employers are going to be

:30:17. > :30:19.billion people. And that is not my experience of unions and the way

:30:20. > :30:25.they conduct themselves or their ballots. She is absolutely right.

:30:26. > :30:30.Workplace ballots take place all the time. They are actually required to

:30:31. > :30:40.have independent scrutiny when they do take place. It is an absolute

:30:41. > :30:46.nonsense to imply there is anything unsafe about that. I will give way

:30:47. > :30:51.one more time. Can I just agree with my honourable friend. This is a

:30:52. > :30:56.terrible attack on trade union rights. But what we have not heard

:30:57. > :31:01.at any point today is any evidence that there is a serious problem. It

:31:02. > :31:05.is absolutely nonsense. It proves this is just a straightforward

:31:06. > :31:08.attack upon trade union movement. Trade Union Bill I think the

:31:09. > :31:12.honourable gentleman is right. This is just what Conservative

:31:13. > :31:16.governments do. Whether or not there is any evidence for it, because they

:31:17. > :31:20.haven't presented any evidence. I have looked through the evidence

:31:21. > :31:24.given and there is no evidence for any of the changes within the Bill.

:31:25. > :31:30.I think they are doing it out of some sort of knee jerk instinct. It

:31:31. > :31:34.is to be greatly regretted. We tabled a great many amendments.

:31:35. > :31:39.Rather surprisingly, none of them were accepted by the Government.

:31:40. > :31:43.Despite the cogency of my honourable friend' argument and they are

:31:44. > :31:48.excellent drafting. So we find ourselves here is submitting further

:31:49. > :31:51.clauses. To answer the honourable gentleman from Huntingdon, I must

:31:52. > :31:59.say that you have been in the house a long time and is very experienced.

:32:00. > :32:05.In the extremely truncated time available to us, it is necessary to

:32:06. > :32:10.focus on a small number of items. That makes no difference to the fact

:32:11. > :32:14.that we in committee made it clear we absolutely, fundamentally

:32:15. > :32:21.disagreed with this Bill in almost every respect. I will give way

:32:22. > :32:25.briefly. I do ask him this. If he says he does not have enough time,

:32:26. > :32:31.how can he come in to this place today and not present amendments on

:32:32. > :32:35.trade union funding or a vote percentages? These are things

:32:36. > :32:39.everyone has been talking about, including all of the union members

:32:40. > :32:43.who have been writing to members of this place. And yet not a single

:32:44. > :32:47.amendments dealing with this. There were many at amendments and I think

:32:48. > :32:51.you will find is not enough time to discuss what we currently are, let

:32:52. > :32:56.alone additional items. If you want to lobby ministers and whips for

:32:57. > :33:05.more time, I welcome that very much indeed. I am going to move on now to

:33:06. > :33:12.clauses five and six, or new clause five and six. New clause five would

:33:13. > :33:15.permit electronic voting in trade union ballots for industrial

:33:16. > :33:19.action. New clause six would permit electronic voting in all other

:33:20. > :33:23.statutory elections and ballots, including elections of general

:33:24. > :33:28.secretaries and political fund ballots. The Government has sought

:33:29. > :33:34.to dress up the Trade Union Bill is some kind of modernisation. But they

:33:35. > :33:37.are continued refusal to introduce e-balloting alongside secure

:33:38. > :33:41.workplace balloting clearly demonstrate they are not serious

:33:42. > :33:45.about modernisation. Online balloting can be as safe and secure

:33:46. > :33:52.as any other form of balloting and it is already used for a variety of

:33:53. > :33:58.purposes in both public and private sectors, including JP Morgan, asset

:33:59. > :34:02.management, Lloyds of London, at Chevron and of course the

:34:03. > :34:06.Conservative Party itself, who recently selected its London mayoral

:34:07. > :34:10.candidate by e-balloting. If Conservative ministers were serious

:34:11. > :34:17.that their reason for resisting a ballots in this Bill was fraud and

:34:18. > :34:23.concern, why would they employ the very same method in their own party

:34:24. > :34:28.elections? We all know the real fraud being perpetrated here is the

:34:29. > :34:33.fraudulent arguments being put forward by ministers, because the

:34:34. > :34:38.real reason they want to do anything they can to discourage turnout and

:34:39. > :34:43.make their threshold is hard to reach. And that is rule one from the

:34:44. > :34:56.Tory party political playbook. This frightful tours who may disagree. --

:34:57. > :35:00.disenfranchise voters. In fact, the seven cases that were made at

:35:01. > :35:06.appeal, not one of them was upheld in terms of believed harassment. She

:35:07. > :35:09.is right. She also knows that most of those complaints were made by

:35:10. > :35:14.trade unions about the conduct of the ballot. So that is a point I

:35:15. > :35:22.might have made later on in my remarks and I might not need to make

:35:23. > :35:25.now. I will give way. Thank you for giving way. He has noted that none

:35:26. > :35:28.of the amendments, reasonable amendments, put forward by these

:35:29. > :35:33.benches have been accepted. But what does he make of the fact that

:35:34. > :35:37.combined authorities throughout England have withstood opposition to

:35:38. > :35:41.the fundamentals of this Bill, but also that the First Minister for

:35:42. > :35:42.Wales stood up in the assembly in Cardiff today and said he will

:35:43. > :35:47.oppose this? This is not showing any oppose this? This is not showing any

:35:48. > :35:54.respect or any attempt at all to find any consensus whatsoever. So

:35:55. > :36:01.much for the respect in the agenda. I will give way. Thank you. You have

:36:02. > :36:05.been very generous with your time. Do you not agree that the people

:36:06. > :36:08.outside of this place will look with bemusement at the fact the

:36:09. > :36:14.opposition are arguing that sitting in front of a computer and a voting

:36:15. > :36:21.electronically will not be safe? Precisely. And I will develop that

:36:22. > :36:25.further in a moment. Under our proposals, electronic or workplace

:36:26. > :36:28.ballots would be overseen by an independent scrutiny. Before the

:36:29. > :36:32.bout is run, they will confirm that the proposed method met the required

:36:33. > :36:38.standard. All members who vote would have the opportunity to do so. Votes

:36:39. > :36:42.would be cast in secret. The risk of any other fairness or malpractice

:36:43. > :36:49.would be minimised. That is the same standard that is set out in section

:36:50. > :36:54.54 of the Employment Relations Act 2004. But none of that matters to

:36:55. > :36:58.ministers. Would you agree with me, as we said in the Bill committee,

:36:59. > :37:02.that the things in this Bill fly in the face of every other bit of

:37:03. > :37:05.legislation this Government has brought forward? Whether that is

:37:06. > :37:10.using online means to apply for benefits, fill in tax forms or

:37:11. > :37:14.anything else. It is entirely at odds with everything else discovered

:37:15. > :37:20.has brought forward. She is right, but that does not seem to matter to

:37:21. > :37:27.ministers. I will give way to my neighbour. I thank my honourable

:37:28. > :37:32.friend for giving way. It is a delighted to be here today. Isn't it

:37:33. > :37:38.the greatest irony that one of the architects of this Bill, the

:37:39. > :37:42.honourable member for West Suffolk, stand-up year extolling the virtues

:37:43. > :37:46.of a Government digital service and the digitalisation of online

:37:47. > :37:53.services and lots of high lead complex matters, but blocked a Bill

:37:54. > :37:59.which allows e-balloting? One is not a road to use the word hypocrisy.

:38:00. > :38:06.Irony is the correct word for the honourable gentleman to use. Our new

:38:07. > :38:09.clause is also requiring unions to use postal ballot alongside

:38:10. > :38:14.electronic and workplace 14 where necessary to ensure everyone has a

:38:15. > :38:18.chance to vote, ensuring members who may be out of work due to sick leave

:38:19. > :38:23.or maternity, paternity or adoption leave, will be able to work. None of

:38:24. > :38:28.that matters to ministers. The clause allows that unions will

:38:29. > :38:32.provide unions with the trust for voting methods. Employers would be

:38:33. > :38:36.under a duty to ensure that union members can vote free from

:38:37. > :38:40.interference or constraint. The use of faster and more efficient

:38:41. > :38:44.balloting matters -- methods could also assist in the earlier

:38:45. > :38:49.resolution of disputes as ballots would take place more quickly. But

:38:50. > :38:55.none of this matters to ministers. The Minister will trot out his line

:38:56. > :38:58.that he's not against e-balloting in principle, but that the speakers

:38:59. > :39:03.commission provided evidence of concerns about safety. That evidence

:39:04. > :39:07.was based on comparison between general election voting in polling

:39:08. > :39:11.stations and online voting. They made no comment on the safety and

:39:12. > :39:16.security of wider forms of online voting. In any case, the report

:39:17. > :39:22.concluded that e-balloting should be available for all electors by 2020.

:39:23. > :39:28.He could easily allow for this legislation, which would permit

:39:29. > :39:31.e-balloting to commence when any concerns he had were satisfied.

:39:32. > :39:37.There is no genuine reason whatsoever why trade unions are the

:39:38. > :39:42.only organisation in the UK which are required by legislation to use

:39:43. > :39:46.postal only ballots or elections and ballots. If the Government were

:39:47. > :39:51.genuinely concerned about levels of electronically -based elections in

:39:52. > :39:56.the private sector, they would legislate for all bodies to be

:39:57. > :40:00.required to use postal only ballots. But they will not because they are

:40:01. > :40:08.not a genuinely concerned. Thousands of sectors use electronic every

:40:09. > :40:12.year. Electoral reform services allow for over 2000 secure online

:40:13. > :40:15.ballots annually and a recent report concluded that online voting is no

:40:16. > :40:22.less secure than postal Val -- balloting. These are more tightly

:40:23. > :40:26.regulated than voting systems used by other organisations. So there is

:40:27. > :40:30.even less chance of a problem. I just wanted to talk about new

:40:31. > :40:34.clauses seven and eight, but give way.

:40:35. > :40:42.If you look at when legislation was brought in, the reason was people

:40:43. > :40:49.said a ballot of this nature would deliver the terms of what they are,

:40:50. > :40:53.but there is a huge cost to this. It has cost them a fortune to run it,

:40:54. > :40:59.and it undermines the capacity to work. My honourable friend is right,

:41:00. > :41:04.that is clearly one of the explanations for the government 's

:41:05. > :41:07.motivations in their attitude towards these amendments. Workplace

:41:08. > :41:13.ballots should be permitted for statutory union elections and

:41:14. > :41:16.ballots, the 1992 act already permits workplace ballots to be used

:41:17. > :41:22.for statutory recognition ballots, and workplace ballots of this nature

:41:23. > :41:25.are secure, and overseen by the qualified independent persons who

:41:26. > :41:32.are generally the same as those who act as scrutineers in industrial

:41:33. > :41:36.action ballots, well over 200 ballots for statutory recognition

:41:37. > :41:39.have been held. A quarter of these involved a combination ballot,

:41:40. > :41:43.including both workplace ballots and postal ballots for those absent from

:41:44. > :41:48.work when the ballot was taking place. And analysis of Central

:41:49. > :41:55.arbitration committee reports indicate the turnout was actually

:41:56. > :42:00.significantly higher when voters voted in the workplace, 88 average

:42:01. > :42:04.turnout compared to 1% in postal ballots. There is no evidence that

:42:05. > :42:09.workers felt pressurised, because where workplace ballots took place,

:42:10. > :42:14.they were more likely... Less likely to vote for union recognition than

:42:15. > :42:17.in postal ballots. The Central arbitration committee, as my

:42:18. > :42:21.honourable friend pointed out earlier, have only received a

:42:22. > :42:26.handful of complaints, mostly made by the unions rather than by

:42:27. > :42:36.individuals. I will now move to new clause nine, which allows Unionists

:42:37. > :42:39.to decide what ballots to use. Given the severe time constraints we have

:42:40. > :42:43.already discussed, it is not possible for us to have divisions

:42:44. > :42:47.this afternoon, on all of our new clauses, relating to e-balloting,

:42:48. > :42:52.and secure workplace balloting. I want to play is clearly on record

:42:53. > :42:55.our view that the government 's failure to accept our very

:42:56. > :42:59.reasonable modernisation proposals, which would enhance trade union

:43:00. > :43:05.democracy, invites further detailed scrutiny of these issues in the

:43:06. > :43:09.other place. E-balloting and secure workplace ballots are distinct

:43:10. > :43:14.issues in their own right, but we recognise due to the, we are unable

:43:15. > :43:19.to vote on all of them separately at report stage without curtailing

:43:20. > :43:20.debate on other important issues in the bill.

:43:21. > :43:25.Turning to turning to amendment seven, that is in my name and of my

:43:26. > :43:31.friends, Madam Deputy Speaker is, that should be read with amendments

:43:32. > :43:35.eight and nine, they all relate to the devolution settlement and

:43:36. > :43:42.conflict with the governments own localism agenda. Amendments to the

:43:43. > :43:47.section are designed to note that provisions do not relate to those

:43:48. > :43:50.partly devolved to the Scottish Government, Welsh government,

:43:51. > :43:54.English local authorities and the Mayor of London. I give way. I'm

:43:55. > :44:00.very grateful to the shadow minister. We managed to obtain from

:44:01. > :44:06.the UK Government that it would be a UK Government minister that would

:44:07. > :44:08.decide the time for health workers in Scotland and Wales, does the

:44:09. > :44:15.honourable member think that is fair? I'm going to come on in a

:44:16. > :44:18.moment to talk about the so-called respect agenda, I hope that will

:44:19. > :44:25.answer the honourable gentleman 's point, because this would ensure

:44:26. > :44:28.that devolved administrations are able to decide how they engage with

:44:29. > :44:35.the staff and trade unions when delivering devolved public services,

:44:36. > :44:39.rather than be subject to a highly partisan central diktat, that I

:44:40. > :44:42.think is what you are referring to, from a government in possession of

:44:43. > :44:46.no mandate in these areas in those particular parts of the UK. I can

:44:47. > :44:52.recall the promised a travelling to rate -- Wales when he was first

:44:53. > :44:56.elected, declaring he would govern in relation to Wales and the other

:44:57. > :45:01.devolved administrations on the basis of respect, and he called it

:45:02. > :45:06."the respect agenda". With that promise in mind, the Welsh First

:45:07. > :45:12.Minister broached to the Prime Minister expressing concerns over

:45:13. > :45:19.the Trade Union Bill and it's lack of respect. He pointed out that the

:45:20. > :45:23.supreme court judgment on the agricultural sector Wales Bill ruled

:45:24. > :45:27.that depending on the impact of devolved services, a UK Government

:45:28. > :45:32.bill may still be subject to a legislative consent motion, even if

:45:33. > :45:38.it can also be classified as relating to matters that are

:45:39. > :45:42.otherwise reserved. Our Scottish Labour leader has written today to

:45:43. > :45:47.the providing the Scottish Parliament calling for a legislative

:45:48. > :45:49.consent motion, and there are calls for Scottish authorities regardless

:45:50. > :45:54.of political persuasion to implement changes where there is no consent. I

:45:55. > :45:59.want to make it clear that there are commitments to solidarity... When I

:46:00. > :46:05.finish this point... I want to make it clear that our commitment to

:46:06. > :46:12.solidarity means that Labour is opposing this bill for workers and

:46:13. > :46:15.trade unions right across the UK. We believe that he simply devolved

:46:16. > :46:19.employment and industrial relations, for example to Scotland, would be

:46:20. > :46:24.playing into the Conservative government 's hands, and a race to

:46:25. > :46:28.the bottom on workplace rights and privileges would result, and that

:46:29. > :46:32.would have a detrimental impact across the United Kingdom. I give

:46:33. > :46:36.way. Can you confirm to the house that the Welsh government will bring

:46:37. > :46:42.forward legislative consent motion is in terms of Wales. I thank the

:46:43. > :46:46.honourable gentleman for his intervention, I think I would be

:46:47. > :46:50.equally guilty of arrogance on my part if I were to assume the role of

:46:51. > :46:57.the devolved ministers in the Welsh government. The consent motion was

:46:58. > :47:02.clearly indicated as something under consideration in the letter from the

:47:03. > :47:07.First Minister. Madam Deputy Speaker... Clauses 12 and 13. I give

:47:08. > :47:09.way. On that point, the public services Minister for Wales made

:47:10. > :47:14.that clear that he was considering the matter in his evidence to the

:47:15. > :47:18.committee, and today I believe that he expressed that the bill in its

:47:19. > :47:23.current form unamended is an all out assault in the devolution

:47:24. > :47:26.settlement, in his own words. That is why I am slightly nervous when I

:47:27. > :47:30.give way to my honourable friend, because his expertise on these

:47:31. > :47:35.matters is so thorough. And he is absolutely right about the evidence

:47:36. > :47:40.given to him in the committee by Leighton Andrews, the minister from

:47:41. > :47:52.the Welsh government. Our amendments seven and eight... I give way. 1-mac

:47:53. > :48:00.going back to Scotland, Scottish local authorities oppose this bill,

:48:01. > :48:05.is there a Conservative councillor under the name of Bella? I think

:48:06. > :48:10.that shows some feeling. It does not surprise me, it may surprise other

:48:11. > :48:14.members of that is the case, but I think most Conservatives would

:48:15. > :48:19.believe that arrangement entered into voluntarily at a local level

:48:20. > :48:24.between an employer and employees... Are not something that

:48:25. > :48:28.should be interfered with by central government. I would have thought

:48:29. > :48:31.that was the DNA of what Conservative principles are about

:48:32. > :48:36.four people who believe that voluntary arrangements and

:48:37. > :48:41.transactions between parties that are entered into freely, that are

:48:42. > :48:45.not immoral in some way or criminal, should not be tinkered with by

:48:46. > :48:49.central government. That is what is extraordinary in this, and it

:48:50. > :48:54.illustrates the blinkered nature of the government 's views about trade

:48:55. > :48:59.unions and their role in society. If you look at the contents of the

:49:00. > :49:02.bill, and if you recognise the fact the government wants to pull out the

:49:03. > :49:07.Human Rights Act, if you take that in conjunction with the cuts of

:49:08. > :49:14.legal aid, this is a direct attack not only on trade unions in the

:49:15. > :49:18.country but on the general population. Many of those human

:49:19. > :49:22.rights implications will be examined, because of the unfortunate

:49:23. > :49:25.constraints we have on time here will stop but I imagine there will

:49:26. > :49:31.be people in the other place who will look at the bill with a great

:49:32. > :49:35.deal of interest. Under current legislation, trade union

:49:36. > :49:41.representatives have a right to reasonable paid time off to perform

:49:42. > :49:44.duties. This has huge benefits to employees and employers alike.

:49:45. > :49:53.Course 13 has set a cap on the percentage that can be invested --

:49:54. > :49:58.clause. An arbitrary limit can be imposed on the amount of time spent,

:49:59. > :50:02.not only on negotiating on improved pay and conditions, but on

:50:03. > :50:04.training, promoting learning opportunities for the workforce, on

:50:05. > :50:09.accompanying individuals in grievance and disciplinary

:50:10. > :50:13.proceedings, in training, health and safety, and the clause demonstrates

:50:14. > :50:18.a democratic deficit, as my honourable friend pointed out,

:50:19. > :50:24.government ministers can use secondary legislation to restrict or

:50:25. > :50:28.appeal trade rights. Secondly, it will prevent democratically elected

:50:29. > :50:34.to devolve bytes in how they manage their employment and engage with

:50:35. > :50:39.their own staff. Thirdly, provisions mean that the government can pick

:50:40. > :50:42.and choose politically which local authorities it will force to impose

:50:43. > :50:49.a cap. That is a very dangerous precedent. The reserved powers

:50:50. > :50:53.elements of the bill show that the government intend to use that? I

:50:54. > :50:56.think she is absolutely right, I don't think they would be there if

:50:57. > :51:00.the government did not intend to use them, and neither should government

:51:01. > :51:04.grant them those powers and anything other than the assumption that they

:51:05. > :51:08.intend to use with them. The opposition should carefully think

:51:09. > :51:11.about what they grant through the bill. We also know there are

:51:12. > :51:16.significant questions about the legal basis of such a change in

:51:17. > :51:20.relation to European Union law, health and safety ropes, on the

:51:21. > :51:26.rights of trade union representatives, -- representatives.

:51:27. > :51:29.Outsourcing, and rights protected by the European Convention of human

:51:30. > :51:40.rights and the international labour conventions. In addition, according

:51:41. > :51:43.to research, in 2007, workplaces have lower voluntary exit rates

:51:44. > :51:49.which have led to significant savings in recruitment costs. I give

:51:50. > :51:53.way to my honourable friend. With my honourable friend agree with me that

:51:54. > :51:58.the cuts to facilities time and charges to employment tribunal 's

:51:59. > :52:02.would put women of pursuing cases of maternity discrimination which are

:52:03. > :52:06.rising, but women have not been receiving justice recently? My

:52:07. > :52:12.honourable friend is quite right, and she points out something others

:52:13. > :52:16.have pointed out, the degree to which the bill discriminates against

:52:17. > :52:25.women. Yellow mac I am wondering whether the right honourable friend

:52:26. > :52:28.can give me examples of where the government says this interferes

:52:29. > :52:33.between consenting parties in order to undo them. Are there any examples

:52:34. > :52:37.in which you are aware of? I may be inadequate in my research, but I

:52:38. > :52:41.have not come across any examples. I'm sure the minister has dozens of

:52:42. > :52:45.them, because surely he would not pick out a particular group in

:52:46. > :52:51.society for this kind of Draconian treatment, and as he was meeting out

:52:52. > :52:54.that kind of treatment to other groups? The honourable lady has an

:52:55. > :52:59.example? Does the honourable member except that when an employer and

:53:00. > :53:03.employee enter into a contract and agreement between each other, the

:53:04. > :53:07.contract is that the member... The employee will turn up to work and

:53:08. > :53:17.not engage with others to disrupt the employment... If I may finish.

:53:18. > :53:25.And, the union's power to engage in collective activity is an exception

:53:26. > :53:34.to that principle. And so that that exception must only be exercised in

:53:35. > :53:38.circumstances where it is justifiable and legitimate. I do

:53:39. > :53:43.understand the basis in which it is possible to undertake industrial

:53:44. > :53:47.action lawfully, which it has been for over 100 years, and she may well

:53:48. > :53:52.know that, in fact, it was a judgment in the part of the world

:53:53. > :53:59.that me and my honourable friend 's represent, over 100 years ago, they

:54:00. > :54:05.lead to changes having ensuring that in any civilised democratic society,

:54:06. > :54:08.white people have the right to withdraw labour if they are involved

:54:09. > :54:13.in trade disputes, I hope you are not suggesting that that should be

:54:14. > :54:17.the case. As I said earlier, if she is serious about wanting more people

:54:18. > :54:22.to be involved in the decision-making around a trade

:54:23. > :54:26.dispute in balloting and so on, she will be supporting our new clauses

:54:27. > :54:29.and amendments which allow for e-balloting and easier access to

:54:30. > :54:36.democracy for the very people that she is purporting to speak about.

:54:37. > :54:41.Does my friend agree with me that actually having facility times

:54:42. > :54:42.improve industrial relations in the workplace, admitted gates against

:54:43. > :54:53.industrial action? I do agree. There is plenty of

:54:54. > :54:59.evidence that it saves money and facilitates good industrial

:55:00. > :55:02.relations. It is also a Draconian and illiberal action for the

:55:03. > :55:07.Government to interfere in voluntary agreements between employers and

:55:08. > :55:12.employees by Central Dick tacked from ministers in this way and it is

:55:13. > :55:23.something I believe they will live to regret. -- Central Dick cat. It

:55:24. > :55:30.is written into the contract they can have a trade union subscription

:55:31. > :55:35.conducted by Sally. Employers will be able to reissue new contracts.

:55:36. > :55:43.The honourable gentleman is a mind reader. I am coming to that very

:55:44. > :55:47.shortly. Following on from the points made by by honourable friend

:55:48. > :55:54.from York, with my honourable friend agreed that actually, the hallmarks

:55:55. > :55:57.of a good, productive, innovative economy are collaborative,

:55:58. > :56:01.harmonious industrial relations? The likes of Unite, and the likes of the

:56:02. > :56:05.community of our beleaguered steel industry, we must stay competitive.

:56:06. > :56:14.Trade unions are not good for injured were -- individual workers.

:56:15. > :56:18.It is good for the economy. Instead, the Government is basically

:56:19. > :56:25.walking across the street to pick a fight in relation to this, where no

:56:26. > :56:31.provocation exists. Let me make some more progress. I want our colleagues

:56:32. > :56:35.have the opportunity to participate in this section of the debate.

:56:36. > :56:39.Negotiations between employers and unions can play a positive role. The

:56:40. > :56:48.Welsh Government recognises the value of that and has a partnership

:56:49. > :56:54.approach with trade unions. I quote, it cannot be right for the UK

:56:55. > :57:00.Government, blind to devolved service delivery reforms in Wales,

:57:01. > :57:11.to specify how much union facility time devolved public sex at --

:57:12. > :57:16.sector employees should be allowed. Half the Welsh Government operates

:57:17. > :57:19.these arrangements as part of its approach to effective, social

:57:20. > :57:27.partnership and is not seeking to change this. Despite this, the Tory

:57:28. > :57:32.Government... This is not the agenda of respect. This is an attitude of

:57:33. > :57:39.contempt towards devolved administrations. I now move on since

:57:40. > :57:49.I have referred to Chekhov. I give way. To offer my honourable friend

:57:50. > :57:55.some support, some 60 local councils and NHS organisations agree with

:57:56. > :58:00.exactly the point he was making on behalf of Wales. The reader of

:58:01. > :58:07.Enfield Council has said it would seem farcical to expect a council to

:58:08. > :58:11.develop efficient organisational structures and deliver million pound

:58:12. > :58:14.services to the public, but deny its writer to set the level of facility

:58:15. > :58:20.time appropriate to meeting these objectives. And the leader of the

:58:21. > :58:27.council has put it very societally and appropriately in the quote that

:58:28. > :58:37.she reads to the House today. I thank my honourable friend. I have

:58:38. > :58:40.seen it from both sides. Most good employers and big companies will

:58:41. > :58:47.tell you that facility time saves them money. The reason why is the do

:58:48. > :58:54.not want hundreds of their employees disrupted and production disrupted.

:58:55. > :58:57.It is clear to me that your side of the Coasters not have any experience

:58:58. > :59:03.of industrial relations or employment practices. If they felt

:59:04. > :59:07.there were some abuse, that could be dealt with. But to legislate to our

:59:08. > :59:12.loyal something of this kind is absolutely shocking. Which is in

:59:13. > :59:20.effect what the Avent is doing. I will give way. Under law, and she

:59:21. > :59:26.and resources director will still have to provide consultation on an

:59:27. > :59:29.individual basis. Through collective consultation, those agreements can

:59:30. > :59:33.be made quickly and the union can commune a kit with their members

:59:34. > :59:39.very quickly and liaise and negotiate with each other. With this

:59:40. > :59:42.legislation, that human resources director will have to go round every

:59:43. > :59:46.single employee. We are talking about the NHS and councils with

:59:47. > :59:50.several thousands of employees. That will cost vast amount of money, take

:59:51. > :59:56.vast amount of time and leave the Government and those employers in a

:59:57. > :00:03.peculiar legal situation when it could be taken to judicial review.

:00:04. > :00:09.My honourable friend brings his vast experience on these matters to bear.

:00:10. > :00:13.Clause nine would ensure that the ban on Chekhov arrangements would

:00:14. > :00:21.also not apply to services which are either wholly or partly devolved.

:00:22. > :00:25.This is now close 14 in the Bill, which would prevent all public

:00:26. > :00:30.sector employers from deducting union subscriptions via the payroll.

:00:31. > :00:34.The proposed ban is clearly designed to target union finances. And to

:00:35. > :00:38.make it harder for individuals, including lower paid workers, to

:00:39. > :00:42.access union representation in the workplace. Under the clause, the

:00:43. > :00:46.Government will be able to introduce regulations imposing a ban on

:00:47. > :00:51.Chekhov arrangements across the entire public sector. They claim

:00:52. > :00:56.that will save taxpayers ?6 million, but many unions already cover the

:00:57. > :01:02.costs for Chekhov services. I will come back to this. There is a real

:01:03. > :01:06.risk that if the ban does come into effect, the Government and hence the

:01:07. > :01:12.taxpayer will incur costs. Potential, the need to compensate

:01:13. > :01:17.members for the loss of contractual rights. In a moment or two. Let me

:01:18. > :01:22.just say one more thing. The proposed ban on Chekhov arrangements

:01:23. > :01:27.has been proposed in consultation with employers. Any engagement with

:01:28. > :01:32.unions or any proper assessment of the impact on employment relations

:01:33. > :01:35.was not included in the Conservative Party manifesto or the Queen's

:01:36. > :01:39.speech and there was no reference to it in any of the consultations or

:01:40. > :01:43.impact assessments which accompanied the Bill. I note the concern

:01:44. > :01:47.expressed by members on the Conservative benches on this in

:01:48. > :01:54.later amendments which will be considered later this afternoon.

:01:55. > :01:59.Which the honourable gentleman agree with me that when many organisations

:02:00. > :02:04.already have a provision to deduct from payroll for credit unions, for

:02:05. > :02:08.charitable giving and many other things, it is an absolute farce for

:02:09. > :02:12.the Government to suggest that it is some kind of burden on organisations

:02:13. > :02:18.to allow trade union deductions to be deducted? To disagree, I think it

:02:19. > :02:25.is a tragedy rather than a farce. I understand the point she is making.

:02:26. > :02:28.I give way. He has already punched holes in the ?6 million figure and

:02:29. > :02:33.the calculation is which underpin it. Does he agree with me that the

:02:34. > :02:37.Government, if it has any credibility, should also estimate

:02:38. > :02:46.for the amount extra that the public sector and taxpayers will be landed

:02:47. > :02:55.with by any increasing unrest and lack of cooperation from the public

:02:56. > :02:59.sector workforce? I do agree. He represents an area where there are

:03:00. > :03:03.many trade union members. He is absolutely right. All I can say is

:03:04. > :03:06.it is shocking the Government has not published those figures. I know

:03:07. > :03:11.the Minister has deep pockets, and he may well have to dip into them

:03:12. > :03:15.when he finds out how much this policy might cost. Was the

:03:16. > :03:20.honourable gentleman attempting to intervene? I thank the honourable

:03:21. > :03:25.gentleman for giving way and would point out that in some cases, as has

:03:26. > :03:32.been pointed out to me, councils actually make money from Chekhov.

:03:33. > :03:37.There are one or two specific examples. Not only do they repay the

:03:38. > :03:42.costs of Chekhov, there is actually extra funding which supports council

:03:43. > :03:49.services. The honourable gentleman is right. As I referred to earlier

:03:50. > :03:54.in his amendment, T has put his finger on something and his

:03:55. > :03:59.intervention now draws it to my attention. That is that the state

:04:00. > :04:03.should not be interfering in this voluntary transaction, entered into

:04:04. > :04:07.freely by parties where it is not illegal or immoral in any sense.

:04:08. > :04:13.What is wrong with an employer either in the public or private

:04:14. > :04:17.sector, in order to maintain good relations with employees,

:04:18. > :04:20.voluntarily agreeing to help collect trade union subscription in exchange

:04:21. > :04:26.for administrative payment? And what other sphere with a Conservative

:04:27. > :04:29.Government legislate to Baron a simple mutually beneficial

:04:30. > :04:33.transaction of this kind? I think the honourable gentleman should be

:04:34. > :04:43.congratulated for actually spotting that floor and that basic issue that

:04:44. > :04:48.is at the heart of this Bill. Can I also disagree slightly with the

:04:49. > :04:51.shadow minister. It is not a tragedy, it is sinister. Any

:04:52. > :04:54.collective bargaining unit where there is a staff Association along

:04:55. > :04:59.with a trade union, the staff association subs will be able to go

:05:00. > :05:03.into the deducted salary but the trade union will not be. Is that not

:05:04. > :05:10.biased? I will not further escalate this dispute is whether it is a

:05:11. > :05:12.first, tragedy or sinister. But the honourable gentleman is absolutely

:05:13. > :05:19.correct. I will give way to my honourable friend. We did raise this

:05:20. > :05:21.in committee in relation to the things that could be collected

:05:22. > :05:28.centrally by a human resource payroll member. Members of staff who

:05:29. > :05:35.are chartered accountants, for example. Or nurses. They are not

:05:36. > :05:41.affected, but the trade union membership would be. It is entirely

:05:42. > :05:45.appropriate for payroll to be used in this way. Often, members pay into

:05:46. > :05:50.a credit union or something through their payroll. These should be

:05:51. > :05:56.encouraged and are good for industrial relations. This ban was

:05:57. > :06:00.not included in the Conservative Party manifesto or the Queen's

:06:01. > :06:04.speech. There was no reference in any of the consultations or impact

:06:05. > :06:09.assessments. I note that the concerns have been heard on the

:06:10. > :06:15.opposite benches as well. It is almost universally opposed, except

:06:16. > :06:18.for the taxpayers Alliance, known colloquially as a tax dodgers

:06:19. > :06:25.Alliance, who gave evidence during the early stages. The Government has

:06:26. > :06:29.failed to give any substantial employer support for proposals.

:06:30. > :06:34.Particularly, the health centre have expressed concern that this

:06:35. > :06:40.undermines positive industrial relations which are vital for

:06:41. > :06:44.delivering public services. We believe these provisions are

:06:45. > :06:51.unnecessary and Draconian and I give notice that we may wish to move our

:06:52. > :06:55.amendment nine litre to a vote. Perhaps at a later time we may wish

:06:56. > :07:01.to ask for a division in relation to amendment nine. I thank my

:07:02. > :07:05.honourable friend for giving way. Well my honourable friend agree with

:07:06. > :07:09.me that this further complicates the situation in the health environment

:07:10. > :07:13.when people pay a leafy not just for the industrial support of the trade

:07:14. > :07:20.union but also a professional levy which goes towards relationships

:07:21. > :07:24.with their work? I think she highlights the lack of thought,

:07:25. > :07:31.consultation and proper scrutiny that has gone into this proposal and

:07:32. > :07:37.it is unravelling by the minute as honourable members bring their

:07:38. > :07:43.expertise forward. I would just like to draw attention to the other

:07:44. > :07:50.amendments, or some of the other amendments that the Scottish

:07:51. > :07:53.national party have brought forward. Some of which were moved at

:07:54. > :08:00.committee stage. I understand they might wish to divide the house on

:08:01. > :08:05.clause two, which is clause is five, six, seven, eight and nine. Given

:08:06. > :08:10.the time, if they do so, we will support them in lieu of our new

:08:11. > :08:14.clauses and in relation to new clause ten. At that point, I think I

:08:15. > :08:27.should allow somebody else and opportunity. We do we start? Trade

:08:28. > :08:33.unions play an important role in protecting the rights of employees.

:08:34. > :08:38.Through their collective power, they have the ability to balance the

:08:39. > :08:41.scales against an employer, who invariably has greater economic and

:08:42. > :08:45.social power than the employees within its workforce. Last week, I

:08:46. > :08:50.met some trade union officials from my constituency and I was struck by

:08:51. > :08:56.the passion and desire they have to do your job in representing others.

:08:57. > :09:04.But therein lies the crux of this legislation. It is the union's job

:09:05. > :09:07.to represent its workforce, and so it actions misrepresent their

:09:08. > :09:13.wishes. It is important is that when a union has the power to bring a

:09:14. > :09:16.school, hospital or factory to a temporary standstill, it actions

:09:17. > :09:22.actually reflect the will of its members. And I say that for three

:09:23. > :09:28.reasons. First call on if I just develop my idle and a little

:09:29. > :09:32.further. Those who suffer most in the striker not employees or

:09:33. > :09:36.employers, it is the public. The employee does not suffer, because

:09:37. > :09:42.any loss of income from the strike may well be covered by the union.

:09:43. > :09:48.The employer does not suffer because he will be paid his salary in any

:09:49. > :09:53.event. It is the public and only the public which suffers. First as

:09:54. > :09:57.consumer, and later, when the Bill comes in, as taxpayer. The public

:09:58. > :10:02.ends up picking up the tab for both sides. In the winter of discontent,

:10:03. > :10:06.the main victims for the low pay offensive in the public service

:10:07. > :10:11.where the old, the sick, the bereaved, children and the poor. The

:10:12. > :10:16.fact it is right that action by a trade union ought to reflect the

:10:17. > :10:20.mood of its members is a point made not only by the side of the House.

:10:21. > :10:22.The need for democratic accountability of the unions was

:10:23. > :10:31.also recognised by the Labour Government. In a White Paper in 1998

:10:32. > :10:34.entitled Fairness And Work, the Labour Government specifically drew

:10:35. > :10:38.attention to the need for accountability. It said laws on

:10:39. > :10:43.picketing on ballots before industrial action and for increasing

:10:44. > :10:46.democratic accountability of trade unions have all helped to improve

:10:47. > :10:51.employment relations. They will stay.

:10:52. > :10:57.For that reason, it is right that this legislation, which is right as

:10:58. > :11:05.a matter of principle, should apply to the whole of the UK if approved

:11:06. > :11:08.by this house. I give way. Of course, that legislation was brought

:11:09. > :11:13.in by the Baroness Thatcher period of government. Is she saying that

:11:14. > :11:20.Baroness Thatcher was wrong or incorrect? Or flawed in anyway in

:11:21. > :11:25.terms of those legislations that she brought in? The legislation that we

:11:26. > :11:29.have at any time must reflect the position that the country finds

:11:30. > :11:33.itself in at the time. This is the place we find ourselves in, this is

:11:34. > :11:38.the legislation that is right for the moment. I press on. I was not a

:11:39. > :11:41.member of the bill committee, but I have read some of the submissions

:11:42. > :11:45.made to the bill committee by the unions on this issue. The Fire

:11:46. > :11:55.Brigades union said that FPU had met the thresholds in its recent

:11:56. > :11:59.ballots. -- FBU. They need not be concerned about this legislation,

:12:00. > :12:04.nor need they be concerned that they do not get the turnout needed on

:12:05. > :12:09.provisions as they currently stand an amended in the bill. Where it is

:12:10. > :12:13.right that action ought to be taken, it is clear this is a needed method

:12:14. > :12:18.of negotiation, they should be confident that their members will

:12:19. > :12:23.take every effort to vote for it. This legislation is simply there to

:12:24. > :12:28.ensure that where there is not such support, the interests of the public

:12:29. > :12:33.are protected and weighed into the balance. The interventions we

:12:34. > :12:36.already have in the debate, it was suggested thresholds have been met,

:12:37. > :12:42.but the bus driver strike earlier this year took place with a turnout

:12:43. > :12:47.of 21%. Inconvenient sing all of those workers attempting to get to

:12:48. > :12:51.work. Transport for London reported there were 6.5 million passengers in

:12:52. > :12:57.London who need to make alternative arrangements. Would my honourable

:12:58. > :13:01.friend give way? I am sure you would agree, these are some of the most

:13:02. > :13:05.vulnerable people in the city on the lowest wages who entirely rely on

:13:06. > :13:10.that transport system. Absolutely right, when there are strikes,

:13:11. > :13:13.low-paid workers had to get alternative childcare, their

:13:14. > :13:20.hospital appointments are affected, and cannot get to work, they also

:13:21. > :13:24.suffer. I continue. Whilst it may be possible to increase methods of

:13:25. > :13:30.voting, we need to ensure there are sufficient safeguards. As I read the

:13:31. > :13:34.amendments put forward, they provide that electronic needs should be

:13:35. > :13:38.provided as is determined by unions. In an area potentially rife with

:13:39. > :13:43.practical concerns, we must be sure, and be certain, that there are no

:13:44. > :13:48.issues before amendments are allowed. Because if the unions have

:13:49. > :13:52.the power to bring major industries to a standstill, they need to

:13:53. > :13:59.exercise that power responsibly and democratically. It is essential that

:14:00. > :14:06.any ballot is seen to be conducted fairly, and transparently. If there

:14:07. > :14:10.is any risk or perceived flaw in the ballot, the legitimacy of the ballot

:14:11. > :14:17.may be in question. The vote that is taken by union members will not

:14:18. > :14:21.garnered the support, public support, and public trust that the

:14:22. > :14:26.representation of the unions demand. It is for that reason that we should

:14:27. > :14:36.pass clauses two and three without amendment at this stage. Your Mac

:14:37. > :14:44.this is a bill that nobody has asked for, and nobody wants. Even the

:14:45. > :14:54.latest polls in the national press to show -- press show there is the

:14:55. > :14:57.gagging bill part two, I think a deputy chairman of the Conservative

:14:58. > :15:05.Party himself said it was about time that we stop bashing the trade

:15:06. > :15:11.unions. But, let's be completely clear. Let me be completely clear on

:15:12. > :15:15.this issue. It is undoubtably a ferocious, full frontal attack on

:15:16. > :15:27.the trade union movement, on members of the trade union, six million-plus

:15:28. > :15:31.members in the trade union movement. I take exception to some comments

:15:32. > :15:36.that have been made, not from everybody on the government benches,

:15:37. > :15:39.but certainly from a number of MPs, who say they want to distinguish

:15:40. > :15:49.between trade union members and ordinary people. Let me tell you, Mr

:15:50. > :15:51.Deputy Speaker, the trade union members are more than ordinary

:15:52. > :15:57.people, they are absolutely fantastic individuals who go the

:15:58. > :16:03.extra mile to try and help colleagues at every opportunity that

:16:04. > :16:07.is required of them. I thank my honourable friend for giving way, a

:16:08. > :16:11.good friend of mine in my constituency is proud of her roots,

:16:12. > :16:15.her mother is Evelyn Allard, one of the Dagenham women who took

:16:16. > :16:19.industrial action in pursuit of equal pay. Do you agree that, in

:16:20. > :16:24.this bill as it stands, some action is prevented from starting, let

:16:25. > :16:27.alone succeeding, and this bill has a pity killer impact on women? --

:16:28. > :16:39.particular impact. I agree on the impact it would have

:16:40. > :16:44.on women in particular, it is a fact, whether we like it or dislike

:16:45. > :16:47.it, that this bill would have a disproportionate negative impact on

:16:48. > :16:54.women in the workplace. That is one of the major issues. Going back to

:16:55. > :17:02.these ordinary people, trade union members are taxpayers. They pay

:17:03. > :17:05.their taxes. Trade union members want their children to get to school

:17:06. > :17:10.in the morning, the argument has been made by a number of people on

:17:11. > :17:17.the government benches. People think trade union members don't have

:17:18. > :17:20.children... ? Wouldn't my honourable friend agree with me that the tone

:17:21. > :17:24.of this debate is similar to what we were talking about with working tax

:17:25. > :17:28.credits? How does this side of the chamber think they can make the case

:17:29. > :17:30.for working people if they are going to be ideological driven around

:17:31. > :17:40.working people, that does not make sense. Let me develop on the

:17:41. > :17:45.comments made, and my contribution. The issue with regards to the bill

:17:46. > :17:50.itself, Mr Deputy Speaker, it is simple, it is gagging Bill part two,

:17:51. > :17:54.about disarming any dissent, especially in the public sector,

:17:55. > :17:57.when we look at thresholds and ballot revisions of agency workers,

:17:58. > :18:05.all of these new clauses and amendments... We begin to form a big

:18:06. > :18:11.picture. It is about criminalising the working people. It is about

:18:12. > :18:15.eradicating any resistance, particularly in the public sector,

:18:16. > :18:24.particularly with women. Low-paid people in the public sector, why are

:18:25. > :18:30.we putting pay restraints on these people and coming up with crazy

:18:31. > :18:33.ideas about stripping family tax credits from hard-working people,

:18:34. > :18:39.and low-paid people, they don't want to give these people the right to

:18:40. > :18:45.fight back. That is what this bill is about. It is about eradicating

:18:46. > :18:50.that dissent while the Conservative government keep their third firmly

:18:51. > :19:01.on the neck of the low-paid who are struggling even to make ends meet.

:19:02. > :19:05.You are right about this, the other disgraceful thing in this bill is

:19:06. > :19:08.that this is a clear attempt to break the elation chip between the

:19:09. > :19:15.trade union movement and this party. It is about undermining those they

:19:16. > :19:18.represent and talk about. It is every man and woman in this

:19:19. > :19:23.country, because if this party is less strong, those people will

:19:24. > :19:29.continue to discriminate against working people. Absolutely, my

:19:30. > :19:38.honourable friend makes an excellent point with regard to provisions in

:19:39. > :19:45.the bill, there has been an agreement gentleman 's agreement for

:19:46. > :19:50.many years, I want to come to an agreement with regard to this, it

:19:51. > :19:55.should be done on a cross-party basis. I think that many of the

:19:56. > :20:03.members on the benches opposite would agree that this isn't a type

:20:04. > :20:08.of bill where we should put in a clause, where it would mean the

:20:09. > :20:15.political party opposite wouldn't have any finances and it would

:20:16. > :20:22.certainly restrict their finances greatly, to fight in the general

:20:23. > :20:26.election. Aside from the dissent, it is dissent from the opposition, they

:20:27. > :20:31.don't even have the finances to fight. It is believing they have the

:20:32. > :20:40.right to rule, not Govan, rule. That is quite different. I am very

:20:41. > :20:45.grateful, my honourable friend, you make a good point. I cannot help but

:20:46. > :20:49.reflect on the comments made from the previous speaker, the honourable

:20:50. > :20:55.lady from Cambridgeshire, who said legislation needs to be appropriate

:20:56. > :20:59.for the time. We are in a time when industrial action in this country is

:21:00. > :21:02.that she at an all-time low. What problem is it that this legislation

:21:03. > :21:09.in terms of industrial action is trying to sort out? I'm aware of a

:21:10. > :21:13.time where more than 1 million people, most of them in work, are

:21:14. > :21:20.claiming family tax credits, a time when more than 1 million people who

:21:21. > :21:26.are in work, they are having to use food banks. It is not about the

:21:27. > :21:30.issue I mentioned with regard to gagging people in dissent, but

:21:31. > :21:35.keeping them quiet. Of course, I give way. As he has gone slightly

:21:36. > :21:40.wider with tax credits and so on, he talks about as putting our foot on

:21:41. > :21:50.the neck of the poor, are we doing that by delivering a record lowest

:21:51. > :21:56.number. That gives me the opportunity that the deputy speaker

:21:57. > :22:01.gave to me over diversifying the contribution, what did the

:22:02. > :22:08.Conservative Party actually have done? They have increased on record

:22:09. > :22:12.levels zero our contracts, low paid work, more apprentices... Moving on

:22:13. > :22:16.from that immediately, it is not anything to do with the bill before

:22:17. > :22:23.you chastise me. With the honourable member accept that the time we are

:22:24. > :22:29.in at the moment is 788,000 days were lost last year in striking

:22:30. > :22:33.action, which, at a time when every party on this house says

:22:34. > :22:38.productivity is key, is essential? If that is the figures, those are

:22:39. > :22:42.the figures. Let me tell the honourable lady that every single

:22:43. > :22:48.one of those days would have been done through a legal process, and as

:22:49. > :22:58.a last resort from individuals who think they need to take industrial

:22:59. > :23:04.action or strike action, their voice can be heard. Anti-union legislation

:23:05. > :23:09.in the Western world, to take a day 's action, or any other kind of

:23:10. > :23:16.action, to go through all the terms of legislation. I give way. He makes

:23:17. > :23:19.an excellent speech, the honourable lady opposite makes comments about

:23:20. > :23:23.statistics and days and hours lost, he will recall from the committee

:23:24. > :23:28.stage that the hours lost in transport for London means other

:23:29. > :23:33.industrial action was the overall majority, due to breakdowns,

:23:34. > :23:37.failures in signals, overcrowding, leaves on the line... Industrial

:23:38. > :23:43.action barely accounted for two or 3% in the last ten years. Is that

:23:44. > :23:46.what we are dealing with today? If you want to talk about productivity,

:23:47. > :23:52.we should look at that issue rather than trying to highlight some name

:23:53. > :23:58.that is not really the problem. If you analyse the number of days lost

:23:59. > :24:02.through industrial action, it is because the negotiators, whether it

:24:03. > :24:05.is the Mayor of London or Secretary of State for Health, they have

:24:06. > :24:10.refused to come to the negotiation table, talk to trade unions, and

:24:11. > :24:19.have spoiled for a strike as we see in junior doctors strike currently.

:24:20. > :24:25.We cannot crush that voice. Of course, I agree with my honourable

:24:26. > :24:31.friend, and as I mentioned earlier on, doesn't anybody want this Bill?

:24:32. > :24:36.Even some of the Tory party major donors have said this is purely and

:24:37. > :24:46.simply union bashing. As my honourable friend, the member for

:24:47. > :24:53.Cardiff West said before, when asked "what is this about?" He said,

:24:54. > :24:57.absolutely right, that is what the Tories do. The Minister opposite

:24:58. > :25:01.said they voted for it in the last election, you did not declare that

:25:02. > :25:06.as a policy prior to the last election, and you did not declare

:25:07. > :25:10.the NHS act, the changes to tax credits, it seems to be if you are

:25:11. > :25:14.so proud about this planned legislation, why did you not declare

:25:15. > :25:23.before the general election? I am not responsible, I want to clear

:25:24. > :25:27.that one up. I'm sure... No, Mr Blenkinsop, let me reassure you, you

:25:28. > :25:31.are wrong, it is not me, it may be the other side, but they actually

:25:32. > :25:36.said you. The other thing is, we need to speak around the amendments,

:25:37. > :25:38.either allowed you because you have been tempted away and I know you

:25:39. > :25:49.want to go back to where you are. I think the reason why my honourable

:25:50. > :25:52.friend was speaking to me was the front bench where having a separate

:25:53. > :25:59.conversation and where not listening to a single word. That is not

:26:00. > :26:04.unusual. But getting back to the Bill. Getting back to the amendment

:26:05. > :26:09.and the new clauses. This Bill is there for three things. It is they

:26:10. > :26:14.are to restrict the right to organise, to restrict the right for

:26:15. > :26:18.collective bargaining and restrict the right for strike action. I was

:26:19. > :26:23.sitting in the Bill, I was not only Bill committee, but I listened to

:26:24. > :26:27.the many arguments and the evidence sessions, which were quite

:26:28. > :26:33.enlightening. I think the minister himself explained that they found it

:26:34. > :26:37.extremely difficult to get anybody who had a clue what the builder was

:26:38. > :26:45.about to come to the evidence sessions. It is mentioned... The

:26:46. > :26:49.chief executive from 2020 Health, with regard to facility time.

:26:50. > :26:56.Facility time is a huge issue in this Bill. As the honourable member

:26:57. > :27:00.for Glasgow South West mentioned before, he asked with regard to

:27:01. > :27:07.facility time, he asked why my honourable friend from Cardiff South

:27:08. > :27:13.West is it right that a Government minister can intervene and dictate

:27:14. > :27:17.facility time in Scotland and Wales? I ask the same question. Is

:27:18. > :27:22.it right that a Government minister intervenes anywhere in the workplace

:27:23. > :27:26.about facility, anywhere in the UK? Because the answer to that quite

:27:27. > :27:30.simply is that it is not right and they should keep out of the

:27:31. > :27:39.workplace with regard to the rights facility. He also referred to that

:27:40. > :27:47.witness who had no idea what life or limb cover was. It has been in

:27:48. > :27:53.existence since at least the early 1980s, if not the early 1970s. The

:27:54. > :27:58.fact that witnesses called by the Government had no idea about

:27:59. > :28:03.long-term, existing legislation just shows you how pull this legislation

:28:04. > :28:11.is and the work of the ministers who have worked on has been poor. In

:28:12. > :28:14.addition, this individual, who runs a health organisation, a private

:28:15. > :28:19.health organisation, the length of the breadth of the UK, when asked if

:28:20. > :28:26.she had read the Bill, she said not really. Well, have you read most of

:28:27. > :28:31.the Bill? Not really. Do you understand what facility time is?

:28:32. > :28:37.Not really. What is facility time? And then, with regards to life and

:28:38. > :28:42.limb, which is integral to trade union law, whereby trade union

:28:43. > :28:46.representatives will if there is a problem, if there is a life and limb

:28:47. > :28:50.issue, will break off industrial action to ensure that people are

:28:51. > :29:07.safe. She did not even understand that. And can I say, she was the

:29:08. > :29:11.best witness they had. Yes. You like thank you my honourable friend.

:29:12. > :29:14.Would you agree with me that the existence of facility time is

:29:15. > :29:18.actually beneficial to the good running of any public authority or

:29:19. > :29:23.business and the erosion of that will cause immense difficulties in

:29:24. > :29:30.of productivity? If new representation cannot be provided

:29:31. > :29:37.for union members in the workplace? Many papers have been presented by

:29:38. > :29:43.professors, doctors, experts with regards to facility time. There have

:29:44. > :29:50.been many battles on industry relations problems. Over many years

:29:51. > :29:56.and decades of decent industrial relations policy, which allows

:29:57. > :30:00.facility time, which could mean health and safety discussions, the

:30:01. > :30:06.avoidance of industrial disputes, the avoidance of the progression of

:30:07. > :30:11.court cases. Facility time is not about people sitting in an office on

:30:12. > :30:15.a telephone, organising disputes. It is about quite the opposite.

:30:16. > :30:26.Facility time is about trying to avoid these. As a former council

:30:27. > :30:30.leader employing thousands of staff, the facility time was

:30:31. > :30:35.actually to cope with all the casework, because the Government at

:30:36. > :30:38.the time was forcing cuts on local government, meaning so many

:30:39. > :30:42.redundancies. We had to triple the amount of casework time, which was

:30:43. > :30:46.crucial for ensuring that terrible period of redundancy was managed in

:30:47. > :30:54.a humane way that helped people. Thank you. Thank you very much. I

:30:55. > :31:02.agree with the sentiments raised by my honourable friend. Facility time

:31:03. > :31:07.is basically within the Bill. If the Government started to say how much

:31:08. > :31:12.and how little individual people should have in terms of facility

:31:13. > :31:15.time, you will see a breakdown of communications between trade unions,

:31:16. > :31:21.the workforce and indeed the employers. And I think in local

:31:22. > :31:26.government and in the NHS, where it is much valued to the benefit of the

:31:27. > :31:35.general public. We have been discussing thresholds. As you said

:31:36. > :31:42.before, thresholds of 40% and 15%. If we have a look at the Cabinet

:31:43. > :31:47.just prior to the election, because Russian Cabinet, if we applied the

:31:48. > :31:58.same sort of rules, not one of them would have been elected. To be fair,

:31:59. > :32:03.we have got to be consistent with regards to thresholds. And we have

:32:04. > :32:12.got to be fair. We have the police and crime commissioners. The average

:32:13. > :32:24.turnout for them was 17%. The Government itself was elected by

:32:25. > :32:29.only 24% of the electorate. A lot of people, or are people saying that

:32:30. > :32:35.people should have the right to govern? I just think that fairness

:32:36. > :32:40.should prevail and that brings me onto the very fact that, with regard

:32:41. > :32:47.to thresholds, if we look at the issue of balloting, there has been

:32:48. > :32:52.many people discussing e-balloting and how that would provide a much

:32:53. > :32:56.bigger turnout. That is what the Conservative Government wants. I

:32:57. > :33:01.think I would agree we want more people to participate in the

:33:02. > :33:07.ballot, hence the issue with thresholds. It is terribly, terribly

:33:08. > :33:13.unfair to suggest that at this stage, it is not a secure way of

:33:14. > :33:20.balloting individuals, because it is. He has been talking about the

:33:21. > :33:26.time we are in. It is clear from the front bench opposite that we are and

:33:27. > :33:32.a time of increased militant activism. We will support all

:33:33. > :33:36.demonstrations of Parliament in the picket line. We have been with you

:33:37. > :33:39.every step of the way. We are trying to protect the public in order to

:33:40. > :33:46.increase accountability and transparency. I certainly do

:33:47. > :33:50.recognise the words of the honourable gentleman, who normally

:33:51. > :34:00.has a much more productive way of addressing issues in the Commons.

:34:01. > :34:04.But with regard to thresholds... We are talking about protecting the

:34:05. > :34:10.public. Remember that when we were fighting to ban the hunting of dogs

:34:11. > :34:13.it was not trade unionists who allowed that through. When they talk

:34:14. > :34:18.about freedom of speech, perhaps they should run some of their own

:34:19. > :34:25.practices of the past. You like a fair point well made by my

:34:26. > :34:31.honourable friend. There are lots of instances and all have been given

:34:32. > :34:36.with regard to the male elections and with regards to e-balloting. I

:34:37. > :34:41.believe in balloting in the workplace or indeed a hybrid to make

:34:42. > :34:49.sure that people actually get involved in these very important

:34:50. > :34:54.ballots. I thank my honourable friend for giving away. What kind of

:34:55. > :35:02.society does my honourable friend think we are moving towards where

:35:03. > :35:06.only the 50% and 40% rule that is proposed, 79% of votes cast in

:35:07. > :35:12.favour of strike action, but such a strike would still be illegal after

:35:13. > :35:18.79% of votes cast in favour. That is absolutely correct. I will talk

:35:19. > :35:24.about that issue briefly with regard to what is on the face of the Bill.

:35:25. > :35:30.The Conservatives are suggesting something that happens nowhere else

:35:31. > :35:35.in society. Those who do not cast their vote will be classified as a

:35:36. > :35:40.no vote. That is outrageous. It is horrendous, it is undemocratic. It

:35:41. > :35:49.is against the European Court of Human Rights' decisions and that

:35:50. > :35:54.will be challenged. I will wind up simply by singing that there is not

:35:55. > :36:02.in my view any place in it today's society for this unbelievably brutal

:36:03. > :36:08.attack on hard working men and women in the workplace. And I predict one

:36:09. > :36:13.thing, that ordinary people, when pressurised to much, you will get a

:36:14. > :36:18.reaction. I predict from the floor of the House of Commons that there

:36:19. > :36:28.will be civil disobedience, because bylaws need to be changed. I speak

:36:29. > :36:36.primarily to amendments 15, 16 and 21 which relate to the causes on

:36:37. > :36:41.thresholds and on the termination of the ballot conclusion. My

:36:42. > :36:46.understanding is that if they were to be added to the Bill, in effect,

:36:47. > :36:54.they would be redundant, because they require agreement by all the

:36:55. > :36:59.devolved authorities. As I said, it was a privilege to serve on the Bill

:37:00. > :37:05.committee. It was my first as a Member of Parliament, and I for one

:37:06. > :37:11.do have an admiration for the union movement and as a new MP, I found it

:37:12. > :37:16.stimulating and interesting to cross-examine the five most powerful

:37:17. > :37:21.union leaders. I shook their hands and Sir Paul Kenny said to me would

:37:22. > :37:24.I like to come and join him on a picket line to find out what it was

:37:25. > :37:31.like. I am not sure which picket line he was referring to. I did a

:37:32. > :37:38.decline on that occasion. Perhaps it was the Chief Whip's. There are many

:37:39. > :37:44.parts to this Bill which I must confess I would not have been an

:37:45. > :37:54.expert in had I not sat on the Bill committee, but I think if you were

:37:55. > :37:59.to talk to him about parts of these Bill and you are not familiar with

:38:00. > :38:04.unionisation, they would not be familiar, and I say that with no

:38:05. > :38:07.disrespect, I recognise how important they are two members

:38:08. > :38:10.opposite, but for most members of the public, the key issue is

:38:11. > :38:15.thresholds will stop because it is about those large strikes that have

:38:16. > :38:22.happened, relatively small in number, but massive an impact, such

:38:23. > :38:29.as the London should strikes. -- London subway strikes. People

:38:30. > :38:32.considering civil unrest... He should go see the London commuters

:38:33. > :38:37.who are trying to find their way onto a bus because the subway is out

:38:38. > :38:44.of action on a ballot brought by Hedman. It is too often we hear the

:38:45. > :38:49.other side talk about the inconvenience of a strike. It can be

:38:50. > :38:54.amazingly disruptive. We need clear accountability to make sure this

:38:55. > :39:03.destruction is minimised. He puts it very well. And I would remind the

:39:04. > :39:07.house that when we took evidence from the general secretary of the

:39:08. > :39:12.community trade union, very busy of course with these difficult times in

:39:13. > :39:16.the steel industry. When asked about thresholds, he said it is about

:39:17. > :39:22.having proper industrial relations and having a partnership approach. I

:39:23. > :39:25.do believe a threshold of 50% is fair and reasonable because that is

:39:26. > :39:36.what we have, that is our democracy. Do you agree? The gentleman has made

:39:37. > :39:42.examples of the fury. I understand that completely. Is he saying that

:39:43. > :39:46.if this goes through and legislation is enacted and a strike then takes

:39:47. > :39:53.place, legitimately that these people will not be furious any more?

:39:54. > :40:00.Is he really saying that? I will just answer that point. If it had

:40:01. > :40:03.taken place with the strong support that would have to be achieved with

:40:04. > :40:07.these regulations, I think the public would at least understand

:40:08. > :40:10.they had the full consent. What they will be angry about is the strikes

:40:11. > :40:16.we heard about from evidence, in front of us from bus, rail companies

:40:17. > :40:17.and others, that from relatively small town, massive disruption was

:40:18. > :40:26.caused. On that point, would you agree that

:40:27. > :40:32.the clauses do not ban or prohibit strikes? What they did do is make

:40:33. > :40:36.sure millions of people who are affected by strikes on public

:40:37. > :40:41.services can be reassured that there is a genuine mandate for that

:40:42. > :40:45.action? He puts very welcome I finish on this point, and going back

:40:46. > :40:50.to the honourable member 41 spec, he asked about support, we heard from

:40:51. > :40:54.the CBI, rail companies, and bus companies, but we hear from the

:40:55. > :41:01.people who use them. It is about this, even Len McCluskey issued a

:41:02. > :41:05.letter to the committee supporting 50%, and it was with e-balloting.

:41:06. > :41:08.There is strong and principled support across the country for

:41:09. > :41:19.changes on thresholds, and I leave it there. Your. I am happy just to

:41:20. > :41:28.take that point. We need to get this right. Are you sure? I need to

:41:29. > :41:32.clarify the point with regard to Len McCluskey, because the United union

:41:33. > :41:38.suggested discussions take place relating to the Prime Minister,

:41:39. > :41:43.suggesting that thresholds would be irrelevant, if, indeed, the

:41:44. > :41:48.government would introduce e-balloting in the workplace, those

:41:49. > :41:51.were the preconditions. I thought it was very given they were mentioned a

:41:52. > :41:54.couple of times, but the best person to take this forward would be the

:41:55. > :42:06.Minister on that, but I'm happy to conclude. Thank you. Thank you Mr

:42:07. > :42:11.Deputy Speaker, during the second reading of this very Bill, I asked a

:42:12. > :42:17.question which, to date, I've had no answer on it. It was simply what

:42:18. > :42:22.problem is this proposed piece of legislation designed to solve? What

:42:23. > :42:25.calamity do we have in our land in the field of industrial relations

:42:26. > :42:30.that means the government of the day must prioritise this piece of

:42:31. > :42:35.legislation? I cannot find any. It is a fact, is it not, that the

:42:36. > :42:40.average worker in the UK now will go on strike for one day every 15

:42:41. > :42:44.years? That seems to me ridiculous that this should be the priority of

:42:45. > :42:50.the government. I believe the only reason it is here with so few

:42:51. > :42:55.members listening opposite in the debate, unfortunately, but it is

:42:56. > :43:00.purely ideological. I don't say or members of the Conservative Party

:43:01. > :43:05.are against trade unions, but there most definitely is a strand that is

:43:06. > :43:09.very an empathetic to trade unions. It seems the ability of people

:43:10. > :43:19.combining in the workforce to prosecute their own rights, it is an

:43:20. > :43:23.impediment on employers, and a hostile attitude to trade unions.

:43:24. > :43:27.Unfortunately for the working people of this country, it is a strand in

:43:28. > :43:32.the Tory party that is in the driving seat of this legislation. It

:43:33. > :43:37.is a great irony, is it not, that in order to do that, they are going to

:43:38. > :43:42.have to have an unprecedented degree of state interference in the affairs

:43:43. > :43:47.of private enterprise. They will have to have state regulation of

:43:48. > :43:52.trade unions which is more akin to a totalitarian then democratic regime.

:43:53. > :43:57.I want to turn and support, in particular, the resolutions put

:43:58. > :44:00.forward in the name of my colleagues, which argued for the

:44:01. > :44:05.requirement for consent from the local and devolved authorities in

:44:06. > :44:15.the UK in order for provisions of this Bill to be -- to be in talented

:44:16. > :44:18.-- implemented. We'd been debating the Scotland Bill, in competencies

:44:19. > :44:24.and authorities that should go to Scottish apartment. We argued that,

:44:25. > :44:27.in fact, it should all be devolved to Scottish parliament, because if

:44:28. > :44:31.we did, then proposals like this would never see the light of day.

:44:32. > :44:35.But we know there is not a majority in this house for this proposal, I

:44:36. > :44:39.want to be clear that what we are arguing today is not that, we aren't

:44:40. > :44:43.arguing for devolution of these powers, but something that goes to

:44:44. > :44:47.the heart of the debate in this country about who runs public

:44:48. > :44:50.services. It has been the will of this Parliament to say that many of

:44:51. > :44:55.our public services should be devolved to local and devolved

:44:56. > :45:00.administrations. Therefore, it is not right for this Parliament to

:45:01. > :45:06.hinder the ability of managers of those services to deliver them, I

:45:07. > :45:09.saying it would interfere and set requirements on the most important

:45:10. > :45:12.resource available to those people, the workforce that work in them.

:45:13. > :45:17.Just because the right honourable member for Uxbridge has a problem

:45:18. > :45:19.managing relations on the London Underground, it should not be that

:45:20. > :45:26.the rest of the country has two suffer. I want to dwell because we

:45:27. > :45:30.have a series of amendments that the consent on these amendments to the

:45:31. > :45:35.bill. I want to talk about this, and I will try not to repeat what has

:45:36. > :45:40.already been said. Firstly, on balloting, the thing that has not

:45:41. > :45:43.come out here is that clearly there is a number of mechanisms in this

:45:44. > :45:47.bill that are designed to make it harder for the trade union to win a

:45:48. > :45:52.ballot and go on strike. Let's be clear, that is what the objective

:45:53. > :45:56.is. But members are mistaken if they think that will make a problem

:45:57. > :46:01.disappear. It seems to me there is a great ignorance in the process of

:46:02. > :46:06.managing industry, amongst the authors of this bill. What often

:46:07. > :46:10.happens is that if something arises that is a concern or dispute among

:46:11. > :46:14.the workforce, members go to their trade union, and the union decides

:46:15. > :46:18.to do something, that can be a way of resolving a dispute and a

:46:19. > :46:24.problem, that actually would be in the benefit of the industry service

:46:25. > :46:30.concerned. By putting an additional measures, what you would do is yes,

:46:31. > :46:34.make it harder for unions to go on strike, let problems fester, and

:46:35. > :46:37.dysfunction continue, and it will not relate to the benefit of the

:46:38. > :46:43.trade industry or service in which is taking place. When the union does

:46:44. > :46:48.pass these hurdles and managed to get a mandate for a strike, that

:46:49. > :46:51.would be a bigger, longer and more vicious strike than it ought to have

:46:52. > :46:56.been, had the matter being attended to at an earlier stage. I content

:46:57. > :47:00.that these measures, which you think are about making it harder for

:47:01. > :47:05.unions to take strike action is, will have a different effect on

:47:06. > :47:08.industrial relations, and make it harder for the management of public

:47:09. > :47:13.and private services to deliver and get consent of the workforce.

:47:14. > :47:18.Another aspect to talk about is facility time, and we should be

:47:19. > :47:26.clear that the wave theory -- the way it has been discussed means some

:47:27. > :47:32.union officials could spend all day winging it to its knees, it is

:47:33. > :47:36.nothing of the kind. - bring it. If you did, for one day, working a

:47:37. > :47:40.public service committee would understand that officials at a local

:47:41. > :47:45.level play an extremely constructive role to the delivery of that

:47:46. > :47:49.industry or service. In many ways, the role can be described as one

:47:50. > :47:53.like a welfare officer, they often help out individual employees who

:47:54. > :47:57.may have problems with work or management, or personal problems as

:47:58. > :48:08.well which are affecting their work. I give way. There was evidence in

:48:09. > :48:11.the Bill committee from the general secretary of Usdaw, which said they

:48:12. > :48:17.were problem-solving is rather than problem causes, would you agree? I

:48:18. > :48:21.would agree wholeheartedly, and I've experienced my entire working life

:48:22. > :48:27.as an employer and employee, that indicates that is exactly the case.

:48:28. > :48:30.Facility time can be a good name for management. It can be a good thing

:48:31. > :48:35.for industry and a good thing for getting things done. Also, on

:48:36. > :48:41.Chekhov, hopefully we would get an explanation in summing up, but how

:48:42. > :48:45.can it be that it is OK for a local authority or health board to have a

:48:46. > :48:49.Chekhov facility voluntarily agreed with its workers to deduct a payroll

:48:50. > :48:53.subscription for a union, how can it be that has to be outlawed or

:48:54. > :48:56.criminalised while at the same time they can do that for the National

:48:57. > :49:02.Trust or any charity or insurance scheme that they wish to? It is,

:49:03. > :49:05.quite friendly, ridiculous. It is punitive in the stream, and very

:49:06. > :49:11.much something that belies the fact that this Bill is an anti Trade

:49:12. > :49:15.Union Bill, despite the title. I hope the National union comes back,