17/11/2015

:00:00. > :00:00.that and compare themselves to a Dale, which put themselves at the

:00:00. > :00:12.centre of the work they do to help patients. Myself and my colleagues

:00:13. > :00:16.support his comments about the atrocities in France at the weekend.

:00:17. > :00:22.I would like to ask him of the assistant he has made of how

:00:23. > :00:29.problems are contributing toward the problem with recruiting nursing

:00:30. > :00:32.staff in London in the NHS? It is a serious problem and people find it

:00:33. > :00:36.hard to live nearby to the hospital where they work on the particular

:00:37. > :00:42.where housing is very expensive and this is an issue we are looking at

:00:43. > :00:46.closely. Could the Secretary of State assure me that the NHS funding

:00:47. > :00:50.review, which is currently under way, will deliver a fair formula for

:00:51. > :00:53.my constituents that many other across York and North Yorkshire by

:00:54. > :01:06.putting age and morality, some of the biggest drivers, at the heart of

:01:07. > :01:17.this review? The clinical commission formula, I can assure him that

:01:18. > :01:23.morbidity is taken into account. It is or is a matter for local decision

:01:24. > :01:26.and discretion. Can the Health Secretary explain how cutting ?200

:01:27. > :01:32.million from pub health Budget is consistent with the emphasis on

:01:33. > :01:39.prevention as put forward in the five-year public review? I have

:01:40. > :01:51.already explained, but I would ask the Labour Party held they committed

:01:52. > :01:55.?5.5 billion less? Some of our GPs surgeries are finding it hard to

:01:56. > :02:03.attract new GPs. What plan does the Government have to train new GPs in

:02:04. > :02:07.areas where it difficult to recruit? We are very colleges of the

:02:08. > :02:09.pressures on general practice and on the pressures of ensuring there are

:02:10. > :02:17.enough GPs available. The Government's plans are for 5000 more

:02:18. > :02:24.GPs to be working by 2020. It is supported by efforts to make sure

:02:25. > :02:29.medical schools are doing anything they can to make sure general

:02:30. > :02:34.practice is more attractive. According to Public Health England,

:02:35. > :02:39.in the most deprived areas in Bradford, life expectancy is 9.6

:02:40. > :02:44.years lower for men at eight years lower for women. It demonstrates

:02:45. > :02:47.that there are clear health inequalities in urban areas in

:02:48. > :02:51.Bradford. The governor's attack on the poor make this issue worse. Can

:02:52. > :02:56.the Minister tell me what the Government is doing to tackle these

:02:57. > :02:59.inequalities to give people a Bradford the quality of life they

:03:00. > :03:02.deserve? The honourable gentleman will be aware of the answer I gave

:03:03. > :03:07.earlier to other questions. There is a wide range of aspects of the

:03:08. > :03:10.public health work that the governed is taking forward that attacks that

:03:11. > :03:18.very issue. The inequality that falls on some community is. I gave

:03:19. > :03:21.examples, the family nurse partnership, more widely, for

:03:22. > :03:23.example, the universal health visitor programme which has moved

:03:24. > :03:30.into commissioning by local government. It has significant

:03:31. > :03:35.elements within it to support families in disadvantaged amenities.

:03:36. > :03:39.For the avoidance of doubt, please with the Secretary of State repeat

:03:40. > :03:48.again that he will enter into completely open-minded, negotiations

:03:49. > :03:55.with the BMA, because the public needs to see this. We'll be doing

:03:56. > :03:59.everything we can to avoid a damaging dispute for patients. We do

:04:00. > :04:03.reserve the right to increment our manifesto commitment to seven-day

:04:04. > :04:05.reforms if we failed to make progress in those negotiations.

:04:06. > :04:09.Right now, in the interest of patients, the right thing to do is

:04:10. > :04:10.to sit around the table and talk rather than to refuse to negotiate

:04:11. > :04:23.and go ahead with the strikes. Rochdale infirmary has dementia help

:04:24. > :04:29.which helps the local people. Will he meet me there to see how it can

:04:30. > :04:34.be shared more widely? I am happy to do that and we have made progress in

:04:35. > :04:37.tackling dementia. There are great examples across the country but we

:04:38. > :04:40.can still do a lot better and we need to concentrate not just on

:04:41. > :04:46.dementia diagnosis but on the quality of care we give people when

:04:47. > :04:50.they have a diagnosis. Could the Health Secretary outline will be

:04:51. > :05:00.available to patients over the winter. Norfolk hospital has

:05:01. > :05:03.declared an alert last week. We are preparing for this winter with

:05:04. > :05:08.unprecedented scales. We are learning from the experiences of

:05:09. > :05:12.last some power -- Samantha would be support provided through the winter

:05:13. > :05:15.to ensure we deal with the additional challenges that are being

:05:16. > :05:20.thrown in the way of hospitals across the country by the junior

:05:21. > :05:26.doctors in their industrial action they are taking. Is the Secretary of

:05:27. > :05:30.State doing everything he can to ensure we secure extra dedicated

:05:31. > :05:35.investment in mental health at the Spending Review? To introduce the

:05:36. > :05:41.same access rights as everyone else, it requires hard cash and I am

:05:42. > :05:45.sure he will agree that we have to end this outrageous discrimination

:05:46. > :05:52.against those who suffer from mental ill-health. I congratulate him on

:05:53. > :05:55.his time given who is sitting on the bench right now. We will put extra

:05:56. > :06:00.resources into the NHS and will make sure we increase the proportion of

:06:01. > :06:02.those resources are going to mental health and I would like to

:06:03. > :06:09.congratulate him on his award last week on mental health, which was

:06:10. > :06:14.extremely well deserved. Statement, the Prime Minister. With permission,

:06:15. > :06:19.I would like to make a statement on the terrorist attack in Paris and

:06:20. > :06:23.the G20 in Turkey this weekend. On Paris, the Home Secretary gave the

:06:24. > :06:28.House the chilling statistics yesterday and now we know among the

:06:29. > :06:32.victims was a 36-year-old Briton, Nick Alexander, was killed at the

:06:33. > :06:36.Bataclan. I know the thoughts and prayers of the whole house will be

:06:37. > :06:40.with the families and the friends of all those affected. On Saturday, I

:06:41. > :06:43.spoke to President Hollande to express condolences of the British

:06:44. > :06:51.people and our commitments to help in whatever way we can. After our

:06:52. > :06:55.horror and anger most, our resolve and determination to rid our world

:06:56. > :06:58.of this evil. Let me set out the steps we are taking to deal with

:06:59. > :07:03.this terrorist threat. The more we learn about what happened in Paris,

:07:04. > :07:06.the more it justifies the full spectrum approach that we have

:07:07. > :07:11.discussed before this house. When you are dealing with radicalised

:07:12. > :07:15.European Muslims, links to isolate and Syria and inspired by poisonous

:07:16. > :07:22.narrative and extremism, you need an approach that covers the full range.

:07:23. > :07:24.-- Isil. Military power, counter-terrorism expertise and the

:07:25. > :07:31.narrative that is the root cause of this evil. First we should be clear

:07:32. > :07:35.that this murderous violence requires a strong security response.

:07:36. > :07:39.That means continuing our efforts to degrade and destroy Isil in Syria

:07:40. > :07:43.and Iraq and where necessary it means working with our allies to

:07:44. > :07:47.strike against those who pose a direct threat to the safety of

:07:48. > :07:53.British people around the world. Together, coalition forces have

:07:54. > :07:58.damaged over 30,500 targets. We have helped local forces to regain 30% of

:07:59. > :08:06.Isil territory in Iraq. We have taken areas and pushed them back and

:08:07. > :08:10.Kurdish forces retook the region. The UK is playing his part training

:08:11. > :08:15.local forces, striking targets in Iraq and providing vital intelligent

:08:16. > :08:24.sports -- intelligence support. The US carried out a strike targeting

:08:25. > :08:29.the Isil executioner known as Jihadi John. This was after painstaking

:08:30. > :08:34.work in which America and Britain worked to stop this vicious

:08:35. > :08:37.murderer. It is important that the whole house understands the reality

:08:38. > :08:42.of the situation we are in. There is no Government in Syria we can work

:08:43. > :08:46.with, particularly in that that part of Syria. There are no police

:08:47. > :08:53.investigations or independent courts upholding justice in one area. We

:08:54. > :08:57.have no military on the ground to stop the fraught sick -- the threats

:08:58. > :09:01.against our people. We cannot support the British people by

:09:02. > :09:05.wishing things were different. We have to act to keep our people safer

:09:06. > :09:11.matters what our Government will always do. Counter-terrorism here in

:09:12. > :09:15.the UK, over the past year alone, our outstanding police and security

:09:16. > :09:20.services have already foiled seven terrorist plots here in Britain. The

:09:21. > :09:24.people in our security services work hard and all credit to our nation

:09:25. > :09:32.and we pay tribute to them again in our house today. Now we must do more

:09:33. > :09:36.to help them. In the defence and Security review, we will make an

:09:37. > :09:41.additional investment in our world-class in the agencies. This

:09:42. > :09:45.will include 1900 additional staff and more money to increase our

:09:46. > :09:50.network of counterterrorism experts in the Middle East, North Africa,

:09:51. > :09:55.South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. At the G20 summit in Turkey this

:09:56. > :09:58.weekend, we agreed additional steps to better protect ourselves from the

:09:59. > :10:02.threat of foreign fighters by sharing intelligence and stopping

:10:03. > :10:06.them from travelling. We agreed that the first time to work together to

:10:07. > :10:10.strengthen global aviation security. We need a robust and consistent

:10:11. > :10:14.standards of aviation security in every airport of the world and the

:10:15. > :10:20.UK will double its spending in this area. To defeat the terrorist threat

:10:21. > :10:23.in the long run, we must understand and address its root causes. That

:10:24. > :10:29.means confronting the poisonous ideology of its domestic extremism

:10:30. > :10:35.is self. That means going after both violent and non-violent extremists.

:10:36. > :10:39.Those that so the poison itself but stop short of promoting violence,

:10:40. > :10:44.they are part of the problem. We will improve integration, not least

:10:45. > :10:48.by inspecting and shutting down any educational experience --

:10:49. > :10:52.institutions and encourage reform and Muslim voices to speak up and

:10:53. > :10:58.challenge the extremists are so many do. It cannot be said enough that

:10:59. > :11:02.the extremist ideology is not true Islam in stock but it doesn't work

:11:03. > :11:05.to deny any connection between the religion of Islam and the

:11:06. > :11:10.extremists, not least because the extremists themselves self identify

:11:11. > :11:15.as Muslims. There is no point denying that. What we need to do is

:11:16. > :11:21.to take a part of their arguments and demonstrate how wrong they are.

:11:22. > :11:23.We need the continued help of Muslim communities and Muslim scholars.

:11:24. > :11:29.They are playing a powerful role and I commend them for that absolutely

:11:30. > :11:33.essential work. We cannot stand neutral in this battle of ideas. We

:11:34. > :11:38.have to back those who share our values with practical help, funding,

:11:39. > :11:41.campaigns, protection and political representation. This is a

:11:42. > :11:45.fundamental part of how we can defeat this terrorism both at home

:11:46. > :11:49.and abroad. Turning to the G20 summit, there were discussions on

:11:50. > :11:56.Syria and on dealing with other long-term flats to security such as

:11:57. > :11:59.climate change. -- threats. On Syria, we discussed how we do more

:12:00. > :12:06.to help those in desperate humanitarian need and how to find a

:12:07. > :12:10.political solution to the conflict. Britain has already provided ?1.1

:12:11. > :12:14.billion in vital life-saving assistance. That makes us the second

:12:15. > :12:19.largest bilateral donor in the world. Last week we committed ?275

:12:20. > :12:24.million to be spent in Turkey, country that is hosting over 2

:12:25. > :12:28.million refugees. In February, the UK will seek to raise further

:12:29. > :12:32.significant new funding bikers hosting a donor's conference in

:12:33. > :12:36.London together with Germany, Norway, Kuwait and the UN. None of

:12:37. > :12:40.this is a substitute for the most urgent need of all, to find a

:12:41. > :12:45.political solution that brings peace to Syria and enables millions of

:12:46. > :12:49.refugees to return home. Yesterday held talks with President Putin and

:12:50. > :12:52.we review the progress made by our foreign ministers in Vienna to

:12:53. > :12:57.deliver a transition in Syria. We still have disagreements and there

:12:58. > :13:02.are big gaps between us that there is progress. I also met with

:13:03. > :13:06.President Obama and European leaders at the G20 and we agreed some

:13:07. > :13:14.important steps forward including basing some British aircraft,

:13:15. > :13:19.alongside other Nato allies at the airbase if that is the decision.

:13:20. > :13:24.These would be in an air defence role to support the at this

:13:25. > :13:29.difficult time. We have to step up our joint effort to deal with Isil

:13:30. > :13:33.in Iraq and Syria and wherever it manifests itself. This raises

:13:34. > :13:37.important questions for our country. We must ask ourselves if we really

:13:38. > :13:43.are doing all we can be doing, all we should be doing, to deal with the

:13:44. > :13:46.threat of ice still -- Isil and the threat it poses. Not just through

:13:47. > :13:51.measures at home but by dealing with Isil on the ground in the territory

:13:52. > :13:57.that it controls. We are taking part in air over Iraq and we have

:13:58. > :14:02.struggled over 350 targets and significant action has been taken in

:14:03. > :14:07.the recent hours. Isil is not just present in Iraq, it operates across

:14:08. > :14:14.the border in Syria, border that is meaningless to it because Isil, this

:14:15. > :14:19.is all one space. It is in Syria comment Raqqa where Isil has its

:14:20. > :14:26.headquarters. It is from Raqqa where the main threats are orchestrated.

:14:27. > :14:33.Isil is the head of the snake. In Syria we are supporting our allies,

:14:34. > :14:36.Jordan, with intelligence and surveillance and refuelling. I

:14:37. > :14:40.believe, as I have said many times before, we should be doing more. We

:14:41. > :14:45.face a direct threat to our country and we need to deal with it, not

:14:46. > :14:49.just in Iraq but in Syria also. I have always said there is a strong

:14:50. > :14:54.case first doing so and our allies are asking us to do this and a case

:14:55. > :14:57.for doing so has grown stronger after the Paris attacks. We cannot

:14:58. > :15:04.expect and should not expect others to carry the burdens and the risks

:15:05. > :15:09.of protecting our country. Now, I recognise that there are concerns in

:15:10. > :15:13.this house. What difference would action by the UK will you make? Did

:15:14. > :15:19.make the situation worse? How does the recent Russian action affect the

:15:20. > :15:24.situation? How would a decision by Britain to join strikes against Isil

:15:25. > :15:27.in Syria fit into a conference of strategy for dealing with Isil and

:15:28. > :15:32.diplomatic strategy to bring the war in Syria to an end? I understand

:15:33. > :15:35.these concerns and I know they must be answered. I believe they can be

:15:36. > :15:39.answered. Many of them were expressed in the recent report with

:15:40. > :15:43.the Foreign Affairs Select Committee. Mike firm conviction as

:15:44. > :15:47.we need to act against Isil in Syria. There is a compelling case

:15:48. > :15:51.for doing so. It is that the Government to make that case to this

:15:52. > :15:54.house and to the country. I can announce that as an important step

:15:55. > :15:59.to do so, I will respond personally to the report of the Foreign Affairs

:16:00. > :16:03.Select Committee and set out our comprehensive strategy for dealing

:16:04. > :16:08.with Isil, our vision for a more peaceful Middle East and this

:16:09. > :16:11.strategy in my view, should include taking the action in Syria I have

:16:12. > :16:16.spoken about. I have been setting out the arguments in this way, I can

:16:17. > :16:21.help build support ride across this house for the action I believe is

:16:22. > :16:23.necessary to take. That is what I am going to be putting in place over

:16:24. > :16:27.the coming days and I hope colleagues from across the House

:16:28. > :16:32.will engage with that and make clear their views, so we can have a strong

:16:33. > :16:38.vote in this House of Commons and do the right thing for our country.

:16:39. > :16:41.Finally, the G20 also addressed the longer term threats to global

:16:42. > :16:46.security. In two weeks' time, we will gather in Paris to agree a

:16:47. > :16:51.global charmer change deal. This time, unlike Kyoto, it will include

:16:52. > :16:55.the USA and China. At this summer I urged leaders to keep the ambition

:16:56. > :16:59.of limiting global warming by 2050 to less than 2 degrees above

:17:00. > :17:04.preindustrial levels. Every country needs to put forward its programme

:17:05. > :17:08.for reducing carbon emissions. As G20 countries, we need to do more to

:17:09. > :17:12.provide the financing that is needed to help poorer countries from around

:17:13. > :17:16.the world switched to greener forms of energy. Also to adapt to the

:17:17. > :17:19.effects of climate change. We agreed we should do more to wipe out the

:17:20. > :17:23.corruption that chokes off development and deal with

:17:24. > :17:28.antimicrobial resistance. Corruption is the cancer as so many of the

:17:29. > :17:32.things that happened today, from migrants fleeing states, from

:17:33. > :17:34.Government is undermining our efforts on global poverty by

:17:35. > :17:41.preventing people from getting the revenues and services that there's.

:17:42. > :17:45.If antibiotics stop working properly, the antimicrobial

:17:46. > :17:52.resistance issue will happen and many people will die. This is one of

:17:53. > :17:57.the things the UK is taking a lead on. Let me return to the terrorist

:17:58. > :18:05.threat. In UK, the prelate is severe which means an attack is highly

:18:06. > :18:09.likely and will remain so. -- the threat is severe. We will do all we

:18:10. > :18:13.can to support our police and intelligence agencies as they were,

:18:14. > :18:18.clock. The terrorist aim is clear. It is to divide us and destroy our

:18:19. > :18:23.way of life. Now, more than ever, we must come together and stand united,

:18:24. > :18:29.carrying on with the life that we know and love. Tonight, England will

:18:30. > :18:36.play France as Wembley. This match is going ahead. Our people stand

:18:37. > :18:40.together and as they have done so many times throughout history when

:18:41. > :18:42.faced with evil. Once again, together, we will prevail and I

:18:43. > :18:52.commend this statement to the House. Firstly, I thank the Prime Minister

:18:53. > :18:57.for his statement, which is kindly sent me a copy of earlier. Can I

:18:58. > :18:59.also thank him for the measured and careful tone of his public

:19:00. > :19:07.statements since the dreadful events of last Friday in Paris? In the face

:19:08. > :19:12.of such tragic events, and the horror and sorrow which have caused

:19:13. > :19:15.the British public to stand up in solidarity with the people of

:19:16. > :19:19.France, it is right we take an approach of solidarity with them.

:19:20. > :19:24.The Prime Minister and Home Secretary has spoken of reaching

:19:25. > :19:28.consensus in reaching a common objective in trying to defeat Isil.

:19:29. > :19:38.I agree with him and the opposition stands ready to work with him to

:19:39. > :19:48.that end. Can I also thank him for the briefing we received last week.

:19:49. > :19:51.On behalf of these benches, I wish to express my condolences and

:19:52. > :19:59.solidarity with the people of Paris in the wake of the horrific and

:20:00. > :20:05.unjustified attacks on the people of that city last week. That extends to

:20:06. > :20:15.the victims of all terrorism, whether they be in Paris, Beirut,

:20:16. > :20:22.and or even in Syria itself will stop these contestable attacks were

:20:23. > :20:28.an attempt to divide Muslims Christians, Hindus and Jews, people

:20:29. > :20:35.of all faiths. They will fail. Secondly, I wish to take a moat to

:20:36. > :20:40.praise the efforts of the emergency service workers in Paris and

:20:41. > :20:46.elsewhere who sprang into action in these dreadful situations and help

:20:47. > :20:48.to save lives. It is easy to forget the heroism of those involved in

:20:49. > :20:52.city going to work, not knowing what will happen. It is not easy to drive

:20:53. > :20:58.an ambulance, not knowing what you will find when you arrive at the

:20:59. > :21:04.scene. In my letter to Francois Hollande this weekend, I said that

:21:05. > :21:09.we stand united with his country in exposing our condemnation of those

:21:10. > :21:20.who carried out these atrocities. These events are a reminder to all

:21:21. > :21:26.of the presence of instrument by -- indiscriminate violence. Yesterday,

:21:27. > :21:39.my right honourable friend, played for support -- pledged support for

:21:40. > :21:43.the Government at this time. Can he confirmed that this intelligence

:21:44. > :21:46.will be balanced with the need to pick our civil liberties which was

:21:47. > :21:51.so hard in this country and so stoutly defended by many of us? They

:21:52. > :21:55.are part of what this thing wishes us from many other regimes around

:21:56. > :22:02.the world, indeed regimes from which people are fleeing. The right moral

:22:03. > :22:08.member for the said yesterday that it should be protection of the

:22:09. > :22:12.policing Budget and services which will be playing a vital role on the

:22:13. > :22:18.ground in insuring our committee are safe. Can the premise to confirm

:22:19. > :22:23.that he is willing to work with us to prevent cuts to the police force

:22:24. > :22:31.to ensure they are able to continue with the work they have to do? Does

:22:32. > :22:43.he agree with the Metropolitan Police Commissioner that committee

:22:44. > :22:51.support officers bring in vital intelligence. I appreciate the work

:22:52. > :22:54.that they do. A subcommittee cohesion, we are proud to live in a

:22:55. > :23:04.diverse and multi-faith society. We stand for the unity of all

:23:05. > :23:07.communities. The Muslims in this country are as appalled by the

:23:08. > :23:10.attacks as anyone else. We have seen in the past, after atrocities like

:23:11. > :23:22.this, there can be a backlash against the Muslim and other

:23:23. > :23:29.committees. This has no place in our society and ill be no tolerance for

:23:30. > :23:31.that after these events. Will the Prime Minister set out in more

:23:32. > :23:36.detail the steps the governorate is taking to work with representative

:23:37. > :23:40.organisations of all about faith communities to ensure that we

:23:41. > :23:45.achieve and strengthen community cohesion at these very difficult

:23:46. > :23:50.times? We must also ensure that those entering the country, whether

:23:51. > :23:54.refugees or visitors, are obviously appropriately screened? Will the

:23:55. > :24:00.Home Office provide the border staff to do this? It is also important in

:24:01. > :24:04.the circumstances that we maintain our humanitarian duty towards

:24:05. > :24:10.refugees. The Syrian refugees are fleeing the deadly brutality of Isil

:24:11. > :24:14.and it is our duty to protect them, and our legal obligation under the

:24:15. > :24:20.1951 Geneva Convention. I hope the primer stop will confirm that our

:24:21. > :24:23.obligation to maintain support for that convention and the rights of

:24:24. > :24:29.refugees will be undiminished by the events of the last few days. It is

:24:30. > :24:32.vital at a time of such tragedy and outrage not to be drawn into

:24:33. > :24:38.responses which feed a cycle of violence and hatred. President Obama

:24:39. > :24:43.has said that Isis grew out of our invasion of Iraq and is one of its

:24:44. > :24:48.unintended consequences. When the Prime Minister consider this as one

:24:49. > :24:53.of the very careful responses that President Obama has made on this

:24:54. > :24:58.matter. It is essential that any military response not only has

:24:59. > :25:01.consent but the support of the international community and

:25:02. > :25:05.crucially the legality from the United Nations. Can I therefore

:25:06. > :25:10.welcome the primer stop's welcomes at the G20 yesterday, when he said,

:25:11. > :25:14.I think people want to know there is a whole plan for the future of

:25:15. > :25:18.Syria, for the future of our region and it is perfectly right to say a

:25:19. > :25:23.few bombs and missiles will not transform the situation. Can I

:25:24. > :25:27.welcome his commitment to respond personally to the Foreign Affairs

:25:28. > :25:32.Committee report which has been so carefully presented to the House and

:25:33. > :25:35.to the country will stop will he confirm that before bringing any

:25:36. > :25:39.motion to the House, she will provide full answers, as he has

:25:40. > :25:45.indicated he will, to the seven questions raised by the report? Will

:25:46. > :25:49.he also say more about the particular contribution that Britain

:25:50. > :25:54.has made to the Vienna talks on the future of Syria? They provide a

:25:55. > :25:58.basis for possibly some cautious optimism that there could be a

:25:59. > :26:04.political future in Syria that involves a ceasefire and the ability

:26:05. > :26:09.of people to be able to return home. Will he also say, and this is the

:26:10. > :26:14.final point I want to make on this, what more can be done to cut off

:26:15. > :26:25.supplies of weapons and external markets to our -- to Isil. What is

:26:26. > :26:32.being done to ensure that they do not end up in worse hands including

:26:33. > :26:36.those of Isil and some of these extremist jihadist groups in Syria?

:26:37. > :26:42.Also, what more can be done to bring to account those governments

:26:43. > :26:43.organisations or banks that are funding these extremists for up

:26:44. > :26:59.turning a blind aye to them? I wonder if the Prime Minister had a

:27:00. > :27:06.chance to graduate the new Canadian Prime Minister. He did not mention

:27:07. > :27:10.it, but I'm sure he has. The slowdown in the global economy is

:27:11. > :27:14.causing concerns and I wonder if he has had conversations about more

:27:15. > :27:19.demand being sucked out of the economy at this time. He mentioned

:27:20. > :27:21.the climate change talks that will be going on in Paris in the next

:27:22. > :27:29.couple of weeks. They are very important indeed, and I welcome his

:27:30. > :27:50.commitment concerning epidemics and the problems created by the lack of

:27:51. > :27:53.antibiotics. We have to combat climate change globally,

:27:54. > :27:58.internationally, and here in Britain.

:27:59. > :28:04.I thank the right honourable Jedward for his remarks and the tone that he

:28:05. > :28:08.is taking in trying to aim for greater consensus. I will answer the

:28:09. > :28:12.questions in turn. First, on the issue of the briefing on national

:28:13. > :28:17.security issues, that is something that is available to all privy

:28:18. > :28:21.counsellors and if it is not offered, please do ask. That is the

:28:22. > :28:26.national security secretary at, they are there to help in these times of

:28:27. > :28:30.heightened alert. He is right to praise the emergency services in

:28:31. > :28:36.France, they did an amazing job. It is important to reiterate that, ever

:28:37. > :28:39.since, and the Home Secretary did this yesterday, since the Mumbai

:28:40. > :28:46.attacks and since the intelligence we had about the potential for

:28:47. > :28:49.marauding firearms attacks, more work has been done in Britain to

:28:50. > :28:53.make sure we are ready for any such attack. I thank him for his support

:28:54. > :28:59.for the security services comedy is to mention the importance of our

:29:00. > :29:03.civil liberties, they are part of what we are fighting to protect. We

:29:04. > :29:07.have protected policing budgets in the last bollard and we will do that

:29:08. > :29:16.through this Parliament will stop I think that is vital and you can see

:29:17. > :29:19.the uplift that we are giving to the security services, and we will build

:29:20. > :29:24.we can to keep this country safe. He is right to condemn anti-Semitism,

:29:25. > :29:37.is a phobia and right-wing -- Islam a phobia, and right-wing racism.

:29:38. > :29:41.Some of the things that have been said by Muslim clerics and leaders

:29:42. > :29:46.have made a huge difference in recent weeks. He asked about the

:29:47. > :29:50.borders. We do have the opportunity to carry out screening and checks in

:29:51. > :29:55.our borders because we didn't join the no Borders system and we're not

:29:56. > :29:57.going to. This shows once again the importance of having those border

:29:58. > :30:04.controls and using them to the best of our ability. In terms of the

:30:05. > :30:06.Syrian migrant programme, it is worth the money the House that we

:30:07. > :30:10.are taking 20,000 Syrian refugees from the camps rather than from

:30:11. > :30:15.those who have already arrived in Europe. This enables us to screen

:30:16. > :30:20.carefully those people we take. There are two levels of screening,

:30:21. > :30:24.to make sure that we are getting people who are genuinely fleeing

:30:25. > :30:32.persecution and would not pose a risk to our country. He asked about

:30:33. > :30:38.the genesis of Isil. What I would say to him is it is one of the

:30:39. > :30:44.branches of this violent Islamic extremism -- Islamist extremism that

:30:45. > :30:50.we have seen. It is worth making the point that the first manifestations

:30:51. > :30:52.of this pilot Islamist extremism, not least the Twin Towers attack,

:30:53. > :31:02.that happened before the invasion of Iraq. It is important we don't try

:31:03. > :31:06.to sneak excuses for what is a death cult that has been killing British

:31:07. > :31:12.citizens for many years. He rightly asks about the process in Vienna, we

:31:13. > :31:16.are a key part of that. The Foreign Secretary has been playing a key

:31:17. > :31:22.roll in that. John Kerry commended his work to me yesterday. He

:31:23. > :31:28.mentioned the additional bombs and missiles going so far in Syria. I

:31:29. > :31:31.think Britain can do more and Britain, because of our expertise

:31:32. > :31:36.and our targeting, actually can cut the number of civilian casualties

:31:37. > :31:41.when this action is taken. I think it would make a difference but I

:31:42. > :31:46.think, yes, alongside that, we also need a process that delivers a

:31:47. > :31:51.government in Syria that camera present all of the Syrian people.

:31:52. > :31:56.You cannot defeat Isil purely by a campaign from the air, you need to

:31:57. > :32:00.have a government in Iraq and a government in Syria that can be your

:32:01. > :32:04.partner in delivering good government to those countries and

:32:05. > :32:07.obliterating the death cult that threatens both us and them. The

:32:08. > :32:11.things go together. That is the point I am making. We asked about

:32:12. > :32:17.cutting the supply of weapons and money, we are 80 part of the

:32:18. > :32:22.committee working on that. A large part of the money comes from the oil

:32:23. > :32:26.it sells to the Syrian regime. Another thing we will be able to

:32:27. > :32:32.address more directly if we are taking part in the action in Syria.

:32:33. > :32:34.Finally, he asked if I met the new Canadian prime Esther, I

:32:35. > :32:40.congratulate it on his victory and he is coming to London shortly to

:32:41. > :32:45.see the Queen and also I will have a meeting with him. There are lots of

:32:46. > :32:50.issues where we work together. In terms of the economic slowdown, he

:32:51. > :32:51.is right that the forecast for global growth is lower than what

:32:52. > :32:58.they were. Britain and America stand they were. Britain and America stand

:32:59. > :33:01.out as having more rapid economic growth and we encourage others to

:33:02. > :33:07.take some of the steps we have taken to deliver that growth. Finally, he

:33:08. > :33:11.asked about renewables and climate change. I would say to the House

:33:12. > :33:17.that the summit on climate change was disappointing, there is still

:33:18. > :33:20.quite a lot of opposition from some countries to really put in place the

:33:21. > :33:25.things that are needed for a good deal in Paris. But I think Britain

:33:26. > :33:29.can say we have played an important role in getting a good European deal

:33:30. > :33:32.and in terms of renewable energy, if you look at what has happened in the

:33:33. > :33:34.last five years, there is nothing short of a renewable energy

:33:35. > :33:47.revolution in Britain. The continued reach and activity of

:33:48. > :33:52.Isis represents a security challenge. The aim was to degrade

:33:53. > :33:56.and contain them, but they are not contained. Can I thank my right

:33:57. > :34:00.honourable friend for what he said yesterday about the need to cut off

:34:01. > :34:05.the financial surprise to Isis about the need to deal with the narrative

:34:06. > :34:08.over values and what he has said today about the need to join our

:34:09. > :34:14.allies in taking action over Syria as well as Iraq? No military

:34:15. > :34:20.campaign of this nature has ever been won from the air alone, so can

:34:21. > :34:24.I say to him that we may require an international coalition on the

:34:25. > :34:29.ground of the sort that we require to remove Saddam from Kuwait. Can I

:34:30. > :34:32.ask him to rule nothing out and give no comfort to Isis because these

:34:33. > :34:39.people hate us not because of what we do but because of who we are? We

:34:40. > :34:43.should be in the business of working out what we can do and what would

:34:44. > :34:48.make a difference rather than what we can do. It is my contention that

:34:49. > :34:53.in the end, the best partner we can have for defeating Isil in Iraq is

:34:54. > :34:58.the Iraqi Government and the best partner we can have in Syria is a

:34:59. > :35:02.reformed Government in Syria without Assad at its head that can represent

:35:03. > :35:05.all of the Syrian people and be a partner for getting rid of this

:35:06. > :35:13.death cult that threatens the Syrian people as well as the rest of us. My

:35:14. > :35:15.thanks to the Prime Minister for advanced sight of his statement and

:35:16. > :35:20.we welcome the commitment to brief all parties on the House on major

:35:21. > :35:23.developments. Can I satiate the S with expressions of sadness with the

:35:24. > :35:29.people of France and all families and friends of those killed in the

:35:30. > :35:31.Paris attacks. -- SNP. Will he confirm that all assistance

:35:32. > :35:37.including intelligence information is being shared with our allies in

:35:38. > :35:41.France? In the UK, we are hugely indebted to all of those in our

:35:42. > :35:45.police and security services who worked to keep us safe. We welcome

:35:46. > :35:48.the commitment by the Prime Minister to provide necessary funding and

:35:49. > :35:52.personnel to allow them to do this vital work. Given the scale of the

:35:53. > :35:57.disaster in Syria, we welcome the progress at the talks in Vienna and

:35:58. > :36:00.at the G20 in Turkey. For the first time, there appears to be momentum

:36:01. > :36:06.building to secure a ceasefire to work with you and and combat

:36:07. > :36:10.terrorism. Can the Minister update the House on the next diplomatic

:36:11. > :36:17.steps towards a potential ceasefire and political transition in Syria?

:36:18. > :36:20.Recent weeks and months, there has been large-scale bombing operations

:36:21. > :36:26.in Syria. There has been bombing by the United States, bombing by

:36:27. > :36:29.Russia, bombing by France and many other countries. There have been

:36:30. > :36:37.bombs dropped by drones, bombs dropped from fast jets and missiles

:36:38. > :36:41.fired from naval vessels. President Obama has reiterated providing boots

:36:42. > :36:45.on the ground. Does the Minister agree that the long-term solution

:36:46. > :36:51.for Syria is an end to the Civil War and support forces like the Kurds

:36:52. > :36:59.who are currently fighting Dyer shone the ground. We have seen the

:37:00. > :37:03.rivals of refugees from Glasgow. -- in Glasgow. Does the Prime Minister

:37:04. > :37:08.agree that the welcome we give to these refugees is the true mark of

:37:09. > :37:14.humanity of decency and compassion, in short, the complete opposite that

:37:15. > :37:22.was visited on Paris by terrorists last Friday? First of all, on the

:37:23. > :37:32.issue of briefings, he is now a privy Counsellor on the intelligence

:37:33. > :37:37.and security committee. He asked about intelligence sharing. We are

:37:38. > :37:40.strong on intelligence sharing with the French Government and others in

:37:41. > :37:44.Europe and I think there's more we can do. I spoke to the Belgian Prime

:37:45. > :37:47.Minister yesterday to talk about increasing the extent of our

:37:48. > :37:54.intelligence sharing and stop that is a vital important agenda to help

:37:55. > :37:57.us move on. On Vienna, there is momentum behind these talks and the

:37:58. > :38:06.foreign ministers will be meeting in the coming weeks. Right now, the

:38:07. > :38:10.role is to bring different parties together. It is vital that some of

:38:11. > :38:18.the Syrian position groups are involved in this dialogue. We want a

:38:19. > :38:22.future Syria where many people are represented and that means the

:38:23. > :38:30.Russians should stop bombing the free Syria army and be part of the

:38:31. > :38:35.future. How much can be done from the air? We need an end to this

:38:36. > :38:39.Syria war but we need to support the Kurds. Some of that support can be

:38:40. > :38:44.developed from the air. They need our help to bring this conflict to

:38:45. > :38:48.an end. Let me commend what Glasgow was doing in taking Syrian refugees.

:38:49. > :38:56.I am confident we will have 1000 here by Christmas and I know they

:38:57. > :38:59.will be well looked after. Can I thank the Minister for his reply.

:39:00. > :39:04.His acknowledgement that the defeat of Isil requires a transition out of

:39:05. > :39:08.the Syrian war. The progress made Vienna is beginning to clear the

:39:09. > :39:11.path towards an international plan that would enable that forward

:39:12. > :39:17.conventional military defeat of so-called Islamic state in both

:39:18. > :39:21.Syria and Iraq. Will he continue to put our full diplomatic effort into

:39:22. > :39:26.making that plan sufficiently clear, politically, military and

:39:27. > :39:30.legally, so he can come to the House to seek an endorsement of a role for

:39:31. > :39:37.our Armed Forces that will lead to the defeat of Isil in both Syria and

:39:38. > :39:44.Iraq sooner rather than later? Can I thank my right honourable friend for

:39:45. > :39:49.his support. I will recognise what he has said today. Our full

:39:50. > :39:54.diplomatic effort is to bring everyone together. Sitting around

:39:55. > :39:58.the table in Arabia are Saudi Arabia, Britain, France, Turkey, all

:39:59. > :40:03.the key players, Russia, all the key players are there. In terms of the

:40:04. > :40:09.legal basis for any action we might take, I could answer that question

:40:10. > :40:14.comprehensively and am happy to put that in front of the House as part

:40:15. > :40:20.of my response to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee. The

:40:21. > :40:26.promise to one know of Isil want to exploit the refugee crisis and also

:40:27. > :40:30.to poison European attitudes to those that are fleeing the barbarism

:40:31. > :40:36.that we saw on the streets of Paris. He has told me before that Britain

:40:37. > :40:38.is supporting proffer -- proper registration increase. I am

:40:39. > :40:44.concerned that is not happening. When he look again urgently at what

:40:45. > :40:48.Britain and Europe can do to support proper registration and border

:40:49. > :40:52.checks, not just in Greece, but in internal borders throughout Europe,

:40:53. > :40:57.so we can make sure we provide both security and humanitarian aid that

:40:58. > :41:00.we desperately need so Britain and Europe can support both our security

:41:01. > :41:10.and our solidarity with desperate refugees? She is right that as the

:41:11. > :41:16.external border of Europe, Greece plays a vital role and the

:41:17. > :41:20.registration of migrants as they arrive is vital that that takes

:41:21. > :41:25.place properly. When it comes to the European Asylum support, we have

:41:26. > :41:31.given more than any other country in Europe. We are putting the resources

:41:32. > :41:36.in, even though Greece is not our external border. Our external border

:41:37. > :41:43.is the border controls at Calais. We are not -- we are doing what we can

:41:44. > :41:47.and will continue to do more but making sure people are properly

:41:48. > :41:58.documented as they arrive is a vital part of our security. The planned

:41:59. > :42:05.carnage in Paris shows the danger of allowing jihadists to return to

:42:06. > :42:08.their country of origin. We who -- will he review the counterterrorism

:42:09. > :42:12.legislation to prevent declared UK jihadists from to Joan dashed from

:42:13. > :42:16.return to the UK whatever human rights or the Charter of fundamental

:42:17. > :42:25.rights may say? We must put the people of this country and their

:42:26. > :42:29.lives before human rights. I have a huge amount of sympathy with it and

:42:30. > :42:34.that is why in the counterterrorism legislation that we passed, we took

:42:35. > :42:39.further steps to confiscate people's passports. If someone is a dual

:42:40. > :42:43.national, we can strip them of their UK citizenship if they no longer

:42:44. > :42:49.merit citizenship of this country. We have the temporary power now to

:42:50. > :42:54.temporarily exclude even British national was from returning to the

:42:55. > :42:58.UK. I am all for looking at options for going further on these measures

:42:59. > :43:01.to make sure we keep yourself safe but it was contentious at the time

:43:02. > :43:07.as I think this is demonstrated we were right to stick to our guns. I

:43:08. > :43:10.would like to thank the promise of the advanced side of his statement

:43:11. > :43:13.and to join him and colleagues on all sides here today in expressing

:43:14. > :43:18.solidarity, compassion and sympathy to the people of Paris and Beirut

:43:19. > :43:22.and to the injured and those who have lost their lives and the

:43:23. > :43:27.families of them and to condemn the terrorists who seek to attack us.

:43:28. > :43:31.They detest our diversity, our freedom and our generosity of spirit

:43:32. > :43:35.and we let them win if we come from eyes on any of those things. It is

:43:36. > :43:39.critical that any UK military involvement in Syria should focus on

:43:40. > :43:47.civilian protection and political transition, alongside crushing I

:43:48. > :43:52.still -- Isil. Does the Prime Minister agree that the long-term

:43:53. > :43:56.stability in Syria must be part of the strategy against Isil and will

:43:57. > :43:59.he confirm that any plan brought Parliament by the Government to use

:44:00. > :44:05.our Armed Forces there will specifically address this? Let me

:44:06. > :44:12.say how I think he is right to mention the bombing in Beirut

:44:13. > :44:17.because some people want to see this as a clash of civilisations. The

:44:18. > :44:24.Islamic world against the rest. The Beirut bomb, so the many bombs

:44:25. > :44:29.before it, this proves Isil are killing Muslims in their hundreds

:44:30. > :44:33.and thousands. It is very important to demonstrate to Muslim communities

:44:34. > :44:36.in our own countries that we take this violence as seriously as

:44:37. > :44:43.violence when it is committed in Paris or elsewhere. Yet at what we

:44:44. > :44:48.would do in Syria and civilian protection, yes it would be about

:44:49. > :44:53.civilian protection in the obvious way. If we can take out the

:44:54. > :44:59.murderers of Isil, we are helping to protect the Syrian people who they

:45:00. > :45:05.are threatening. Also because Britain has munitions that are more

:45:06. > :45:12.effective than some of the things the Americans have. It would mean a

:45:13. > :45:19.better targeting of the people who should be targeted and fewer

:45:20. > :45:23.civilian casualties. In his welcome statement today, my right honourable

:45:24. > :45:31.friend is clearly right to focus on the political track in the Syrian

:45:32. > :45:35.negotiations. Building in part on the Kofi Annan proposals from some

:45:36. > :45:42.time ago but also the significant progress that appears to be made in

:45:43. > :45:48.Vienna last week. If those negotiations are successful, that

:45:49. > :45:51.will remove a huge barrier to the widespread military coalition that

:45:52. > :45:57.all of us want to see and in which Britain, as he said today, would

:45:58. > :46:01.have the ability and a number of unique assets to play a very

:46:02. > :46:06.significant part. If those negotiations in Vienna are

:46:07. > :46:10.successful, I have no doubt the prime minister coming back to this

:46:11. > :46:15.house will get a huge majority of members from both sides in

:46:16. > :46:23.Britain's for participation in it. What I would say to my right

:46:24. > :46:29.honourable friend, is, of course, as I said to defeat Isil in Syria, two

:46:30. > :46:33.things are required. We do need to make sure the international

:46:34. > :46:38.community, Arab states and others, are taking the military action to

:46:39. > :46:44.degrade and defeat I still -- Isil but we need a solution that gives us

:46:45. > :46:49.an effective ally in Syria to defeat Isil in a way that can unite the

:46:50. > :46:52.country. His -- if he is arguing that military action should only

:46:53. > :46:58.follow after some political agreement has been nailed down, I

:46:59. > :47:01.think we might be waiting a long time for that to happen. I would

:47:02. > :47:06.caution against that approach. I want to be clear what I am proposing

:47:07. > :47:11.here. The Government will bring together all of its arguments about

:47:12. > :47:16.how we succeed in Iraq, how we succeed in Syria, what a political

:47:17. > :47:19.process should achieve, how we degrade and defeat Isil, the role

:47:20. > :47:26.Britain should play. My argument that we should be going forward in

:47:27. > :47:32.Syria. Put those arguments together and it will be members -- for

:47:33. > :47:35.members of this house that want to assent to this idea. If that

:47:36. > :47:40.happens, then we can have the vote and take action so we are playing a

:47:41. > :47:44.part with others in defence of our own national security. Can I say I

:47:45. > :47:50.am very conscious that there are many colleagues here who cannot be

:47:51. > :47:53.accused of underestimating their own expertise in these important

:47:54. > :47:57.matters, but there are nearly 60 people still wishing to contribute

:47:58. > :48:02.and if I am having any chance of accommodating them all, they will

:48:03. > :48:10.all need to follow the rubric of brevity now to be demonstrated to

:48:11. > :48:16.perfection. I welcome the commitment to a wider narrative of explaining

:48:17. > :48:20.how he thinks they can be defeated. His insistence that it can be done

:48:21. > :48:25.with our allies. Press reports suggest France has invoked a clause

:48:26. > :48:30.in the Lisbon Treaty for the first time. Could the Prime Minister

:48:31. > :48:42.explain what the implications would be for Britain? It is not a clause

:48:43. > :48:47.that has been invoked before. Standing back from the legalities of

:48:48. > :48:50.it. The French are our friends and allies, our brothers and sisters and

:48:51. > :48:58.we should be with them. If there are things to two help them, we should

:48:59. > :49:02.help them. Given the extreme circumstances of a Paris type attack

:49:03. > :49:07.in London, does my right honourable friend think that depriving the

:49:08. > :49:11.police of the right to shoot to kill would make public safer?

:49:12. > :49:19.I absolutely don't. I hope that the Leader of the Opposition will review

:49:20. > :49:25.his remarks. When you're combating a terrorist attack, when you look at

:49:26. > :49:28.what happened in Paris, it was not a siege, they were not taking hostages

:49:29. > :49:35.and making demands, they were killing as many people as possible.

:49:36. > :49:39.When the police are confronted by that, if it is clear they have to

:49:40. > :49:46.take out a terrorist to save lives, they should go ahead and do so. Is

:49:47. > :49:56.is he aware of us who are not convinced that extending the attacks

:49:57. > :50:05.in Syria, it is not because we are pacifist or semi-pacifist, or

:50:06. > :50:09.because of the internal politics of the Labour Party, it is because that

:50:10. > :50:12.the Foreign Affairs Committee has concluded that there does not seem

:50:13. > :50:16.to be a strong case for extending air strikes, that it will achieve

:50:17. > :50:20.little or nothing and Sibley make us feel good and that we're doing

:50:21. > :50:26.something as a result of the atrocities? I don't agree with that

:50:27. > :50:30.view. I respect the fact that it is for the Government to bring forward

:50:31. > :50:33.the argument, to make the case and seek to persuade as many men as of

:50:34. > :50:37.this House that it is the right thing to do. I think the people who

:50:38. > :50:47.oppose this have to answer the question, why is it right to take

:50:48. > :50:54.out I Isil in Iraq, but not in Syria, when it is in Syria that the

:50:55. > :51:06.headquarters is based and that is where are the attacks on this

:51:07. > :51:11.country have been planned. I'm not asking for an over warming majority,

:51:12. > :51:18.a majority will be good enough, to come forward and say it is right for

:51:19. > :51:33.us to take this action. The premises only too aware that given the nature

:51:34. > :51:40.of those returning... What measures can we take to encourage those to

:51:41. > :51:45.speak out against what has happened. My honourable friend is right. There

:51:46. > :51:50.are huge and others in Britain's Muslim communities who made clear

:51:51. > :51:57.that what is being done by Isil is not in their name, they are not

:51:58. > :52:00.representatives of Islam, they are perversion of Islam. I encourage

:52:01. > :52:03.those who have made such an effort to continue to do that. He is right,

:52:04. > :52:08.those who have been to Syria, as part of an aid convoy, who have seen

:52:09. > :52:14.what has happened and have come back, disillusioned by the butchery

:52:15. > :52:17.of these people, by their hatred of people with different ways of life,

:52:18. > :52:22.by the appalling way they treat women, by the way they throw gay

:52:23. > :52:28.people off the top of buildings, people come back disillusioned, they

:52:29. > :52:35.could be some of the loudest voices, saying that these are people

:52:36. > :52:42.we have to finish. We have experienced over many years, the

:52:43. > :52:48.ravages of terrorism personally and close quarters, we will express our

:52:49. > :53:00.support for his words and actions in the of days after these events. For

:53:01. > :53:04.the Prime Minister agreed that the security need the resources, and I

:53:05. > :53:08.welcome what has been said in recent days, they need their powers, and we

:53:09. > :53:13.look forward to working with the Government to introducing more

:53:14. > :53:17.powers, but they also need the public support and the support of

:53:18. > :53:28.politicians. When they need to shoot to kill, they need to shoot to kill.

:53:29. > :53:41.I welcome what the Prime Minister said, for saying that the victims

:53:42. > :53:45.contributed to their own demise. Terrorism has no excuses. It never

:53:46. > :53:49.had any excuses and the people who expressed such sentiment should be

:53:50. > :53:53.ashamed of themselves. As has often been the case in recent days and

:53:54. > :53:55.recent weeks, the honourable gentleman speaks with great power

:53:56. > :54:04.and great force and I agree with what he says. As well as action from

:54:05. > :54:07.our Armed Forces, security forces and police, we also need to tackle

:54:08. > :54:12.the ideology that lies behind the threat that we face. Does the Prime

:54:13. > :54:15.Minister agree that as part of that we need to support those who

:54:16. > :54:27.challenge the extremists, expose it as a death cult and also support the

:54:28. > :54:30.communities who feel vulnerable and help stop people sliding into

:54:31. > :54:35.extremism. I think my honourable friend is right. For too long in

:54:36. > :54:40.some European countries, governments have felt that the way to handle

:54:41. > :54:44.community relations is to leave people into different silos and

:54:45. > :54:49.listen to self appointed community leaders, rather than engaging

:54:50. > :54:52.directly with people, and when it comes to this battle against

:54:53. > :54:58.extremism, we should not be neutral, we should be clear about those

:54:59. > :55:00.groups we shall deal with because they share our values, and those we

:55:01. > :55:07.don't agree with because they are part of a greater problem. I

:55:08. > :55:11.expected will be necessary not only in Britain but in other parts of

:55:12. > :55:15.Europe as well. Last Friday evening at Wembley Stadiums, whether Prime

:55:16. > :55:21.Minister shared a platform, she made this age about being proud to be the

:55:22. > :55:28.leader of the most mighty cultural -- most multicultural country in the

:55:29. > :55:34.world. In order to protect that, does he agree, we need to be more

:55:35. > :55:37.aggressive, which includes the Internet Company is doing more than

:55:38. > :55:41.they are currently doing in order to take away the most important method

:55:42. > :55:46.of recruitment. Internationally, it means working with Europol and

:55:47. > :55:59.Interpol, giving them the support they need as it is an international

:56:00. > :56:02.issue. What I said standing alongside the Indian prime and

:56:03. > :56:05.estate is that we have to fight discrimination and racism in this

:56:06. > :56:10.country and we can lay some claim to being one of the most successful

:56:11. > :56:13.multiracial, multi-faith, multiethnic democracy is in our

:56:14. > :56:18.world, something India aspires to do as well, it is something that should

:56:19. > :56:23.link us. He is right about the issue of Internet companies, just as we

:56:24. > :56:26.worked with them to try and take paedophilia and child pornography on

:56:27. > :56:34.the Internet, there is more we can do to get extremism of the Internet

:56:35. > :56:37.as well. The Prime Minister was right to focus on a multifaceted

:56:38. > :56:41.approach. When it comes to military intervention in Syria, we must learn

:56:42. > :56:46.from previous errors and try to ensure that we put together a proper

:56:47. > :56:51.strategy involving regional powers and allies, including Iran and

:56:52. > :56:56.Russia, which might have to recognise that Isil is the grated

:56:57. > :57:00.danger than President Assad because we also need to accept that air

:57:01. > :57:10.strikes alone will not defeat the evil regime. My honourable friend is

:57:11. > :57:14.right that we need to bring together an international coalition in Syria

:57:15. > :57:18.and that is what we are doing. Iran, Saudi Arabia, France and others are

:57:19. > :57:24.in the room together, negotiating this. That is how it should be. We

:57:25. > :57:30.also have to have a regard to our own national security, and every day

:57:31. > :57:36.that Isil is active in Iraq and Syria is a day that we are in some

:57:37. > :57:40.danger in our own country. The Prime Minister is right that the police

:57:41. > :57:44.and the security services need our full support at this time. But

:57:45. > :57:52.shouldn't it be immediately obvious to everyone that the police need the

:57:53. > :57:59.full and necessary powers, including the proportionate use of lethal

:58:00. > :58:12.force if need be, to keep our committees safe. -- our communities

:58:13. > :58:16.safer. He is right. The old saying that the police other public the

:58:17. > :58:22.public are the police is true. They are not some occupying force. It is

:58:23. > :58:26.right that they are confronting murderers with weapon, they have to

:58:27. > :58:28.be able to take legal action and I hope that the Leader of the

:58:29. > :58:33.Opposition will think carefully about what he said. It is important

:58:34. > :58:46.we support the police in the work they do rather than undermine it.

:58:47. > :58:51.Can my honourable friend set up the plans to enhance airport security,

:58:52. > :58:56.given what happened to the Russian plane # the Russian security forces

:58:57. > :59:02.are making clear that they believe it was a bomb that brought down that

:59:03. > :59:08.aircraft after it left Egypt. It was an issue I discussed with President

:59:09. > :59:13.Putin yesterday. What we need to do is work with others to look at the

:59:14. > :59:17.most vulnerable locations around the world, and work out how we can make

:59:18. > :59:21.them more safe. There is no 100% security you can deliver even in the

:59:22. > :59:27.most advanced airport. There are basic things about scanners, the

:59:28. > :59:31.weight luggage is handled, about how passengers interact with their

:59:32. > :59:38.luggage. Best practice needs to be introduced around the world. If a

:59:39. > :59:41.broad international coalition is not just possible but necessary in

:59:42. > :59:53.Syria, what is the obstacle to a Security Council resolution? On that

:59:54. > :00:04.subject, can the Prime Minister tell us what the opticals are to cutting

:00:05. > :00:09.off the finances of the Brahim Abdeslam question the obstacles have

:00:10. > :00:22.been that one of the permanent members has threatened to veto

:00:23. > :00:30.meaningful Security Council actions to stop I will answer the question

:00:31. > :00:32.directly that the action I believe we should take is legal under

:00:33. > :00:36.international law. I know that should be spelt out clearly and I

:00:37. > :00:40.will spell it out clearly. In terms of disrupting the finances, we are

:00:41. > :00:43.part of the committee looking at all of the action that can be taken,

:00:44. > :00:47.including against financial institutions. One of the most

:00:48. > :00:50.important things we can do is stop their funding through the oil

:00:51. > :00:56.trade, some of which they are selling direct to President Assad.

:00:57. > :01:10.Earlier this year, Morocco signed an agreement with France to train in

:01:11. > :01:20.... Will he commend their further

:01:21. > :01:24.efforts as far as the UK is concerned, we can learn some of the

:01:25. > :01:35.lessons that France is carrot Leander going? -- is currently

:01:36. > :01:41.undergoing. The work Germany has been doing with Turkish imams. One

:01:42. > :01:48.of the things about the G20 is the conversation about fighting

:01:49. > :01:53.radicalisation, the Indonesian president and the Malaysians

:01:54. > :01:56.president, both countries that pride themselves on being part of the

:01:57. > :02:03.moderate Muslim world, they were particular powerful to listen to.

:02:04. > :02:06.Whilst we differ on the details of how to ensure that citizens are kept

:02:07. > :02:11.safe, I agree it is the Government to make sure that they are. In that

:02:12. > :02:16.vein, can he assure us that as well as giving money to the security

:02:17. > :02:20.services, he will make a significant investment in a diplomatic

:02:21. > :02:26.services, who are world-class and they are needed more than ever. They

:02:27. > :02:30.play a vital role in out soft power. We were ranked as another one in the

:02:31. > :02:34.world for soft power. We have been opening embassies around the world

:02:35. > :02:40.other than closing them. It is a good opportunity to thank all of our

:02:41. > :02:45.hard-working staff from this dispatch box. To counter the

:02:46. > :02:50.apparent slaughter that was faced by those in Paris, we will need armed

:02:51. > :02:55.police on the spot in minutes. Can my honourable friend reassure the

:02:56. > :03:01.House that we have sufficient police to do all that? My honourable friend

:03:02. > :03:05.is right to rate this and following the Mumbai attacks and the

:03:06. > :03:09.intelligence we had after that of potential attacks in this country, a

:03:10. > :03:13.lot of work was done to ensure that the armed response vehicles we have

:03:14. > :03:19.have sufficient numbers of people to meet the challenge in our major

:03:20. > :03:22.urban areas. We keep this under review, we are studying what

:03:23. > :03:27.happened in Paris. We are looking at the numbers we need. I think the

:03:28. > :03:29.idea of routinely arming all of the police in our country is not the

:03:30. > :03:33.right approach but certainly increasing the number of armed

:03:34. > :03:40.police that are available, that is something that we are looking at

:03:41. > :03:43.and, if necessary, we will do that. Although we don't talk about the

:03:44. > :03:47.role of our special forces, they are also available to help in the

:03:48. > :03:53.circumstances and, again, we will do everything we can to make sure they

:03:54. > :03:58.can be brought to bear at the right moment and can help in dealing with

:03:59. > :04:05.what are challenging problems thrown up by what happened in Paris. Does

:04:06. > :04:09.the Prime Minister agree that full responsibility for the attacks in

:04:10. > :04:17.Paris lies solely with the terrorists, and that any attempt by

:04:18. > :04:22.any organisation to somehow blame the West or France's military

:04:23. > :04:29.intervention in Syria, is not only wrong, disgraceful but should be

:04:30. > :04:32.condemned? The response across the House shows how right the honourable

:04:33. > :04:39.lady is. It is worth remembering, for those who think that this was

:04:40. > :04:43.caused by Iraq, France did not take part in the Iraq war, they condemned

:04:44. > :04:47.it. These terrorists hate our way of life, they want to kill and maim as

:04:48. > :04:53.many people as possible, they also do this to Muslims with whom they

:04:54. > :05:01.disagree and that is why we must not excuse in any way this vile

:05:02. > :05:05.organisation. Can I welcome the premised's statement, particularly

:05:06. > :05:11.his commitment to come to the House with an argument for extending our

:05:12. > :05:16.presence in Syria. The threat we face is such a threat to our

:05:17. > :05:20.national security, it is timely that he may have to take action as Prime

:05:21. > :05:27.Minister without coming to this House in order to protect and

:05:28. > :05:32.national security is to? I have always had clearly that, in the case

:05:33. > :05:38.of the meditated action, for instance against Isil in Syria, then

:05:39. > :05:43.it is right that we have a debate and a vote and I'm happy to repeat

:05:44. > :05:48.that again. I do reserve the right, taking action international interest

:05:49. > :05:57.where you have to take action quickly, rapidly, and you need the

:05:58. > :06:06.competition at a, I am prepared to do that. -- confidentiality. It was

:06:07. > :06:09.right to take that action and explain afterwards. I will try to

:06:10. > :06:16.stick to that clear demarcation. That is the right approach for our

:06:17. > :06:20.country. I work in the premised's statement and I expect that sensible

:06:21. > :06:24.people will support sensible measures in the days and weeks

:06:25. > :06:29.ahead. Has the governor given any consideration to the way in which

:06:30. > :06:30.the Government of Saudi Arabia exports and encourages

:06:31. > :06:35.radicalisation, and is this something we should address to make

:06:36. > :06:41.sure that they do not radicalise people in the UK? He makes an

:06:42. > :06:46.important point. I met with the King of Saudi Arabia at the G20 and we

:06:47. > :06:49.discussed the situation in Syria. It is fair to say that Saudi Arabia has

:06:50. > :06:56.a strong deep radicalisation programme for its own citizens who

:06:57. > :07:01.have become extremists and it has become successful in that. We do

:07:02. > :07:05.need to focus on how we stop people setting off down the path to

:07:06. > :07:08.extremism in the first place. That is important in terms of what is

:07:09. > :07:13.taught in schools and how it is taught and how we make sure that in

:07:14. > :07:19.all about educational practices around the world is, that we are

:07:20. > :07:30.teaching tolerance and understanding from the start.

:07:31. > :07:40.I fully support the Prime Minister in having those discussions. Is it

:07:41. > :07:52.the case that the Government is trying to work towards getting into

:07:53. > :07:56.the UN Security Council resolution? We keep talking about potential

:07:57. > :08:04.resolutions that we can put forward on any number of issues to deal with

:08:05. > :08:10.this overall problem. In terms of something that takes military action

:08:11. > :08:14.that we have spoken about in this house, that hasn't been possible

:08:15. > :08:28.until now because of the Russian veto. It is possible to act with

:08:29. > :08:38.international law, without an international council resolution. We

:08:39. > :08:49.cannot outsource our community to end international veto. I reject the

:08:50. > :08:54.view that sees terrorist acts as always being a response or a

:08:55. > :09:00.reaction to what we in the West do. Does he agree with me that such an

:09:01. > :09:04.approach risks infantilising the terrorists and treating them as

:09:05. > :09:10.children when we are adults are entirely responsible for what they

:09:11. > :09:20.do? No one forces them to kill innocent people in Paris or Beirut

:09:21. > :09:27.and unless we are clear about that, we will not be able to confront it

:09:28. > :09:30.and understand it? It is that intellectual clarity that is

:09:31. > :09:36.necessary in dealing with terrorists. I know there is

:09:37. > :09:48.something to find an explanation but sometimes the answer is staring us

:09:49. > :09:54.in the face. The people of Colchester and North Essex mourned

:09:55. > :10:01.the loss of Nick Alexander. He died with many others. Can you pay

:10:02. > :10:05.tribute to make but reform our resolve that we will not allow these

:10:06. > :10:13.murderous cowers to destroy our way of life? I pay tribute to him and

:10:14. > :10:19.our thoughts are with his family and friends. What Isil was trying to do

:10:20. > :10:22.was to destroy our way of life and our value systems and the things

:10:23. > :10:26.that people like to do in their spare time. One of the most

:10:27. > :10:33.important things we can do, alongside these security responses

:10:34. > :10:37.is to go on living our lives. Can I thank their promise of a statement

:10:38. > :10:43.and behalf -- on Dombey half of myself and my colleagues of the

:10:44. > :10:46.SDLP, I would like to convey our sympathy and outrage to terrorism.

:10:47. > :10:51.From Northern Ireland, we know what that was like so many years. In so

:10:52. > :10:55.doing, we note that the Prime Minister is coming back to the House

:10:56. > :11:01.with a full competence of strategy in so doing, quickly define the term

:11:02. > :11:06.that he referred to earlier? Action that would be legal under

:11:07. > :11:13.international law. What I have said I will do is part of the strategy

:11:14. > :11:17.that I will lay out, is set out as one part of that strategy why I

:11:18. > :11:22.think we should be taking action not just in Iraq but in Syria and in

:11:23. > :11:27.doing so we will set out the legal advice for that. I think it is

:11:28. > :11:31.important that the House sees that. You can already see with the action

:11:32. > :11:36.we are taking in Iraq, that we are taking action at the request of the

:11:37. > :11:45.legitimate Iraqi Government. You can see with the action we have taken so

:11:46. > :11:49.far against them, that that was on the basis of self defence of the

:11:50. > :11:53.United Kingdom. I can lay out these arguments about why we should be

:11:54. > :11:59.doing it and how we will help to keep yourself safe, but I will make

:12:00. > :12:07.sure it addresses those legal arguments as well. With the second

:12:08. > :12:13.massacre in Paris last weekend, our own citizens in Tunisia murdered and

:12:14. > :12:18.the plethora of massacres over the last year, can I say that now is not

:12:19. > :12:23.the time for the jerk reactions but a time to reflect and plan

:12:24. > :12:26.effectively. Can I ask my right honourable friend if he will do

:12:27. > :12:31.everything in his power to stop and destroy this murderous regime for

:12:32. > :12:35.the sake of our own national security, for which he has my 100%

:12:36. > :12:45.support come as no doubt he does further members in this house? When

:12:46. > :12:51.something like Paris happens, it is worth asking the question about how

:12:52. > :12:57.we would response -- respond to this. That is what we are doing and

:12:58. > :13:03.it is right that we do. The Prime Minister's content and tone of his

:13:04. > :13:14.statement spoke not just for the Government, but for the country.

:13:15. > :13:17.Can... He referred to the retaking of sin job by Kurdish forces

:13:18. > :13:32.supported by the international coalition. I was with the Kurds in

:13:33. > :13:35.Iraq at the front line south. Those Kurdish forces are brave and putting

:13:36. > :13:45.their lives on the line every day. Along with the Syrian Kurds, can we

:13:46. > :13:49.do more to provide material support for the Iraqi Kurdistan people and

:13:50. > :13:53.pending a dissertation on whether we go into Syria, give more support

:13:54. > :14:01.from the air to the Kurds in Iraq now? The answer to his question is,

:14:02. > :14:07.yes, we are providing training and support to the Kurdish forces and

:14:08. > :14:12.they are incredibly brave and dedicated. They have done a

:14:13. > :14:15.brilliant job liberating people from Isil dominance. We discussed with

:14:16. > :14:21.President Obama and the French, German and Italian leaders what more

:14:22. > :14:27.we can do. Germany is doing a lot in that area and there is more that we

:14:28. > :14:31.can do. I welcome my right honourable friend's commitment to

:14:32. > :14:35.defeating Isil in Syria as well as in Iraq and his commitment to either

:14:36. > :14:39.case to this house and to the electrodes. Can I ask him to do so

:14:40. > :14:48.as part of a long-term vision for stability in region? People want to

:14:49. > :14:55.know that our response is not driven by anger but is driven by resolve

:14:56. > :14:59.and is thoughtful and thought through and will make us safer and

:15:00. > :15:02.the region more stable. I am convinced we can answer all those

:15:03. > :15:11.questions in the document I will put in front of the House. Can I talk

:15:12. > :15:15.about the comments talking about the refugees arriving in Glasgow today.

:15:16. > :15:19.With regard to the Paris climate change talks, what discussions were

:15:20. > :15:24.held at the due 20 and whether he plans to attend those talks in Paris

:15:25. > :15:31.as an act of leadership and solidarity? -- G20. I will be there

:15:32. > :15:36.at the start of the talks on Monday. The discussions at the G20 were

:15:37. > :15:41.positive in that everyone committed to having the aim of below 2

:15:42. > :15:47.degrees. My concern is that some of the things that are necessary to

:15:48. > :15:52.make this agreement really meaningful like five-year reviews

:15:53. > :15:57.and the rest of it, there is still some opposition from some countries

:15:58. > :16:00.to that and we haven't had every country's independent proposal to

:16:01. > :16:03.how they reduce their own carbon emission. We can use the

:16:04. > :16:08.Commonwealth conference for part of that and Britain is playing a part.

:16:09. > :16:12.There will be an agreement and it will involve Russia and China and we

:16:13. > :16:18.are backing for aggrieved do -- back in for a good agreement other than a

:16:19. > :16:20.mediocre one. Will he agree that our overriding priority must be the

:16:21. > :16:26.security of our country and its people. Recognising that the threat

:16:27. > :16:30.we face from terrorists today is not just about bullets and bombs, but

:16:31. > :16:34.about cyber attacks and will he ensure we have the right funding and

:16:35. > :16:43.organisations in place to deal with this threat? We deface cyber attacks

:16:44. > :16:52.not just from states but from radical groups and individuals. It

:16:53. > :16:58.should be a major feature of the Strategic Defence Review that we

:16:59. > :17:01.discussed. The first thing is to protect our citizens and the Prime

:17:02. > :17:05.Minister has set out the steps required to do that, for which it is

:17:06. > :17:10.welcome. Could he say some more about what steps he will take to

:17:11. > :17:15.secure action against those who are buying goods of contraband from

:17:16. > :17:21.Isil, not just the Syrian Government but of individuals and companies.

:17:22. > :17:27.There is the sale of antiquities, which she might be referring to, as

:17:28. > :17:30.well as the sale of oil and we are trying to crack down on all of those

:17:31. > :17:34.things and we are looking at what more we might have to do in this

:17:35. > :17:37.country to ascend to some of the conventions in that area. It is

:17:38. > :17:45.reasonable to move on at two o'clock. Can I appeal for brevity.

:17:46. > :17:52.Along with the honourable member for Ilford South and South Antrim and

:17:53. > :18:03.Barrow, I join them on the front line against Isil in Iraqi Kurdistan

:18:04. > :18:08.where we saw the amazing work that the Peshmerga is doing in taking

:18:09. > :18:16.back territory and communities from that evil existence. We visited some

:18:17. > :18:19.refugee and displacement camps and saw families affected. Would my

:18:20. > :18:25.right honourable friend agree with me that we need to ensure that we

:18:26. > :18:34.are protecting those minorities in the Middle East? At finding and

:18:35. > :18:38.making sure both Iraq and Syria are countries and governments that

:18:39. > :18:49.represent all of their people is vital. I agree with all the comments

:18:50. > :18:52.about the number one priority of this Government being safeguarding

:18:53. > :18:56.the national-security of those who represent them but that extends to

:18:57. > :19:00.every single member of this house. With regard to the use of lethal

:19:01. > :19:05.force by intelligence and police forces abroad and at home, it is

:19:06. > :19:09.important that they have the powers necessary to act. It is important

:19:10. > :19:12.that they act within a legal framework and I welcome the Prime

:19:13. > :19:16.Minister going to publish the advice on which he intends to act in Syria.

:19:17. > :19:20.Could he ensure that the basis on which police act on our streets here

:19:21. > :19:27.is published and made known to those we represent? Let me clarify

:19:28. > :19:30.something. I am not saying I will publish the legal advice, because

:19:31. > :19:36.governments have never done that. What I did as Prime Minister in the

:19:37. > :19:40.last Government and will do again in this, is provide a proper and full

:19:41. > :19:45.description of what that legal advice says. I know that sounds like

:19:46. > :19:51.splitting hairs but it is important. As for the issue of the police, I

:19:52. > :19:57.will ask the Home Secretary to write directly to him about that. The

:19:58. > :20:04.member firms Bosworth can put a question very likely in a single

:20:05. > :20:06.sentence. Will the Prime Minister have heard anything about the

:20:07. > :20:12.partition as a settlement on the line of Cyprus leaving an Isle of

:20:13. > :20:18.Wight tribal area in the south and free Syria North? I have seen ideas

:20:19. > :20:22.put forward for these sorts of things. I don't think it is the

:20:23. > :20:31.right idea. The idea of trying to carve up these countries into a

:20:32. > :20:34.group will be a mistake. We need to build a Syria that can have a

:20:35. > :20:44.Government that represents all of its people as Syrians. I have met a

:20:45. > :20:48.number of Syrians, including a brave citizen journalist who was about to

:20:49. > :20:52.return to Syria. They are unanimous in calling for a no bombing zone in

:20:53. > :20:58.Syria to stop civilians being killed by Asad's barrel bombs. Can the

:20:59. > :21:02.promised to reassure us that he will ensure the views of Syrian civilians

:21:03. > :21:09.are taken into account to any UK military action? If we were to take

:21:10. > :21:14.action, it would be to save the lives of Syrian civilians. We also

:21:15. > :21:18.bought no bombing zones in terms of Asad's stopping the prospect of

:21:19. > :21:24.raining down barrel bombs with chemical weapons on his own people.

:21:25. > :21:29.That is why we should be focused on Isil and we cannot forget that

:21:30. > :21:33.President Assad has been one of the recruiting sergeants for Isil and

:21:34. > :21:37.his brutality keys providing fresh recruits. The idea you can take

:21:38. > :21:42.sides and team up with a sad against Isil is a false prospectus.

:21:43. > :21:48.Can I thank the Prime Minister for his statement. In the light of the

:21:49. > :21:53.terrorist attacks, I believe our security services need the new

:21:54. > :21:58.powers set out in the investigatory Powers Bill now. Can I therefore

:21:59. > :22:03.urge and asked my right honourable friend, the Prime Minister, to

:22:04. > :22:05.consider speeding up the legislated scrutiny procedure and bring forward

:22:06. > :22:12.the date when this vital Bill will read the statute book? We are

:22:13. > :22:17.looking at this issue but I would reassure him that most of what the

:22:18. > :22:22.Bill does is put onto an even clearer statutory footing those

:22:23. > :22:25.practices currently carried out by our security and intelligence

:22:26. > :22:28.services. There is one element that is particularly important that is

:22:29. > :22:32.new, which relates to Internet connection records, which is

:22:33. > :22:38.probably the most controversial part of the Bill. I don't want to

:22:39. > :22:41.jeopardise this Bill by rushing it but I hope he is reassured that we

:22:42. > :22:48.will look at the timing but most of the powers are being put on a

:22:49. > :23:02.clearer legal basis. Arguably the most successful forces on the ground

:23:03. > :23:05.have been the Passion ... We have been having with training,

:23:06. > :23:12.logistical support coming from us, from the Germans, from the

:23:13. > :23:15.Americans. Obviously, we need to work with all of the countries in

:23:16. > :23:19.the region to recognise that the Kurds are our allies in this fight,

:23:20. > :23:35.not least because they are taking it directly to ten Isil. Does the Prime

:23:36. > :23:40.Minister agree with me that these Kurdish forces now need their fair

:23:41. > :23:45.share of oil revenues, promised from Baghdad, to help them in the fight

:23:46. > :23:57.against Isil? My honourable friend has a lot of experience working with

:23:58. > :24:00.the Kurds. It needs to be honoured properly, because the Iraqi

:24:01. > :24:04.government needs to make clear that it is they're not just for the sheer

:24:05. > :24:12.but for the Kurds and the Sunnis as well. Can the primaries to share his

:24:13. > :24:19.views in light of the G20, of a safe zone within Syria for civilians?

:24:20. > :24:22.We're always happy to look at these suggestions but when it comes to

:24:23. > :24:26.save zones, you have to remember that you cannot do declare them

:24:27. > :24:33.without making them fully safe. In order to do that, you might have to

:24:34. > :24:39.take very severe military action against Syrian air defences, Syrian

:24:40. > :24:45.aircraft, Syrian aircraft control, and you have to have the troops to

:24:46. > :24:48.make that zone safe as well. I think there are problems with the

:24:49. > :24:51.suggestions. I look at them and I discussed them with the Turks a huge

:24:52. > :24:57.amount. There is another danger worth thinking about which is there

:24:58. > :25:00.are 2 million Syrian refugees in Turkey. If they felt a safe zone was

:25:01. > :25:06.being created in order to push them out of Turkey into Syria, that might

:25:07. > :25:09.hasten their move to come to Europe. All of these things have to be

:25:10. > :25:15.considered. At the end of the day, save zones are only proxies what

:25:16. > :25:21.needs to happen, which is the destruction of Isil at the political

:25:22. > :25:30.transition in Syria. At least one of the perpetrators came into Europe

:25:31. > :25:35.under the guise of a refugee. As I welcome the genuine refugees in our

:25:36. > :25:40.company, I'm need assurance that proper checks are being done to make

:25:41. > :25:43.sure that other terrorist to not get in in a similar way. He also puts

:25:44. > :25:48.his question in the right way, we mustn't confuse migration and

:25:49. > :25:52.terrorism. But we do need to be clear that proper border controls

:25:53. > :25:57.and checks are necessary to make sure that people who come to our

:25:58. > :26:03.country do not threaten us. We wanted to keep our own border

:26:04. > :26:06.controls, and taking out Syrian refugees from the camps allows us to

:26:07. > :26:14.carry out checks before they take off. The Prime Minister is right,

:26:15. > :26:17.that greater powers are needed to thwart Internet plots. The Prime

:26:18. > :26:22.Minister is also right to make available additional resources for

:26:23. > :26:25.how security services and special forces. Does the Prime Minister not

:26:26. > :26:29.agree that it would be the worst possible time now to proceed with

:26:30. > :26:33.the biggest cuts to any police service in Europe which will have a

:26:34. > :26:39.serious impact on neighbourhood policing, vital to intelligence

:26:40. > :26:43.gathering, the eyes and ears of local committees. We have protected

:26:44. > :26:48.counter-terrorism policing budgets in the last Barnard and we will do

:26:49. > :26:51.the same in this Parliament. The police have shown in the last five

:26:52. > :26:55.years how well they can do at finding efficiencies and increasing

:26:56. > :27:01.the number of neighbourhood police officers that are on our streets.

:27:02. > :27:06.Terrorists and their weapons can enter the UK through any point of

:27:07. > :27:10.entry, and the ports that mainly handle freight, such as the Humber

:27:11. > :27:14.port, are particularly vulnerable. Can my right honourable friend

:27:15. > :27:18.assure me that staff levels for Border Force will be maintained and,

:27:19. > :27:26.if necessary, enhanced to come back this threat? -- combat this threat?

:27:27. > :27:30.We are very focused on preventing firearms from entering our country.

:27:31. > :27:35.That is one of the best ways we can try and defend ourselves from these

:27:36. > :27:37.appalling attacks. We have an intelligence led model where we try

:27:38. > :27:41.and use intelligence to make sure that our border security is

:27:42. > :27:47.delivered in the right way at the right time. But all of the time, we

:27:48. > :27:54.are asking Border Force weather have -- whether they have what they need.

:27:55. > :27:57.We discussed this on Saturday. I agree with everything the Prime

:27:58. > :28:02.Minister said about Syria and terrorism but does he agree with me

:28:03. > :28:09.that those who say that Paris is reaping the whirlwind Paul Weston

:28:10. > :28:17.policy, or want -- for Western policy, not just absorbing the

:28:18. > :28:22.terrorists of responsible at it but risk reinforcing, fuelling the sense

:28:23. > :28:30.of grievance and resentment which can you develop into extremism and

:28:31. > :28:36.terrorism. The moment when he very kindly said he agreed with me, and I

:28:37. > :28:40.agree with him. We have to make it clear to those who are at risk of

:28:41. > :28:46.being radicalised that this kind of excuse culture is wrong. It is not

:28:47. > :28:51.only wrong for us to argue, for anyone to argue that Paris was

:28:52. > :28:56.brought about by Western policy, it is also very damaging for young

:28:57. > :28:59.Muslims growing up in Britain to think that any reasonable person

:29:00. > :29:06.could have this view. I agree with him 100%. Does the Prime Minister

:29:07. > :29:11.believe that any individuals living in the United Kingdom now who have

:29:12. > :29:15.information about any activities of those who have become radicalised or

:29:16. > :29:22.are terrorists themselves, are silent a compass is to any cards --

:29:23. > :29:27.silent accomplices to any carnage that may occur after this, and they

:29:28. > :29:33.need to pass on this information immediately to save innocent lives?

:29:34. > :29:38.He makes an important point. He goes to this issue about this idyll that

:29:39. > :29:40.we have in our country. People who might suspect that a friend or

:29:41. > :29:45.relative or someone they know has become radicalised or their mind has

:29:46. > :29:49.become poisoned, they should come forward, secure in the knowledge

:29:50. > :29:54.that everything we do in this country is done under the law, under

:29:55. > :30:00.the rule of law. We cannot send that message out clearly enough. In this

:30:01. > :30:08.age of terrorism, can the Prime Minister spell out how safe the

:30:09. > :30:12.British people are question I do not set the alert levels, it is right it

:30:13. > :30:16.should be done by a group of experts, who have set it at severe,

:30:17. > :30:21.which means they think an attack is likely. The next attack is critical,

:30:22. > :30:26.when you believe the threat is imminent. That will not happen until

:30:27. > :30:30.you have some intelligence that will tell you that a threat was imminent.

:30:31. > :30:34.I say to the British people, we should go about our lives, we should

:30:35. > :30:40.be vigilant and work with the police and intelligence services where the

:30:41. > :30:43.can, but never giving to the fact that the terrorists pose because

:30:44. > :30:49.they want us to change our way of life and to live in fear. That is

:30:50. > :30:55.what terrorism means. Does my right honourable friend agree that

:30:56. > :30:59.terrorists issue their trade most effectively through training, and

:31:00. > :31:05.that requires territory. Action to reduce Isil's territory, whether in

:31:06. > :31:11.Iraq or Syria or elsewhere is a vital component to ridding the world

:31:12. > :31:14.of these evil people? My honourable friend is right and it goes to the

:31:15. > :31:19.point that the honourable member for Dudley made is that so much of what

:31:20. > :31:23.our policy over previously is has been about is to try and close down

:31:24. > :31:28.the ungoverned spaces where terrorists are able to stay and are

:31:29. > :31:32.able to train. That is why we cannot sit back from all of these things,

:31:33. > :31:37.that is why we are engaged in trying to make Somalia into a proper

:31:38. > :31:44.functioning country, why we took action in Afghanistan, while the

:31:45. > :31:49.cannot stand by why they'll -- while their fables to be a covered in

:31:50. > :31:53.Libya. Then is to be law and order in this country. We don't do this

:31:54. > :31:56.because we believe in military adventurism, we do it because we

:31:57. > :32:04.want to keep people safe in our own country. May I joined the Prime

:32:05. > :32:10.Minister in cautious optimism that the piano process could advance the

:32:11. > :32:13.prospects of sustainable peace in Syria, important given the huge

:32:14. > :32:18.numbers that have died there and the millions that have been displaced,

:32:19. > :32:27.but also the horrors of Paris and Beirut reminders of its importance

:32:28. > :32:30.in defeating Isil as well. Can I emphasise to him as well be

:32:31. > :32:34.importance of a strategy being in there. I understand that he will

:32:35. > :32:38.want to advance the case for military action, but what we will be

:32:39. > :32:48.looking at is how that fits into a strategy, including what occurs in

:32:49. > :32:52.the area. There is a strategy and we need to lay out more clearly, and

:32:53. > :32:56.with the military action that I with the military action that I

:32:57. > :32:59.think is important and the involvement of neighbouring

:33:00. > :33:02.countries. In the end, we have to decide whether to take this action

:33:03. > :33:08.as part of a strategy, but certainly that is my aim in this document that

:33:09. > :33:14.I will produce. I fully welcome the Prime Minister's statement.

:33:15. > :33:24.President Hollande has used the words, Europe is at war with Isil.

:33:25. > :33:36.Can we join our counterparts and use the words ten two.

:33:37. > :33:45.The use of the word is increasing in every issue of Hansard that is the

:33:46. > :33:51.gist. We know that this group, they would be equally content to carry

:33:52. > :33:58.out an attack in Belgium, in Sweden, in Denmark or in Britain. They don't

:33:59. > :34:01.not do it because they feel that somehow we are different. They just

:34:02. > :34:08.haven't managed it yet. We have got to stop it. Can I thank the Prime

:34:09. > :34:13.Minister for his statement, which I fully support? Would he agree that

:34:14. > :34:17.the multiculturalism of our country is more likely to be destroyed if we

:34:18. > :34:24.do not take every possible action to defeat these murderous terrorists?

:34:25. > :34:32.I absolutely agree. As we do so, we need to take everyone in our country

:34:33. > :34:40.with us. Can I direct the Prime Minister back to the alarming news

:34:41. > :34:44.that it is reported that 450 valid jihadists have been readmitted to

:34:45. > :34:50.the UK? Worthy make an undertaking that he will not pull out any action

:34:51. > :34:52.against these individuals, however tough order cunning, including

:34:53. > :34:57.revoking their passports in order to protect the British public? He is

:34:58. > :35:02.right to make this point. What we have is a system for trying to

:35:03. > :35:06.this way. Some people will come home this way. Some people will

:35:07. > :35:09.completely disillusioned with what they had seen, because it is an

:35:10. > :35:13.appalling regime with appalling practices. But there are people who

:35:14. > :35:23.we will have to keep a close eye on and use all the powers we have at

:35:24. > :35:25.our discretion. Can I congratulate the Prime Minister in his

:35:26. > :35:29.leadership, there is clearly a need for a new strategy and that must

:35:30. > :35:33.come from within this harassment. Is it not time for the members who sit

:35:34. > :35:39.in this chamber to step back and support the new strategy and protect

:35:40. > :35:43.all the UK? I am grateful for what he says. I hope that the response to

:35:44. > :35:47.the Foreign Affairs Select Committee will be something around which

:35:48. > :35:50.embers of this House can rally, so that we can move forward in a way

:35:51. > :35:59.that supports our allies and keeps our country safe. The Prime Minister

:36:00. > :36:03.is aware that the Lancashire Constabulary is one of the leading

:36:04. > :36:07.forces of the UK infighting radicalisation and terrorism. Could

:36:08. > :36:10.he update House as to what further steps can we take to ensure our

:36:11. > :36:16.security services and our police forces cooperate fully with each

:36:17. > :36:19.other? He makes a good point, we announced additional funding for our

:36:20. > :36:22.security forces, I have said what I had said about counterterrorism and

:36:23. > :36:26.policing, but there is a need to continue to work on the Prevent

:36:27. > :36:30.programme and I am sure there will be something to be addressed by the

:36:31. > :36:34.Home Office in the Spending Review. Mr Speaker, and I raced to the Prime

:36:35. > :36:39.Minister disturbing reports of the firebomb attack in the early hours

:36:40. > :36:46.of this morning against the cultural centre in Bishopbriggs, used by

:36:47. > :36:51.Muslim constituents of mine? Can also looked into the grotesque

:36:52. > :36:56.racist attack faced my my colleague Humza Yousef in social media, will

:36:57. > :36:59.he join me in condemning some of the inflammatory statements in the

:37:00. > :37:06.press, attempting to link innocent Muslims with extremism? I suddenly

:37:07. > :37:08.join the honourable gentleman in condemning these attacks. We should

:37:09. > :37:14.be equally clear that just as anti-Semitism is wrong, Islamophobia

:37:15. > :37:17.is long, and right wing extremism, attacking people for their religion,

:37:18. > :37:23.is covertly wrong. I think this is absolutely vital, that we must BVM

:37:24. > :37:28.at on all these things. -- we must be vehement. We have had an hour and

:37:29. > :37:33.a half and I think the Prime Minister for his brevity. Can I

:37:34. > :37:36.gently remind colleagues, if your colleagues who got in had been

:37:37. > :37:44.briefer, you would have got in. We need to help each other. Point of

:37:45. > :37:49.order. Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. This morning, and at

:37:50. > :37:53.academics published research in a peer-reviewed journal, estimating

:37:54. > :37:56.the mental health effects of Government's work capability

:37:57. > :38:02.assessment process, between 2010 and 2013. The research is the first

:38:03. > :38:08.population level study which looked at over 1 million work capability

:38:09. > :38:12.reassessments in 149 local authorities in England and trends in

:38:13. > :38:15.suicide, self-reported mental health problems and anti-depressant

:38:16. > :38:21.prescribing rates. They found there is independent cessation of an

:38:22. > :38:26.additional 590 suicide. 280,000 cases of self-reported mental health

:38:27. > :38:34.conditions. 725,000 antidepressant prescribes. Mr Speaker, concerns

:38:35. > :38:38.about the working ability assessment process and other aspects of the

:38:39. > :38:43.welfare policy have repeatedly been made in this House. In view of the

:38:44. > :38:48.gravity of the scale and range of impacts of the policy on health of

:38:49. > :38:51.its citizens, I seek your advice as to how best to get the Secretary of

:38:52. > :39:00.State to make statement on how he intends to address this appalling

:39:01. > :39:02.situation. I am very grateful to the honourable lady for her attempt at

:39:03. > :39:09.Punta Gorda. I know she follows this issue extremely close. -- at a tent

:39:10. > :39:14.at a point of order. But it is not a point of order, I am afraid, for the

:39:15. > :39:17.chair. I do not want to dilate on matters that take place outside the

:39:18. > :39:22.chamber, but what we cannot have, forgive me for saying, but it has to

:39:23. > :39:26.be said, is a situation in which an attempt to raise a matter through an

:39:27. > :39:33.urgent question, for example, which is not granted, is then substituted

:39:34. > :39:36.by an attempt to deal with the motto via a point of order because it

:39:37. > :39:42.every member did that, we could spend quite long periods each day

:39:43. > :39:44.with people trying to get in and did not succeed in thinking they could

:39:45. > :39:49.deal with it to a point of order instead. If she honestly is asking

:39:50. > :39:55.me for my advice, I am afraid my advice is, written questions through

:39:56. > :40:00.the order paper, if the honourable lady remains unhappy with the

:40:01. > :40:05.answers or as she sees it, lack of answers, she can try again to deploy

:40:06. > :40:10.the mechanism of an urgent question. I am afraid it is for her

:40:11. > :40:14.to demonstrate why it is urgent for this day, rather than submit a

:40:15. > :40:21.matter of very great importance and relative topicality. If the

:40:22. > :40:26.honourable lady wants to apply for an adjournment and debate, of course

:40:27. > :40:29.she can do that. I think I have shown a considerable readiness, both

:40:30. > :40:35.to grant new cues and to hear points of order, so I do not intend any

:40:36. > :40:39.discourtesy to her, she is extremely assiduous in the execution of her

:40:40. > :40:44.duties, but I do not think I can say more than that today. I am being

:40:45. > :40:54.fair about it! Well, I think I am, anyway. If there are other points of

:40:55. > :41:06.order, we had better get them. They may have melted! A couple of other

:41:07. > :41:10.people who were... Point of order. Last year, HMRC unsourced one of the

:41:11. > :41:15.functions relating to tax credits to a US-based company, many

:41:16. > :41:19.constituents have contact me -- contacted me in desperation because

:41:20. > :41:23.of mistakes made which led to arbitrate cancellations of their tax

:41:24. > :41:28.credits. There is no way, constituents to contact the

:41:29. > :41:32.company. HMIC itself has a hotline, but their staff have told me they

:41:33. > :41:39.cannot get an update on the status of a case because they cannot speak

:41:40. > :41:41.for or to the company. Hansard has shown members have been Hobbits --

:41:42. > :41:45.unable to get answers on this company. Is there any guidance you

:41:46. > :41:49.can give me on how we can best represent our constituents given the

:41:50. > :41:54.obvious failings of the government agency and its contract? There are

:41:55. > :41:59.only a couple of points to make in response. First, it is an

:42:00. > :42:02.expectation that Ministers in relation to matters which fall

:42:03. > :42:05.within their confidence, and I use that term in the technical sense,

:42:06. > :42:12.will provide answers that are both timely and substantive. If that has

:42:13. > :42:13.not been so, or she judges it has not been so, it is disappointing and

:42:14. > :42:20.I urge the Treasury bench that I urge the Treasury bench that

:42:21. > :42:23.answers to legitimate questions should be provided and they should

:42:24. > :42:32.not be alternatives to answers, they should be answers. The second point

:42:33. > :42:35.is this, it is sometimes necessary and to be expected that the

:42:36. > :42:40.Government will make certain urgent announcements when the House is not

:42:41. > :42:46.sitting, and indeed if they did not, they would probably be criticised.

:42:47. > :42:49.However, I confess I am sympathetic, having studied this matter in

:42:50. > :42:52.concert with advisers, to the view that has been expressed, not least

:42:53. > :42:59.by the honourable lady, that the announcement relating to HMIC is the

:43:00. > :43:04.kind that might reasonably have been expected to be made -- HMRC, I think

:43:05. > :43:07.it is fair to say that over the last couple of days, there have been

:43:08. > :43:12.quite exceptionally important matters which have unnaturally

:43:13. > :43:17.dominated. That said, I hope the Treasury bench will have noted what

:43:18. > :43:21.has been said and it is open to Ministers to come forward sooner

:43:22. > :43:27.rather than later with announcements to the House. If they are so minded.

:43:28. > :43:30.If they are not, even having known the honourable lady only six months,

:43:31. > :43:36.I rather suspect that she will pursue the matter with her

:43:37. > :43:39.terrierlike intensity which has thus far been demonstrated to

:43:40. > :43:44.colleagues! If there are no further points of order, perhaps we can move

:43:45. > :43:47.to the ten minute rule motion push-up the honourable member for

:43:48. > :43:54.Gainsborough has been waiting with stoicism and fortitude. Ten minute

:43:55. > :44:01.rule motion. I beg to move the House of Lords Parliamentary standards etc

:44:02. > :44:06.bell which stands in my name, and a number of other members of this

:44:07. > :44:12.House. The fact is, the other place is too large, too political, too

:44:13. > :44:22.comfortable, and too prone to political patronage. It is time to

:44:23. > :44:26.reform it. May I say straightaway, I have had responses from several

:44:27. > :44:32.parties, and this bill assumes that for the time being, the House of

:44:33. > :44:37.Lords remains appointed. On the of at least one honourable member, who

:44:38. > :44:43.is in this place now, supporting this bill, I am not saying that the

:44:44. > :44:49.House of Lords should not be elected or should be appointed, we have had

:44:50. > :44:53.that debate for 100 years, there is a division of opinion, but we are

:44:54. > :44:58.where we are. The House of Lords, for the present time and for the

:44:59. > :45:06.foreseeable future, is appointed and it does need reform. My personal

:45:07. > :45:09.view may be that there are all sorts of problems with an elected chamber

:45:10. > :45:16.which would have to be resolved before it was elected, I do not see

:45:17. > :45:22.any point in the other place replicating this place. I do not see

:45:23. > :45:25.it being a place for ambitious 30 and 40-year-olds who want to climb

:45:26. > :45:29.the greasy pole and become Ministers. There is no harm in

:45:30. > :45:35.that, no harm in ambition, but there is no point in having another set of

:45:36. > :45:38.politicians in that place. There are many other arguments which will rage

:45:39. > :45:45.back and forth but I do not want to get involved in that debate during

:45:46. > :45:50.this speech. So, I am looking at the House of Lords as it is, as it is

:45:51. > :45:56.appointed. And I believe that if it is appointed by the Deputy Speaker

:45:57. > :46:02.-- Madam Deputy Speaker, if it is not elected, again it cannot

:46:03. > :46:05.replicate this place into a political dispute. It has to be a

:46:06. > :46:13.place of experts, of distinguished men and women from all walks of life

:46:14. > :46:18.and from all parts of the country, mature people who do not really want

:46:19. > :46:23.to get involved in politics any more, they may have been politicians

:46:24. > :46:27.but they want to use the other place to improve legislation. There is no

:46:28. > :46:32.doubt about it, the legislation which leaves this place has not been

:46:33. > :46:36.thought through, is hurried and does need approving, so there is a place

:46:37. > :46:40.for a revising chamber. And as part of this bill I would like to get an

:46:41. > :46:43.agreement by convention that the House of Lords is not there to

:46:44. > :46:47.overturn manifesto commitments, in my view not their turn to get

:46:48. > :46:52.involved in taxation, because the reason why this House of Commons was

:46:53. > :46:55.created centuries ago was that the king should not be allowed to tax

:46:56. > :46:58.the people without the consent of the people, therefore taxation

:46:59. > :47:02.resides with this House of Commons. So I would like to see it being

:47:03. > :47:10.re-established as a sensible revising chamber. But I return to my

:47:11. > :47:15.original point, it is too large, too comfortable, too prone to political

:47:16. > :47:18.patronage. I have to say straightaway that mine is not a

:47:19. > :47:27.declaratory bill. I would lay down the guidelines and it is for the

:47:28. > :47:30.other place within certain guidelines to decide how they meet

:47:31. > :47:34.those guidelines. But my own view is that the House of Lords is too

:47:35. > :47:39.large, and it doesn't need to be larger than the size of the House of

:47:40. > :47:44.Commons. I would use that as a guide. At the moment, 650 members

:47:45. > :47:48.perhaps after the next election there will be 600, so how do we

:47:49. > :47:55.reduce a House of Lords of 800 members for 850 down to 600 or 600

:47:56. > :47:58.or 650? My own view and I would leave this Lords to determine how

:47:59. > :48:03.they do it, as there has to be some way in which the size of the

:48:04. > :48:07.political parties in the other place reflect the size of the political

:48:08. > :48:10.parties in this place after a General Election. But that is for

:48:11. > :48:13.them to decide, they may have another point of view or may wish to

:48:14. > :48:18.reflect voting strengths. And then they would have to be left over from

:48:19. > :48:21.crossbenchers so that no one party would have a majority, I think that

:48:22. > :48:26.is terribly important. Just because one party gets an overall majority

:48:27. > :48:30.in this place, I do not believe that one party should have an overall

:48:31. > :48:36.majority in the other place. So we reduce the size, it is obviously too

:48:37. > :48:40.overcrowded at the moment, we stop this absurd race every time there is

:48:41. > :48:44.a General Election, where there is a change of party control and the

:48:45. > :48:48.incoming Prime Minister feels he has to create another ten, 20, 30, 40

:48:49. > :48:52.members in the other place to try and increase his strength. So we go

:48:53. > :48:57.on, getting a larger and larger body. Frankly, when I started in

:48:58. > :49:02.office, it was pretty hard to get into the House of Lords, basically

:49:03. > :49:07.you have to be pretty well a former Cabinet Minister. It is becoming too

:49:08. > :49:16.easy, there are too many people and it gives the Prime Minister too

:49:17. > :49:26.If we have to reduce the number of bishops, not everybody would agree

:49:27. > :49:33.with this, so be it. I will not carry on with that. We have other

:49:34. > :49:37.people of other faiths. It is for them to decide. I do not think there

:49:38. > :49:40.should be a set retirement age. There are people at the age of 19

:49:41. > :49:46.that are making a contribution. If they are elected by their fellows to

:49:47. > :49:52.go on sitting there, let them do it. -- the age of 90. Nobody ever the

:49:53. > :49:56.age of 80 should draw expenses or allowances and nobody over the age

:49:57. > :50:01.of 80 should be allowed to vote. This system works well in the

:50:02. > :50:08.Vatican, where you can ask us with your colleagues, but over the age of

:50:09. > :50:15.80, E don't vote. -- you don't vote. That is for them, again, to decide.

:50:16. > :50:18.To force people over the age of 80 to be on the whip, coming in, the

:50:19. > :50:24.thing late at night, is rather the meaning for them and unnecessary,

:50:25. > :50:32.and if they are not receiving expenses... IMF rate the House of

:50:33. > :50:37.Lords -- I am afraid the House of Lords has increasingly in prone to

:50:38. > :50:42.criticism and scandal, and we have to find a way forward. Members of

:50:43. > :50:48.the House of Lords should either be on an expense regime, and it should

:50:49. > :50:54.be subject to IPSA, you should be allowed to claim for a hotel or for

:50:55. > :50:59.travel, if your main home is outside London, and as an alternative, there

:51:00. > :51:04.should be a modest flat rate taxable allowance. If we get rid of all of

:51:05. > :51:09.these scandals that we read about, which is drawing away support from

:51:10. > :51:12.the other place, people coming in for half an hour to claim their

:51:13. > :51:18.tax-free allowance, we give them the choice, and I think we should have

:51:19. > :51:23.the system here, you either go on the IPSA regime with all of its

:51:24. > :51:31.convocations, or you have a modest taxable allowance. -- all of its

:51:32. > :51:37.complications. If we recreate the conventions about making it a

:51:38. > :51:41.revising chamber, if we have a modern expense regime, if we try and

:51:42. > :51:44.an sure that we have really distinguished people in the other

:51:45. > :51:49.place who want to go there because they want to make a contribution,

:51:50. > :51:53.not necessarily speaking a lot every year, but coming in a few times a

:51:54. > :51:57.year because they have a particular expertise, if that is the sort of

:51:58. > :52:03.chamber we want, and I believe my Bill fits the Bill. It fits what is

:52:04. > :52:11.needed. It fits the Bill, although it is a Bill. It would be a modern

:52:12. > :52:16.revising chamber. We are all modernizers now, are we not? It

:52:17. > :52:22.would avoid scandals and create a House of Lords of a good size and

:52:23. > :52:27.make a House of Lords fit for purpose for the 21st century, and I,

:52:28. > :52:35.and it's to the House. -- and I commend it to the House. As many of

:52:36. > :52:43.that opinion say I. On the contrary know. The ayes have it, the ayes

:52:44. > :52:52.have it. You will prepare and bring in the Bill? Geoffrey Clifton

:52:53. > :52:58.Brown, Philip Davis, Michael fabricant, Robert Neil and myself.

:52:59. > :53:29.Sir Edward Leigh. House of Lords Parliamentary

:53:30. > :53:41.standards etc. Bill. Friday the 4th of December. Friday the 4th of

:53:42. > :53:46.December. The clerk will now proceed to read the orders of the day.

:53:47. > :54:14.Cities and local government devolution Bill lords committee.

:54:15. > :54:23.Order. Order. Cities and local devolution will lords. -- Bill of

:54:24. > :54:29.Lords. We again with clause 20, with which it will be convenient to

:54:30. > :54:33.debate clause 21, at new clause three, and new clause nine. The

:54:34. > :54:42.question is, that clause 20 stand part of the Bill. Thank you. I look

:54:43. > :54:52.forward to an interesting discussion this afternoon. I hope we are able

:54:53. > :54:57.to explore issues that are of concern to members, but hopefully,

:54:58. > :55:00.in the bulk of those areas, find consensus, areas in which the House

:55:01. > :55:13.agrees. I wish to oppose clause 20, standing

:55:14. > :55:19.part of the Bill, and I will speak to clause 21 and new clauses three

:55:20. > :55:28.and nine. Clause 21 followed a lively debate in the other place. It

:55:29. > :55:33.amends section two, by lowering the voting age in inland and Wales. This

:55:34. > :55:36.means that 16-18 -year-olds could vote in all of those elections which

:55:37. > :55:42.are based on this franchise. This would include in England and Wales

:55:43. > :55:45.Police and Crime Commissioner elections, elections for the Greater

:55:46. > :55:49.London Authority of Mayor and collections to the National Assembly

:55:50. > :55:54.of Wales and also mean that 16-18 -year-olds could vote in local

:55:55. > :55:57.neighbourhood planning referendums and referendums on local authority

:55:58. > :56:00.government arrangements. I have considered carefully the arguments

:56:01. > :56:03.that have been set out in earlier considerations of the Bill, but here

:56:04. > :56:09.at second reading and in the other place and I am of course aware of

:56:10. > :56:12.similar arguments that have been made on consideration of the

:56:13. > :56:21.European Referendum Bill, a Bill I follow closely for personal interest

:56:22. > :56:25.reasons. I will give way. Whilst I agree with the government's view on

:56:26. > :56:30.this, I don't think the voting age should be lowered. Would there be

:56:31. > :56:33.any consideration given to the idea that there is a distinction between

:56:34. > :56:38.a normal election and eight referendum, given the likely

:56:39. > :56:45.permanence or longer. At least that a referendum would have sway for? I

:56:46. > :56:49.think there are some colleagues on the side of the House who would take

:56:50. > :56:53.a distinction between the two. Perhaps he could go into some detail

:56:54. > :57:01.about why the government build their should not be a distinction made. He

:57:02. > :57:04.tempts me to go off-topic. The European Union Referendum Bill has

:57:05. > :57:08.had eight debate on this matter and it has come to a conclusion to

:57:09. > :57:13.express the will of this place on the issue of the age of the

:57:14. > :57:17.franchise but it is an issue that is of interest to a number of members.

:57:18. > :57:20.I know that referendums are different to elections of other

:57:21. > :57:24.sorts but I don't think the difference is as such that

:57:25. > :57:31.concessions should be made, certainly not in the vehicle of this

:57:32. > :57:34.tubular Bill. I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. The

:57:35. > :57:39.Secretary of State has at least indicated that there is a debate to

:57:40. > :57:43.be had about lowering the voting age, and I wonder whether secretly

:57:44. > :57:48.he might actually agree with the proposition, but could the Minister

:57:49. > :57:53.actually explain the dangers of reducing the voting age to 16? The

:57:54. > :58:04.world did not cave in when people were given the age previously. I

:58:05. > :58:14.Cantile him that -- I recognise that there is a time and place for

:58:15. > :58:18.matters such as this to be debated. I will now go on to my comments. I

:58:19. > :58:24.feel that this is not necessarily the time and place stop I will give

:58:25. > :58:31.way. The -- and place. I will give way. Was he also understand that

:58:32. > :58:37.there is a lot of desire to see an extension of dissipation in our

:58:38. > :58:47.processes -- participation in our processes? His position is very

:58:48. > :58:51.clear that he does not want to do this at this moment, but would he

:58:52. > :58:54.consider the possibility, as we devolve power to local government,

:58:55. > :59:02.that in certain pilot areas that requested, there is the possibility

:59:03. > :59:08.of trying some experiments on 16-18 -year-old franchise? I admire the

:59:09. > :59:12.creativity of honourable members who wish to pursue this matter. I feel

:59:13. > :59:16.it is inappropriate for this Bill, but they recognise what the

:59:17. > :59:19.honourable member is saying. It is undeniable that there is a debate

:59:20. > :59:24.about this issue to be had, that there are views on both sides of the

:59:25. > :59:28.argument. It is the view of nearly all honourable members that we would

:59:29. > :59:39.like to see greater participation in our democratic processes. Rather --

:59:40. > :59:42.this is an area in which I have significant reservations. I have

:59:43. > :59:47.considered carefully the arguments that have been sent out regarding

:59:48. > :59:52.this Bill. I will give way. Would he confirm that we did not place in our

:59:53. > :59:57.manifesto any wish to change the voting age, so we have no manifesto

:59:58. > :00:00.mandate, and that when Labour were in office for 13 years, they never

:00:01. > :00:06.thought it a good idea to change the voting age? My right honourable

:00:07. > :00:09.friend makes a very important point. Members on the government benches

:00:10. > :00:15.did not stand with that in the manifesto, and indeed, members sat

:00:16. > :00:18.in a variety of parties on the opposition parties did. It may be

:00:19. > :00:23.arguable that the issue has been decided by Democratic processes

:00:24. > :00:28.already, but I recognise, as I said earlier, that there is a debate to

:00:29. > :00:32.be had. We may come to different conclusions, but my argument today

:00:33. > :00:36.is, that's valid though that's debate may be, this is not the

:00:37. > :00:41.vehicle for it to be delivered. I will make our progress and then I

:00:42. > :00:44.will give way to more members to want to have their say on this

:00:45. > :00:50.issue. Lowering the voting age would be a major change to the fundamental

:00:51. > :00:53.building blocks of our democracy. The right start for making that

:00:54. > :00:56.change is to make sure that people who have been elected to represent

:00:57. > :01:01.those people would consider all the issues involved. We should seek the

:01:02. > :01:03.views of those we represent and recognise where public opinion

:01:04. > :01:06.stands on the issue and how to maintain and strengthen competence

:01:07. > :01:12.in ensuring that elections are free and fair and carefully discuss the

:01:13. > :01:14.issues, and having recognised were consensus and opinion eyes across

:01:15. > :01:25.the country, only then would we decide whether or not we should make

:01:26. > :01:32.such a change. When he also agree that logic would dictate that there

:01:33. > :01:37.should also be... Is this something he would support or not? My

:01:38. > :01:41.honourable friend makes a very important point. There is a need for

:01:42. > :01:45.a joined up approach in such matters. There is a need to ensure

:01:46. > :01:49.that any changes fully considered in the context of all of the other

:01:50. > :01:52.things that we place age restrictions on, all of the things

:01:53. > :01:57.that we do or do not allow people to do at different ages, and often for

:01:58. > :02:00.very good reason, whether it is buying cigarettes or alcohol or

:02:01. > :02:03.using a sunbed or voting or standing for Parliament or driving a car, we

:02:04. > :02:08.have different ages for different things in this country, and those

:02:09. > :02:12.ages are not set in stone, but they are in place for very good reasons

:02:13. > :02:19.in principle. There is a debate to be had, but they conclusion is not a

:02:20. > :02:25.foregone one. I agree very much with what the Minister said. Actually,

:02:26. > :02:29.the truth is, particularly in the last 10-15 years, there has been a

:02:30. > :02:35.movement in many of the areas to do with smoking, drinking, that has

:02:36. > :02:43.actually raised the age rather than lower them, so in many ways, if you

:02:44. > :02:46.try to have any sense of working together, having a single age, if

:02:47. > :02:54.anything, we are working in an upward direction, and it begs the

:02:55. > :03:00.obvious question, and I only say this... In the 50s, the electoral

:03:01. > :03:09.age and that part of Europe at the time, in Germany, it was 14. Why not

:03:10. > :03:15.ten or 12, rather than 16, which is being proposed? I am tempted to go

:03:16. > :03:18.down the path of debating different ages, but he makes a fundamentally

:03:19. > :03:22.important point. We have different ages for different things and these

:03:23. > :03:26.matters need to be considered fully. Change should not be wrought on

:03:27. > :03:33.piecemeal or as an adjunct to a Bill such as this. It needs to be done in

:03:34. > :03:42.a proper way after a thorough debate. I will give way and then I

:03:43. > :03:46.really must move on. I just wonder how he intends to facilitate the

:03:47. > :03:47.debate to ensure that we can have it perhaps during the course of this

:03:48. > :03:57.Parliament? I recognise what he says, it is a

:03:58. > :04:01.debate that has been ongoing for some time in our democratic process.

:04:02. > :04:04.I said Heller that at least two of the parties on the opposition

:04:05. > :04:08.benches stood with this issue on a manifesto, they were not successful

:04:09. > :04:11.at that last election. The intention is to discuss the content of this

:04:12. > :04:14.bill and the progress and the progress commodity this bill make. I

:04:15. > :04:18.think his point has been well made on the record but it is not one that

:04:19. > :04:23.is going to tempt me to go further than that at the dispatch box in

:04:24. > :04:26.this discussion at this stage today. There is a broader issue underlying

:04:27. > :04:30.this clause about the transition from childhood to adulthood, about

:04:31. > :04:33.all of those issues which we have already seen discussed which have

:04:34. > :04:38.been raised by honourable members already so early in our debate today

:04:39. > :04:41.about the interplay of the different limits and age ranges of the

:04:42. > :04:46.different restrictions we apply, the desire to further -- for further

:04:47. > :04:50.democratic engagement and how we should do it, this is a very compact

:04:51. > :04:53.issue and it is one that deserves the most serious attention. It is

:04:54. > :04:58.not one that should be inserted as an adjunct into this bill, which is

:04:59. > :05:00.about devolution, which we want to progress to meet that manifesto

:05:01. > :05:04.commitment and deliver for those errors. But those reasons we will

:05:05. > :05:09.not be supporting this clause today. -- those areas. We do not

:05:10. > :05:13.believe it is the right place to insert such a significant change

:05:14. > :05:18.into our legislation and constitution. I want to turn to

:05:19. > :05:20.clause 21, which after careful consideration, we have concluded

:05:21. > :05:25.should indeed stand part of the bill. Clause 21 was also inserted

:05:26. > :05:31.into the bill and the other place, against the then the wishes of the

:05:32. > :05:34.Government. It removes sections nine NA of the local government act 2000

:05:35. > :05:39.which provides that Borough Council has been required to hold a mayoral

:05:40. > :05:41.referendum under an order made by the Secretary of State of the

:05:42. > :05:46.referendum has been successful and the Mayor elected, they cannot

:05:47. > :05:51.subsequently be changed except by further acts of Parliament. This

:05:52. > :05:56.provision currently applies solely to Bristol, on which basis I will

:05:57. > :06:01.happily give way. I am very grateful. On behalf of all parties

:06:02. > :06:06.who discussed this in Bristol, and they grateful for the recommendation

:06:07. > :06:09.to retain this, which is as I said last we talked about this in

:06:10. > :06:14.committee, a fundamental principle of democracy for the people of

:06:15. > :06:18.Bristol to continue to control the power in which they might have their

:06:19. > :06:20.elected representatives. Absolutely, this reflects the

:06:21. > :06:25.consensus which we are trying to build around this bill, it is the

:06:26. > :06:29.very actions of a listening government that is working cross

:06:30. > :06:33.party to deliver and everyone's interests. Bristol was the only city

:06:34. > :06:37.to vote for a Mayor in the referendum is held in May 2012. We

:06:38. > :06:40.have considered the arguments including those put forward by the

:06:41. > :06:44.honourable lady that the people of Bristol should have the same

:06:45. > :06:48.opportunity of those from other areas. Clause 21 effectively places

:06:49. > :06:52.the people of Bristol and the same position as they would be if the

:06:53. > :06:56.referendum for a Mayor in 2012 had been triggered by a resolution of

:06:57. > :07:00.the Council order receipt of a pipe edition. Having considered these

:07:01. > :07:03.arguments we are prepared to see the people of Bristol in this position,

:07:04. > :07:09.hence we support that clause 21 stand part of the bill. I will give

:07:10. > :07:16.way. The Minister has just spoken about the consensus, one issue that

:07:17. > :07:21.has been discussed has been the Government's proposals to amend the

:07:22. > :07:24.Sunday trading laws, the consensus being that we should not do this.

:07:25. > :07:27.Can the Minister confirm that this is not coming back in this bill or

:07:28. > :07:36.in any other way in terms of the government? I am not sure to which

:07:37. > :07:40.clause she refers to. But more generally, we are of course always

:07:41. > :07:45.talking to honourable members across the House, were always listening to

:07:46. > :07:48.the views of the public to see the best course of action that should be

:07:49. > :07:51.taken. She can take it from what is on the face of the bill today in the

:07:52. > :07:55.amendments we are discussing that that is not an issue that is before

:07:56. > :07:58.the House for the rest of this afternoon. What will happen in

:07:59. > :08:03.future, she tempts me to go further than I am able in the course of this

:08:04. > :08:06.discussion. The member for Nottingham North has tabled new

:08:07. > :08:11.clause three, which would amend section 36 of the representation of

:08:12. > :08:15.the people act 1983 to allow local errors to alter their systems for

:08:16. > :08:17.the election was of councils. His enthusiasm to push the boundaries of

:08:18. > :08:23.devolution throughout the course of this bill and more generally has not

:08:24. > :08:27.gone unnoticed by myself, by members on the side of the House or by

:08:28. > :08:31.members on his own side as well. When we last met in committee, he

:08:32. > :08:35.flagged up the proposition that councillors should be free to decide

:08:36. > :08:38.their own electoral arrangements in conjunction with their people. He

:08:39. > :08:43.suggested they should be able to debate and come to a decision. I

:08:44. > :08:47.understand and appreciate his interests in voter engagement. It is

:08:48. > :08:51.interest which as I have already said we all share and they know the

:08:52. > :08:54.evolutionary nature of his proposals under which a cancer would be able

:08:55. > :08:59.to decide on the electoral system that they wanted. That said, I have

:09:00. > :09:05.some concerns. -- under which a council. Such proposals are complex

:09:06. > :09:09.and I have concerns about how they would work in practice and whether

:09:10. > :09:12.there is a real appetite for the change he proposes. Local

:09:13. > :09:18.councillors are currently collected under the 1st past the post system.

:09:19. > :09:20.It is a well recognised and straightforward system. As we have

:09:21. > :09:25.seen in the outcome of the reference -- the referendum on first past the

:09:26. > :09:30.post versus alternative referendum on alternative vote. Of voters chose

:09:31. > :09:33.first past the post over the alternative vote, which suggests

:09:34. > :09:39.there is no public consensus for change. I have real concerns about

:09:40. > :09:42.the potentially caused by the possibility of voting systems

:09:43. > :09:45.changing from one poll to do next. We can imagine the pressures which

:09:46. > :09:49.councils and councillors could come under in considering the systems

:09:50. > :09:52.they might wish to employ. There would be a desire to consider or

:09:53. > :09:56.attempt to second guess whether there may or may not be political

:09:57. > :10:01.advantage in adopting a different set of arrangements or sticking with

:10:02. > :10:04.the existing tried and tested once. Even if some appropriate safeguards

:10:05. > :10:07.could be introduced, which themselves necessarily without the

:10:08. > :10:11.complexity of the arrangements, the practical process of switching

:10:12. > :10:17.voting systems can be complex and costly. A change to single

:10:18. > :10:19.transferable vote good in many cases require major re-warding of an

:10:20. > :10:25.entire local authority area. Whilst it may be that none of these

:10:26. > :10:27.concerns are insurmountable, the proposal represents a fundamental

:10:28. > :10:31.change to the building blocks of our democratic process. It requires

:10:32. > :10:34.significant consideration, development and consensus and I am

:10:35. > :10:38.clear that this bill whilst both given a sugary and enabling is not

:10:39. > :10:47.the right way for such change. -- both evolutionary. As an idea, this

:10:48. > :10:52.might need to brew a little. I suspect that, comments he will sense

:10:53. > :10:56.my view that I believe this idea is brewed nowhere near enough yet. I

:10:57. > :11:01.would therefore ask that he does not push it to a division at this time.

:11:02. > :11:08.Finally, I will comment on new clause nine. This would introduce a

:11:09. > :11:10.requirement through regulations for local government collectors in a

:11:11. > :11:14.particular area to approve certain boundary and structural changes via

:11:15. > :11:17.referenda. The changes involved are those relating to these -- the

:11:18. > :11:24.establishment of new unitary authorities. Clause 16 already gives

:11:25. > :11:27.the Secretary of State wide regulation array powers regarding

:11:28. > :11:29.structures and boundaries. The regular shoes would allow

:11:30. > :11:35.modification of the existing processes, as provided in the local

:11:36. > :11:39.government and public -- local government and Public involvement in

:11:40. > :11:44.health act 2007. These regulations can be made only where all the

:11:45. > :11:47.affected councils agree. I doubt it would be right to include a

:11:48. > :11:53.requirement for a referendum, nor do I believe referendums to be sound

:11:54. > :11:55.practically in this context. Our democracy is founded on the

:11:56. > :12:00.traditions and principles of represented -- represented

:12:01. > :12:04.democracy, which has stood the test of time. We believe that in general

:12:05. > :12:08.decisions on public matters, they are made most effectively by those

:12:09. > :12:13.democratically elected to represent the area affected. All past

:12:14. > :12:17.experience suggests this is the case, changes to local authorities

:12:18. > :12:20.and structures. The democratically elected local representatives for an

:12:21. > :12:24.error are best placed to take any local decisions on these issues. --

:12:25. > :12:29.for an error. These representatives will want to take account of the

:12:30. > :12:32.views of their electorate. Those who contribute to the life of the

:12:33. > :12:35.area's communities, how they seek these views, the kind of

:12:36. > :12:38.consultation exercises they undertake, that is a matter for

:12:39. > :12:42.them. It is not for the Government to tell elected representatives how

:12:43. > :12:48.to undertake roles. Hence we believe it would not be right to require

:12:49. > :12:53.referendums, to ascertain the views of local people and for the purposes

:12:54. > :12:57.of this exercise, to determine local boundary or structure changes. We do

:12:58. > :13:02.not believe the referendums envisaged by this amendment would be

:13:03. > :13:06.sound in practice. The amendment on the requires a referendum in a part

:13:07. > :13:11.of the area or the part becoming unitary, for example. Such changes

:13:12. > :13:14.-- such change has indications for the surrounding areas and I'm not

:13:15. > :13:18.sure that this would be right in any event. Such structural changes are

:13:19. > :13:23.must invariably part of some wider reform, to present the question is

:13:24. > :13:27.simply one about council structure or boundary risks being misleading.

:13:28. > :13:31.It risks over simplifying what is a convex argument that needs to be

:13:32. > :13:35.made. I would hope therefore that my honourable friend will withdraw his

:13:36. > :13:40.amendment after what I am sure will be an interesting discussion in the

:13:41. > :13:44.House later this afternoon. In conclusion, I have explained that

:13:45. > :13:48.the Government cannot support new clauses three and nine. We are

:13:49. > :13:56.content for clause 21 to stand part of the bill and we are opposed to

:13:57. > :14:03.clause 20. Thank you, I am glad to hear that this Government is in

:14:04. > :14:06.listening mode and I hope, I am very pleased with the statement on clause

:14:07. > :14:11.21 and I would hope that the Government will now listen to the

:14:12. > :14:20.arguments in favour of voting for clause 20. To reduce the voting age

:14:21. > :14:25.to 16 in local government elections. Now, there are over 1.5 million 16

:14:26. > :14:31.and 17-year-olds in the UK, who are currently denied any part in our

:14:32. > :14:34.democratic process. In recent years, there has been pressure for a

:14:35. > :14:43.reduction in the voting age from 18 to 16. The electoral reform Society

:14:44. > :14:46.has argued for it, in 2006, we had the power report, the power

:14:47. > :14:53.commission was funded by the Joseph Rowntree reform trust, to find out

:14:54. > :14:56.what was happening to British democracy and five people were

:14:57. > :15:00.disengaged from politics. The commission drew up a set of

:15:01. > :15:07.proposals and recommendations to increase political participation and

:15:08. > :15:14.presented these in a final report. One recommendation was to lower the

:15:15. > :15:19.voting and candidacy age to 16, with the exception of candidacy for the

:15:20. > :15:26.House of Lords. The commission explained its recommendations thus.

:15:27. > :15:30.Our own experience and evidence suggests that just as with the white

:15:31. > :15:35.population, when young people are faced with a genuine opportunity --

:15:36. > :15:39.wider publishing, to involve themselves in a meaningful process

:15:40. > :15:42.that offers them a real chance of influence, they do so with

:15:43. > :15:49.enthusiasm and with responsibility. We recognise that few people take an

:15:50. > :15:53.interest in a skier of life or an area from which they have been

:15:54. > :16:00.deliberately excluded. -- sphere of life. I will give way. Can she just

:16:01. > :16:09.remind the House why for 13 years in office after 2010, bigger-mac never

:16:10. > :16:15.wanted to do this? -- Labour. I thank the honourable gentleman for

:16:16. > :16:21.his question. Sometimes, there needs to be a build-up of pressure for

:16:22. > :16:26.change is made. The Labour Party did not make a change in the 13 years of

:16:27. > :16:31.office, he is quite correct, and I am going to talk about the build-up

:16:32. > :16:35.of pressure, but the organisations that have been involved, and I think

:16:36. > :16:38.we saw it with the Scottish referendum, there is a real feeling

:16:39. > :16:43.that our young people are affected by the democratic process, to take

:16:44. > :16:47.his arguments to their conclusion, we would never make any changes

:16:48. > :16:53.whatsoever, something because we did not in a previous term of office. --

:16:54. > :16:56.similar because. I was quoting the Cath Mackie power commission and

:16:57. > :17:02.worst about young people feeling excluded. -- the Cath Mackie power

:17:03. > :17:08.reducing the voting age to 16 would reducing the voting age to 16 would

:17:09. > :17:12.be an obvious way of reducing the extent of sucks exclusion for many

:17:13. > :17:17.thousands of young people, it would increase likelihood of taking an

:17:18. > :17:19.interest and taking part in political and democratic debate if

:17:20. > :17:28.they actually felt they could influence the debate. The Power

:17:29. > :17:32.commission... I will give way. Logically, if you have 16-year-old

:17:33. > :17:35.having about, they clearly should be entitled to stand as a candidate as

:17:36. > :17:40.well. She covered above that a 16-year-old would therefore be able

:17:41. > :17:44.to get elected to a position that has executive authority? I thank the

:17:45. > :17:49.honourable gentleman for his intervention. The Power commission

:17:50. > :17:53.did not recommend that 16-year-olds should become candidates, but they

:17:54. > :17:58.should have their vote, to raise their awareness of the democratic

:17:59. > :18:02.process, so that when they come to such an age where they are eligible

:18:03. > :18:06.to become a candidate, they will actually have played some part in

:18:07. > :18:14.the democratic process. I will give way. I thank my honourable friend

:18:15. > :18:18.were giving way. During my election campaign, I spoke to hundreds of

:18:19. > :18:24.young people that not only were confused by the political process,

:18:25. > :18:29.but also actively wanting to get engaged in it. Does she agree with

:18:30. > :18:33.me that it is an absolute myth that young people somehow I'm not

:18:34. > :18:36.interested in politics, not capable of holding public office and not

:18:37. > :18:41.capable of voting? And does she agree that the right thing to do is

:18:42. > :18:45.to give them that right to vote, so we have more engagement for young

:18:46. > :18:51.people, but is actively needed at this time in politics more than

:18:52. > :18:56.ever? I thank my honourable friend for that intervention, I think he is

:18:57. > :19:01.absolutely right, the 16-year-old I know and speak to are very keen on

:19:02. > :19:06.the idea of greater political involvement, and we keep going back

:19:07. > :19:09.to the Scottish referendum, but it was amazing to see so many young

:19:10. > :19:15.people taking part in that very important debate, it was... Well, it

:19:16. > :19:18.was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for them and it was something that

:19:19. > :19:31.was done to affect them. We have 16-year-olds who are engaged

:19:32. > :19:44.in the political process, and yet we deliberately exclude them from it.

:19:45. > :19:49.Referring to clause 20, clause 20 of this Bill will allow anyone over the

:19:50. > :19:54.age of 16 to vote in local elections, and this was an amendment

:19:55. > :20:01.brought on by Labour and the Lib Dems in the House of Lords, it was

:20:02. > :20:07.not in the original Bill. I think it would be a retrograde step to try

:20:08. > :20:11.and remove this clause. It would have effect for all elections in

:20:12. > :20:17.England and Wales which currently use a local government franchise,

:20:18. > :20:21.and that means local government elections in England and Wales,

:20:22. > :20:26.including elections for the Mayor of London, the Police and Crime

:20:27. > :20:30.Commissioner elections, National Assembly for Wales elections and

:20:31. > :20:35.European Parliament elections, and for years, there has been a

:20:36. > :20:42.consistent demand from young people for votes at 16, and at 16, people

:20:43. > :20:47.become adults and take control of their own futures. They can leave

:20:48. > :20:52.school, work full time. If they work, they pay their taxes, they can

:20:53. > :20:59.leave home, they can get married, they can join the Armed Forces.

:21:00. > :21:05.Thank you for that, from a sedentary position. I accept that young people

:21:06. > :21:10.cannot do these things at 16 without the consent of their parents, but

:21:11. > :21:15.they can still do that in. But contrary to popular myth, young

:21:16. > :21:21.people are interested in political issues, from climate change to

:21:22. > :21:24.racism, from education to crime, I meet with young people in my

:21:25. > :21:34.constituency, and I am sure many of my honourable friend you as well, 16

:21:35. > :21:38.and 17-year-olds who are studying politics and engaged in the

:21:39. > :21:47.political resinous and get this country still denies them a vote. In

:21:48. > :21:52.a democracy, this is a way for young people to express their opinions,

:21:53. > :21:57.voting. It is worth remembering that we enlist 16-year-olds into the

:21:58. > :22:03.Armed Forces and we expect them to pay taxes if they are earning. So,

:22:04. > :22:08.they should be able to participate in the selection of those who govern

:22:09. > :22:13.them. We believe that any reform to encourage young people to engage

:22:14. > :22:18.politically would be very severely limited in its effectiveness while

:22:19. > :22:23.the current Constitutional party and electoral arrangements remain in

:22:24. > :22:27.force. Given that government decisions will naturally affect the

:22:28. > :22:31.future, it is arguable that the young are much more likely to be

:22:32. > :22:39.affected by some political decisions than older people. Preventing 16 and

:22:40. > :22:46.17-year-olds from voting sends a signal to them and to society that

:22:47. > :22:49.their views are not valid or important. The next generation of

:22:50. > :22:55.voters are the first to have received a citizenship education in

:22:56. > :22:58.schools, yet they are being denied their full rights as citizens. This

:22:59. > :23:06.seems particularly unfair and unjust. At a time when some people

:23:07. > :23:10.do feel that politics is not relative to them, young people need

:23:11. > :23:14.to be encouraged to take part in democracy, not kept out of it. The

:23:15. > :23:18.Scottish independence referendum showed once and for all that 16 and

:23:19. > :23:24.17-year-olds are more than capable of taking important political

:23:25. > :23:28.decisions, and if young people are registered early and get into the

:23:29. > :23:36.habit of voting, we will see lasting improvements in turnout. My

:23:37. > :23:41.honourable friend secured a Westminster Hall debate on this very

:23:42. > :23:47.subject last year. My honourable friend argued that the time was

:23:48. > :23:52.right to open the democratic system even further and to include 16 and

:23:53. > :23:58.17-year-olds among the people who are able to vote. We cannot expect

:23:59. > :24:07.16 and 17-year-olds to contribute to our society through various means,

:24:08. > :24:10.it economically, physically, the socially, and a capacity where we

:24:11. > :24:16.recognise them as an adult but then give them the democratic rights of a

:24:17. > :24:20.child. We trust our young people to contribute to society in many ways,

:24:21. > :24:26.so we should start to give them the democratic rights. I fully support

:24:27. > :24:30.these words, the words of the honourable member, and I would urge

:24:31. > :24:36.all in this House to support the retention of clause 20 in this Bill

:24:37. > :24:44.and welcome our 16 and 17-year-olds to the democratic process. I want to

:24:45. > :24:48.just say a few words on clause 21, and I M very pleased that the

:24:49. > :24:55.government, at least on this issue on is listening. I want to pay

:24:56. > :25:01.tributes to my honourable friend, the Member for Bristol South, who is

:25:02. > :25:10.still in her place, she has done a lot of work around the issue of the

:25:11. > :25:14.rest of mayor, as I am sure everyone is aware, Bristol was the only city

:25:15. > :25:20.to vote yes in the mayoral referendum of 2012, and I think it

:25:21. > :25:26.would be fair to say that the current mayor of Bristol has proved

:25:27. > :25:31.to be a somewhat controversial dig your -- figure. But my honourable

:25:32. > :25:37.friend has quite rightly said that this is not whether or not you

:25:38. > :25:42.support the current mayor, it is about whether the citizens of

:25:43. > :25:46.Bristol should be allowed a voice about the post itself, it is about

:25:47. > :25:50.democracy and the right of Bristol people to decide how they are

:25:51. > :25:57.governed, and that seems to be a fundamental aspect of democracy. She

:25:58. > :26:01.added that the citizens of rest I deserve the right to reverse the

:26:02. > :26:05.decision at any time, and the amendments that have come into this

:26:06. > :26:09.Bill from the House of Lords offering Bristol people the

:26:10. > :26:18.opportunity are to be welcomed. About my honourable friend's said.

:26:19. > :26:23.All knowledge -- superior knowledge about the Bristol mayor, but I hope

:26:24. > :26:27.all in this House support clause 21, and I look forward to giving people

:26:28. > :26:33.in Bristol the same democratic rights as the rest of the country.

:26:34. > :26:39.Thank you. Thank you very much indeed. I strongly support the

:26:40. > :26:45.amendment passed in the House of Lords, and I am very disappointed

:26:46. > :26:51.that the government has chosen to move to remove that amendment from

:26:52. > :26:56.this hill. The argument from the Minister seems to me to be that it

:26:57. > :27:00.is horribly complicated and this is not the right place to discuss it,

:27:01. > :27:07.but they could not really identify any particularly strong argument for

:27:08. > :27:10.why it is the wrong thing to do and why 16 and 17-year-olds should not

:27:11. > :27:15.be given the right to exercise their vote like the rest of us do, and I

:27:16. > :27:19.was interested in the intervention from the honourable member from

:27:20. > :27:25.Westminster, and encouraged by it, in the sense that he appeared to

:27:26. > :27:30.recognise that there was some argument for 16-year-olds having a

:27:31. > :27:36.say on some issues. He drew a distinction, I think, between

:27:37. > :27:41.referendum and voting in elections on a continuous basis, but I would

:27:42. > :27:46.argue with him, I would argue to him that he should go with his logic,

:27:47. > :27:51.that if he feels there is a case for young people having a say in the

:27:52. > :27:56.future of their country, or on other big issues which are put before the

:27:57. > :28:00.country in referendum, then surely they should have a right to a say on

:28:01. > :28:10.who is elected as their local counsellor in their local community

:28:11. > :28:23.-- out on earth could he sustain the logic that Shakur community. --

:28:24. > :28:28.local community. There is some logic that says that a referendum is a

:28:29. > :28:37.somewhat different side to an election. The European election... I

:28:38. > :28:40.suspect we will not have to wait as long in Scotland but there was the

:28:41. > :28:49.prospect of having to wait a generation or more for a referendum.

:28:50. > :28:52.The broader issue, this is a pretty important change in our franchising

:28:53. > :28:58.arrangements, and therefore, it is not something that should seep

:28:59. > :29:03.through an additional clause coming from the House of Commons. It needs

:29:04. > :29:07.a broader analysis, and they accept the view, and they hope that we will

:29:08. > :29:12.have some fertile discussion through the course of the Parliament, but

:29:13. > :29:17.the notion of it being a major change what about simply on an

:29:18. > :29:21.amendment during the consideration of the Bill doesn't seem the right

:29:22. > :29:31.way of looking at the entirety of the franchising system. I share his

:29:32. > :29:34.view. It is an urgent issue. But I hope he will understand that, for

:29:35. > :29:40.those of us that are convinced of the case for change, we should take

:29:41. > :29:44.every opportunity to argue that case, and indeed, this is the very

:29:45. > :29:48.opportunity to do so, and because we see that the world will not cave in

:29:49. > :29:53.and that there are very many positive results that will flow from

:29:54. > :29:59.it, we see no difficulty in including it with this Bill. The

:30:00. > :30:03.Shadow Minister referred to the Scottish referendum, and I also make

:30:04. > :30:09.the point that it engendered an extraordinary level of engagement

:30:10. > :30:15.amongst young people, there was no suggestion, I do not think, from

:30:16. > :30:18.members opposite that those young people who voted in the Scottish

:30:19. > :30:23.referendum in some way he did not know what they were talking about or

:30:24. > :30:27.did not have the right to have a say. If their view is that it was

:30:28. > :30:31.right for them to have that say in that Scottish referendum, on

:30:32. > :30:35.refection, given what happened, then they should stick with the logic of

:30:36. > :30:40.that and accept the case for including it within this Bill, and

:30:41. > :30:45.the interesting thing is, turn out amongst young people between the

:30:46. > :30:53.ages of 16 and 18 was very high in Scotland. Let me just make this

:30:54. > :30:57.point and I will gladly give way. My understanding is that the electoral

:30:58. > :31:13.commission reform and 20s... Given the opportunity, they very

:31:14. > :31:19.busily engaged in the democratic process, something I am sure we

:31:20. > :31:24.should all welcome. I give way. The honourable member is making fair

:31:25. > :31:26.points about the analysis of the participation in the Scottish

:31:27. > :31:33.referendum, but does he agree with me that the Scottish referendum was

:31:34. > :31:40.almost a uniquely... The enthusiasm is engendered across the population

:31:41. > :31:46.of Scotland in all age groups and therefore there is not an immediate

:31:47. > :31:52.read across to other elections. I accept it was a highly unusual event

:31:53. > :31:57.in terms of the degree of excitement and enthusiasm that it engendered

:31:58. > :32:02.across the population. I am simply making the point that the world did

:32:03. > :32:06.not cave in as a result of 16 and 17-year-olds having a vote in that

:32:07. > :32:11.referendum, and I don't think the world will cave in if we give people

:32:12. > :32:18.aged 16 and 17 the rights to say who is the local representative in their

:32:19. > :32:24.local authority. Perhaps we are more sanguine about the events of the

:32:25. > :32:29.18th of September 2014. If there was any suggestion that a change in the

:32:30. > :32:35.franchise of this magnitude might have been decisive, it was clearly

:32:36. > :32:43.not the case, lest we forget, the referendum was lost, as we are

:32:44. > :32:47.reminded regularly, and that is one of the reasons that we are so

:32:48. > :32:51.sanguine about it in the world has not followed in, but it could have

:32:52. > :33:00.been more controversial had it been more closely run. It could have had

:33:01. > :33:04.a distinctive impact on the result. I am half Scottish and I

:33:05. > :33:14.passionately wanted Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom. I

:33:15. > :33:21.also accept the rights of 16 and 17-year-olds to be part of the

:33:22. > :33:25.decision. With the honourable member agree with me that it is precisely

:33:26. > :33:28.because of 16 and 17-year-olds have the biggest stake in the future of

:33:29. > :33:32.the country it was important that they had a vote in the referendum? I

:33:33. > :33:37.think that is absolutely right and that is why I think they should also

:33:38. > :33:40.have the boat in the European referendum, because it is their

:33:41. > :33:44.continent as well as ours, and they have a larger stake in terms of the

:33:45. > :33:51.number of years on this planet than we do, so I accept the case that she

:33:52. > :33:57.makes. I have long held the view that, in principle, this is right.

:33:58. > :34:02.If you can marry, join the Armed Forces and perhaps most important of

:34:03. > :34:06.all, if you are obliged to pay taxes at the age of 16, if you are

:34:07. > :34:11.working, then surely you have a right to have a say about the level

:34:12. > :34:18.of that taxation and how that taxation is applied by governments.

:34:19. > :34:23.It is surely actually a Democratic outrage that people can be expected

:34:24. > :34:24.in our country to pay taxes but not have the rights to any say over the

:34:25. > :34:34.application of those taxes. Surely the arguments make little

:34:35. > :34:38.sense. My daughter is currently saving up to buy a computer, she

:34:39. > :34:48.will have to pay VAT, she is 13 and will have no vote. I am referring to

:34:49. > :34:53.the application of income tax to people's employment rights. Of

:34:54. > :34:56.course, to take it to that conclusion, is this ridiculous to

:34:57. > :34:59.suggest that a 4 -year-old should have the right to vote. But I made

:35:00. > :35:06.the point also as someone who has the right to join the Armed Forces,

:35:07. > :35:09.defending this country, has no right to vote in the decisions, the

:35:10. > :35:15.critical decisions that this country makes, on such matters, so I think

:35:16. > :35:19.the case is clearly very powerful. Let me also make the point that I

:35:20. > :35:26.think it would have a very beneficial impact. The Shadow

:35:27. > :35:31.Minister talked about the extent of engagement of young people in

:35:32. > :35:35.politics. I would draw a distinction, I think young people

:35:36. > :35:40.from every experience I have had are very interested in political issues,

:35:41. > :35:43.but I think they are totally disillusioned and disengaged in the

:35:44. > :35:49.political process. I think this is one way of addressing that. The

:35:50. > :35:52.problem goes further than that. David Willetts, a highly respected

:35:53. > :36:00.former Cabinet Minister from the party opposite, has made the case, I

:36:01. > :36:04.think very powerfully, about the look on contract, the broken

:36:05. > :36:09.generational contract, and he talks about generational unfairness to

:36:10. > :36:13.stop the way our system works, and we all know it in this House,

:36:14. > :36:18.whether we admit it or not, older people tend to vote in greater

:36:19. > :36:24.numbers. That drives the manifestos of political parties, which in turn

:36:25. > :36:28.drives the deal that different members of our society get from

:36:29. > :36:31.governments in this country and I'm pleased to see the member for

:36:32. > :36:40.Norwich North agreeing with that point. This drives that problem. It

:36:41. > :36:46.makes that problem worse. If young people aged 16 and 17 are denied a

:36:47. > :36:49.say, political parties are not forced to listen and think about

:36:50. > :36:54.their interests when shaping the manifesto. They shape the manifesto

:36:55. > :36:58.to address the needs of older people. And of course, the needs of

:36:59. > :37:02.older people have to be met, but we have to ensure that there is, as

:37:03. > :37:06.David Willetts says, generational fairness. And it is denied by the

:37:07. > :37:11.denial of the vote to 16 and 17-year-olds. I entirely agree, the

:37:12. > :37:17.intergenerational unfairness is a major issue that we all have to face

:37:18. > :37:22.before too long. But isn't the real problem is one that would not be

:37:23. > :37:27.solved by reducing the voting age, the real problem is that very few

:37:28. > :37:31.people under the age of 35 even bother to vote, the toner level even

:37:32. > :37:36.the Scottish referendum for 18 to 35-year-olds was much lower than it

:37:37. > :37:40.is for others. The truth of any political party is that twice as

:37:41. > :37:47.many voters over the age of 55 as under the age of 35 and they are

:37:48. > :37:50.twice as likely to vote. I think that there is a progressive

:37:51. > :37:56.struggling to get out of the other side. He wants to support this, I

:37:57. > :38:00.can tell. He sees the argument in favour and he absolutely rightly

:38:01. > :38:05.points to the low engagement of people under the age of 25, but we

:38:06. > :38:09.have to ask ourselves, why? When they are growing up in their teenage

:38:10. > :38:13.years, they are denied any involvement in our political

:38:14. > :38:16.process. Perhaps, as happened in Scotland, if we give them the

:38:17. > :38:22.opportunity to have their say, at an earlier age, if perhaps we start to

:38:23. > :38:27.teach more about the political process in our schools, we might

:38:28. > :38:31.just enable them to understand that by participating, they get a greater

:38:32. > :38:40.say in society and their interests may be better met. I give way. I

:38:41. > :38:46.thank him for giving way. You have very often found that those in

:38:47. > :38:50.Scotland listen and are extremely well-informed and it is many of the

:38:51. > :38:58.older generation that sometimes it's a situation that young people get

:38:59. > :39:07.disillusioned with. They are very often progressive minded. I would

:39:08. > :39:11.agree and I think it is condescending in the extreme to

:39:12. > :39:15.suggest that someone aged 17, for example, is not capable of making a

:39:16. > :39:21.decision about, for example in the context of this bill, who their

:39:22. > :39:25.local councillor should be. That is what the party opposite of simile is

:39:26. > :39:32.saying. That they cannot be trusted to have a vote. That is what they

:39:33. > :39:40.are denying them by the argument that the make. I will have a stab at

:39:41. > :39:46.answering that point. I don't think anyone denies there will be a

:39:47. > :39:50.minimum voting age, therefore an arbitrary cut-off. I guess all we

:39:51. > :39:55.are saying on this side is that all things considered, with all of the

:39:56. > :39:59.other issues that surround the drinking of alcohol, driving,

:40:00. > :40:06.smoking, that 18 seems a pretty sensible cut-off date, rather than

:40:07. > :40:09.16. And also, I think I fundamentally believe that as well

:40:10. > :40:13.as being a right to vote, it is a responsibility to be engaged in

:40:14. > :40:18.politics and I suspect again, 18 seems to be a slightly better

:40:19. > :40:23.arbitrary cut-off point compared to 16 or any other age one could pluck

:40:24. > :40:27.from the sky. I thank him for that and I accept of course that

:40:28. > :40:32.ultimately, where you draw the line is ultimately to a degree arbitrary.

:40:33. > :40:38.But I would tempt him to be a rebel on this because I think deep down,

:40:39. > :40:45.his instincts are with giving people aged 16 and 17 a vote. Because at

:40:46. > :40:49.the moment, where his party chooses to place that arbitrary line will

:40:50. > :40:54.deny 16 and 17-year-olds the right to have a say on electing the local

:40:55. > :40:58.councillor in their communities. And ultimately, if he thinks about it

:40:59. > :41:03.for more than, isn't that actually ridiculous? So, I will conclude my

:41:04. > :41:08.remarks, I have gone on for too long and I apologise for that, but I

:41:09. > :41:11.would urge honourable members, including the honourable member for

:41:12. > :41:16.Westminster, to have the courage of his convictions and enjoy, join

:41:17. > :41:23.those of us who will vote against the Government on this and to retain

:41:24. > :41:26.clause 20. I am very glad to have the opportunity to raise the rights

:41:27. > :41:33.of local residents where there is some pressure for powers to be

:41:34. > :41:37.devolved. The kind of pressure I mean is where, for instance, a rural

:41:38. > :41:44.area finds itself under the control of an urban council or an urban area

:41:45. > :41:49.under a rural council. I'm not going to raise the issue of the Isle of

:41:50. > :41:55.Wight, as there is very little pressure now for a change. That

:41:56. > :41:59.change in fact took place as long ago as 1996. But let us look at some

:42:00. > :42:03.where I am not so familiar with, let us look at Lancashire and Yorkshire,

:42:04. > :42:09.where the county boundary was, and for some areas have been part of

:42:10. > :42:15.Lancashire but only since 1973. Before that, it was clear that the

:42:16. > :42:19.ancient boundaries were of Yorkshire. Another example, Bradford

:42:20. > :42:24.and its environs. In Bradford, there is quite a difference between those

:42:25. > :42:27.areas which are rural and those which are urban. Many would like to

:42:28. > :42:33.see changes to their own counsel, rather than a Metropolitan Council,

:42:34. > :42:36.which is no charging, and many others would not. It seems to me

:42:37. > :42:42.there would be almost no problem in allowing the more rural areas to

:42:43. > :42:46.have more responsibility for their own local areas. For instance,

:42:47. > :42:52.planning libraries and housing. It could indeed take over all

:42:53. > :42:57.responsibilities. But it seems more likely that they would want to take

:42:58. > :42:59.on the district responsibilities, leaving others such as education

:43:00. > :43:06.with their Metropolitan Bros. It used to be the case that it was

:43:07. > :43:09.necessary for effective metropolitan districts to have all their

:43:10. > :43:16.responsibilities over a reasonably large area to enable them to cut

:43:17. > :43:21.costs. But now, however, things have changed. It is possible mall for a

:43:22. > :43:27.District Council or a unitary authority to share offices so that a

:43:28. > :43:31.Chief Executive could be the Chief Executive for two or even three

:43:32. > :43:35.councils. It is powerfully normal in rural areas and the possibility

:43:36. > :43:41.could be made available, I am proposing, in urban areas. It would

:43:42. > :43:45.not be unduly difficult to introduce these benefits. I think it should be

:43:46. > :43:51.possible, but no compulsion, to allow such a responsibility to be

:43:52. > :43:56.devolved and a way forward, I would suggest, is a referendum. If the

:43:57. > :44:01.majority of people in an area vote yes, the change would take place,

:44:02. > :44:09.giving them direct control over their local areas. It is simple, it

:44:10. > :44:14.is easy to express, and would be something which local people could

:44:15. > :44:29.make known their preference. That, I am very much in favour of. Apologies

:44:30. > :44:35.he stopped rather aborted! I was not quite ready. -- rather abruptly. I

:44:36. > :44:40.was disposed to support some of the comments made on this side of the

:44:41. > :44:46.house. I think it is quite strange that we find the House of Lords has

:44:47. > :44:51.become the defender of the rights of young people to vote in this

:44:52. > :44:56.country! I think they are -- they're wise intervention in this bill

:44:57. > :44:59.should be maintained, because the experience in Scotland of having

:45:00. > :45:04.1617 -year-old voting is a very positive one. It is interesting that

:45:05. > :45:09.of all the opportunities in this house since my collection, it has

:45:10. > :45:12.never been the time, it has never been the place, and I ask the

:45:13. > :45:17.Minister, when is the time and place? I believe we should see is

:45:18. > :45:22.that the -- at every opportunity. It is always a good time to get people

:45:23. > :45:26.involved in politics and voting. At a local level, where local services

:45:27. > :45:29.are delivered to young people, it is a really good way to get people

:45:30. > :45:37.involved because it is relevant to them. They see their schools, the

:45:38. > :45:40.local things, the local services at the 1st time ever, and it is a good

:45:41. > :45:45.example of what local government does and they can get involved quite

:45:46. > :45:50.directly in quite a real fashion. I think it is interesting that members

:45:51. > :45:57.have mentioned the referendum because it speaks to young people in

:45:58. > :46:00.that debate that it was a very positive experience for young people

:46:01. > :46:07.and for their engagement. If you saw the debate held with young people

:46:08. > :46:10.following the Glasgow Hydro Irena, it was one of the best debates on

:46:11. > :46:18.the whole campaign, with incredibly engaged young people. -- Arena.

:46:19. > :46:21.Politicians indeed, the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Ruth

:46:22. > :46:25.Davidson, has become, and I quote from her, I am happy to hold my

:46:26. > :46:31.hands up and say I have changed my mind. I am a fully paid-up member of

:46:32. > :46:34.the votes for 16, now but I thought 1617 -year-olds were fantastic

:46:35. > :46:37.during the referendum campaign, I cannot tell you the number of

:46:38. > :46:42.hustings in public meetings I did and some of the younger members of

:46:43. > :46:46.the audience were the most informed. That should tell you why the younger

:46:47. > :46:51.people need to be engaged in this way. Just looking for some

:46:52. > :46:57.consistency with regards to the arguments. If... Would you suggest

:46:58. > :47:04.therefore that they have a right to vote, therefore we should look to

:47:05. > :47:10.reduce the age for alcohol consumption and driving? I think

:47:11. > :47:15.with regards to alcohol, perhaps the public health concerns that are

:47:16. > :47:19.there, that is entirely Democratic concerns. The member for North

:47:20. > :47:23.Norfolk also spoke about the manifestos, and if a voter were

:47:24. > :47:27.voting and 16 or 17 maybe it is an issue they should wish to campaign

:47:28. > :47:34.on. But we do not know because -- because they do not have that right.

:47:35. > :47:38.The Minister mentioned that parties who had votes at 16 in a manifesto

:47:39. > :47:42.were not particularly successful. I would have to correct him on that,

:47:43. > :47:51.the SNP had it in our manifesto and were very successful. We welcome and

:47:52. > :47:55.respect -- they welcome and respect the right and responsibilities

:47:56. > :47:58.placed upon them. If they are going to receive taxation, income tax,

:47:59. > :48:02.they should have the right to vote and that is badly correct and

:48:03. > :48:08.reasonable. I wanted to touch as well... Some of the amendments and

:48:09. > :48:15.new clauses. I am a huge supporter of single transferable vote. I was

:48:16. > :48:19.elected under that. It made a huge difference to the local authority I

:48:20. > :48:29.was a member of. Prior to the election, prior to the debate, the

:48:30. > :48:33.SNP had four out of 79 councillors. Then we got 22 candidate elected.

:48:34. > :48:38.The result of that is seen in the electable for -- the report into the

:48:39. > :48:45.event in 2010, entitled working with STV. It interviewed officers from

:48:46. > :48:51.that counsel who said Glasgow has a council again. There is actually

:48:52. > :48:55.scrutiny and the electoral reform Society's most recent work on the

:48:56. > :49:00.need for electoral reform says that one party state councils where you

:49:01. > :49:05.do not have a system such as STV, they become 1-party states, they

:49:06. > :49:09.have uncontested seats and in the worst cases there is a risk of

:49:10. > :49:14.corruption due to a lack of scrutiny and a lack of attention paid to

:49:15. > :49:18.decisions taken. My understanding is that in England there are

:49:19. > :49:34.multimember wards already. They are elected on a rolling basis.

:49:35. > :49:43.You would not necessarily change any wards, but you could bring in more

:49:44. > :49:56.democracy to those wards. What happens when there are single wards,

:49:57. > :50:01.as most of the -- them are? There are plenty of examples. In

:50:02. > :50:09.Scotland, there was a review, we looked at the different sizes and

:50:10. > :50:15.shapes of the wards, and in 2007... Constituents always have represented

:50:16. > :50:20.as they can go to with their issues, and at the very best, they

:50:21. > :50:26.can have a good team standing up for their local area, and you always

:50:27. > :50:31.have an option of someone to go to in order to be represented, and I

:50:32. > :50:40.think that is good for constituents as well. The process of putting it

:50:41. > :50:48.in this Bill, perhaps needs a bit further thought, and if the House is

:50:49. > :51:00.not owing to bring in... There is great value to it. The other point I

:51:01. > :51:09.was going to make was around local referendums. I think that is a good

:51:10. > :51:13.thing. On issues where there is a local demand, local people should be

:51:14. > :51:17.able to have a say on issues that affect them, and if it happens to be

:51:18. > :51:22.revising the way local government is set up in areas, perhaps it is too

:51:23. > :51:30.complex and they cannot see the lines of accountability with in

:51:31. > :51:36.that. The point about elected mayors, does the honourable lady

:51:37. > :51:39.believe that the great cities in Scotland should have the opportunity

:51:40. > :51:43.for a referendum to vote for a mayor in their city? I don't think it is

:51:44. > :51:48.something that people are generally calling for in Scotland. There has

:51:49. > :51:51.not been that tradition in Scotland. If people wanted to have a

:51:52. > :51:58.referendum on it, that would be fine. Lots of councils have petition

:51:59. > :52:02.processes, and if they wanted to have an elected mayor, it could be

:52:03. > :52:06.done through that process. The Scottish Parliament also has a

:52:07. > :52:12.petition process which would allow for areas that wanted to have that,

:52:13. > :52:16.to allow for that to happen. There are processes to allow for that to

:52:17. > :52:21.happen if there was the demand. With I was going to say is, there is not

:52:22. > :52:24.that tradition in Scotland of elected mayors. In Glasgow and other

:52:25. > :52:31.local authorities, we have a political head and a civic head and

:52:32. > :52:40.the local provost, so there is not really that type of tradition with

:52:41. > :52:49.mayors, and for the Glasgow deal, there was no suggestion of a mayor

:52:50. > :52:52.being imposed as part of that deal. His own party seem to think there

:52:53. > :53:00.was not a rationale for that in Scotland either. I do think that

:53:01. > :53:02.this is a good opportunity to try a number of different things which

:53:03. > :53:11.could improve local government and make it more democratic and supports

:53:12. > :53:18.the principles of these amendments. I will just contribute a few brief

:53:19. > :53:26.points to this section of the Bill. I spoke in an earlier segment of

:53:27. > :53:30.this Bill, and I am one of those who believe that we ought to move the

:53:31. > :53:39.vote to 16, but I don't think this Bill is the correct way to do it.

:53:40. > :53:44.Perhaps it is the courage of my convictions, as the honourable

:53:45. > :53:49.member has just outlined. People confuse our constituency names

:53:50. > :53:54.sometimes, and no doubt that happens to him. Close though we may be

:53:55. > :54:04.geographically, and today's debate, we share a lot of substance and

:54:05. > :54:09.values. Except this, IAC the courage of my convictions around my belief

:54:10. > :54:15.in engaging young people in politics to reside with doing the job

:54:16. > :54:20.properly and of doing it piecemeal on and therefore, I stand to speak

:54:21. > :54:24.against clauses 20 of this Bill, and I think as the Minister himself has

:54:25. > :54:29.said today, it does not do the job well to have something, merely in an

:54:30. > :54:39.amendment, it doesn't do the job well to own it that much larger

:54:40. > :54:43.debates around the various ages of majority we have in this country and

:54:44. > :54:49.it does not do the job well to fail to speak to young people as we take

:54:50. > :54:54.on this debate, because if it is about anything, it should be about

:54:55. > :54:58.them. Think you for giving way. Though we do not necessarily agree

:54:59. > :55:03.on the conclusion of where this should go, perhaps we could agree

:55:04. > :55:07.that if this step were to be taken, and it is a step that I do not

:55:08. > :55:11.necessarily look to support, but if it were to be taken, it should be

:55:12. > :55:15.taken after a proper process, in a way that would last the test of time

:55:16. > :55:22.and have real support across the House, and those affected, not by an

:55:23. > :55:26.amendment to a Bill which is about something altogether different. I

:55:27. > :55:30.think the Minister and I do agree, but I might but the question back to

:55:31. > :55:34.him, as my honourable friend also did, which is to say, perhaps we

:55:35. > :55:38.should discuss when we should have that debate. It is after all a

:55:39. > :55:41.natural follow-on from the various contributions that have been made

:55:42. > :55:46.today that we perhaps could move forward to doing that debate. I

:55:47. > :55:57.suspect the Minister will tell me that is for another Minister to

:55:58. > :56:01.debate. The honourable lady from Glasgow Central quoted the leader of

:56:02. > :56:09.the Conservatives in Scotland, and I am a big fan, as many people are,

:56:10. > :56:19.but Ruth Davidson, as it has been cited, has changed her view on the

:56:20. > :56:26.10th 16, but she comes to the -- voting at 16, but she comes to the

:56:27. > :56:32.conclusion that it is important to not do this piecemeal and to give it

:56:33. > :56:36.the respect of a full debate. What did he honourable member accept that

:56:37. > :56:42.in the absence of any other Bill or strategy or proposals in bringing

:56:43. > :56:46.about the folks at 16 or 17, this is really the best we can do in the

:56:47. > :56:52.meantime and we should support everything we can to bring it

:56:53. > :56:54.forward? I am interested in that argument, and although the real

:56:55. > :57:05.answer to that is for the Minister to give than for me to attempt, I do

:57:06. > :57:15.think we run a risk of creating eight... And I am not hugely

:57:16. > :57:20.comfortable with the inconsistency, I would far prefer as to take this

:57:21. > :57:27.debate in the round, and as I say, to do it properly. I completely

:57:28. > :57:33.agree with her that this is not the right forum for the discussion on

:57:34. > :57:37.reducing the voting age, but would she agree that if that debate ever

:57:38. > :57:40.comes forward, we have to include things like the age for alcohol,

:57:41. > :57:47.should they have executive power and things like that, so there is a

:57:48. > :57:50.consistency? Yes, I agree exactly, and the next section of my notes

:57:51. > :57:59.acknowledge the points of the Member for Carlisle about standing for

:58:00. > :58:03.office and indeed we should of course go through all the points

:58:04. > :58:09.around the age of consent for sex, marriage and joining the Armed

:58:10. > :58:11.Forces and abuse of substances and all of these are the items and that

:58:12. > :58:23.much longer list. I just include those points to make

:58:24. > :58:27.the broader debate a real one. We need to get to that, as the

:58:28. > :58:31.honourable member for Westminster said when he was in his place

:58:32. > :58:35.earlier today. We might all hope that we can do that in the next

:58:36. > :58:44.couple of years am a because it is an important topic. She cautioned

:58:45. > :58:48.against creating a patchwork of rights, and yet, of course, the

:58:49. > :58:54.current process the government is over going -- undergoing across the

:58:55. > :58:59.country, with different deals in different parts of the country, what

:59:00. > :59:07.is the danger of having the courage of her convictions and voting with

:59:08. > :59:11.us for clause retention to enable 16 and 17-year-olds to vote for the

:59:12. > :59:18.local counsellor, that is all we are asking for, what danger is involved

:59:19. > :59:23.in that? He tempts me to join him in the lobby and I shall only further

:59:24. > :59:30.trash his reputation if I do that. In all seriousness, joking to one

:59:31. > :59:34.side, I think there is a distinction to be drawn between the rights that

:59:35. > :59:39.somebody might have in different parts of the country versus public

:59:40. > :59:42.services that someone might have in different parts of the country,

:59:43. > :59:46.which I would describe as the substance of the devolution Bill, it

:59:47. > :59:51.is about how public services could be better delivered, and I wonder if

:59:52. > :59:57.he will permit me to extend this point, something that the honourable

:59:58. > :00:03.member for Nottingham North East, and that is in new clause three,

:00:04. > :00:08.which could be argued to bring an something of a patchwork, and I just

:00:09. > :00:10.draw in the distinction that while I am talking about rights and

:00:11. > :00:18.mentioning public services, the honourable members new clause three

:00:19. > :00:21.brings in another cottage where he -- category, which is methods of

:00:22. > :00:26.voting, and I would have some concern about having a patchwork, I

:00:27. > :00:36.think that is another area where there is inconsistency. Overall, I

:00:37. > :00:43.support this Bill, and the Labour front bench is asking me to give

:00:44. > :00:47.way. Does she recognise that it is in the nature of British

:00:48. > :00:52.constitutional reform at it tends to be pragmatic and incremental, and

:00:53. > :00:57.this opportunity in this Bill is a foot in the door to what she is

:00:58. > :01:01.telling the House she believes in, and in fact, this has already been

:01:02. > :01:14.done he smell, and that 16-year-old had the vote and the Scottish

:01:15. > :01:22.referendum? I do know very well. It is often done in a pragmatic way.

:01:23. > :01:25.What a regard as a medic in this instance is to have this -- what I

:01:26. > :01:29.regard to be pragmatic is paying respect to the people that we seek

:01:30. > :01:35.to serve by looking properly at their rights and opportunities, and

:01:36. > :01:40.they don't want to be seen as the champion of four votes at 16, I want

:01:41. > :01:46.to be seen as a champion for young voters. The technicality of the

:01:47. > :01:49.voting age is in my view a very important signal that we ought to be

:01:50. > :01:55.able to send to young people to say that they are valued in politics.

:01:56. > :01:59.That is the way I do politics and it is the way I would like to think

:02:00. > :02:02.everyone in this chamber approaches this crucial matter of the no credit

:02:03. > :02:07.engagement. It has not been enough for us to take such an important

:02:08. > :02:16.topic as this that crucially affects the generation of people who would

:02:17. > :02:21.indeed like to be involved in politics to not consider the full

:02:22. > :02:25.importance of what we has been talking -- have been talking about.

:02:26. > :02:33.I find that this younger generation is asking things of us. Clinical

:02:34. > :02:42.engagement has changed, -- political engagement has changed. The thing to

:02:43. > :02:46.do is to roll up your threes and power up your laptop rather than

:02:47. > :02:54.rely on the states to do things for you. That is what we believe in on

:02:55. > :03:02.this side, we believe in getting things done, we believe in local

:03:03. > :03:07.innovation and individuals being self-reliant and helping people to

:03:08. > :03:11.take those opportunities. That is why I support this devolution Bill

:03:12. > :03:19.in its entirety, because it promotes that for local areas, and what we

:03:20. > :03:22.can see in that research is a certain skepticism of the state. You

:03:23. > :03:30.will see where things that the state could do, a fair way down the list

:03:31. > :03:33.after businesses and charities who can all achieve things in society,

:03:34. > :03:38.and young people believe that, they do not look to the state alone to

:03:39. > :03:44.get things done, you can see that in some research that has been done

:03:45. > :03:49.which demonstrates the skepticism of today's younger generation towards

:03:50. > :03:54.the welfare state compared to their older generations. You are seeing

:03:55. > :03:57.the opportunity for us to embrace a new generation of voters, and it is

:03:58. > :04:02.the generation that I and the Minister belong to ourselves, and it

:04:03. > :04:05.is this generation that we need to be welcoming into politics. We have

:04:06. > :04:10.had opportunities to do that properly. We have had opportunity to

:04:11. > :04:13.change our campaigning styles to meet that challenge, to embrace

:04:14. > :04:21.those values here in this House. We have that opportunity, but most of

:04:22. > :04:25.all, let us pay our fellow young people the respect of treating their

:04:26. > :04:31.democratic rights pop really in a debate that looks at the matter

:04:32. > :04:34.fully rather than off the back of a single amendment that has come from

:04:35. > :04:38.the other place without the chance to look around the issue.

:04:39. > :04:50.Thank you. I'm surprised but delighted to follow the honourable

:04:51. > :04:53.lady, she was a very important performer in the democratic

:04:54. > :04:57.constellation, having been a Minister and given evidence to my

:04:58. > :04:59.will Select Committee in the last session for political and

:05:00. > :05:05.constitutional reform, which could have been the perfect vehicle for

:05:06. > :05:09.bringing forward the proposals like this, had the Government not

:05:10. > :05:14.abolished it. I think that tells us all we need to know. I have to say,

:05:15. > :05:18.speed of reaction by the Government speed of reaction by the Government

:05:19. > :05:23.to proposals from the House of Commons is not noticeably been a

:05:24. > :05:27.problem in my 20 or so years in the House, but maybe it might feel like

:05:28. > :05:32.there is a constant blur of democratic innovation in the House

:05:33. > :05:41.of Commons, but that side of the house, perhaps it always happens

:05:42. > :05:51.when I am not in the chamber! But if in doubt, always read the title of

:05:52. > :05:52.the bill. The city is the global -- the Cities and Local Government

:05:53. > :05:57.Devolution Bill. Not decentralisation. Not saying, here

:05:58. > :06:02.is Whitehall handing power out, it is on a string, we can pull it when

:06:03. > :06:08.we like, what we are just decentralising. Actually, power

:06:09. > :06:12.should lie in the centre, but let us experiment on a very strong piece of

:06:13. > :06:19.elastic, should the subalterns who are out in the sticks be unable to

:06:20. > :06:24.administer their own affairs. Devolution is entirely a different

:06:25. > :06:30.concept. Devolution is giving power away to a more appropriate level.

:06:31. > :06:35.And therefore, devolving power is by definition going to create

:06:36. > :06:42.difference, it is going to create best practice, it is going to create

:06:43. > :06:45.a lot of people experimenting or enervating, if people prefer that

:06:46. > :06:51.work, on how they do things to suit themselves better. In areas which it

:06:52. > :07:00.is appropriate for people in localities to do those things. And

:07:01. > :07:07.so, a patchwork or differentiation, or are lots of different levels of

:07:08. > :07:11.change, is actually the essence, the heart of devolution, in a way that

:07:12. > :07:16.decentralisation never can be. So, let us read the title of the bill

:07:17. > :07:22.and let's try and make the bill what it says on the title, which is about

:07:23. > :07:26.devolving power down to the localities, rather than having the

:07:27. > :07:32.localities as a means of administration of what the centre

:07:33. > :07:35.wants. And that is a very, very clear distinction, which all of us

:07:36. > :07:44.who want to talk about devolution should actually understand. My

:07:45. > :07:51.claws, new clause three, in essence apply that principle to a number of

:07:52. > :07:54.fields that most obviously -- but most obviously to the electoral

:07:55. > :08:00.system is that we have in this country. There is not any more than

:08:01. > :08:04.anyone electoral system that applies everywhere in the United Kingdom.

:08:05. > :08:09.There is a massive diversity and plurality of electoral systems we

:08:10. > :08:15.have -- and we have decided to do horses for courses, a sort of

:08:16. > :08:20.British constitutional evolution, and I think the last major one was

:08:21. > :08:26.around the way in which we elect people to the European Parliament

:08:27. > :08:30.then there has been change in our devolved the semis of Parliament.

:08:31. > :08:36.People are finding their way in different areas. That should be

:08:37. > :08:41.allowed to continue to change if that is what people in those areas

:08:42. > :08:45.or regions or nations wish to do. It should be a process of constant

:08:46. > :08:51.exploration. So, why on Earth can't we do that in the localities? With

:08:52. > :08:55.the consent of the people in the localities, why can't we try, if

:08:56. > :09:01.they so wish, in this case, let's say they go for the votes for 16 to

:09:02. > :09:07.17-year-olds, and the Secretary of State, given the immense power

:09:08. > :09:11.invested in him in the bill, which could not be a better person to

:09:12. > :09:18.trust using these powers, I am sure, could use his discretion to

:09:19. > :09:22.try a pilot, to try and see what happens in a particular case, what

:09:23. > :09:27.is the turnout likely to be? Let's really do a proper evidence -based

:09:28. > :09:32.analysis in a number of areas to see if young people are interested in

:09:33. > :09:35.participating in that way. That seems to me one of the benefits of

:09:36. > :09:40.devolution that you could actually try to do to stop there may be other

:09:41. > :09:46.places, I am very happy with first past the post and it may never even

:09:47. > :09:51.occurred there, but they may be pressure brought to bear, there are

:09:52. > :09:54.some people who say there are 1-party state and local government.

:09:55. > :10:01.I do not happen to be one of those people, but there -- if there is

:10:02. > :10:06.momentum to say the system could change, people might say, we could

:10:07. > :10:09.do better if we had the chance. Whatever the debate taking place,

:10:10. > :10:15.that people should try something else, let them try it. Alternative

:10:16. > :10:22.vote, let them try if they wish, STV, let them be the arbiters and

:10:23. > :10:29.judge and jury in their own area about the system they want.

:10:30. > :10:34.Similarly, about governments -- governance, if people wish to have

:10:35. > :10:37.the governance which includes a leadership for a committee structure

:10:38. > :10:42.or a Mayor, they should be allowed to try that. It is one of the

:10:43. > :10:46.weaknesses of the Government proposal, and I do not list many,

:10:47. > :10:49.but it is one of the fundamental weaknesses, that there is an

:10:50. > :10:54.imposition element, that if you want to run your own affairs, you must do

:10:55. > :10:58.it in the way that we say and have a Mayor. If you don't want the Mayor,

:10:59. > :11:06.you're not going to get the powers. I think that is unfortunate, I think

:11:07. > :11:10.it is actually counterintuitive, especially to those who believe in

:11:11. > :11:14.devolution and I do not think it has double -- don the cause any good.

:11:15. > :11:18.But if we generally, perhaps after one more bill or two more goals

:11:19. > :11:25.before 2020, get to a position where we trust local people to have the

:11:26. > :11:32.wit and the creativity to devise their own means of governance, then

:11:33. > :11:38.they should decide whether they want the Mayor or they do not. The reason

:11:39. > :11:42.only one city went for the Mayor and the last round and the rest rejected

:11:43. > :11:45.it was partly because it was effectively an imposition, it came

:11:46. > :11:48.very close on the back of a number of elections where people had

:11:49. > :11:56.expressed a political view that they should run their locality, and it

:11:57. > :12:03.was done in a very clumsy way, and you can see the fingerprints from

:12:04. > :12:10.that exercise on the 1 that is being transposed into this bill. It is

:12:11. > :12:15.unfortunate. To allow people to find the Mayor reality if they feel it is

:12:16. > :12:19.appropriate for them, allow them to test that experiment, rather than

:12:20. > :12:22.saying, yet again, you're getting devolution but only in the way that

:12:23. > :12:28.we in Whitehall say it is appropriate. I have to say, if like

:12:29. > :12:33.me, you have the opportunity to study a document about devolution,

:12:34. > :12:38.again, I don't think the Government is doing any of us who care about

:12:39. > :12:45.devolution any favours at all in the way these things are written, it is

:12:46. > :12:50.like a gathering of local officials and centralised Whitehall officials

:12:51. > :12:57.with a very large lashing of LSD, very difficult for ordinary people,

:12:58. > :13:04.let alone politicians, some of whom are intellectually challenged, to

:13:05. > :13:14.understand what is meant by much of the documentation. That may just be

:13:15. > :13:17.my own errors, but I suspect, given the size of the smile on the

:13:18. > :13:24.Minister's face on the other side, that he also realises that to an

:13:25. > :13:30.extent, officials, both at a local and national level, have

:13:31. > :13:33.depoliticised the very thing that he and the Secretary of State have done

:13:34. > :13:38.so well in bringing this bill to the House. I will give way. I hope

:13:39. > :13:42.members on this side are not intellectually challenged! Would he

:13:43. > :13:47.not agree with me that this Government has done an awful lot to

:13:48. > :13:52.further the cause of devolution, when looking back historically at

:13:53. > :13:58.the governments of your party and mine, and should be given credit for

:13:59. > :14:02.that effort? I know the honourable gentleman is an assiduous reader of

:14:03. > :14:05.my speeches. And he will see at second reading and on a number of

:14:06. > :14:09.occasions subsequently I have paid tribute to the Secretary of State

:14:10. > :14:14.for his determination in bringing devolution to the state in which we

:14:15. > :14:19.have got it at the moment. It is an extremely good foundation for my

:14:20. > :14:28.honourable friend on the front bench to build on in 2020. I am surprised,

:14:29. > :14:33.however, that we have got to this point in the debate today that no

:14:34. > :14:37.one has mentioned that we've had devolution appeals announced, I'm

:14:38. > :14:43.surprised that the Minister has not mentioned it, I help word does not

:14:44. > :14:48.get back to the Chancellor about his mission from mentioning the deals of

:14:49. > :14:54.Liverpool, the West Midlands, adding to the deals in Sheffield, the North

:14:55. > :14:57.East and Tees Valley and I hope very soon in my own area of

:14:58. > :15:04.Nottinghamshire and Derby, that is rapidly on the way. I think 38

:15:05. > :15:10.potential deals covering up to 80% of the population. I do hope,

:15:11. > :15:18.however, that the Minister will also ensure, and it seems odd for someone

:15:19. > :15:23.on this side of the House, for me to point out that there are large

:15:24. > :15:27.areas, Conservative areas, rural areas, county areas, that have been

:15:28. > :15:33.left out again. And I do think it is very important, if this is to stick,

:15:34. > :15:40.if this is to genuinely be a democratic change of the order of

:15:41. > :15:47.developing national parliaments and assemblies of the order as those in

:15:48. > :15:51.the front bench have said this morning, the change that will lead

:15:52. > :15:57.to a federal United Kingdom, if it is to be that order, I do not think

:15:58. > :16:01.we can leave friends in the rural areas out of the equation. I think

:16:02. > :16:05.him for giving way. I think it is important to find areas of

:16:06. > :16:09.agreement. -- I thank him. On the issue of devolution, the honourable

:16:10. > :16:16.member tempts me to go further than I am currently predisposed to do.

:16:17. > :16:19.And I think it is important to put on record that he is right about

:16:20. > :16:23.rural areas who do have the deal with Cornel, we are working with

:16:24. > :16:28.other areas to each deals which will include many other areas. --

:16:29. > :16:32.Cornwall. It is a process of making individual deals for individual

:16:33. > :16:36.areas, so it will be difficult and will take time but we are determined

:16:37. > :16:43.to deliver them. I genuinely wish him well in that I I am sure he has

:16:44. > :16:47.followed the debates over the last 36 hours, as closely as I have. It

:16:48. > :16:53.is very important that everyone shares in the benefits of

:16:54. > :16:57.devolution. And are enabled to make the sort of decisions that they feel

:16:58. > :17:05.are appropriate, rather than the 1 that Whitehall feel appropriate. --

:17:06. > :17:11.the ones. The Minister told me again I am pushing this a little too fast,

:17:12. > :17:17.a little bit too hard. We have had these debates going back to the

:17:18. > :17:21.1830s, where people have come up with this argument, we don't want to

:17:22. > :17:25.rush things too much. Fancy giving these working men a vote! Fancy

:17:26. > :17:31.giving women the vote! What would happen with Mac now, my goodness,

:17:32. > :17:37.this brand-new issue, no one has ever thought about it, giving 16 and

:17:38. > :17:41.17-year-olds the vote. I think we should revel in the fact that there

:17:42. > :17:44.are people in our country still desperate to use the franchise, it

:17:45. > :17:54.should be extended to them, it should be done sensibly, if I may

:17:55. > :17:58.again refer the Minister to the report, I can see a number of

:17:59. > :18:03.distinguished former members even sitting behind him that select,

:18:04. > :18:09.which came up with an array of possibilities -- that Select

:18:10. > :18:12.Committee, for extending the franchise, whether it is online

:18:13. > :18:18.voting or 16 to 17-year-old building, many other proposals that

:18:19. > :18:21.I would be ruled out of order would I would be ruled out of order would

:18:22. > :18:24.either get into. But to say sometimes, in a political career,

:18:25. > :18:29.and I look at the Minister as a young man starting out in his

:18:30. > :18:35.political career, there are moments of opportunity, and they are very

:18:36. > :18:38.rare, and he may not be the Minister doing the next devolution bill,

:18:39. > :18:47.which is sure to have and before 2020. -- which is sure to happen. He

:18:48. > :18:50.will gain massive experience. But to seize the opportunity to actually

:18:51. > :18:54.push it a little further than the officials might like, I think is

:18:55. > :18:59.something that it is a political lessons -- lesson that all others

:19:00. > :19:03.could share. It is or was a pleasure to listen to his very wise and

:19:04. > :19:05.considered words on the issues of devolution, even if we do not always

:19:06. > :19:16.reach the same conclusions. I thought there might be a glimmer

:19:17. > :19:26.of agreements between us. I'm a not come to the same conclusion. Does he

:19:27. > :19:34.perhaps agreed that a proper process should be carried out rather than an

:19:35. > :19:38.amendment, taking into account the honourable members have raised, so

:19:39. > :19:45.that any such fundamental change would be long-lasting or it to be

:19:46. > :19:50.made? I am always searching for consensus. In an ideal world, we

:19:51. > :19:58.should do this thoroughly and properly. Unfortunately, Parliament

:19:59. > :20:02.is the creature of executive power, and so occasionally, when an

:20:03. > :20:07.opportunity arises, parliamentarians of any local party should always

:20:08. > :20:12.seize the moment. Perhaps this may not be the moment, but I would say

:20:13. > :20:16.to the honourable gentleman that perhaps he should be thinking, as we

:20:17. > :20:21.all should be thinking, particularly outside of the House, of the

:20:22. > :20:26.opportunities coming up. And, there will be a further increment, it

:20:27. > :20:31.devolution will go further, and we will write devolution package is

:20:32. > :20:35.that ordinary human beings and members of Parliament can

:20:36. > :20:39.understand. We will want to share them that people want to enjoy

:20:40. > :20:45.across the whole Democratic family the fruits of devolution, which, as

:20:46. > :20:51.the Minister Lord of Neil from the other place said on the radio this

:20:52. > :20:57.morning, not only gives us Democratic change, but gives us a

:20:58. > :21:01.fantastic economic opportunities, as Manchester have so successfully led

:21:02. > :21:06.the way on, to build economic growth for our communities in a way that

:21:07. > :21:12.only our local communities can put forward. With that, I would like to

:21:13. > :21:16.make it clear to the House they will not be pushing my amendment to a

:21:17. > :21:24.vote, but I do hope that's perhaps above all the Minister and my own

:21:25. > :21:28.colleagues on the front bench will be thinking about what should be on

:21:29. > :21:32.the devolution Bill. It is a pleasure to follow my honourable

:21:33. > :21:41.friend from Nottingham North, who makes the sensible but profound

:21:42. > :21:44.point that if you devolve services and economic development, you will

:21:45. > :21:51.not have consistency across the country, and those people who, over

:21:52. > :22:02.the last 50, 6070 years have argued for consistency in other parts of

:22:03. > :22:13.local tomography, that has been a cover, because you cannot have a

:22:14. > :22:16.default system that is consistent without... It is never actually

:22:17. > :22:21.achieved because of the nature of different areas and services that

:22:22. > :22:29.are delivered in different ways. Having said that, if my honourable

:22:30. > :22:34.friend had the claws through to a vote, unusually, I would not have

:22:35. > :22:43.agreed with his or voted for it. I rarely disagree my honourable friend

:22:44. > :22:47.but I will try to explain why. I would like to make two points on

:22:48. > :22:53.clause 20 and clause three. Why can't let it go that my honourable

:22:54. > :23:01.friend on both benches have said only one city voted for an elected

:23:02. > :23:09.mayor in 2012. In actual fact, one of the two cities, the city of

:23:10. > :23:13.Salford, it was just the fact that the referendum to have an elected

:23:14. > :23:18.mayor of Salford was not one of the 11 that was forced on them, and I

:23:19. > :23:25.think there is a lesson there, that the reason that devolution to

:23:26. > :23:31.Greater Manchester is popular, and there was an opinion poll that came

:23:32. > :23:37.out this week that showed 75% support for that, it is because

:23:38. > :23:41.there is a negotiated agreement, not something that is being forced on

:23:42. > :23:47.Greater Manchester. One of the reasons that people in Salford voted

:23:48. > :23:51.for an elected mayor was that, by petition, they asked for the

:23:52. > :23:55.referendum, it was not forced on them, so it is not surprising that

:23:56. > :23:59.the other tent cities that had referendums forced on them voted

:24:00. > :24:06.no. There was no constituency they're arguing the case for the

:24:07. > :24:10.elected mayors and there was no offer made to them that there would

:24:11. > :24:17.be different powers had they been given an elected mayor, unlike this

:24:18. > :24:22.Bill. The second point that came up in the debate that I would like to

:24:23. > :24:29.refer to is the auto of a lady from Glasgow Central for the SNP who said

:24:30. > :24:44.there was no desire for devolution in Scotland. It is completely up to

:24:45. > :24:50.the SNP for elected mayor in the cities of Scotland's in the context

:24:51. > :25:09.of this devolution Bill. I would suggest to the SNP that a try it.

:25:10. > :25:15.Cities have grabbed at that's because more powers have been

:25:16. > :25:20.offered to them, and they think in essence the honourable lady's

:25:21. > :25:25.argument is the argument for Democratic centralism and nothing

:25:26. > :25:34.that is what is happening in Scotland. The honourable member may

:25:35. > :25:43.not be aware that the Scottish islands requested more powers. The

:25:44. > :25:47.issue is, we do not have powers and would like to have more powers. I

:25:48. > :25:56.think the honourable lady for that. I was making the argument that if

:25:57. > :26:02.Glasgow were offered more powers or Aberdeen or Dundee, and resources,

:26:03. > :26:08.that they would grab it as other cities have. That was the real point

:26:09. > :26:17.I was making. When it comes to clause 20, let me say, I have been

:26:18. > :26:20.and agnostic as far as the voting ages are concerned. Arbitrary lines

:26:21. > :26:32.have to be drawn somewhere, and I have never really seen the

:26:33. > :26:37.argument... How the Labour Party won the election, as part of our

:26:38. > :26:42.manifesto to reduce the voting age, I would have voted for it because it

:26:43. > :26:51.was in the manifesto. I think there are complicated arguments associated

:26:52. > :26:57.with it. It seems to sit idly with the Labour Party's commitment to a

:26:58. > :27:06.constitutional convention on changes in the Constitution and I am wary

:27:07. > :27:13.that people are bringing forward arguments to lower the voting age to

:27:14. > :27:20.alter the results of decisions, not because the argument about whether

:27:21. > :27:26.the voting age has been comprehensively one, so I will be

:27:27. > :27:32.abstaining on clause 20 if it is put to the votes when it is put to the

:27:33. > :27:39.vote, and one of the reasons I am an agnostic on this issue is because

:27:40. > :27:45.the arguments about being a direct relation between the age of people

:27:46. > :27:53.and whether they get involved in elections seems to me not to have

:27:54. > :28:00.been made and not to be based on evidence. It seems to me that people

:28:01. > :28:03.vote for a whole series of different reasons, financial, self-interest,

:28:04. > :28:09.principled arguments, how they viewed the future of society, and

:28:10. > :28:19.the older they get, the more they feel that they have and interest in

:28:20. > :28:22.society. I think the Scottish referendum was different because it

:28:23. > :28:26.was the future of Scotland being considered and people at different

:28:27. > :28:34.ages turned out in greater numbers than they had done in elections for

:28:35. > :28:40.Scottish Parliament or local elections. Rather than the voting

:28:41. > :28:45.age, I want to massively increase the voter turnout in Manchester by

:28:46. > :28:52.putting the rates up by twice the level of inflation. Believe me, that

:28:53. > :28:59.created a great deal of enthusiasm for voting, more so than any

:29:00. > :29:03.relation with the age. It also does not seem to me, although there are

:29:04. > :29:08.appealing arguments, that the arguments about paying tax is a

:29:09. > :29:15.complete argument, as the honourable gentleman over there made the case,

:29:16. > :29:20.people, very young people, pay tax in terms of the 18, and many 16 and

:29:21. > :29:31.17-year-olds don't pay income tax the cause they are in college, so

:29:32. > :29:38.does it mean to say that the qualification is just for those

:29:39. > :29:48.people who are paying tax, Simone Marley -- similarly in the way

:29:49. > :29:54.that's these people can join the Armed Forces. All I am saying is

:29:55. > :29:58.that I think there are big questions about the arguments that seem

:29:59. > :30:04.immediately appealing on lowering the voting age, and it needs a

:30:05. > :30:10.discussion about the issue of the age of franchising people, not to be

:30:11. > :30:14.placed in a Bill which is evolving power and resources to parts of this

:30:15. > :30:18.country, and not in a Bill that is about determining what this

:30:19. > :30:27.country's relationship is with the European Union. The final plane guy

:30:28. > :30:32.would make on the -- the final point I would make on a new clause three,

:30:33. > :30:36.my honourable friend is an extraordinary advocates for

:30:37. > :30:46.devolving powers and resources and makes the case for devolving the

:30:47. > :30:57.power to decide on the voting system to local governments. I am very wary

:30:58. > :31:06.about that as a devolved function. Although the argument is sometimes

:31:07. > :31:13.made, if you have a system that is proportional, the turnout will

:31:14. > :31:19.increase and people will be more enthused because it is a different

:31:20. > :31:25.voting system. The European elections, the last Labour

:31:26. > :31:29.government had to put the European elections with the local government

:31:30. > :31:34.elections because the turnout was so embarrassingly low, and that is the

:31:35. > :31:41.only national election we have on a proportional system. The real

:31:42. > :31:48.arguments about whether we have additional members, what ever system

:31:49. > :31:55.we want, there is nearly always party political advantage from the

:31:56. > :32:04.party who is proposing a different voting system. The Labour Party when

:32:05. > :32:11.it started was in favour of PR. The liberals... I will just finish this

:32:12. > :32:15.point. The liberals who were backed down to a normative level of eight

:32:16. > :32:26.members of Parliament are very strongly in favour of PR, as are

:32:27. > :32:34.Ukip. Perhaps, the exception to that point was the Labour Party in

:32:35. > :32:38.Scotland brought in STD as part of the Coalition for local government.

:32:39. > :32:54.-- STV. The Scottish Prem and tell... -- the

:32:55. > :33:02.Scottish Government failed... There is one exception to the argument

:33:03. > :33:05.that was making. In terms of local government in Scotland, I think it

:33:06. > :33:11.is fair to say that the Labour government at the time was

:33:12. > :33:16.distrustful of the Labour Party within Scotland and thought it would

:33:17. > :33:19.be healthier if the very large majority that the Labour Party had

:33:20. > :33:25.in those cities was broken up and I think that was a mistake. And the

:33:26. > :33:28.advantage point is strong in the sense of the SNP are no longer

:33:29. > :33:32.talking about proportional representation for their

:33:33. > :33:36.representatives in this place. Since half the Scottish population is

:33:37. > :33:39.represented by three members of Parliament and the other half is

:33:40. > :33:47.represented by 56, they have suddenly gone white on that, but the

:33:48. > :33:52.point I was going to make, in relation to the electoral systems

:33:53. > :33:57.being decided by local councils, it is very clear that the electoral

:33:58. > :34:00.systems may only change with the full consent of people locally

:34:01. > :34:11.rather than a deal by the political parties. I accept what my honourable

:34:12. > :34:16.friend says but he also gets the opportunity I'm at let's use an

:34:17. > :34:19.example, if the liberals unexpectedly gotten control of a

:34:20. > :34:25.council they had not been in control of the four, they could immediately

:34:26. > :34:30.move to a referendum to try and change the system, and I think that

:34:31. > :34:35.is a mistake, and I think the electoral system is better

:34:36. > :34:39.determined here and they think it is genuinely a central function.

:34:40. > :34:50.On that basis I would not have been voting for my honourable friend's

:34:51. > :34:53.Amendment. The question is that clause 20 stand part of the bill. As

:34:54. > :35:03.many as are of the opinion say, "Aye," to the contrary, "No."

:35:04. > :37:54.The question is that clause 20 stand part of the bill. As many as are of

:37:55. > :38:07.the opinion say, "Aye," to the contrary, "No." The teller for the

:38:08. > :43:08.ayes. The tellers for the noes are Simon Kirby and Sarah Newton.

:43:09. > :47:13.The ayes to the right, 188. The noes to the left, 283.

:47:14. > :47:27.The ayes to the red, 100 naked. The noes to the left, 283. The noes have

:47:28. > :47:33.it, the noes have it. -- the ayes to the right, 188. Unlock. The question

:47:34. > :47:40.is that clause 21 stand part of the bill. As many as are of the opinion

:47:41. > :47:46.say, "Aye," to the contrary, "No." I think the ayes have it, the ayes

:47:47. > :47:52.have it. The next group begins with new clause 84, with which it will be

:47:53. > :48:00.convenient to debate government amendments 62 to 66. Minister to

:48:01. > :48:07.move, Government new clause 34. Thank you very much. I beg to move

:48:08. > :48:14.new clause 34 and in doing so I was pictured Government amendments 62

:48:15. > :48:17.and 66. In the summer of 2015 budget my right honourable friend the

:48:18. > :48:21.Chancellor reaffirmed their commitment to the development of a

:48:22. > :48:22.Northern Powerhouse, a key part of our plan to deliver sustainable

:48:23. > :48:28.economic growth throughout the country. The new clause and

:48:29. > :48:33.amendments I am talking to today on transport bodies will strengthen the

:48:34. > :48:35.development of the Northern Powerhouse and potentially the

:48:36. > :48:40.Midlands engine and other areas of our country. In this ayes and the

:48:41. > :48:44.other place we are transforming Northern growth and rebalancing our

:48:45. > :48:47.country's economy. It is not to the detriment of London but consummate

:48:48. > :48:51.think its economic might and building stronger links between

:48:52. > :48:54.cities so hard working people and businesses can access markets and

:48:55. > :49:00.make the most of their skills and dynamism. One of our first

:49:01. > :49:04.challenges is to improve transport links between the great cities of

:49:05. > :49:05.the North. The Government has been very clear, we need better travel

:49:06. > :49:18.connections in the North. When travelling to London from Leeds

:49:19. > :49:25.by train, the journey takes about 2.5 hours to travel 170 miles at an

:49:26. > :49:29.average beat 76 miles per hour. If you travel from Leeds to Liverpool

:49:30. > :49:34.on a train, it can also take just around the two hours, but it is 70

:49:35. > :49:38.miles at an average speed of 35 mph. These and other examples like

:49:39. > :49:43.it throughout the country are evidence of the break in the

:49:44. > :49:48.activity and prosperity that transport can unwittingly provide.

:49:49. > :49:53.The connections between major urban areas can provide the catalyst for

:49:54. > :50:00.growth. We only have to look at examples in other regions to see the

:50:01. > :50:03.benefits. One region bounded by Amsterdam and The Hague is linked by

:50:04. > :50:16.fast and frequent rail services with attorneys of around 30-50 minutes

:50:17. > :50:20.and an extensive network. Similarly, when the region in Germany covering

:50:21. > :50:24.five large cities and ten smaller ones has a network of fast

:50:25. > :50:30.intercity, inner urban and Metro style rail services and a well used

:50:31. > :50:36.city of Audubon 's. Currently, in our country, decision-making of a

:50:37. > :50:41.transport scheme is made at a central level but the journey to

:50:42. > :50:44.greater devolution have started. Individually, cities across the

:50:45. > :50:50.country are already strong and are being given the tools through more

:50:51. > :50:55.powers, allowing areas of the type of local determination he deserved.

:50:56. > :50:59.I believe there is support on all sides of this House for further

:51:00. > :51:04.devolution and a desire to see all parts of the UK benefit from greater

:51:05. > :51:08.devolution of power. This Bill will deliver resources so that our

:51:09. > :51:12.cities, towns and counties can become their own economic

:51:13. > :51:17.powerhouses. Through devolution, ever meant investment and economic

:51:18. > :51:19.growth has been tailored directly to the individual challenges and

:51:20. > :51:32.opportunities which particular, the space. Let us not forget that much

:51:33. > :51:34.has been achieved already. Infrastructure is of fundamental

:51:35. > :51:40.importance to this country and we are arty spending ?13 billion on

:51:41. > :51:47.transport in this Parliament. The last five years, has invested

:51:48. > :51:52.heavily in RealNetworks and is tripling road spending by 2020,

:51:53. > :51:58.improving the capacities and conditions of our motorways. It can

:51:59. > :52:02.be seen also in the major benefits to come in the northern passenger

:52:03. > :52:06.rail franchise. Building on these and through our continuing work to

:52:07. > :52:11.develop northern powerhouse rail and roads, we will ring people and

:52:12. > :52:15.businesses closer together and strength in connections. -- bring

:52:16. > :52:20.people. Excellent news that there will be more road and rail capacity

:52:21. > :52:25.in the northern cities as it is much needed. It is the rail capacity, is

:52:26. > :52:31.it able to be provided on the existing track? I think my

:52:32. > :52:39.honourable friend for the intervention. -- thanks. The way we

:52:40. > :52:42.can boost capacity is both through new lines and working with the

:52:43. > :52:47.existing network alongside the electrification and the billing, the

:52:48. > :52:49.combination of all of these things in conjunction with the combination

:52:50. > :52:57.of all of these things in conjunction with new need. Our real

:52:58. > :53:00.industry is a huge excess. It has gone from carrying 750 million

:53:01. > :53:06.passenger journeys per year 20 years ago to 1.65 billion now. The

:53:07. > :53:17.industry is facing the challenge of how to deliver capacity. I would

:53:18. > :53:28.like to thank the Minister for giving way, and I welcome the

:53:29. > :53:31.unpopular the electrification of the trans-Pennines franchise. Next

:53:32. > :53:37.month, it will mean the end to the dreaded pace of trains across the

:53:38. > :53:42.north. My honourable friend is a vigorous campaigner for rail I'm a

:53:43. > :53:49.especially in his constituency. I am happy to confirm that we are

:53:50. > :53:58.expecting to announce the new franchises before Christmas. The

:53:59. > :54:04.Minister is talking about the importance of trans-Pennines links,

:54:05. > :54:11.which are the awful. They have been described as a matter of national

:54:12. > :54:16.concern. There are 12 ages hear about it so it must be important. --

:54:17. > :54:30.12 pages. How is this going to help us deliver HS three in a way that

:54:31. > :54:38.Ford made the HS2? -- in a way that coordinates with HS2? I would

:54:39. > :54:43.caution the honourable gentleman that the length of new clauses

:54:44. > :54:48.amendments is not related necessarily to the importance, but I

:54:49. > :54:52.think we can say that what a subnational transport body will do

:54:53. > :54:55.is provide a link between central government and local government to

:54:56. > :54:59.ensure that we have a united voice that comes forward to represent the

:55:00. > :55:05.transport requirements of an area, and so we are aware likely to see

:55:06. > :55:09.solutions tailored to local needs. I agree with his basic point that

:55:10. > :55:18.connections across the Pennines, specially across Sheffield and

:55:19. > :55:22.Manchester are not good enough. What role is this body going to have in

:55:23. > :55:27.looking at a tunnel? Would he actually do a review about if a

:55:28. > :55:31.tunnel was necessary for the Pennines, would he take on

:55:32. > :55:37.commission of the work Mister Mike how does it work -- commission of

:55:38. > :55:50.the work? What is its role with the two? The -- with HS2? I will be

:55:51. > :55:59.coming onto that point. Explain to me whether in fact the right

:56:00. > :56:07.honourable gentleman suggested that these are trains around ways, do

:56:08. > :56:11.they include ferries? -- trains and railways. I am not the Minister for

:56:12. > :56:15.maritime, I am not in the best position to comment on that, but I

:56:16. > :56:21.am aware that we are seeing huge growth in all of our transport

:56:22. > :56:26.modes, and the capacity that is being injected into our ports is

:56:27. > :56:32.extremely welcome. In terms of what is happening to our ferries, I will

:56:33. > :56:41.have to get back to him on that. Our commitments to improving the road

:56:42. > :56:47.network includes improving sections of roads in the North East and

:56:48. > :56:53.improving access to many of our ports, including the tort of

:56:54. > :57:01.Liverpool. I have seen -- the ports of Liverpool. I have seen upgrades

:57:02. > :57:06.that these improvements can make. All over the North, there are

:57:07. > :57:11.schemes totalling ?3 billion in the pipeline. We are already working

:57:12. > :57:17.with transport for the North on plans for East - West links, better

:57:18. > :57:22.connecting the region so that northern towns and cities can create

:57:23. > :57:26.a single economy. This includes work to identify the next generation of

:57:27. > :57:32.strategic road investments, building on the transformative schemes,

:57:33. > :57:40.including a new road tunnel into the Peak district and upgrades to other

:57:41. > :57:44.key routes. Highway England is starting to develop its next

:57:45. > :57:51.programme of strategies which will inform investment decisions for the

:57:52. > :57:56.period starting in 2020. Options are being explored to move towards a 30

:57:57. > :58:01.minute journey time between Manchester and Leeds and divide

:58:02. > :58:05.speed and capacity improvements between Liverpool and Manchester and

:58:06. > :58:13.between Leeds and Newcastle. Also, bring for it smart to getting --

:58:14. > :58:21.also, bring forward smart ticketing similar to the Oyster system. These

:58:22. > :58:28.are examples of the good work being taken. By working across the country

:58:29. > :58:33.with different organisations, we are making sure that growth is being

:58:34. > :58:37.supported in each area's economy, and throughout the country as a

:58:38. > :58:42.whole. A joint internal report providing an update on progress will

:58:43. > :58:49.be published in the humming weeks. David Brown, formerly the CEO of

:58:50. > :58:56.Mercy travel, has been appointed the CEO of transport for the North and

:58:57. > :58:59.is expected to... The North needs a body of permanence and solidity

:59:00. > :59:06.rather than the current arrangements. That is why my right

:59:07. > :59:09.honourable friend the Chancellor announced plans to establish

:59:10. > :59:16.transport for the North as a statutory body with statutory

:59:17. > :59:21.duties, putting it at a statutory footing is going to balance the

:59:22. > :59:25.economy because it gives them a clear role in developing a programme

:59:26. > :59:30.for the North and it will provide transport for the North with the

:59:31. > :59:39.ability to drive forward activity and give staff confidence in it as

:59:40. > :59:43.an organisation. A statutory body thinking long-term sends a clear

:59:44. > :59:47.message about the determination of this government to join up transport

:59:48. > :59:53.planning to help drive economic growth. Creating the statutory body

:59:54. > :59:57.and others like it means legislation is vital if we want them to be

:59:58. > :00:01.thinking about how to use transport to grow their economies not just now

:00:02. > :00:12.but 40 or 50 years into the future. This statutory status is the ability

:00:13. > :00:16.needed to give duty -- do the work that is needed. That is why the

:00:17. > :00:18.government has moved quickly to develop legislation and allow

:00:19. > :00:24.transport for the North what it needs to deliver on ambitious

:00:25. > :00:28.programmes and to ensure that it is ready to look at the improvement not

:00:29. > :00:32.just now but in the next Parliament and beyond. We are aiming to

:00:33. > :00:35.introduce the secondary legislation at the earliest opportunity so that

:00:36. > :00:41.it is established on a statutory footing no later than 2017. The new

:00:42. > :00:44.clause and amendments will not just to fill our commitments, it will

:00:45. > :00:55.help develop the northern powerhouse and be a step change on how policy

:00:56. > :01:01.is made in England. It will help to boost growth and develop in areas

:01:02. > :01:07.and allow similar bodies to evolve with the potential to assume more

:01:08. > :01:11.1's abilities over time, but this clause goes further than just the

:01:12. > :01:15.northern powerhouse. It provides a way to create organisations similar

:01:16. > :01:20.to transport for the north across the whole of England except London

:01:21. > :01:25.at the request of local areas. The newly strengthened Midlands connect

:01:26. > :01:29.partnership brings together 26 local authorities and 11 local enterprise

:01:30. > :01:32.partnerships, working with national agencies and the government to drive

:01:33. > :01:40.forward improved transport links across the Midlands to power the

:01:41. > :01:47.Midlands engine. This could boost the economy by more than ?1 billion

:01:48. > :01:53.per year and say businesses nearly half ?1 billion in cost every year.

:01:54. > :01:58.This government has put forward money to help the Midlands set up

:01:59. > :02:02.credible transport prior to the fore the region that will help build the

:02:03. > :02:10.Midlands engine for the great this country needs. What he is saying

:02:11. > :02:15.makes sense in terms of transport being used as an economic growth

:02:16. > :02:18.driver. Can he confirm that these announcements he is making today

:02:19. > :02:26.will in no way undermine previous announcements with regards Sue the

:02:27. > :02:41.motorway which brushes my constituency, and is there any

:02:42. > :02:53.updates with regards to dueling? That is not part of this Bill, the

:02:54. > :02:57.A303, but there are critical schemes being implemented between now and

:02:58. > :03:01.2021, and I can tell my friends that it is on track and we are about

:03:02. > :03:08.creating a much more resilient road access into the Southwest. Once this

:03:09. > :03:15.legislation is passed, the Midlands connect partnership would be able to

:03:16. > :03:21.move forward in the process to become and STB. This will give

:03:22. > :03:28.localities a greater say because local people know better, about how

:03:29. > :03:34.growth can be maximised in their area. Let me now outline the detail

:03:35. > :03:38.about the creation of these transport bodies. This new clause is

:03:39. > :03:44.set out the basic powers and responsibilities of every STB. Age

:03:45. > :03:53.will be for local areas to come to the Secretary of State with a

:03:54. > :04:03.proposal to form a STB. There will be a period of consultation that

:04:04. > :04:10.will need to be completed. It seems to me that the clause about General

:04:11. > :04:20.Powers is drawn incredibly widely. Can the Minister in plain English

:04:21. > :04:25.tell us exactly what a STB can and cannot do? It is not clear to me

:04:26. > :04:29.whether one of these bodies could turn itself into a Housing Authority

:04:30. > :04:34.or an educational authority, such is the width of the definition.

:04:35. > :04:45.These bodies are to create that link between Whitehall and Westminster

:04:46. > :04:47.and local councils, local authorities and constituent members

:04:48. > :04:53.to develop transport plans for their areas, to come together to tackle

:04:54. > :04:56.the issues which are currently decided within this area or

:04:57. > :05:03.Whitehall, not from local councils, but it is the areas such as the

:05:04. > :05:09.RealNetworks or issues which cross the areas of geography, could be

:05:10. > :05:13.something like a smart ticketing system, if it's not about broadening

:05:14. > :05:16.the responsibility is to take powers away from other areas but taking

:05:17. > :05:25.those much more accountable and those much more accountable and

:05:26. > :05:30.decided upon locally. On that very issue, can he give us more detail on

:05:31. > :05:35.how the Secretary of State for Transport's powers to improve and

:05:36. > :05:42.look after the national road network is affected by these powers for

:05:43. > :05:46.regional policies on roads, presumably the Secretary of State is

:05:47. > :05:49.still in charge of the national network? The Secretary of State

:05:50. > :05:55.would still be in charge of the National Matt Wrack, and still be

:05:56. > :05:58.the final decision maker. -- the national transport network. At

:05:59. > :06:01.first, these bodies will provide advice to the Secretary of State on

:06:02. > :06:06.strategic transport priorities for their particular area to help

:06:07. > :06:11.promote economic development. Over time the STBs will be able to advise

:06:12. > :06:14.on how they can develop their role and take a more responsible at these

:06:15. > :06:17.four inch -- improving transport planning or make provision for other

:06:18. > :06:20.enhancements to economic development. The Secretary of State

:06:21. > :06:34.is not made redundant by these developments. I'm pleased to hear

:06:35. > :06:40.it! I am still not sure what will these bodies plays, is a just an

:06:41. > :06:43.advisory body, is just an advisory body, of State make decisions

:06:44. > :06:47.decisions? How will the body related to HS2 and HS three? Will it link

:06:48. > :06:53.those bodies together without any oversight at all in those

:06:54. > :06:58.development is? Their responsibilities will certainly

:06:59. > :07:03.start by developing plans for their area, as the honourable gentleman

:07:04. > :07:07.will have seen with the transport for the North plan which has already

:07:08. > :07:13.been published last year. As the bodies develop, I expect them to

:07:14. > :07:19.work with other bodies. There is already an understanding signed by

:07:20. > :07:22.transport for the highways England so they can inform each other's

:07:23. > :07:26.plans. That is how we expect this to be working, decisions taken away

:07:27. > :07:32.from here to a more local basis, then collaboration to produce the

:07:33. > :07:35.right plans for their areas. Subject to the Secretary of State's

:07:36. > :07:41.agreement, affirmative secondary legislation will designate the area

:07:42. > :07:44.as a STB and consistent with enabling legislation there will be

:07:45. > :07:48.no one size fits all approach. The governments for the STB will not be

:07:49. > :07:52.standardised and the detail for each will be set out in secondary

:07:53. > :07:55.legislation. Combined authorities and local transport authorities will