07/01/2016

:00:08. > :00:14.Good morning and welcome to BBC Parliament's live coverage of the

:00:15. > :00:19.Commons. The Lords are in recess but the MPs are here and in an hour's

:00:20. > :00:22.time, Leader of the Commons Chris Grayling, will set out the timetable

:00:23. > :00:26.for what will becoming up in Parliament in the next couple of

:00:27. > :00:31.weeks and take questions from MPs. Two debates after that chosen by

:00:32. > :00:35.backbenchers, the first on the effect on women of the equalisation

:00:36. > :00:41.of the state pension age. The second is on children in care. The date

:00:42. > :00:46.ends with a debate on primary school admission criteria. Join me for a

:00:47. > :00:51.round-up of the day at Westminster at 11pm tonight. First, questions to

:00:52. > :00:55.the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Amber Rudd, and

:00:56. > :01:00.her ministerial team. First question today from, making, concerning the

:01:01. > :01:14.EU's renewable heat targets. Questions to the Secretary of State

:01:15. > :01:22.for Energy and Climate Change. Question number two, Mr Speaker. A

:01:23. > :01:27.reformed domestic supply obligation from 2017 which will run for five

:01:28. > :01:32.years will upgrade the energy efficiency of over 200,000 homes per

:01:33. > :01:36.year, tackling the root cause of fuel poverty. The extension to the

:01:37. > :01:41.warm homes discount in 2021, at current levels of ?300 million per

:01:42. > :01:46.annum, would also help vulnerable households with energy bills. We

:01:47. > :01:50.intend to focus the efforts through eco-and the warm home discount more

:01:51. > :01:55.effectively and we will be consulting on the future approach in

:01:56. > :02:02.the spring. I thank the Minister for her answer. Fuel poverty is a sign

:02:03. > :02:08.of inequality. New research by the National charity has found that one

:02:09. > :02:12.in two low-income households are struggling to afford energy costs

:02:13. > :02:16.despite being in work. Many households rely on in work social

:02:17. > :02:20.assistance. Can I ask the Secretary of State if she or her Cabinet

:02:21. > :02:24.colleagues have made an assessment of the effect of welfare reform on

:02:25. > :02:31.low-income households judged to be in fuel poverty? We do in fact, in

:02:32. > :02:36.my department, work closely with the Department for Work and Pensions to

:02:37. > :02:42.ensure the support we give goes to the most honourable. Energy costs

:02:43. > :02:50.are always at the centre of our minds in this government. -- most

:02:51. > :02:55.vulnerable. When Hastings, Motherwell and the rest of the

:02:56. > :03:00.United Kingdom votes to leave the European Union in the referendum, we

:03:01. > :03:04.hope to abolish the 5% VAT on domestic fuel bills, which will

:03:05. > :03:10.really help those suffering from fuel poverty. Is that something you

:03:11. > :03:13.would welcome? The honourable gentleman will be aware that this

:03:14. > :03:18.government is focused always on making sure that the bills are kept

:03:19. > :03:22.down for householders in all constituencies. I would tactfully

:03:23. > :03:30.suggest that the Chancellor might have something to say about reducing

:03:31. > :03:32.VAT income on such a service. Evidence has suggested that

:03:33. > :03:36.disproportionately raw raw communities are affected or

:03:37. > :03:41.adversely by fuel poverty. One way of combating this is with the

:03:42. > :03:45.development of domestic energy syndicates, collective purchasing,

:03:46. > :03:49.if you will. What proactively should be department can do and should be

:03:50. > :03:55.doing to support such initiatives? The honourable gentleman is right

:03:56. > :03:59.and we are ensuring there is a focus on oral areas which often have the

:04:00. > :04:03.largest problem with fuel poverty. My partner works closely with

:04:04. > :04:12.various community energy schemes to make sure we assist them and we will

:04:13. > :04:20.continue to do so. David" top cat" Davies. LAUGHTER

:04:21. > :04:26.Fine by me, Mr Speaker. Would the honourable lady agree with me that

:04:27. > :04:31.renewable energies are two to three times more expensive than fossil

:04:32. > :04:37.fuels, and therefore the more renewables we use, the more fuel

:04:38. > :04:40.poverty we will create. The question should be intelligible to people

:04:41. > :04:48.beyond it. The explanation is that the middle initials are TC. My

:04:49. > :04:55.apologies. I don't share that view, I think energy supplies should be a

:04:56. > :04:59.mix and that means a combination of fossil fuels and renewable energy,

:05:00. > :05:03.and investing in renewable energy is an essential part of energy security

:05:04. > :05:12.as well as reducing carbon emissions and meeting targets.

:05:13. > :05:20.With permission, I will answer this question, question 18 together. We

:05:21. > :05:23.are currently considering the indications of the Paris outcome

:05:24. > :05:30.domestically and with EU partners. The 2015 target of at least 80%

:05:31. > :05:35.reduction from the 1990 baseline is already in statute and we are set on

:05:36. > :05:40.meeting it. We look forward to meeting the carbon targets later

:05:41. > :05:43.this year. The floods over the last few weeks are a reminder of the

:05:44. > :05:47.effects of climate change. As we have known for a while, these

:05:48. > :05:53.extreme weather events are here to stay. Given the government claims

:05:54. > :05:59.for the UK ambition at the Paris climate change talks, why were they

:06:00. > :06:04.at the same time undermining policies? I don't accept we are

:06:05. > :06:09.undermining those policies. What we are trying to do is get the right

:06:10. > :06:13.balance to support policies, support renewable energy, but also look

:06:14. > :06:16.after the bill payer and make sure not too much is added to their

:06:17. > :06:21.bills. I would remind the honourable lady that the UK is responsible for

:06:22. > :06:26.1% of the world's emissions. The success of Paris is that we deal

:06:27. > :06:32.with nearly 100% of the world's emissions, and that is where we will

:06:33. > :06:36.see the real difference in change. I hope the Secretary of State will

:06:37. > :06:40.agree that delivering the Paris climate agreement requires a cross

:06:41. > :06:44.departmental approach. If that is the case, can she explain why there

:06:45. > :06:48.appears to be no mention of climate change in the remit of the national

:06:49. > :06:54.infrastructure commission. Can she urged colleagues to remedy that, and

:06:55. > :06:55.can she say the rapid need for deep carbonisation will be a

:06:56. > :07:01.non-negotiable criteria for every single one of its projects. I thank

:07:02. > :07:05.the honourable lady for bringing up the national infrastructure

:07:06. > :07:10.commission. I had a preliminary meeting with the head of it, and we

:07:11. > :07:13.will shortly consult on which projects to prioritise. I can say

:07:14. > :07:17.the projects they have already said they will look at in our sector,

:07:18. > :07:25.which is interconnected as, systems operations, will be important for

:07:26. > :07:29.delivering on the less carbon future, and it will play an

:07:30. > :07:34.important role in getting cross-party consensus on getting the

:07:35. > :07:39.investment we need going forward. The secretary of state will be aware

:07:40. > :07:44.that the legally binding UK commitment is about 30 or 40% faster

:07:45. > :07:48.than that signed up by the EU in Paris. Some countries like Austria

:07:49. > :07:54.have increased emissions by about 20% since 1990. What discussions

:07:55. > :07:56.that she planned to have with her colleagues in Europe regarding

:07:57. > :08:02.getting their process up to the same level as the UK? You raise an

:08:03. > :08:08.interesting point. The fact is that the UK is leading in this area. Not

:08:09. > :08:13.only in terms of the commitment to the Climate Change Act, but also the

:08:14. > :08:17.structure of the commitment of fewer carbon emissions. The transparency

:08:18. > :08:20.of the regime and the five-year review. I will talk to colleagues in

:08:21. > :08:25.Europe to make sure they also step up and participate in the important

:08:26. > :08:31.sharing decisions taking place this year. The Secretary of State's words

:08:32. > :08:37.are one thing, but credibility with the public is another. My

:08:38. > :08:40.constituents are worried about jobs and renewables and our real

:08:41. > :08:45.commitment as a country to the deal we made in Paris. Will the Secretary

:08:46. > :08:49.of State be absolutely clear, is she going to do any more to protect

:08:50. > :08:54.worked in the renewables sector that affects my constituents? I know the

:08:55. > :08:58.honourable lady will be concerned about offshore wind, so close to her

:08:59. > :09:10.constituency. I hope she will share with me and welcome that Dong energy

:09:11. > :09:14.wants to invest ?6 million by 2020, which will be important for offshore

:09:15. > :09:21.element. Having signed up to the Paris agreement and with the UK

:09:22. > :09:25.agreements on this basis, we will see more investment and her

:09:26. > :09:29.constituents will benefit as well. Can I ask the Secretary of State, if

:09:30. > :09:33.Paris happened one year ago, would you still make the same

:09:34. > :09:37.announcements you have made in the last six months, adversely affecting

:09:38. > :09:42.onshore wind and solar, impacting badly on jobs and investor

:09:43. > :09:46.confidence. I don't accept the honourable member's interpretation

:09:47. > :09:49.of the announcements I have made. Those announcements have set out a

:09:50. > :09:52.clear path in getting a balance between making sure we continue to

:09:53. > :09:57.support renewable energy and getting the investment we need and also

:09:58. > :10:01.looking after people's bills. Paris was a triumph, let's recognise the

:10:02. > :10:05.fact it starts to bring other countries up to the high standards

:10:06. > :10:17.that the UK has placed on it and we encourage further investment. The

:10:18. > :10:21.decision to pull ?1 billion. The Prime Minister said we have to make

:10:22. > :10:24.decisions about technology that works and technology not working.

:10:25. > :10:29.How was that assessment made given the competition had not yet been

:10:30. > :10:34.completed? We don't rule out carbon capture and storage in the future.

:10:35. > :10:40.This government made substantial investments through the entrepreneur

:10:41. > :10:43.fund through early starts. We have industrialised carbon capture and

:10:44. > :10:47.storage operating and testing in Teesside. The decision was made not

:10:48. > :10:51.to have a ?1 billion investment, and it was a difficult decision made in

:10:52. > :10:54.a difficult spending round, but we recognised carbon capture and

:10:55. > :10:58.storage will have an important future in a low-carbon economy. The

:10:59. > :11:01.Prime Minister said it wasn't working, but the Secretary of State

:11:02. > :11:08.says it will work. One of them is clearly wrong, Mr Speaker. In his

:11:09. > :11:10.list of technology that was working, the Prime Minister included

:11:11. > :11:14.small-scale nuclear reactors. Can I ask the Secretary of State where

:11:15. > :11:19.this technology is working, and whether it is working as the Prime

:11:20. > :11:23.Minister would claim, why does it require ?250 million of taxpayer

:11:24. > :11:27.money? I can bring together some of the questions by highlighting the

:11:28. > :11:31.investment we are making in innovation. Innovation is an area

:11:32. > :11:36.where is we think we can see great steps forward in renewable energy

:11:37. > :11:41.and technology that will help to develop important new technologies

:11:42. > :11:44.to renewable energy. For instance, at Paris different countries came

:11:45. > :11:48.together to double investment in this area and I believe carbon

:11:49. > :11:49.capture and storage and small modular reactors will benefit from

:11:50. > :12:06.that investment going forward. This has told us further away, now

:12:07. > :12:12.we are on falls short of it by some 10% or 187 million tonnes, it is

:12:13. > :12:17.also predicted we will miss out 2020 renewal target. Could she explained

:12:18. > :12:21.precisely what steps you will be taking in the remainder of this

:12:22. > :12:29.Parliament to make good on the Prime Minister's. The UK is leading the

:12:30. > :12:35.way in order to cut emissions? I don't accept his depressing

:12:36. > :12:40.interpretation of our progress towards our targets. Our green new

:12:41. > :12:45.Bulls targets are difficult to make, but I can point out we have exceeded

:12:46. > :12:52.the interim target. We know we need to make more progress to do so,

:12:53. > :12:55.which is why I working across departments to make sure actions

:12:56. > :13:00.taken on heat and transport. In terms of the fourth carbon budget,

:13:01. > :13:03.it was recognised in 2011 that there was a problem with it and it is

:13:04. > :13:08.about making sure now that we put in place policies necessary to meet it.

:13:09. > :13:17.But being no doubt, we remain committed to doing that. The

:13:18. > :13:24.honourable member will be aware that the cost of UK reaction to reduce

:13:25. > :13:27.emissions is already committed. The Paris agreement will help ensure

:13:28. > :13:36.that all countries acting, helping to make sure climate change

:13:37. > :13:43.effectively addressed. Greater opportunities for UK business in low

:13:44. > :13:47.carbon transformation. Thank you for the answer, but would she accept

:13:48. > :13:53.that the estimates suggesting the UK is on track predate the cuts to the

:13:54. > :13:57.budget under allergic date: meaning that meeting the 2 degrees target

:13:58. > :14:05.would require further support from the government, particularly for low

:14:06. > :14:09.carbon generation. I do accept that this government needs to put in

:14:10. > :14:14.place more policies in order to make sure we beat our carbon budgets,

:14:15. > :14:20.which we have just been referring to. I would also point out how it

:14:21. > :14:24.the Palace climate change agreement is not as ambitious as the ambition

:14:25. > :14:27.that we already have in place through the climate change act,

:14:28. > :14:33.which is legally binding and is delivered through our carbon

:14:34. > :14:36.budgets. She rightly says the Palace climate agreement is not as

:14:37. > :14:43.ambitious as the climate change bill we have. National action plans and

:14:44. > :14:49.Palace commit the world's 22.7 degrees of warming. Bush outlined

:14:50. > :14:57.what or conversation she has had with her counterparts in Europe

:14:58. > :15:02.before the next uptake in 2018? She raises a very important point, the

:15:03. > :15:05.current proposals only achieve a reduction of 2.7 degrees and we

:15:06. > :15:09.would be ambitious to make sure we reached not only to degrees but

:15:10. > :15:13.would like to see it go further. There will be conversations this

:15:14. > :15:19.year to make sure we meet their EU renewables targets. We have

:15:20. > :15:24.discussions ahead of us, but the triumph of the Paris agreement is

:15:25. > :15:28.that it is not just the UK, but the whole of the world, where the

:15:29. > :15:37.largest emitters like China and India, are also participating.

:15:38. > :15:43.Number seven. With permission, Alain answer this question with number 13.

:15:44. > :15:47.My honourable friends will be aware that the agreement reached in Paris

:15:48. > :15:55.in December was a historic step forward. Almost 200 countries

:15:56. > :15:58.committed to climate action, there will now be follow-up work in the UN

:15:59. > :16:04.to agree the detailed rules and prepare for the five-year reviews.

:16:05. > :16:08.Does she agree that the deal agreed in Paris actually sees the world is

:16:09. > :16:14.signing up for the approach adopted by the UK in tackling climate change

:16:15. > :16:20.is in marked and she confident her approach means we will meet the

:16:21. > :16:24.goals agreed in Paris? He's absolutely right. The UK can take

:16:25. > :16:27.pride in the structure that was put together in Paris, because it mimics

:16:28. > :16:31.in some way the climate change act we have put in place so many years

:16:32. > :16:36.ago. The five-year review, the transparency, we need to combat all

:16:37. > :16:39.the time with an improved offer, it's absolutely the right way to go

:16:40. > :16:44.and I'm confident we'll be able to deliver on that. I'm excited about

:16:45. > :16:49.talking further to my international partners to make sure we have the

:16:50. > :16:56.right system to deliver it. Does she agree that making sure all countries

:16:57. > :16:59.who have signed up to the agreement submit regular and full updates and

:17:00. > :17:05.that data on progress is crucial, so we can see which countries are

:17:06. > :17:12.actually sticking to the agreement? He raises a very important point.

:17:13. > :17:16.Transparency in these reviews is absolutely essential and it is

:17:17. > :17:20.something that the UK for very hard for during the Paris negotiations,

:17:21. > :17:24.to make sure that when other countries come back with their

:17:25. > :17:29.five-year reviews, they have actually made it clear, so we can be

:17:30. > :17:33.certain that carbon emissions are being reduced. New figures from this

:17:34. > :17:46.department show that renewables are the biggest source of carbon

:17:47. > :17:49.reduction. Will she sure her department's own commitment to this

:17:50. > :17:55.vital sector by now accepting the case for the inclusion of projects

:17:56. > :17:58.in the period of renewables obligation, which have attracted

:17:59. > :18:06.significant investment and achieved all the technical requirements to

:18:07. > :18:16.meet the cut-off date of June 2015, including the farm in my

:18:17. > :18:22.constituency. The renewable industry, offshore wind and onshore

:18:23. > :18:26.is wind are great success story. It is a great opportunity for export

:18:27. > :18:29.for business and am happy to say a number of ministers spoke to me

:18:30. > :18:35.about this in Paris and I think there will be great opportunities.

:18:36. > :18:40.As regards individual wind Farms, I must ask her to write me separately,

:18:41. > :18:46.so a look at those. But I remind her that on the side of the house we are

:18:47. > :18:57.committed to making sure we deliver on our carbon targets while keeping

:18:58. > :19:00.the bills down. Number eight. Firstly, I'm delighted to see him

:19:01. > :19:20.fully recovered and back in his place. We support AD and wind, with

:19:21. > :19:25.full support from the government. These technologies can make a

:19:26. > :19:30.valuable contribution to our decarbonisation targets and we will

:19:31. > :19:43.continue to support them. Thank you. I recently met with residents at my

:19:44. > :19:50.surgery to discuss AD and biogas. Does she agree with me that compared

:19:51. > :19:52.to wind solo, biogas has anything since delivering consistent and

:19:53. > :19:59.reliable amounts of energy into the network? I do absolutely agree,

:20:00. > :20:04.there are real benefits for the UK in having a wide range of renewable

:20:05. > :20:07.energy sources, but he's quite right to point out that as the sector

:20:08. > :20:14.develops in the UK, biogas technologies could bring additional

:20:15. > :20:24.benefits, Inc including injecting into the gas grid and transporting.

:20:25. > :20:28.In her letter to other departments on the 29th of October, the

:20:29. > :20:33.Secretary of State, who I congratulate on her letter of

:20:34. > :20:37.stressing the importance of reaching renewable targets to recover to

:20:38. > :20:42.departments, she indicated that the highest potential for additional

:20:43. > :20:46.renewable heat is from bio methane injection into the grid, but you'll

:20:47. > :20:50.is said we would face a shortfall against part of that target related

:20:51. > :21:01.to the heat sector, even if support for her agreed measures was agreed

:21:02. > :21:05.in the spending review. Now that she does have the reduced amount of

:21:06. > :21:11.money for the renewables up to 2020, does she consider that amount is

:21:12. > :21:16.going to enable us to reach our heat targets by 2020? And if not, what

:21:17. > :21:20.new proposals will she be bringing forward to make sure that this

:21:21. > :21:27.investment in the sector that can enable us to reach that target? He

:21:28. > :21:32.is right to point out that we had a good settlement in the comprehensive

:21:33. > :21:37.spending review. We were very pleased with the commitment in this

:21:38. > :21:41.pension review to enhancing increasing renewable heat

:21:42. > :21:46.insensitive, and we're making good progress towards that. He will

:21:47. > :21:51.realise the fourth carbon budget is for a 23 to 27 and he wouldn't

:21:52. > :21:56.expect us to meet it today. Putting plans in place and working towards

:21:57. > :22:01.that progress as we speak, and we'll be continuing to set out plans

:22:02. > :22:05.choosing this year. Despite more effective use of packaging, better

:22:06. > :22:09.date labelling and programmes by supermarkets to distribute unsold

:22:10. > :22:13.food, we still generate substantial quantities of food waste. Does she

:22:14. > :22:18.agree that using this resource to generate electricity is better than

:22:19. > :22:22.sending it to landfill? I completely agree with them, and recently, I

:22:23. > :22:25.went to see a proposed new project in my own county of

:22:26. > :22:30.Northamptonshire, which is looking to use landfill to create a

:22:31. > :22:33.renewable heat scheme. There are contrasting the ideas coming

:22:34. > :22:37.forward, and I admire officials was very keen to hear about them and

:22:38. > :22:45.support them where we can. Number nine, please. And I commend my

:22:46. > :22:47.honourable friend for the first not commitment he has shown to

:22:48. > :22:53.researching best practice in this area. The government is committed to

:22:54. > :22:58.protecting our most valuable spaces from server strolling of wells for

:22:59. > :23:05.fracking. On the 4th of November, we set out how we plan to do this and

:23:06. > :23:11.will issue a response to our industry consultation closed on

:23:12. > :23:15.December 16 as soon as possible. I very much welcome the minister's

:23:16. > :23:20.comments. The task force Rush Elgar first called for a single regulator

:23:21. > :23:25.and increased levels of individual monitoring. But the ministers agree

:23:26. > :23:27.this would improve public confidence and provide further protection,

:23:28. > :23:35.particularly for a more sensitive areas? The task force is 2015 report

:23:36. > :23:40.says that the regulatory regime is currently fit for purpose, but my

:23:41. > :23:44.honourable friend rightly points out their proposal that if a shield gas

:23:45. > :23:48.industry does develop, the government should consider creating

:23:49. > :23:52.a bespoke regulator and I can is your him we will keep the regulatory

:23:53. > :23:57.regime under review to make sure it remains fit for purpose. This second

:23:58. > :24:00.point about independent monitoring, I entirely agree with them and that

:24:01. > :24:07.is why we are already grant funding baseline monitoring in

:24:08. > :24:11.Northamptonshire and Lincolnshire. Does the Minister accept that is

:24:12. > :24:18.widespread opposition to fracking in all parts of Britain? Will she

:24:19. > :24:22.congratulate, as I have done, the residents in Bolsover for refusing

:24:23. > :24:28.to allow drilling operation and getting it stopped, not all made by

:24:29. > :24:37.the local authority, but by her own inspectorates? I think it's quite

:24:38. > :24:42.extraordinary at honourable members opposite continually talk about the

:24:43. > :24:46.potential for shale is as if it is some kind of disaster. The

:24:47. > :24:52.honourable gentleman himself comes amid very honourable and

:24:53. > :24:58.long-standing mining area. Mining has a legacy that we will be dealing

:24:59. > :25:03.with for many years to come. The shale industry offers the

:25:04. > :25:09.opportunity to really create a new home-grown energy source that is

:25:10. > :25:18.vital for our energy security into the next decade. When will the

:25:19. > :25:20.Secretary of State produce some legally enforceable protection

:25:21. > :25:28.against service level fracking in our national parks and areas of

:25:29. > :25:35.interest? Hopefully, she will have heard my initial comments, which is

:25:36. > :25:39.that we have been able to put forward a proposal to restrict

:25:40. > :25:42.surface gelling in any of our most protected areas, not limited to

:25:43. > :25:48.national parks, but including many other valuable spaces, through the

:25:49. > :25:51.licensing, and as things stand, we are waiting for our report and

:25:52. > :25:55.response of the industry consultation that closed on December

:25:56. > :26:04.16, and we will be announcements very soon. Question number ten. As

:26:05. > :26:11.more domestic community and business generators come on stream, the

:26:12. > :26:16.demand for a grid connection is increasing. Accommodating this is

:26:17. > :26:20.the responsibility of the network companies, overseen by Jen. Network

:26:21. > :26:27.companies publish long-term plans to see how a generation will be

:26:28. > :26:34.managed. She might want to look at the ten year statement as a good

:26:35. > :26:38.example of this. Let's face it, the National Grid is notorious for

:26:39. > :26:44.stifling new energy projects. Given that the tough bill involves

:26:45. > :26:47.devolving stations up to 350 megawatts, but not transmission, how

:26:48. > :26:48.will the Minister work with the Welsh government to make sure this

:26:49. > :27:17.isn't a empty promise. about 1.7 billion of this is for the

:27:18. > :27:19.distribution company that is responsible for North Wales that

:27:20. > :27:25.includes the Lady's own constituency. Does the Minister

:27:26. > :27:32.share my concern is that in the short to medium turn our energy

:27:33. > :27:35.security might be put at risk if capacity markets put in place to

:27:36. > :27:40.bring forward new gas capacity, not only fails to bring forward new gas

:27:41. > :27:46.capacity, but also works to make current gas capacity, such as

:27:47. > :27:49.provided by the power station in my constituency, to be no longer

:27:50. > :27:56.worthwhile doing, and that comes off stream. I can tell the honourable

:27:57. > :28:01.gentleman we have just completed the second capacity market auction,

:28:02. > :28:04.achieved a very competitive price for consumers, and as you will know,

:28:05. > :28:07.a top row or two for this covenant is to keep the bills down. At the

:28:08. > :28:18.same time we can ensure national Grid has the tools at its disposal

:28:19. > :28:25.to don't share his concerns. We want to bring a new gas, but there are

:28:26. > :28:30.not concerns about renewable energy. Number 11. Solar is an enormous UK

:28:31. > :28:35.success story and one this government continues to support. As

:28:36. > :28:39.my right honourable friend the Prime Minister said yesterday, 98% of all

:28:40. > :28:51.solar deployment has taken place since 2010. We announce the feeder

:28:52. > :28:56.tariff scheme would remain open. We can potentially deliver 1.2

:28:57. > :29:01.gigawatts across 220,000 installations by 2019. I would like

:29:02. > :29:04.to thank my honourable friend for that answer. I have the opportunity

:29:05. > :29:10.recently of meeting a company in the solar sector industry in my

:29:11. > :29:14.constituency, and was very impressed with the technology innovation and

:29:15. > :29:17.job creation of that company. Would she give me an assurance that the

:29:18. > :29:22.government will do everything possible to continue supporting this

:29:23. > :29:27.important energy source. As my honourable friend will know, it's a

:29:28. > :29:31.key priority to keep consumer bills down, so it's always a balance

:29:32. > :29:35.between supporting what is a superb UK industry with making sure

:29:36. > :29:39.consumer bills remain affordable. We will continue to support the further

:29:40. > :29:44.growth of the sector, but not at any price. So the changes we have made

:29:45. > :29:47.another feeding tariff six to maintain a solar industry which in

:29:48. > :29:52.the medium term can continue to reduce cost and move towards a

:29:53. > :29:58.subsidy free deployment. Could the Minister update the house on what

:29:59. > :30:02.steps she is taking to make sure the rate of VAT on solar installations

:30:03. > :30:09.doesn't arise as potentially proposed from 5% to 20%, so

:30:10. > :30:14.affecting about ?9 on average solar installations. He's exactly right to

:30:15. > :30:19.raise this, an important point. He will know this is a result of

:30:20. > :30:22.proceedings by the European Commission who believe our VAT rates

:30:23. > :30:28.on solar installation should be higher than they are. It's something

:30:29. > :30:31.HMRC are looking at closely and consulting on, and taking into

:30:32. > :30:34.account what the outcome of that consultation is, we will look

:30:35. > :30:40.further at the regime we have in place. Bexhill and Battle

:30:41. > :30:44.constituency has a number of thriving solar businesses, some of

:30:45. > :30:47.which I have worked with over the recent changes for feed in tariffs.

:30:48. > :30:54.As the government looks for the industry to expand, can I ask how

:30:55. > :30:57.the Minister will support the delivery of energy storage solutions

:30:58. > :31:03.for existing and future solar systems. My honourable friend is

:31:04. > :31:07.exactly right to point out the huge potential for energy storage to

:31:08. > :31:11.enhance the value of solar installations. My department has

:31:12. > :31:17.provided more than ?18 million of innovation support since 2012 to

:31:18. > :31:21.support and demonstrate a range of technologies. We also investigating

:31:22. > :31:25.the potential barriers to the deployment of energy storage,

:31:26. > :31:28.focusing in the first instance of removing regulatory barriers and we

:31:29. > :31:35.plan to hold a call for evidence in the spring on specifically this

:31:36. > :31:42.area. Many constituencies fear the end of solar. What about the ?1

:31:43. > :31:49.rescue scheme, and what is the response to that? As I think my

:31:50. > :31:54.right honourable friend and I have made clear on many occasions, there

:31:55. > :31:59.is a fine balance. As a new technology, as the costs come down,

:32:00. > :32:03.as they have done so with this excellent UK solar industry, so we

:32:04. > :32:08.must focus on the needs of people in this country to be able to afford

:32:09. > :32:13.their energy bills. Fuel poverty is an enormous problem here. What we

:32:14. > :32:18.don't want to do is over subsidise, so it's a fine balance. We think our

:32:19. > :32:22.results in December to the consultation provide that fine

:32:23. > :32:25.balance, giving a 5% investment return to installations on solar.

:32:26. > :32:36.That's fair to consumers and the industry. EU minimum import prices

:32:37. > :32:42.on Chinese, Taiwanese and Malaysians sells inflate the cost of an average

:32:43. > :32:45.solar installation by ?385. The Minister is working to extract the

:32:46. > :32:49.UK from this, but will she update the house on her progress and set a

:32:50. > :32:55.date by which she hopes to end these price controls. I certainly agree

:32:56. > :33:02.with my honourable friend that this is an unwelcome drain on the UK

:33:03. > :33:06.solar industry. I also agree it would be fairer and simpler to

:33:07. > :33:14.remove it while the UK review is under review. It's one for the

:33:15. > :33:17.commission, not member states. The anti-dumping and anti-subsidy

:33:18. > :33:20.regulations require the commission to maintain existing trade defence

:33:21. > :33:29.measures while the expiry review takes place. It could be some months

:33:30. > :33:34.yet. Last year the solar trade Association estimated 27,000 workers

:33:35. > :33:38.would lose their jobs as a result of the government proposed 87% cut to

:33:39. > :33:43.the feed in tariff. Following public outcry, which included both sides of

:33:44. > :33:47.the house, her department reduced the cut to 64%, saving around 8000

:33:48. > :33:51.jobs. Something I'm sure the Minister would love to take credit

:33:52. > :33:55.for. However, can she say what the message is to the remaining 19,000

:33:56. > :34:01.solar workers who now face redundancy in the coming year as a

:34:02. > :34:05.result of the tariff cuts? What I can say to the honourable gentleman

:34:06. > :34:13.is that UK solar is a huge success story. It has grown rapidly since

:34:14. > :34:19.2010 with enormous support from energy consumers in the UK. As we

:34:20. > :34:23.have said time and again, there is a balance. We absolutely welcome the

:34:24. > :34:27.jobs and growth that has been provided in the sector, but what we

:34:28. > :34:34.can't do is to continue to support jobs just through bill payer

:34:35. > :34:38.subsidy, it's not fair. What our members can ensure is that there is

:34:39. > :34:42.good potential for the industry to continue to grow and jobs be

:34:43. > :34:50.supported whilst bills remain affordable. Number 12. The

:34:51. > :34:53.government is making it quicker and easier for consumers to switch

:34:54. > :34:57.supplier and moved to the best value tariffs. We have a national

:34:58. > :35:00.switching campaign, worked with the industry to cut the time it takes to

:35:01. > :35:07.switch to 17 days, and are working with Ofgem to move towards reliable

:35:08. > :35:12.next day switching. We also are working to wards and energy

:35:13. > :35:18.switching guarantee to be produced later this year. It's the vulnerable

:35:19. > :35:22.customers where this is particularly important, and they should be able

:35:23. > :35:26.to find the best value tariffs. Would she say more about what the

:35:27. > :35:28.government is doing to spread that message and ensure these consumers

:35:29. > :35:35.are getting the best deals available. Would she agree with me

:35:36. > :35:39.that perhaps organisations such as carers organisations and children's

:35:40. > :35:44.centres that support vulnerable younger families, that they could

:35:45. > :35:48.have a role to play. I do agree with my right honourable friend, it's

:35:49. > :35:51.absolutely essential that we improve access for vulnerable people to the

:35:52. > :35:56.switching that could provide such great benefits. If people can

:35:57. > :36:03.benefit from a ?200 saving on energy bill, it's no good unless they can

:36:04. > :36:07.access it. That's why we have launched the big energy saving

:36:08. > :36:09.network, and are ensuring vulnerable people who particularly need the

:36:10. > :36:14.improvement of the energy bills this can deliver can access it. One of

:36:15. > :36:16.the ways this is done to is through the citizens advice bureau. We will

:36:17. > :36:25.look at other suggestions put forward. It has been identified that

:36:26. > :36:30.the sticky customer base are not being served well by their energy

:36:31. > :36:33.suppliers. Something like 70% of those customers on the standard

:36:34. > :36:37.variable tariff are paying over the odds. As the secretary looked into

:36:38. > :36:41.the suggestion I have made in the last year and before that, that we

:36:42. > :36:47.need to protect those customers as well, with maybe a default or

:36:48. > :36:52.protection tariff to make sure suppliers provide tariffs that are

:36:53. > :36:56.fair to their customers. The Right Honourable Lady raises an important

:36:57. > :37:00.point, and it's helpful to have the suggestion about the competition and

:37:01. > :37:04.market authority who have just begun to include in their consideration

:37:05. > :37:06.the issue of vulnerable customers on prepayment meters. We are interested

:37:07. > :37:11.in the recommendations they will make over the next few months, we

:37:12. > :37:15.hope, to make sure we look after vulnerable customers who are not

:37:16. > :37:19.able to switch. We have said before that we will take seriously and act

:37:20. > :37:26.on the recommendations they make to make sure we look after those

:37:27. > :37:29.customers who haven't engaged in switching, but should be doing so,

:37:30. > :37:34.and we look forward to seeing their suggestions on Redmond remedies to

:37:35. > :37:38.do so. I welcome the concern by members across the house for

:37:39. > :37:40.consumers and best value. Last month the Secretary of State agreed to

:37:41. > :37:46.hand out hundreds of millions of pounds in new public subsidies to

:37:47. > :37:50.diesel and coal power generators through the capacity market scheme.

:37:51. > :37:57.Can she tell the house how much family energy bills will rise as a

:37:58. > :38:01.consequence? The capacity market is specifically designed to ensure that

:38:02. > :38:05.energy security is not negotiable. Energy security is something this

:38:06. > :38:08.government takes very seriously. Because of the lack of investment in

:38:09. > :38:12.energy infrastructure over the past decades we have needed to make sure

:38:13. > :38:17.the capacity market is in place to make sure we do not have any problem

:38:18. > :38:22.at all with energy security. Diesel will form a part of the future, but

:38:23. > :38:25.only in very small amounts. Let's remember, is there as back-up, and

:38:26. > :38:30.will be switched on occasionally when it's needed. The condition of

:38:31. > :38:34.the capacity market to people's bills will be a matter of a few

:38:35. > :38:37.pounds. It's astonishing she comes to the house and repeatedly said,

:38:38. > :38:43.and I quote, that the government wants to put as little pressure as

:38:44. > :38:45.possible onto hard-pressed households, and is spectacularly

:38:46. > :38:51.unable to answer a very simple question about how much this will

:38:52. > :38:55.put on to family energy bills. In just one day in December, she agreed

:38:56. > :39:03.to subsidise highly polluting diesel generators to the tune of ?175

:39:04. > :39:07.million, paid for by increasing family energy bills. Can she and is

:39:08. > :39:10.this, are those companies now expected to make returns of more

:39:11. > :39:16.than 20% at the expense of bill payers? What is astonishing is the

:39:17. > :39:21.honourable ladies's lack of understanding of the fact that the

:39:22. > :39:24.capacity market is needed because of Labour's woeful underinvestment in

:39:25. > :39:29.infrastructure under their government. We are left with the

:39:30. > :39:33.consequences of making sure their energy security is completely

:39:34. > :39:36.reliable. The capacity market is essential to ensure that hole is

:39:37. > :39:42.filled. We are proud of the way it has delivered at a second auction

:39:43. > :39:46.just completed. As I said, it's a few pounds, it will be under ?10,

:39:47. > :39:52.and we will ensure that energy security is never going to be a

:39:53. > :40:00.question under this government. Number 14, Mr Speaker. I can assure

:40:01. > :40:04.the honourable member that the good progress is being made. Energy

:40:05. > :40:07.suppliers have now installed over 200 metres in homes and small

:40:08. > :40:15.businesses across Britain ahead of the main installation state this

:40:16. > :40:17.year. -- stage this year. In September 2014 the Public Accounts

:40:18. > :40:22.Committee raised real concerns about the roll-out of smart meters.

:40:23. > :40:25.Recently a former Conservative energy adviser warned the Secretary

:40:26. > :40:32.of State that the roll-out would at best be regarded as a waste of

:40:33. > :40:37.money, and that it is now a ghastly mess, I quote. What are you doing to

:40:38. > :40:42.resolve these problems. I don't agree with that particular position.

:40:43. > :40:47.I think smart meters are going to have a great future in this country.

:40:48. > :40:50.We discussed earlier in these questions the issue of energy

:40:51. > :40:55.security and fuel poverty and smart meters will be a very good way for

:40:56. > :40:58.people to reduce their bills and use less energy, therefore creating less

:40:59. > :41:03.carbon emissions and smart meters are an aborted part. No doubt the

:41:04. > :41:08.introduction of smart meters will help customers control their energy

:41:09. > :41:12.bills. Just so they are aware of the background to this, can the Minister

:41:13. > :41:25.confirm that the UK is rolling out smart meters because of the European

:41:26. > :41:28.Union's directive 2009 Stoke 72 EC. The honourable gentleman is right

:41:29. > :41:33.that the European Union does have directives that give us guidance on

:41:34. > :41:37.this. But there is no question that this initiative of smart meters is

:41:38. > :41:40.of huge advantage to the UK customers, and it's the UK customers

:41:41. > :41:50.and consumers who will always be put first. Number 15, Mr Speaker. As my

:41:51. > :41:53.right honourable friend announced in her November speech, we are

:41:54. > :41:57.committed to the continued growth of UK offshore wind where Britain is

:41:58. > :42:00.already the world leader. This industry is a huge potential source

:42:01. > :42:04.of jobs and growth and we will always focus on maximising UK

:42:05. > :42:08.content in the supply chain. He will appreciate the decision on where to

:42:09. > :42:12.base one company's operations is a commercial decision for them,

:42:13. > :42:15.however, my officials are working closely with the developer can

:42:16. > :42:17.Scottish Gottman to maximise the use of UK Government in his wind farm.

:42:18. > :42:30.-- Scottish Government. Dundee and its port is ideally

:42:31. > :42:36.placed to provide operation maintain and air supply.

:42:37. > :42:41.Well, I absolutely agree with him. I am thinking, recently I visited one

:42:42. > :42:47.of the ports in Scotland, Aberdeen, to hear how they are trying to

:42:48. > :42:50.expand to accommodate not just their growth of offshore wind but the

:42:51. > :42:57.potential for decommissioning in the future. It is vital that whatever

:42:58. > :43:03.our energy policy we focus as far as possible on maximising all the

:43:04. > :43:09.content we can in the supply chain. Number 19, Mr Speaker.

:43:10. > :43:13.The oil and gas industry is vital to our economy, providing over 350,000

:43:14. > :43:18.jobs and the Government is committed to supporting it. Our latest

:43:19. > :43:24.projections show in 2030 oil and gas will still be a core part of our

:43:25. > :43:26.energy mix, providing nearly 70% of the UK's primary energy

:43:27. > :43:31.requirements. Our commitment to the industry is why we have established

:43:32. > :43:36.the oil and gas authority which is charged with working the industry to

:43:37. > :43:40.maximise the economic recovery of the UK's gas and oil resources. I

:43:41. > :43:50.thank the minister. The oil and gas industry has asked her Government

:43:51. > :43:54.for further tax relief. And the and a professor has said it is necessary

:43:55. > :43:59.to explore the potential of the North Sea. What considerations has

:44:00. > :44:03.she given to refundable tax credit for exploration?

:44:04. > :44:11.So the honourable lady will be aware that the Chancellor has already

:44:12. > :44:15.significantly improved the fiscal the regime to encourage for

:44:16. > :44:21.exploration in the North Sea basin. We had a series of meetings before

:44:22. > :44:25.Christmas with the oil and gas authority and others to discuss

:44:26. > :44:29.exactly what other measures could take and certainly that further

:44:30. > :44:36.fiscal measure is on the table. So too is the vital importance of

:44:37. > :44:39.getting production costs down, making more efficiencies, sharing

:44:40. > :44:44.infrastructure and that is what the OGA is focussed on doing. I am

:44:45. > :44:47.grateful to my honourable friend for raising that question and the reply.

:44:48. > :44:52.I can acknowledge the work the Government has done in this sector.

:44:53. > :44:56.Can the minister give me her assurance in the lead up to the

:44:57. > :45:02.Budget in March that she will leave no stone unturned in ensuring this

:45:03. > :45:06.vet lally important industry secures the support it needs at this

:45:07. > :45:11.difficult time? I am grateful to my honourable friend who has done so

:45:12. > :45:15.much - #230e cusses so much on this -- focuses so much on this sector.

:45:16. > :45:20.We are focussed on what can be done in all areas to try and support this

:45:21. > :45:25.vital UK sector. THE SPEAKER: Order. Topical

:45:26. > :45:30.questions. Mr Mann. Topical one, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, my thoughts are

:45:31. > :45:35.with all of those affected by the recent flooding. Energy security is

:45:36. > :45:41.our number one priority. We are working closely with the industry to

:45:42. > :45:47.look at the risks, including severe weather, to put protections in place

:45:48. > :45:51.and stop disruptions. We have ensured that power is restored to

:45:52. > :45:56.customers as soon as possible in very challenging circumstances.

:45:57. > :46:04.Everyone in this chamber benefits this year from the electricity the

:46:05. > :46:09.cool burnt - coal burnt at power stations. What contingency

:46:10. > :46:16.arrangement has been reached with EDF to ensure that in 2026 and

:46:17. > :46:21.beyond, when we don't have enough power available, the decision to

:46:22. > :46:27.close down coal-based power stations can be reversed? Well, Mr Speaker,

:46:28. > :46:32.can I reassure the honourable gentleman that we are moving to a

:46:33. > :46:36.consultation on ending coal-fired pou irstations by 2025 -- power

:46:37. > :46:39.stations by 2025. I am sure he'll want to participate in it. This

:46:40. > :46:44.Government is taking the long-term view on getting the right mix of

:46:45. > :46:48.decarbonising and having nerge security. That is why we are making

:46:49. > :46:54.this plan well ahead of time. It is ten years ahead. Thank you, Mr

:46:55. > :46:58.Speaker. Given the revisions to the feed-in tariffs which will come into

:46:59. > :47:03.force, has my friend made assessment on the likely effects on the solar

:47:04. > :47:09.industry, particularly in the south west, where the sun nearly always

:47:10. > :47:14.shines? Well, of course, he's absolutely right the sun always

:47:15. > :47:19.nearly shines there. It is a great place for solar has been a

:47:20. > :47:27.spectacular success there. The tariffs aim to give it sited with

:47:28. > :47:34.well-sighted projects. Around 5% for solar. We believe this will be by

:47:35. > :47:39.2021 save up to ?330 million a year to bill payers. At the same time

:47:40. > :47:42.enable 220,000 new installations to be subsidised under the new feeding

:47:43. > :47:47.tariff. Thank you. Can I welcome the

:47:48. > :47:50.Secretary of State's update to the House on the actions take no-one

:47:51. > :47:55.response to the floods. Particularly welcome the Prime Minister's

:47:56. > :47:58.decision to set up a cross-Whitehall review of the Government's approach

:47:59. > :48:02.to flood defences, which will consider the rising flood risk posed

:48:03. > :48:07.by climate change. Mr Speaker, we know now that the last review, in

:48:08. > :48:12.2014, which was also led by the member for West Dorset met just

:48:13. > :48:17.three times and didn't publish a single finding K the Secretary of

:48:18. > :48:20.State confirm to the House that she personally attends this committee?

:48:21. > :48:25.Can she tell us whether it has met yet? Can she tell us how often it

:48:26. > :48:30.plans to meet? Which independent expeshts are on it and what this

:48:31. > :48:34.time -- expects are on it and what she time she expects it to achieve?

:48:35. > :48:38.This Government takes seriously the impact of climate change and the

:48:39. > :48:44.fact it has had such a devastating impact in terms of the flooding

:48:45. > :48:51.recently. I can reassure here that we participated, this department, in

:48:52. > :48:55.regular meetings of COBRA on a almost daily basis, to ensure that

:48:56. > :49:01.electricity source were restored as quickly as possible. The review will

:49:02. > :49:05.take place and we will keep a careful, watchful eye on making sure

:49:06. > :49:10.it does meet and make sure it looks carefully at what impact it has had.

:49:11. > :49:14.Thank you, Mr Speaker. What steps is the Government taking to address the

:49:15. > :49:20.increasing shortage of skills in the nuclear industry? Well, we have

:49:21. > :49:24.already taken a lot of action to tackle the skills problem at a all

:49:25. > :49:28.levels, from programmes to attract more school children to stem

:49:29. > :49:33.careers, to apprenticeships and training at all levels, as well as

:49:34. > :49:37.setting in train work for transfer of skills from wider sectors. He's

:49:38. > :49:44.right to highlight the need for new nuclear skills. Hiply will provide

:49:45. > :49:49.25,000 jobs and 1,000 apprenticeships. Thank you Mr

:49:50. > :49:56.Speaker. It suggests 18700 jobs could be lost as a result of the 65%

:49:57. > :50:01.reduction to the solar feed-in tariff. What loss in income tax will

:50:02. > :50:08.this mean to Government, in light of the ?16 billion fall short of tax

:50:09. > :50:13.receipts last year? What is the combined effect if HMC press forward

:50:14. > :50:18.with the increase of tax to solar installations? I can assure the

:50:19. > :50:22.honourable gentleman this Government remains committed to the on-going

:50:23. > :50:26.success of the solar industry. As I explained in an earlier reply. What

:50:27. > :50:32.we cannot do is simply keep jobs going as a result of subsidy. Our

:50:33. > :50:37.best guess under our tariff is that will support up to 23,000 jobs in

:50:38. > :50:42.the solar sector. Of course it is up for the sector to bring down the

:50:43. > :50:45.costs, as far as possible, to reach a subsidy-free stage by 2020. Of

:50:46. > :50:49.course we will do everything we can, as I have said, if the VAT rate has

:50:50. > :50:54.to go up, then we will look at what more we can do within the tariff to

:50:55. > :51:00.ensure we don't penalise the sector. Thank you. Can I refer the House to

:51:01. > :51:04.my register, the register of interests as chairman of globe

:51:05. > :51:09.international, which held a successful summit recently in Paris

:51:10. > :51:17.as part of a process. Can I ask the Secretary of State, does she agree

:51:18. > :51:20.with me that the world's leading network of parliamentarians devoted

:51:21. > :51:26.to leadership, legislative leadership in climate change, has a

:51:27. > :51:32.key role to play to make sure it is reality. And to meet with me p to

:51:33. > :51:36.make sure this is achieved? Well, I thank the honourable gentleman for

:51:37. > :51:43.his question. I am aware that Globe is one of the largest forums on

:51:44. > :51:47.sustainable development. I acknowledge his important role in

:51:48. > :51:51.chairing it. I will be delighted to meet him to discuss how we can

:51:52. > :51:56.promote parliamentarian international development on this

:51:57. > :52:01.important subject. I was absolutely delighted when the minister said in

:52:02. > :52:08.June at her renewable summit that we will remove subsidies. When does she

:52:09. > :52:14.expect the subsidies to disappear completely? Projects just off the

:52:15. > :52:19.coast of the honourable member's constituency provide enough

:52:20. > :52:22.electricity for over 100,000 homes, follows hundreds of millions

:52:23. > :52:27.invested by the developer, much of which was spent locally. I am sure

:52:28. > :52:31.he'll welcome that. We have to get the balance between supporting newer

:52:32. > :52:38.technologies and being tough on subsidies to keep bills as low as

:52:39. > :52:48.possible. We will work towards getting technology subsidy, free.

:52:49. > :52:52.By far and aware in the EU one third of electricity comes from that

:52:53. > :52:57.source. China has 50 stations under construction. We need small modular

:52:58. > :53:04.reactors. Can the minister set up her plans and in this regard?

:53:05. > :53:08.Nuclear is an important part of our energy future. I am very proud we

:53:09. > :53:17.have signed the first new nuclear deal in over 20 years. It will have

:53:18. > :53:21.an important part. We are using part of our substantial innovation

:53:22. > :53:27.funding to make sure we bring them on as early as possible. It will not

:53:28. > :53:35.be at the expect of reactors going forward. Smaller nuclear is what we

:53:36. > :53:42.will aim for. Earlier this week the SNP agreed a support package to

:53:43. > :53:48.retain staff at DL and Clydebridge steel plans, this will address

:53:49. > :53:54.costs. Can I ask what consideration the Secretary of State or of Cabinet

:53:55. > :53:58.colleagues va given to bringing forward a co-her hent strategy to

:53:59. > :54:03.address the high energy costs facing businesses across the UK? We are

:54:04. > :54:06.well aware of the importance of keeping energy costs down in order

:54:07. > :54:12.to support businesses and households. My honourable friend,

:54:13. > :54:17.the Prime Minister, announced that intensives would be given a specific

:54:18. > :54:20.package of support and that has got state aid clearance and will be put

:54:21. > :54:26.in place as soon as possible. The minister will be aware that just

:54:27. > :54:32.before Christmas, the European Commission announced new tariffs in

:54:33. > :54:38.Malaysian power and they would back these to May last year. That could

:54:39. > :54:43.result in many solar companies having an unwant and devastating tax

:54:44. > :54:47.-- unwanted and devastating tax bill. Will she make sure this does

:54:48. > :54:50.not happen? I think the honourable gentleman is right to raise this. It

:54:51. > :54:56.is a real concern that in spite of the fact that the cost of solar

:54:57. > :55:01.panels have developed dramatically, nevertheless in Europe they remain

:55:02. > :55:05.higher than elsewhere in the world as a result of the import tariffs.

:55:06. > :55:08.The commissioner was writ on the explaining how bad this is for the

:55:09. > :55:13.onof going success of the UK industry. We will do everything we

:55:14. > :55:18.can to ensure that those get removed as soon as possible.

:55:19. > :55:23.Mr Speaker, we were disapointed in the Humber last year not to be

:55:24. > :55:27.granted the national wind college in the locality, especially in light of

:55:28. > :55:33.the renewables which is important to the future of the Humber area. I

:55:34. > :55:39.wonder if ministers would meet with me and representatives to discuss

:55:40. > :55:43.what can be done to promote a national wind college to promote

:55:44. > :55:49.funding in the area. I would be delighted to meet with her and

:55:50. > :55:59.colleagues. I had a huge u poer to see the new blade -- I - there have

:56:00. > :56:04.been new jobs and apprenticeships in her area. I think we should do

:56:05. > :56:07.everything we can to promote this northern energy powerhouse, which is

:56:08. > :56:14.taking off and doing so well. THE SPEAKER: There is an arm of

:56:15. > :56:20.opposition members to catch my eye. I say to the member that I don't

:56:21. > :56:24.want him to feel excluded. If he wishes to contribute now we will

:56:25. > :56:29.happily hear him. Not at the moment. As soon as he wants to, he can. Mr

:56:30. > :56:48.Newlands. These households are more likely to

:56:49. > :56:53.have prepaid metres. These are ?200 more ex-penive per year. Can the

:56:54. > :57:00.speck of state tell me what she will do to make sure they have

:57:01. > :57:07.availability to lower prices, as those on other methods?

:57:08. > :57:14.In Paisley and Renfrewshire North, there have been eco-measures that

:57:15. > :57:19.will help your constituents. 119 measures per 100,000 households to

:57:20. > :57:25.be installed by 2015, compared to the average 77 per thousand in the

:57:26. > :57:30.rest of the UK. Rest assured we are focused on making sure bills stay

:57:31. > :57:35.low and making sure fuel poverty is addressed and the ecosystem is one

:57:36. > :57:40.of the best ways to do that. In Northern Ireland one in five

:57:41. > :57:47.pensioners are defined as living in income poverty. 65% of those are in

:57:48. > :57:54.fuel poverty. What about the dealings with colleagues in Northern

:57:55. > :57:57.Ireland to address these issues? Keeping fuel poverty up they are

:57:58. > :58:01.making sure we can keep bills down is a absolute priority. Regarding

:58:02. > :58:10.the statistics, I'd have to write to him. Outside Hinkley Point C, the

:58:11. > :58:15.proposed new power station the government is considering, this

:58:16. > :58:19.means yet again the government will be held to hostage. No guaranteed

:58:20. > :58:25.programme, high profits for the suppliers, extortionate rates

:58:26. > :58:28.agreed, for the just to users. Should the government not do the

:58:29. > :58:36.decent thing and rethink this nuclear at all cost policy? The

:58:37. > :58:39.government thinks nuclear reactors are an important part of delivering

:58:40. > :58:44.on a low carbon future. There is a great opportunity to make sure we

:58:45. > :58:48.develop skills. On the particular example he has referred to, I will

:58:49. > :58:53.ensure my department looks at it carefully and comes back with

:58:54. > :58:57.answers. In her attempt to explain the hugely unpopular cuts to solar,

:58:58. > :59:01.the Secretary of State constantly pretends it's about reducing costs

:59:02. > :59:04.to householders. Given industry analysis shows solar costs around

:59:05. > :59:11.half the cost of Hinckley over 35 years and save consumers around ?15

:59:12. > :59:15.billion, how can she keep justifying such blatant double standards when

:59:16. > :59:19.it comes to nuclear power? The honourable ladies not dealing with

:59:20. > :59:24.the facts. The facts are that the solar changes will still deliver 5%

:59:25. > :59:29.yields to people who put them up. The fact is that nuclear provides

:59:30. > :59:32.important baseload. When the sun isn't shining, or when the wind

:59:33. > :59:40.isn't blowing. The honourable lady can have her own views but not her

:59:41. > :59:46.own facts. Last, but never forgotten, Mr Skinner. With the

:59:47. > :59:57.Chinese economy hitting the buffers, week after week, does it make sense

:59:58. > :00:00.to continue with this Chinese connection of nuclear power in

:00:01. > :00:05.Britain? Isn't it time it was abandoned? A shine has been knocked

:00:06. > :00:13.off it every single day. Change your mind. Can I reassure the honourable

:00:14. > :00:17.gentleman that we are ambitious for this country, confident in our

:00:18. > :00:20.regulations, open for business, and if the Chinese want to make a

:00:21. > :00:24.substantial investment in delivery new nuclear then we will be able to

:00:25. > :00:31.take it and make a great success of it. Order, business question. Chris

:00:32. > :00:38.Bryant. We'll be leader give us the business for this week and next week

:00:39. > :00:42.and all the rest? Probably not all the rest, Mr Speaker, but the

:00:43. > :00:46.business next week on Monday the 11th, we will debate the remaining

:00:47. > :00:50.stages of the Armed Forces Bill. After that, a general debate on

:00:51. > :00:54.local government funding for rural areas nominated by the backbench

:00:55. > :00:57.business committee. On Tuesday the 12th, the conclusion of the

:00:58. > :01:02.remaining stages of the Housing and planning Bill. On Wednesday the

:01:03. > :01:06.13th, an opposition day with a debate on trade exports, innovation

:01:07. > :01:12.and productivity in the name of the Scottish National party. On Thursday

:01:13. > :01:15.the 14th, another day of business nominated by the backbench business

:01:16. > :01:20.committee. On Friday the 15th of January, we are not sitting. The

:01:21. > :01:23.provisional business for the week commencing the 18th of January will

:01:24. > :01:29.include, on Monday the 18th, the second reading of the energy bill at

:01:30. > :01:34.the Lords. Tuesday the 19th, another opposition day on a motion to be

:01:35. > :01:38.announced by the party opposite. Wednesday the 28, we have the

:01:39. > :01:42.remaining stages of the psychoactive substances bill at the Lords,

:01:43. > :01:45.followed if necessary by consideration of Lords amendments.

:01:46. > :01:51.On Thursday the 21st of January, another day of business nominated by

:01:52. > :01:53.the backbench business committee. On Friday the 22nd we will debate the

:01:54. > :01:57.private members bills. I should inform the house that the business

:01:58. > :02:03.in the Westminster Hall for the 18th of January, decided buy the

:02:04. > :02:06.petitions committee will be a debate on the petition is relating to the

:02:07. > :02:14.exclusion of Donald Trump from the United Kingdom. I'm certainly up for

:02:15. > :02:19.that one. Mr Speaker, happy New Year, and if you were Russian, happy

:02:20. > :02:22.Christmas. Many congratulations for the honourable member for North West

:02:23. > :02:31.Norfolk and the wonderful Chief Whip who proves that there is nothing

:02:32. > :02:35.quite like a game. -- a game. Warm congratulations to the new Serjeant

:02:36. > :02:40.at Arms elect. We look forward to working with him. In the words of

:02:41. > :02:50.Stephen Sondheim, I'm still here. LAUGHTER

:02:51. > :02:53.I'm delighted, Mr Speaker, that the honourable member for

:02:54. > :02:59.Stratford-upon-Avon yesterday joined my call for a proper parliamentary

:03:00. > :03:05.commemoration for the 400th anniversary of the death of William

:03:06. > :03:09.Shakespeare, but I thought he rather marred the effect by referring to

:03:10. > :03:16.him as the greatest living bard, which Hansard has corrected for him.

:03:17. > :03:19.Should we have a Shakespeare debate in order to consider the

:03:20. > :03:24.government's own special use of the English language? The Leader of the

:03:25. > :03:30.Opposition asked yesterday about the ?120 million flood defence projects

:03:31. > :03:34.in Leeds that was cancelled in 2011. The Prime Minister stated quite

:03:35. > :03:39.categorically that no flood defence schemes had been cancelled since

:03:40. > :03:43.2010, but that's not quite the case, is it, Mr Speaker? The Prime

:03:44. > :03:47.Minister's official spokesman had to dig the Prime Minister out of that

:03:48. > :03:58.hole bio referring to the most extraordinary bout of circulation

:03:59. > :04:03.yesterday saying that Jeremy Corbyn had a proposal made but not adopted.

:04:04. > :04:08.In Shakespeare's in this, that means it was cancelled. The truth is that

:04:09. > :04:13.families don't want spend, they want proper protection from flooding.

:04:14. > :04:16.That wasn't all. When the member for Cardiff West asked the Prime

:04:17. > :04:19.Minister about the nub of special advisers, the Prime Minister said

:04:20. > :04:22.that there were fewer special advisers under this government than

:04:23. > :04:26.there were under the last government. He meant as old to

:04:27. > :04:31.believe that he had cut the number of special advisers since it came to

:04:32. > :04:35.power. He can't have meant that, can he, because under the last Prime

:04:36. > :04:41.Minister there were 71 special advisers. Now there are 97. I know

:04:42. > :04:44.the Secretary of State for Education can't do her times tables, but even

:04:45. > :04:50.she must be able to work out that is a net increase of 26. The Prime

:04:51. > :04:55.Minister's words yesterday can only be true if, when he said the last

:04:56. > :05:00.judgment, he didn't mean the Labour government, he meant the government

:05:01. > :05:04.he led last year. It's as if he hasn't existed for five years. I've

:05:05. > :05:08.heard of people being airbrushed out of history by their opponents, but

:05:09. > :05:11.this is the first time I've ever heard of a Prime Minister

:05:12. > :05:15.airbrushing himself out of his own history books. I note that yet again

:05:16. > :05:20.the leader of the house has only given us the dates for the East of

:05:21. > :05:27.recess and not for the State Opening of Parliament over the Whitsun

:05:28. > :05:33.recess. Is that because he doesn't yet know when he will table the

:05:34. > :05:38.motion for the EU referendum date? Can he now come clean? Can he tell

:05:39. > :05:42.us how he will vote? It's not a matter of conscience for him any

:05:43. > :05:45.more, he would even be able to keep his two special advisers and

:05:46. > :05:54.ministerial car and salary. He could tell us, in or out. It's an outcome

:05:55. > :06:00.isn't it? Come on, come out! Can I also suggest that after every

:06:01. > :06:04.recess, the first day back is devoted to no business other than

:06:05. > :06:07.statements from government ministers and urgent questions. Firstly, it

:06:08. > :06:11.might stop the government from piling up bad news announcements for

:06:12. > :06:16.the last day before the recess. This December was the worst ever with 36

:06:17. > :06:20.in one day. In one day we learned immigration officers have given up

:06:21. > :06:25.hunting for 10,000 missing asylum seekers, the HMRC lost out on ?16

:06:26. > :06:29.billion of tax, there will be a massive expansion of fracking for

:06:30. > :06:33.shale gas, and in the recess we learned that the government has

:06:34. > :06:36.abandoned the SCA review of the culture of banking, and half the

:06:37. > :06:44.Cabinet went to pay tribute to Rupert Murdoch. Bearing gifts of a

:06:45. > :06:47.licence fee cut, and ending the Levenson and tax cuts for

:06:48. > :06:52.billionaires. Isn't it time they learned that Rupert isn't the

:06:53. > :06:56.Messiah, he's a very naughty boy. On Tuesday we will have the remaining

:06:57. > :06:59.stages of the Housing Bill. For the first time in our history, some

:07:00. > :07:04.members of this house will be barred from voting in a division in this

:07:05. > :07:10.chamber. Was it not propose to us that we started debating the bill at

:07:11. > :07:14.8:50pm on Tuesday, and over the recess the government tabled 65

:07:15. > :07:19.pages of amendments to a bill that is only 145 pages long. Not one

:07:20. > :07:24.amendment on resilience and sustainable drainage. Can the leader

:07:25. > :07:28.calorie and a view things about the operation of evil on Tuesday next

:07:29. > :07:32.week? Because of the programme motion the government has tabled we

:07:33. > :07:35.will have to proceed on the basis of manuscript motions from the

:07:36. > :07:39.government and manuscript amendments, if there are any. That's

:07:40. > :07:43.right, isn't it? Surely it's wrong to proceed on shut important

:07:44. > :07:47.measures the first time we are doing this on manuscript business. Would

:07:48. > :07:52.it be better to devote the whole of Tuesday to report stage and keep

:07:53. > :07:58.remaining stages for another day. Could there be a clearer symbol of

:07:59. > :08:04.how incompetent conservative ministers are than the events of

:08:05. > :08:08.this Monday afternoon when two government ministers visited flood

:08:09. > :08:11.victims in Pooley. Not only did they arrive late, but they turned up at

:08:12. > :08:15.the wrong end of a bridge that had been washed away a month ago. A

:08:16. > :08:22.farmer had to be dispatched on a quad bike to take the two MPs a 30

:08:23. > :08:25.minute ride, while the bewildered entourage of civil servants, and hat

:08:26. > :08:30.carriers to trundle along in a minibus. I suppose you can just

:08:31. > :08:34.understand the confusion if it weren't for the fact that the two

:08:35. > :08:37.ministers concerned with the transport minister, who really

:08:38. > :08:41.should know when a bridge has disappeared, and the local MP! Who

:08:42. > :08:47.had already visited the bridge once before since the bridge disappeared.

:08:48. > :08:51.I gather there was some signalling from the villagers on the other side

:08:52. > :08:57.of the river, but it's not quite clear what they were trying to

:08:58. > :09:02.suggest. You really couldn't make it up, could you, Mr Speaker. Finally,

:09:03. > :09:05.four new elements of the periodic table have been discovered this

:09:06. > :09:10.week, and scientists are looking for new names for them. Apparently,

:09:11. > :09:16.these elements are dangerous and short lived. Rather like the...

:09:17. > :09:20.Rather like the Right Honourable member's policies at the Ministry of

:09:21. > :09:35.Justice. Can I suggest one of them is named Graylingium. Welcome to day

:09:36. > :09:40.four of the Labour reshuffle. I imagine it's been a frustrating week

:09:41. > :09:42.for the shadow leader. As Oscar Wilde so famously said, the only

:09:43. > :09:48.thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about. Never

:09:49. > :09:53.mind, I suspect he will make a return to the on Monday. It's his

:09:54. > :10:00.birthday and I think he will appear in the court circular and I wish him

:10:01. > :10:04.happy birthday for next week. Can I also echo your comments yesterday

:10:05. > :10:11.about the new Serjeant at Arms. I worked with him, he's a fine man and

:10:12. > :10:15.a consummate professional. When I discovered he was in the frame for

:10:16. > :10:18.this job I was delighted. He will be an excellent appointment and will

:10:19. > :10:22.serve the house at Arab League. I'm very grateful to all of those who

:10:23. > :10:27.sat as part of the recruitment process for the work they did, for

:10:28. > :10:35.the choice they made, and I would commend the appointment of a house.

:10:36. > :10:39.-- serve the house admirably. The new Northern Irish First Minister

:10:40. > :10:43.took her position over the Christmas period and takes up a difficult and

:10:44. > :10:48.challenging role. It's in all of our interests to wish her well for it.

:10:49. > :10:53.We all want to see stability continue in Northern Ireland and it

:10:54. > :10:58.continued to succeed in the future. On the European Union, the Labour

:10:59. > :11:02.Party has a leader who has changed his mind twice in the last few

:11:03. > :11:05.months. They claim to support a reformed European Union, but won't

:11:06. > :11:10.say what they want to reform. They didn't even want a referendum. The

:11:11. > :11:14.Prime Minister this week has done the right thing. I'm not going to

:11:15. > :11:17.take any lessons from the party opposite. When are they ever going

:11:18. > :11:25.to do the right thing for their people? Mr Speaker, he talks about

:11:26. > :11:31.the issue of what people meant, what people say. I would remind him of

:11:32. > :11:36.what it means in a Labour Party when people say something. In a Labour

:11:37. > :11:40.Party... The Conservative Party, a free vote means you can vote

:11:41. > :11:43.according to your own conscience. In the Labour Party, a free vote means

:11:44. > :11:51.you can vote according to the leader's conscience. In terms of the

:11:52. > :11:56.flooding issue, I am proud of the response this country has made to a

:11:57. > :12:02.devastating situation in so many parts of the country. Our emergency

:12:03. > :12:05.services, our voluntary services, local community, the Armed Forces,

:12:06. > :12:10.have come together to deal with a dreadful situation I think

:12:11. > :12:13.effectively and well. We have committed as a government to provide

:12:14. > :12:16.financial support to all communities affected in a way that goes far

:12:17. > :12:23.beyond what has taken place in the past.

:12:24. > :12:30.But I am proud of the way this country has responded. I'm happy to

:12:31. > :12:35.say I think we have done a better job this time than has been done in

:12:36. > :12:39.the past. We will learn lessons for the future, but it is imperative

:12:40. > :12:43.that we do the right thing when troubles like this strike. On the

:12:44. > :12:48.question of the announcements made before Christmas. I have stood at

:12:49. > :12:54.this dispatch box week after week, listening to questions on when can

:12:55. > :12:58.we have an update, can we have an announcement for Christmas, can we

:12:59. > :13:03.have a publication of the report before Christmas? We actually

:13:04. > :13:05.produced before Christmas a whole range of announcements and

:13:06. > :13:10.publications confirmations, then they complain about it. It is

:13:11. > :13:15.nonsense. We will do the right thing this country. It will continue to

:13:16. > :13:23.complain about it, but I am taking no lessons from them. On the housing

:13:24. > :13:25.report, we are having a two-day report on this bill, something which

:13:26. > :13:44.is often called for. At 1am on Tuesday, when we, and this

:13:45. > :13:48.side of the house, were debating those measures, most of the people

:13:49. > :13:52.on the benches opposite had gone home to bed, so why will take no

:13:53. > :13:55.lessons from him either on them saying we should be offering more

:13:56. > :14:01.time for debate on when we are debating and fearlessly. He brought

:14:02. > :14:06.up the question of Shakespeare. And when I listen to him, it reminds me,

:14:07. > :14:17.when I listen to him, it reminds me of that great quote from King Lear,

:14:18. > :14:24.have more than usual, speak less than you know. We should express our

:14:25. > :14:30.thanks to the Labour Party. When we come back to work after Christmas,

:14:31. > :14:38.we think, I wish it could be Christmas every day. Looking at the

:14:39. > :14:44.Labour reshuffle, frankly, it is. Successful local businesses in a

:14:45. > :14:47.prominent office building in my constituency have recently been

:14:48. > :14:52.informed they will have to vacate so that force can be converted. Come

:14:53. > :14:58.and have a debate and consider whether the planning system affords

:14:59. > :15:01.adequate protection for high-quality business space, which is so vital

:15:02. > :15:07.for generating jobs in places like Cheltenham? I understand these

:15:08. > :15:12.points. The change we have brought forward is to make sure that

:15:13. > :15:16.redundant office buildings can be quickly used for residential

:15:17. > :15:19.purposes, given the nature of the housing challenge we face in this

:15:20. > :15:24.country. We all agree we need to make more housing available, but I

:15:25. > :15:28.will take note of what he says. There will be an opportunity to

:15:29. > :15:31.question the Secretary of State for local government. I think he does

:15:32. > :15:35.make a valid point, but I think this is a policy we need to make sure we

:15:36. > :15:41.don't have empty commercial buildings of people are struggling

:15:42. > :15:45.to get on the housing ladder. Thank you for announcing the business for

:15:46. > :15:50.next week. Can I take this opportunity to wish you properly a

:15:51. > :15:55.happy New Year and that is extended to all the staff who worked so

:15:56. > :16:03.diligently throughout the course of the year. On behalf of the Scottish

:16:04. > :16:09.National party, we want to congratulate the first BM ease

:16:10. > :16:14.Serjeant at Arms and we wish them the best for the future. I think

:16:15. > :16:20.this could be a fantastic year, it will be a particularly good year for

:16:21. > :16:25.the SNP. Restart the New Year just as we entered the old year, with

:16:26. > :16:29.divisions in the Conservative Party and the Labour Party. With the

:16:30. > :16:33.Conservatives, it is Europe as usual and I know the leader of the house

:16:34. > :16:39.is now looking forward to campaigning for the cherished exit.

:16:40. > :16:45.At least he will have the opportunity. We might, as a nation,

:16:46. > :16:49.be taken out of the European Union against our will. The Labour Party

:16:50. > :16:55.are probably divided on just about anything else, and as the Civil War

:16:56. > :16:59.descends into the total, intractable variety, it is time to send some

:17:00. > :17:05.international peace envoy, because somebody needs to rescue them from

:17:06. > :17:10.themselves. This week's business has been dominated by the flooding, the

:17:11. > :17:14.flooding that has impacted on practically every constituency in

:17:15. > :17:18.this nation, and my constituency remains so much underwater, given I

:17:19. > :17:22.have the biggest river system in the whole of the UK. But that is a

:17:23. > :17:29.massive disappointment in the country on the tune of the debate.

:17:30. > :17:33.When we have tragedy like we have observed, I think this house hasn't

:17:34. > :17:41.risen to the occasion and debates have been of their partisan and

:17:42. > :17:47.point-scoring for IT. There will be much more debates like that in the

:17:48. > :17:50.future. Can I make an appeal, but we try to debate this properly and

:17:51. > :17:54.consensually and constructively, might we have heard on the SNP when

:17:55. > :18:00.we have addressed these issues in this house. Listening to the

:18:01. > :18:06.Chancellor this morning, what has happened to the Chancellor? After

:18:07. > :18:10.all the cheesiness of the Autumn Statement and the gloom today, I

:18:11. > :18:15.don't know if it is just some are characteristic honesty, Dorothy has

:18:16. > :18:26.had some assessment of the fortunes of the country? Perhaps we can find

:18:27. > :18:35.out what is ailing him and offer him some proper economic medicine. As we

:18:36. > :18:38.finish this debate today, we will be discussing the appalling situation

:18:39. > :18:48.of the unfair change to the state pension imposed on women. I'm

:18:49. > :18:52.delighted that it is the youngest member of this house who will be

:18:53. > :18:57.leading the debate. So many of our constituents caught up in this trap

:18:58. > :19:02.and we're hoping to hear something positive today when the minister

:19:03. > :19:05.response. Let's just hope the government thinks about doing the

:19:06. > :19:09.right thing for obese women. Lastly, this will be a massive year, and of

:19:10. > :19:13.the government think they can put their feet up while observing the

:19:14. > :19:17.chaos in the Labour Party, they will have another thought, because it

:19:18. > :19:21.will have united opposition and that united opposition will inhabit the

:19:22. > :19:29.benches here, which will make sure the government is held to account.

:19:30. > :19:35.Happy New Year to the honourable gentleman and his colleagues. It is

:19:36. > :19:40.good to see him back in this house. We are going to disagree on much

:19:41. > :19:43.this year, but on that latter point, we will agree. It has been a

:19:44. > :19:54.shambles. The one thing that has been a shambles -- hasn't been a

:19:55. > :19:58.shambles is that I do offer congratulations to the opposition

:19:59. > :20:02.Chief Whip. It is a well-deserved honour, she has been an excellent

:20:03. > :20:07.servant of those highs and it is something that has been welcomed on

:20:08. > :20:19.all sides of this house. I offer her my sincere congratulations. The

:20:20. > :20:23.shadow leader likes the sound of his own voice more than anyone else in

:20:24. > :20:35.this place. If you could just be patient, I was about to come on and

:20:36. > :20:40.say I am also delighted that the other member honoured in the New

:20:41. > :20:45.Year 's Honours list, they both very much deserved it and I apologise for

:20:46. > :20:54.not seeing so earlier. It has been an utter shambles in the Labour

:20:55. > :20:59.Party. I noticed the shadow leader's Parliamentary Private Sega J has

:21:00. > :21:07.disappeared, so maybe he is being moved around into different

:21:08. > :21:13.positions. You could not make up the idea that we would get into four

:21:14. > :21:15.days of the reshuffle and this is just a sign of how utterly

:21:16. > :21:20.incompetent they are as an opposition. But he is back on some

:21:21. > :21:25.of his usual themes this week. I would remind him that the United

:21:26. > :21:30.Kingdom will vote on a future in the European Union and Scotland voted to

:21:31. > :21:35.be a part of the United Kingdom. I know he has never quite accepted

:21:36. > :21:38.that reality, but the reality is nonetheless that Scotland chose to

:21:39. > :21:43.be part of the United Kingdom and we will vote as one United Kingdom. On

:21:44. > :21:51.the economy, the Chancellor is talking about the challenges we face

:21:52. > :21:55.internationally. The number of people claiming jobseeker's

:21:56. > :21:59.allowance has have since 2010. The number of children growing up in

:22:00. > :22:03.work with households has fallen by half a million. The level of

:22:04. > :22:09.employment in this country has mushroomed under this government. He

:22:10. > :22:12.should look across at this bench and say, these are people who have

:22:13. > :22:17.delivered for this country and they will carry on delivering for this

:22:18. > :22:24.country. He talked about the floods, I would pay to beat all of those in

:22:25. > :22:29.Scotland. I know Southwest Scotland was particularly badly affected. All

:22:30. > :22:34.those involved in the emergency services have done a fairly good

:22:35. > :22:38.job. It was a distressing period for this country, I hope those

:22:39. > :22:43.communities get themselves back together shortly. I will look

:22:44. > :22:47.forward this year to our usual amicable debate. We will not agree

:22:48. > :22:52.on most things, but I always enjoy seeing him there and I look forward

:22:53. > :22:59.to this year. Do you recall that in little bit this year, the

:23:00. > :23:01.administration nodded through an unwelcome recommendation from the

:23:02. > :23:05.House of Lords that we should abandon the centuries-old tradition

:23:06. > :23:10.of recording acts of parliament on bail, will which means we are

:23:11. > :23:22.putting out a number of workers in Milton Keynes, who are the last

:23:23. > :23:34.remaining experts on this. -- recording acts of Parliament on

:23:35. > :23:39.vellum. Will the other house tell me if the government has any plans to

:23:40. > :23:43.make time available for debate and if there is no debate, can he

:23:44. > :23:50.confirm the recommendation cannot go ahead? This is a matter for

:23:51. > :23:55.discussion by the relevant committees, it is on their agendas.

:23:56. > :24:00.As of today, I have had no requests to make available time. There is a

:24:01. > :24:04.balance between maintaining traditions of this house and

:24:05. > :24:09.country, also making sure what we do is cost effective. It is a matter

:24:10. > :24:17.for debate and am not aware that any final decision has been reached. Can

:24:18. > :24:20.we have a debate, perhaps in government time, or in backbench

:24:21. > :24:28.business, on flooding, with a particular focus on Brazilians of

:24:29. > :24:36.major critical infrastructure assets. A quarter of all bridges,

:24:37. > :24:40.10% of all emergency stations, 6% of hospitals are in areas susceptible

:24:41. > :24:45.to flooding. The last resilience review did not report to Parliament

:24:46. > :24:50.because of national security issues. Can he make sure that the next flood

:24:51. > :24:54.resilience report which is about to be carried out, does report to this

:24:55. > :24:56.place and is treated by the intelligence and Security committee

:24:57. > :25:02.as the national security threat which it actually is. One of the

:25:03. > :25:08.things we will have to do is learn lessons from the flooding, like the

:25:09. > :25:14.areas where mobile phone networks have come down. These are things

:25:15. > :25:17.that are already being looked at very carefully in the government

:25:18. > :25:21.office. We did have a debate yesterday, there will be further

:25:22. > :25:27.opportunities to discuss this in future, but I can assure her that

:25:28. > :25:32.work is taking place now to make sure lessons are learned and been

:25:33. > :25:39.can protect our critical national infrastructure. She is absolutely

:25:40. > :25:43.right. We have a debate on the action needed on air pollution on

:25:44. > :25:50.health. Across the world, we are losing around 7 million people a

:25:51. > :25:54.year due to the effects of air pollution and locally, the terrible

:25:55. > :26:00.consequences of standing traffic, which you see in my constituency. I

:26:01. > :26:03.know she has been a tireless campaigner since her election on

:26:04. > :26:09.trying to secure local improvements. I know she campaigned on a link

:26:10. > :26:14.ruled in her constituency. Many of these decisions are now taken

:26:15. > :26:18.locally and discussions with county councils about what should be

:26:19. > :26:22.prioritised for the future. We will continue to look for ways in the

:26:23. > :26:26.best thing nationally and providing financial support to local and

:26:27. > :26:30.regional authorities to make sure we provide what they need to keep

:26:31. > :26:39.traffic flowing and ease the ear pollution. Could I thank the leader

:26:40. > :26:43.of the highs for the business statement and the advance notice of

:26:44. > :26:49.the two days of backbench business committee debates to be held on the

:26:50. > :26:52.14th and the 21st. I'm glad to say that before the Christmas recess, we

:26:53. > :27:00.were pretty much up-to-date with our waiting list of debates to be tabled

:27:01. > :27:02.and we must have a clear deck, so appealing to honourable members

:27:03. > :27:04.across the house for applications for business on those two days.

:27:05. > :27:14.Thank very much. Can I commend the honourable

:27:15. > :27:17.gentleman and his committee for the work they do. For the backbench

:27:18. > :27:21.system to work well we need colleagues on all sides to come

:27:22. > :27:26.forward with topics for debate. We have seen requests in this session

:27:27. > :27:31.in recent weeks for things like the debates on policing and so forth,

:27:32. > :27:34.and I want to see members seeing those traditions continue, but the

:27:35. > :27:37.appropriate channel now is to go through the backbench business

:27:38. > :27:43.committee, where I'm think there will be a receptive ear. Is the

:27:44. > :27:47.leader of the house aware that the European Commission is attempting

:27:48. > :27:54.for the third time to introduce damaging and wasteful regulations on

:27:55. > :27:58.the UK's ports? Employers and workers representatives agree that

:27:59. > :28:05.these measures will damage investment and jobs. The European

:28:06. > :28:09.committee of which I am a member has called for these measures to be

:28:10. > :28:14.debated on the floor of the house, not in committee. Can the leader of

:28:15. > :28:17.the house look urgently at this issue and ensure this matter is

:28:18. > :28:23.properly scrutinised by the whole house? I'm aware of the issue. I've

:28:24. > :28:26.had a number of discussions with colleagues who represent ports and

:28:27. > :28:31.have concerns about these issues in the last couple of days. The Chief

:28:32. > :28:34.Whip and I are considering those representations now and I can assure

:28:35. > :28:39.my honourable friend this is a matter that is on our agenda. We

:28:40. > :28:42.have to make sure this is got right. When the Prime Minister talks about

:28:43. > :28:48.the need for deregulation in Europe, he's right, and it's not entirely

:28:49. > :28:53.clear to me why we should have regulation of ports at European

:28:54. > :28:58.level anyway. It needs to be the right regulation, if it needs to

:28:59. > :29:02.happen at all. The leader of the house will be delighted to know that

:29:03. > :29:06.Hull has been put in the top ten cities of the world to visit by the

:29:07. > :29:12.rough guide, alongside Vancouver and Amsterdam. I can see he's delighted

:29:13. > :29:16.by that why the comment he is making to the government Chief Whip. On

:29:17. > :29:22.that basis, can we please have a statement from the Minister for the

:29:23. > :29:28.Northern powerhouse to discuss how transport links can be improved to a

:29:29. > :29:31.global city, and the UK global city of culture 2017, including

:29:32. > :29:36.electrified rail and the scrapping of the Humber tolls on the Humber

:29:37. > :29:41.Bridge. Can I congratulate her and all the people of Hull on a

:29:42. > :29:46.remarkable achievement. It's always a matter of pride to this country

:29:47. > :29:49.when one of our great cities received worldwide acclamation and

:29:50. > :29:54.we can all be proud of Hull making that achievement. We should also be

:29:55. > :29:58.proud of the preparations for the capital of culture year. It promises

:29:59. > :30:01.to be a great year for the city. I know my colleagues in different

:30:02. > :30:05.parts of government will do what they can to help ensure that for the

:30:06. > :30:09.people and authorities of Hull, it's a moment of great historic

:30:10. > :30:16.importance and enjoyment for the city. The Prime Minister quite

:30:17. > :30:19.rightly has made the decision that all members on this side of the

:30:20. > :30:23.house can speak with their conscience over the European debate,

:30:24. > :30:26.and rightly so. Given that, can we have a series of debates on the

:30:27. > :30:30.European Union and what it will mean for this country when the referendum

:30:31. > :30:34.comes, so the people of this country are aware of what they can and can't

:30:35. > :30:38.vote for and why they should and shouldn't vote the way there

:30:39. > :30:43.conscience is take, the way this side of the house can. I suspect we

:30:44. > :30:47.will have extensive debates in this house and around the country, and

:30:48. > :30:53.rightly so, over the next few months. This is perhaps the key

:30:54. > :30:59.issue for our generation. While there appears to the debate around

:31:00. > :31:04.much of the country, they do not have the debate on the other side of

:31:05. > :31:07.the house. They called for a reformed European Union, but will

:31:08. > :31:14.not say what they are prepared to reform. Can I thank the leader of

:31:15. > :31:20.the house for his kind comments in relation to the new leader of the

:31:21. > :31:27.DUP, and the incoming First Minister. We look forward to a

:31:28. > :31:29.bright future for Northern Ireland. The leader of the house will be

:31:30. > :31:34.aware, because I know of his interest in this, of the High Court

:31:35. > :31:37.decision to grant a was at control licence, something that took five

:31:38. > :31:47.years to happen. In light of that High Court decision, will the leader

:31:48. > :31:53.of the house say that all future buzzard control licences will be

:31:54. > :32:01.looked unfavourably in the future? I will ensure that my right honourable

:32:02. > :32:08.friend takes a look and gives a proper response. I'll ask him to

:32:09. > :32:10.write to and respond. As somebody interested in international Pavel

:32:11. > :32:15.and, you will be interested to know I just returned from Uganda, looking

:32:16. > :32:20.at the terrible situation of the malaria epidemic in the north of the

:32:21. > :32:25.country. Could we have a debate on the health systems in Uganda which

:32:26. > :32:28.are failing the people, mothers and children are dying of malaria, it

:32:29. > :32:32.should not be happening in this day and age. Could we have an urgent

:32:33. > :32:38.debate on discussing this situation in this house, please. First of all,

:32:39. > :32:43.can I commend my honourable friend on the work she's doing. Malaria is

:32:44. > :32:46.a scourge in many parts of the world and is particularly bad in Uganda at

:32:47. > :32:51.the moment. They terrible disease that can cost the lives of very

:32:52. > :32:55.young people and blight communities. She makes a very portable point. I

:32:56. > :33:00.know she herself was looking to debate the matter of Uganda in this

:33:01. > :33:06.house. There is a broader debate happening in this house in the near

:33:07. > :33:11.future on the impact of a malaria globally. She makes a good point

:33:12. > :33:16.that the situation in Uganda merits attention in this house, and I hope

:33:17. > :33:21.the fact we are as prominent and international donor of aid as any

:33:22. > :33:24.country in the world, we could do some thing as a nation to help

:33:25. > :33:30.Uganda, a country with which we have historic ties. Could we debate

:33:31. > :33:35.whether Parliament is slipping back into its bad old ways that lead to

:33:36. > :33:39.the expenses scandal? In recent cases involving Malcolm Rifkind,

:33:40. > :33:47.Jack Straw, Tim Yeo, and Lord Ben Carson wrote, we need decisions were

:33:48. > :33:50.made by bodies in this house, but harsh decisions made by independent

:33:51. > :33:57.voices outside, including the courts and Ofcom. The committee

:33:58. > :34:02.adjudicating on Lord Ben, was chaired by Lord Siew, who has his

:34:03. > :34:06.own difficulties now. If we don't look at how one of our bodies who is

:34:07. > :34:14.meant to be a watchdog, is actually toothless Aussie cat, and look at

:34:15. > :34:19.the uselessness of it so, and expensive ornament, isn't there a

:34:20. > :34:26.grave danger we can slip back into new scandals in the future? I think

:34:27. > :34:31.we now have the most regulated system of operation for any

:34:32. > :34:36.Parliament across the whole of Europe, probably. The reality is

:34:37. > :34:39.that there are always cases to be made to improve the situation. I

:34:40. > :34:46.will not discuss individual members here or of the House of Lords, but

:34:47. > :34:50.there are proper processes in the house to make changes and

:34:51. > :34:53.improvements, meticulously through the standards and privileges

:34:54. > :35:01.committee, which has responsibility for the overall approach. This

:35:02. > :35:07.Christmas news headlines were dominated by the floods. We can

:35:08. > :35:13.recognise that. I'm concerned about the number of wildlife that has been

:35:14. > :35:17.lost, including hedgehogs. While Plymouth didn't face the kind of

:35:18. > :35:22.problems that saw the railway line at Dawlish washed away, over the

:35:23. > :35:27.last to make years, in my constituency the walls are falling

:35:28. > :35:31.into the sea. Can we have a statement from the government as to

:35:32. > :35:35.how it is local authorities can make sure they can apply for money in

:35:36. > :35:41.order to deliver and look after their heritage as well. Can I start

:35:42. > :35:45.by saying to my honourable friend that I have seen over Christmas that

:35:46. > :35:48.he has continued his valuable campaign on protecting the hedgehog,

:35:49. > :35:53.and I'm sure we will hear more about that work in the coming months. In

:35:54. > :35:56.terms of the impact of floods, last year it was about the south-west,

:35:57. > :36:02.this year it's about challenges further north. It's important we

:36:03. > :36:06.learn lessons. We have to ensure we make compensation available for

:36:07. > :36:10.communities affected by flooding, and there are various mechanisms and

:36:11. > :36:13.funds available for communities to protect historic buildings and

:36:14. > :36:16.historic sites. There are many of those in his constituency and I will

:36:17. > :36:22.be happy to make sure that the relevant minister talks to him about

:36:23. > :36:26.the options available. The leader will be aware of significant

:36:27. > :36:31.concerns that the UK might be in breach of international law for

:36:32. > :36:38.supplying Saudi Arabia with weapons used in the Yemen. Does the leader

:36:39. > :36:40.have any intelligence about when the arms intelligence select committee

:36:41. > :36:45.will be re-established. We need that select committee looking at the

:36:46. > :36:51.issues and ensuring the UK is not in breach of international law. That

:36:52. > :36:54.committee is effectively a conglomeration of four difference

:36:55. > :36:59.elected committees that can meet whenever. Its decision to meet and

:37:00. > :37:02.not meat is not a matter for the government, it's a matter for the

:37:03. > :37:11.chairs of those committees. There's no reason that can't happen now. I

:37:12. > :37:17.was disturbed last night when I visited a winter night shelter

:37:18. > :37:21.posted by churches across Enfield. I spoke to a man who told me that if

:37:22. > :37:26.it wasn't for the night shelter, he would be travelling around the night

:37:27. > :37:30.buses tonight and in future nights because he himself is either not too

:37:31. > :37:36.young or vulnerable enough to get housing. Can we have a debate which

:37:37. > :37:38.looks at developing a cross departmental strategy for

:37:39. > :37:41.homelessness which will prevent people like him becoming homeless in

:37:42. > :37:46.the future. It should not be tolerated in Britain in 2016. Can I

:37:47. > :37:53.start by commending my honourable friend. He is typical of many people

:37:54. > :37:57.in this house who do unseen and unsung work in the community,

:37:58. > :38:01.visiting shelters, spending nights out with the homeless on the

:38:02. > :38:05.streets. I commend him for what he's doing and bringing this issue to the

:38:06. > :38:08.house. The best solution for homelessness is to have more homes,

:38:09. > :38:15.which is at the centre of which this covenant is doing. -- what this

:38:16. > :38:21.government is doing. We will do what we can to end the blight of

:38:22. > :38:26.homelessness. Can we have a debate on how we improve support and the

:38:27. > :38:33.dignity of people who suffer in continents. Sadly there is a

:38:34. > :38:38.postcode lottery across the UK for access to support and advice on

:38:39. > :38:45.these problems. There is also a problem and how often you can access

:38:46. > :38:52.the problems materials to deal with the problem. 200,000 people were

:38:53. > :39:00.admitted to hospital with your retreat tract infections. If we

:39:01. > :39:03.attack these problems we can do it with dignity and respect and save

:39:04. > :39:07.considerable sums of money. Can we look at this problem across covenant

:39:08. > :39:16.and see how we can begin to tackle it? For those who suffer from the

:39:17. > :39:20.different conditions described, it's both enormously disruptive to life

:39:21. > :39:24.and distressing, but the decisions about these things are devolved, not

:39:25. > :39:27.only with the United Kingdom to different parts of the United

:39:28. > :39:30.Kingdom, but local clinical and commissioning groups who take the

:39:31. > :39:34.decisions about how to operate policies in their local communities.

:39:35. > :39:37.Where there are members who have a situation in their constituency

:39:38. > :39:40.which they think are not right, they need to take those up with the local

:39:41. > :39:44.clinical and commissioning groups and try to get a change of practice

:39:45. > :39:49.in those communities. My constituency in Kettering are

:39:50. > :39:52.outraged that an illegal immigrant from Sudan, who broke into this

:39:53. > :39:58.country by walking through the Channel Tunnel has this week been

:39:59. > :40:03.awarded asylum and allowed to stay here. Not only does this send an

:40:04. > :40:07.appalling signal to the staff at Eurotunnel and our hard-working

:40:08. > :40:10.border staff, both in this country and in France, what's the point in

:40:11. > :40:17.intercepting these people if they are going to be given permission to

:40:18. > :40:20.stay? It gives a green light to illegal immigrant is across the

:40:21. > :40:23.world, that they might as well give it a go, because they might make

:40:24. > :40:28.asylum. Can we have an urgent statement from the Home Office on

:40:29. > :40:31.this matter. I understand the concerns by honourable friend makes.

:40:32. > :40:34.We have Home Office questions on Monday. We are subject to

:40:35. > :40:37.international rules about asylum claims, and the best way of

:40:38. > :40:41.addressing those pressures is to continue the work we are doing to

:40:42. > :40:49.make sure border controls in Calais are secure and I'm grateful for the

:40:50. > :40:56.work the French government has done on this. It's a constant battle for

:40:57. > :41:00.the border forces. Can I congratulate the leader of the house

:41:01. > :41:03.on his bold leadership of the anti-European faction in the

:41:04. > :41:08.government. Has he considered what all this means for the geography of

:41:09. > :41:12.the house? As I understand it, if the Right Honourable member for

:41:13. > :41:15.Leeds Central loyally supports his leader by disagreeing with him

:41:16. > :41:23.again, he will be moved to the backbench. But in leader of the

:41:24. > :41:28.house is summing up, we'll he moved from the dispatch box as to the

:41:29. > :41:31.backs benches? Call me old-fashioned, but could we go back

:41:32. > :41:35.to the previous practice where government ministers not agreeing

:41:36. > :41:42.with the policies of their own government, they just tendered their

:41:43. > :41:50.resignations. If I understand correctly, we are about to move on

:41:51. > :41:55.from the days of call Nick Clegg on LBC, to the days of call Alex

:41:56. > :42:03.Salmond on LBC. When he gets a call from Chris of South London, can he

:42:04. > :42:07.work out whether... North London? I look forward to hearing the

:42:08. > :42:10.programme. I will say that we will all have a lively debate over the

:42:11. > :42:14.next few months. It's right and proper to have the debate as a

:42:15. > :42:18.nation. I have to say to him, on this side of the house we are a

:42:19. > :42:20.united party in government. On that side of hours we have an opposition

:42:21. > :42:35.not to be in opposition. Three quarters of all pensions tax

:42:36. > :42:40.relief goes to those who least needed. Can we have a debate on

:42:41. > :42:47.addressing the situation and proper reform for pensions tax relief so

:42:48. > :42:51.that we can benefit millions of ordinary British workers? The

:42:52. > :42:53.Chancellor of the Exchequer is currently undertaking a review of

:42:54. > :42:59.pension tax relief and we are pension system works. I know he has

:43:00. > :43:01.great expertise in the Celia and I would urge him to discuss his views

:43:02. > :43:09.with the Chancellor and make sure they go into the review. When it

:43:10. > :43:21.comes to discussions of reform, there will be a chance to debate it.

:43:22. > :43:26.Could we have a debate on the use of language in this house and find out

:43:27. > :43:29.what the Prime Minister means when he says he's going to look into

:43:30. > :43:33.something, what ministers mean when they say they will review something

:43:34. > :43:38.and discussion about what is meant when someone asks a question of a

:43:39. > :43:47.wanton answer to that question, not some thing completely unrelated to

:43:48. > :43:55.that question. Nobody this week had accused Labour Party or the lack of

:43:56. > :44:00.plain speaking. Member after member opposite has lined up to say their

:44:01. > :44:09.leader is hopeless. The question is, are reactionary going to do anything

:44:10. > :44:17.about it? And please have a debate on the health benefits of eating

:44:18. > :44:24.black pudding? My right honourable friend will not doubt have seen

:44:25. > :44:29.reports this week that those tasty delicacy is full of protein,

:44:30. > :44:34.potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron and sync, so it is not only good for

:44:35. > :44:40.you, it is actually a superfood and the debate will enable us to make

:44:41. > :44:55.sure the benefits are more widely known. There were distinct nods of

:44:56. > :45:04.approval from the deputy shadow leader but not the same view from

:45:05. > :45:08.the leader. I remember working walking -- walking round market is

:45:09. > :45:15.seeing black puddings and they are tasty too weak perhaps in

:45:16. > :45:20.moderation. Given that 21 members stuck it out and 2:30am yesterday to

:45:21. > :45:26.take part in any debate on the world's on the Welsh language

:45:27. > :45:30.channel and only to receive the most land of brush of this, surely there

:45:31. > :45:40.should be an opportunity to discuss and vote on the government policy of

:45:41. > :45:46.milking the channel to death. Westland was broadcasting is

:45:47. > :45:51.important as any changes brought forward would be a matter for

:45:52. > :45:59.discussion and debate in this house. -- Welsh language broadcasting. I

:46:00. > :46:02.student enquiry into it pump prices and we heard the number of

:46:03. > :46:07.independent petrol retailers is reduced from 14,000 to 8600 in the

:46:08. > :46:14.last decade. They said the automated car washes have been a much-needed

:46:15. > :46:20.source of income for independent petrol retailers, but it is now

:46:21. > :46:25.calculated that 30,000 people are now employed in the hand car washing

:46:26. > :46:31.industry and the petrol retailers Association can't the Treasury could

:46:32. > :46:38.be missing out on ?200 million of tax, and debate on the hand car

:46:39. > :46:42.washing industry, please? There will be an opportunity to raise this at

:46:43. > :46:45.Treasury questions shortly, but the important thing here is not to say,

:46:46. > :46:49.we shouldn't have hand car washing of this country, but to make sure

:46:50. > :46:54.that people doing it and the businesses operating at our

:46:55. > :46:57.operating properly within the tax system and have legitimate right to

:46:58. > :47:04.be doing the work, to make sure they don't hold back any other business.

:47:05. > :47:11.This week, the Department of Justice and the United States filed a civil

:47:12. > :47:16.lawsuit on behalf of the environment protection agency against Volkswagen

:47:17. > :47:19.cars on behalf of the fact that 600,000 engines were basically

:47:20. > :47:26.illegal because of defeat devices. It might of the fact that 30,000

:47:27. > :47:31.people in Britain die from diesel emissions, much of the contribution

:47:32. > :47:35.to those extra emissions from the illegal defeat devices, what legal

:47:36. > :47:39.action or the government take, in line with the Americans, against

:47:40. > :47:51.Volkswagen and can we have an urgent debate on this matter? What VW did

:47:52. > :47:53.was shocking and inappropriate, but prosecution decisions in this

:47:54. > :47:58.country are not a matter for government, they had a matter for

:47:59. > :48:02.the relevant authorities. I'm sure they will note what he has said

:48:03. > :48:07.today, but it would be wrong for politicians to get directly involved

:48:08. > :48:10.in prosecution decisions. Over the Christmas period, I had to

:48:11. > :48:15.constituents, one Muslim and one Jewish, contact me about problems

:48:16. > :48:20.they had with the out of hours coroners service. Pupil of those

:48:21. > :48:24.religions need is death certificate within 24 hours to comply with their

:48:25. > :48:28.religious beliefs and dispose of the body. Can we have administered come

:48:29. > :48:31.and explain to the house how the government is making sure that is

:48:32. > :48:39.professional across the whole of the UK to make sure there is a 24-hour

:48:40. > :48:45.coroners service available to all? I am aware of the issues and

:48:46. > :48:48.challenges we face in north London and the communities who live there.

:48:49. > :48:53.This is an area now subject to review by the Minister of Justice

:48:54. > :48:57.and I would hope they can bring forward ideas to improve the

:48:58. > :49:04.situation. Can we have a debate on government time of the plight of the

:49:05. > :49:12.3000 refugees living in tents near Dunkirk. 90% of people suffering

:49:13. > :49:15.from scabies and 80% suffering from hypothermia. Does the leader of the

:49:16. > :49:20.house think this is a people should live and does he not accept that the

:49:21. > :49:24.UK Government must do more? I have a simple view on this. Firstly, we are

:49:25. > :49:30.providing more support to refugees in and around Syria and any other

:49:31. > :49:35.country except United States. We're taking thousands of refugees into

:49:36. > :49:38.this country to provide the most honourable with the route to skip

:49:39. > :49:42.that environment. But I do not believe you should be able to come

:49:43. > :49:48.through France and just come into United Kingdom. If you are genuine

:49:49. > :49:53.refugee, you are seeking safe haven. France is a safe haven. It is not

:49:54. > :49:59.clear to me why we should throw open borders and allow people to travel

:50:00. > :50:04.to the United Kingdom. Honeypot Lane Forest part of the border between my

:50:05. > :50:10.constituency had a yeast and the honourable member for Brent North.

:50:11. > :50:16.It is also that spider boundary BG Group read in Harrow. Brent Bader

:50:17. > :50:20.has a policy to introduce a barking exclusion zone on honeypot Lane. All

:50:21. > :50:26.the residents on each side have been consulted and objected. On the

:50:27. > :50:31.Harrow size, there has been no consultation other than a tatty

:50:32. > :50:35.notice applied to a lamp post. We have a debate in government time on

:50:36. > :50:40.the implementation of controlled parking zones and the need for

:50:41. > :50:45.public authorities to properly consult people before anything is

:50:46. > :50:48.done. This is a matter of local controversy, maybe one were to

:50:49. > :50:52.members could be working together, but in terms of the overall rules,

:50:53. > :50:57.the practicalities going to have to be dealt with at a local level, but

:50:58. > :51:04.you have the opportunity to argue that the duty of local authority to

:51:05. > :51:09.make people aware of changes could be raised at the next local

:51:10. > :51:11.government debate. On Tuesday, a Foreign Office minister told the

:51:12. > :51:19.house that is no agreement on judicial Corporation between the UK

:51:20. > :51:24.and Saudi governments. The Secretary of State visited Riyadh to sign a

:51:25. > :51:30.memo of understanding on judicial Corporation. The government refused

:51:31. > :51:41.to publish a memorandum, could we have a statement to explain the

:51:42. > :51:53.stark inconsistency? There will be plenty of occasions to challenge

:51:54. > :51:56.that in the coming weeks. Following the recent local government

:51:57. > :52:02.settlement, Lancashire County Council will have 713 million to

:52:03. > :52:06.spend, compared with 704 million this year, yet the Labour run

:52:07. > :52:11.council continue to slash services and waste money, the latest example

:52:12. > :52:15.being spending 6.6 million on consultants to help them identify

:52:16. > :52:20.cuts they can make. In a debate on local government finance to discuss

:52:21. > :52:26.the appalling way some of our local councils are being run. We have a

:52:27. > :52:30.debate coming up on funding for rule all areas. It is quite noticeable at

:52:31. > :52:36.Conservative councils using the challenges real face have risen to

:52:37. > :52:38.the challenge is to deliver high quality services at a lower price of

:52:39. > :52:46.Labour councils are struggling with the money they have got. Driven

:52:47. > :52:51.grouse shoots damage wildlife, increase water pollution, increase

:52:52. > :52:57.greenhouse gas emissions, increase water bills, resulted in the illegal

:52:58. > :52:59.killing of Penn Harriers and shed water off the hillside, causing

:53:00. > :53:03.millions of pounds of damage and floods, such as we have seen in

:53:04. > :53:11.recent weeks. Could we have a debate and vote on whether to abolish

:53:12. > :53:14.driven grouse shoots? We believe we should support our countryside and

:53:15. > :53:17.our country traditions. Those on the other side of the house have no

:53:18. > :53:20.interest in the ruble communities, no interest in the people who live

:53:21. > :53:27.in those communities and every time they go there, they do gym damage to

:53:28. > :53:42.those communities. -- rule all communities. -- rural communities. A

:53:43. > :53:50.student at a Glasgow colleges was removed from the UK, and now his

:53:51. > :53:54.home and those of his relatives have been raided by Pakistan authorities

:53:55. > :53:59.and he finds himself on the run. While the government make a

:54:00. > :54:03.statement or a lover debate on government time and deportation and

:54:04. > :54:08.government removal orders and how we arrange a safe passage back to UK

:54:09. > :54:13.for those people served with those orders? I don't the details of the

:54:14. > :54:16.case, the Home Secretary will be fewer on Monday to answer questions.

:54:17. > :54:23.We have to provide a fair balance in this country be June providing a

:54:24. > :54:28.refuge for people who are genuinely fleeing persecution, but we can't

:54:29. > :54:32.provide an open door for everyone. In the last eight days, we have seen

:54:33. > :54:39.a Chinese government to value its own currency and intervene

:54:40. > :54:42.aggressively on its own manufacturing business. Can we have

:54:43. > :54:47.a statement from the government on why they are supporting Chinese

:54:48. > :54:54.manufacturing, given the amount of steel which is flooding the UK

:54:55. > :54:57.market. We have Treasury questions coming up shortly and the

:54:58. > :55:00.opportunity will be there to question the Chancellor. It is right

:55:01. > :55:03.and proper to maintain close ties with China, which is shaping up to

:55:04. > :55:18.be the world's biggest economy for this century.

:55:19. > :55:25.Many of my constituents have lost Motability vehicles only to have

:55:26. > :55:29.them restored at a later date on subsequent appeal, but causing a

:55:30. > :55:36.huge amount of distress, a real sense of isolation. Motability is an

:55:37. > :55:41.important scheme and indeed, the welfare support we provide to people

:55:42. > :55:44.who face disability challenges is very important, but it is right and

:55:45. > :55:47.proper that we have gateways in place. One of the reasons we change

:55:48. > :56:01.the system was that a large number of people who were receiving at an

:56:02. > :56:07.allowance or not the people who really needed it. In a statement

:56:08. > :56:10.from piling minister and carbon reduction and building regulations,

:56:11. > :56:16.given that it is clear to all but ministers that it is more

:56:17. > :56:20.cost-effective to integrate solar power on buildings at the

:56:21. > :56:24.construction stage, both the Greater London authority and the Scottish

:56:25. > :56:27.Government have improved their building regulations in this

:56:28. > :56:35.respect. Isn't it time that the rest of the United Kingdom followed suit?

:56:36. > :56:37.I think we have a wreckage and government second to none and

:56:38. > :56:42.encouraging the growth of pupils in this country. In the last year, we

:56:43. > :56:49.have seen the level of electricity generated by renewables rise by 25%.

:56:50. > :56:53.But in the end, there has to be a degree of flexibility for builders

:56:54. > :57:05.to decide what products they actually build.

:57:06. > :57:10.During our enquiry, received evidence from industry experts that

:57:11. > :57:14.manufacturers were treating the safety regulations in order to get

:57:15. > :57:18.around them. Is it not the case that we now need a debate in this house

:57:19. > :57:22.on the regulation of cars and other vehicles on the road as far as

:57:23. > :57:27.software that is concerned and cheating devices used for emissions,

:57:28. > :57:30.because the list of countries taking action across the world is getting

:57:31. > :57:50.longer, and the UK Government's silence is getting more definite. --

:57:51. > :57:57.If he feels the need to bring the matter to this house it should talk

:57:58. > :58:05.to the chair of the backbench business committee. If the EU was to

:58:06. > :58:09.confirm the status of coming is China, it would have a detrimental

:58:10. > :58:13.effect on UK steel jobs. Could we have a statement in this house to

:58:14. > :58:17.update us on discussions in Europe on this matter and UK Government

:58:18. > :58:22.position? He will have that opportunity on Tuesday because the

:58:23. > :58:25.Foreign Secretary will take questions and I encourage him to put

:58:26. > :58:31.the point to the Foreign Secretary. We are long overdue a debate on the

:58:32. > :58:35.Parliamentary and health service ombudsman. We have a nonsensical

:58:36. > :58:39.situation where it's supposed to be the ombudsman for Parliament and

:58:40. > :58:41.parliamentarians, but the system can only be changed if the government

:58:42. > :58:47.decides to bring forward legislation. Bollettieri 's in this

:58:48. > :58:53.house must have decisions on where the optimum instruction and

:58:54. > :58:59.ombudsman without fearing interference from government. In

:59:00. > :59:05.maybe the backbench business committee is the right way to test

:59:06. > :59:08.the views of this house and see how the people share his opinions. There

:59:09. > :59:11.is a matter of debate about the future of the ombudsman, how it's

:59:12. > :59:18.structured and how it works. I expect to see it debated in the

:59:19. > :59:21.coming months. We know this house relies on convention and following

:59:22. > :59:26.on from the comments from the Right Honourable friend from Gordon, can I

:59:27. > :59:29.get a statement from the leader of the house to explain his

:59:30. > :59:34.understanding of collective carbon at responsibility, and what has to

:59:35. > :59:39.happen for Cabinet members who disagree with policy and how does

:59:40. > :59:42.that compare with a weak Prime Minister who will allow his

:59:43. > :59:48.ministers to campaign against his own viewpoint? We have a grown-up

:59:49. > :59:51.approach to politics on this side of the house. We will have a great

:59:52. > :59:57.national debate and the primers that has set out his position. Looking at

:59:58. > :00:01.the party opposite, and I don't blame the Scottish Nationalists for

:00:02. > :00:10.this, and they looked at the vote on Syria, a free vote, and those who

:00:11. > :00:14.spoke out against the leader were sacked. We come to the backbench

:00:15. > :00:20.motion on the effect of the equalisation of the state pension

:00:21. > :00:29.age on women. To move the motion, I call Mhairi Black. I beg to move the

:00:30. > :00:33.motion on the order paper. I want to thank the backbench committee for

:00:34. > :00:40.giving us the time to debate this important issue. I especially want

:00:41. > :00:46.to take the time to thank the women of age inequality team. Pensions are

:00:47. > :00:49.obligated, as you can imagine, but these ordinary women have managed to

:00:50. > :00:53.take the time to sift through all this information and have come up

:00:54. > :00:56.and drafted one of the most comprehensive and articulate

:00:57. > :01:02.briefings I have seen since I was elected. I want to thank them for

:01:03. > :01:05.articulating that argument so well. It's precisely because pensions are

:01:06. > :01:15.so, the gated that I think it's important... -- are so complicated.

:01:16. > :01:18.The honourable member makes an important starting statement given

:01:19. > :01:24.the pensions minister has admitted he made a bad decision based on

:01:25. > :01:29.inadequate briefing. Former pensions minister, sorry. Is it not therefore

:01:30. > :01:33.only right that the house considers this decision today and takes it

:01:34. > :01:38.seriously in terms of making the absolute right decision with the

:01:39. > :01:42.right information before it? I think that's why this bait is so important

:01:43. > :01:48.and we should call on the government to act. I think because pensions are

:01:49. > :01:53.so come placated, it's important not just for the benefit of members or

:01:54. > :01:56.people in the gallery of people watching at home, it's important to

:01:57. > :02:00.try to explain why these women have found themselves in a position they

:02:01. > :02:04.have done. To do so we have to go back to 1995 when the pension act

:02:05. > :02:10.increased the female state pension age from 60 to 65. The purpose of

:02:11. > :02:14.this was to equalise the pension age so women were retiring at the same

:02:15. > :02:17.age as men. That's fair enough, it makes sense, and I don't think

:02:18. > :02:22.anyone would disagree with that principle. The Turner commission

:02:23. > :02:25.recommended that the 15 years notice should be given to individuals if

:02:26. > :02:29.their pension arrangements are going to change in order to give them

:02:30. > :02:34.adequate time to respond appropriately. The 1995 act

:02:35. > :02:39.technically didn't do that. Equalisation, the changes were not

:02:40. > :02:43.to be brought in until 2010, and that would technically give women 15

:02:44. > :02:47.years notice, but the problem is, nobody knew about it. The reality is

:02:48. > :02:53.that less than half of women knew this would affect them as late as

:02:54. > :02:57.2008. The National Centre for social research stated that in 2011 only

:02:58. > :03:04.43% of women were aware of the plans change. I'm grateful to the

:03:05. > :03:10.honourable lady for giving way, and she makes an important point about

:03:11. > :03:13.people not being aware. It seems people on the front benches are not

:03:14. > :03:22.aware. There is not an equalities minister here, not even the DWP

:03:23. > :03:26.ministers are here. It's noticeable that it's a pity how few

:03:27. > :03:29.Conservatives have turned out. It's important to highlight that not a

:03:30. > :03:34.single letter was sent out by the government to women. There was no

:03:35. > :03:36.official correspondence between the government and the individuals

:03:37. > :03:40.affected alerting them to the changes that would happen to them.

:03:41. > :03:46.Even previous pensions Minister Steve Webster realised that not

:03:47. > :03:57.everybody knew what had happened in the 1995 act. They freed of

:03:58. > :04:02.information application says that information was disbursed between

:04:03. > :04:10.2009 and 2013, 14 years after the act. Women were not notified by

:04:11. > :04:19.anyone official until 14 years after the regulations came in. 14 years

:04:20. > :04:22.less to prepare. She is making an important point, but isn't the

:04:23. > :04:27.injustice to this set of women, this in a knot shell, they haven't just

:04:28. > :04:32.had one change to the pension age, they've had two and the process has

:04:33. > :04:38.been accelerated and there is no transitional arrangements in place.

:04:39. > :04:44.Isn't that the real unfairness here? To go back to the correspondence

:04:45. > :04:48.between the government... On you go. Thank you for giving way. I have a

:04:49. > :04:52.great deal of sympathy with what she is saying, and would she accept that

:04:53. > :04:55.the need for equalisation is generally accepted, and is right and

:04:56. > :05:01.proper, would she perhaps consider that it would be sensible to urge

:05:02. > :05:04.the government to look at the sort of transition arrangements that were

:05:05. > :05:09.made with public sector pensions reform, where there was some 10-15

:05:10. > :05:14.year arrangements? Would that be instructive going forward? As I said

:05:15. > :05:18.at the beginning, I don't think anybody in here has the problem with

:05:19. > :05:24.the principle of the transition to equality. In this instance we are

:05:25. > :05:29.talking about women's pensions, so it's important to bring it back to

:05:30. > :05:31.that. The fact of the matter is that multiple constituents who have

:05:32. > :05:36.written to me have said that from the letters they did receive, the

:05:37. > :05:40.information was conflicting. They were getting different information.

:05:41. > :05:44.In one case, a constituent of mine had been told they had enough

:05:45. > :05:48.contributions to receive a full date pension at 60, which was only a few

:05:49. > :05:51.months away, only to receive a further letter three weeks later

:05:52. > :05:55.telling her that in actual fact she would not get her pension until she

:05:56. > :05:59.was nearly 66. Many of the letters did not even reach the people they

:06:00. > :06:03.were supposed to. Some were told by MPs and ministers they must have

:06:04. > :06:06.given the DWP the wrong addresses. The reality is that these women have

:06:07. > :06:14.been living in the same house for many years. They have been living in

:06:15. > :06:18.these houses for over 20 years, so I find that difficult to believe. Some

:06:19. > :06:21.people say you shouldn't have to be written to, it's your pension and

:06:22. > :06:24.you should keep an eye on it, look out for the reports and take

:06:25. > :06:28.responsible to. But when giving evidence to the work and pensions

:06:29. > :06:32.committee, a financial journalist told us that after researching this

:06:33. > :06:38.himself, he could barely find any reporting of the issue at all in

:06:39. > :06:43.1995. There were very few small press cuttings in the business pages

:06:44. > :06:46.at the back of some newspapers. Another Freedom of Information Act

:06:47. > :06:51.states that the government funded "Broader awareness campaigns goes

:06:52. > :06:59.good which ran in ways between 2001 and 2004. These campaigns did not

:07:00. > :07:03.focus on equalisation in particular. In fact, one of the press adverts in

:07:04. > :07:08.these campaigns were focused on this issue. One press cutting, roughly

:07:09. > :07:12.seven years after it had been passed into law. The whole thing clearly

:07:13. > :07:18.became a total mess. That's quite evident. I don't know whether it

:07:19. > :07:21.wasn't reported deliberately, for political reasons, fear of

:07:22. > :07:25.ramification. I don't know if it was a genuine accident, I do not know.

:07:26. > :07:29.But I know women were not notified and it wasn't reported and they were

:07:30. > :07:32.not given enough time to make appropriate arrangements. That

:07:33. > :07:40.brings us onto the pension act of 2007. It increased the equalised SBA

:07:41. > :07:45.from 65 to 66 between 2024 and 26, giving all that affected people

:07:46. > :07:51.effectively 17 years notice. That's fair enough, but then we come to

:07:52. > :07:55.what my colleague has mentioned, the pensions act of 2011. That came

:07:56. > :08:01.along and said, forget 17 years notice, we will rush it through. We

:08:02. > :08:06.need to do it now. The 2011 act accelerated pension age for women,

:08:07. > :08:11.the subsequent age increase from six V6 from October 2016 onwards,

:08:12. > :08:18.meaning affected women had only five years notice to remedy life plans

:08:19. > :08:21.that had been in place for years. She's making an excellent speech and

:08:22. > :08:26.I welcome the debate she has brought to the house. Would she agree with

:08:27. > :08:31.me that many of these women, had a lifetime of low and unequal pay to

:08:32. > :08:35.men, lower than they should be getting. They would have had broken

:08:36. > :08:40.careers, because they may have brought up children. They may have

:08:41. > :08:43.separated, got divorced, and the whole life plan has been disrupted,

:08:44. > :08:49.destroyed and impoverished by these awful changes. I couldn't agree more

:08:50. > :08:53.with what the honourable gentleman said, something I will touch on

:08:54. > :08:58.later. Referring back to the 2011 act, it made women have to wait an

:08:59. > :09:01.extra year or year and a half to claim a state pension. We have to

:09:02. > :09:06.remember and take it in the context that women did not know about the

:09:07. > :09:11.initial 1995 act. We have a situation where a whole host of

:09:12. > :09:15.women read about the 2011 act, thought they would have to do work

:09:16. > :09:19.extra two years, make the plans, and then figure out, I working to line

:09:20. > :09:25.six D6. Where did that come from? A host of women have been given a

:09:26. > :09:32.double whammy. -- have to work until I'm 66. The Conservative ethos is to

:09:33. > :09:36.encourage independence and responsible choice, but how can that

:09:37. > :09:44.happen if you don't give people the time to make responsible choices? By

:09:45. > :09:52.continuing this policy... Hold on a second... No, I'm right! The

:09:53. > :09:56.government is to liberally placing another burden on women who have

:09:57. > :09:59.orally had to deal with the consequences of an act passed 21

:10:00. > :10:06.years ago they have only found out about now. To put that in context,

:10:07. > :10:10.I'm 21, this is how old it is. One of my constituents told me she began

:10:11. > :10:14.working at 17, and she chose to pay the full rate of national insurance

:10:15. > :10:19.on the basis she would retire at 60. Other options were available to her,

:10:20. > :10:22.but you said you wanted to retire at 60, so she paid the price through

:10:23. > :10:26.national insurance her whole working life. She put it in a way that I

:10:27. > :10:30.think is good and accurate to describe what is happening, because

:10:31. > :10:34.she's found out she is not retiring until six D6. He says the coalition

:10:35. > :10:46.and this present government have stripped as Oz of pensions --

:10:47. > :10:50.stripped us of pensions. Pensions are not a benefit, they are a

:10:51. > :10:53.contract. People enter into them, on the basis that if they pay extra

:10:54. > :11:02.amount of national insurance, they will receive why at a certain age.

:11:03. > :11:08.Is this same case as my constituent who at 57 and a half realised she

:11:09. > :11:11.would no longer be able to retire at 60. She's a care worker doing an

:11:12. > :11:16.extremely physically demanding job, and now has to work until the age of

:11:17. > :11:20.66. She has low income throughout life, working as a care worker, and

:11:21. > :11:27.now has to carry on this demanding job for a further six years. I think

:11:28. > :11:30.every member in here, if they got in contact with their constituents

:11:31. > :11:34.would recognise this is a problem that spreads across the whole of the

:11:35. > :11:40.UK and affects women of all classes, backgrounds and jobs. In criminal

:11:41. > :11:45.law, if we want to send a prisoner to jail, it has to be agreed

:11:46. > :11:49.beforehand how long that person is going away for. If that changes,

:11:50. > :11:53.there are appropriate measures to deal with that. In civil law, if we

:11:54. > :11:56.enter into a contract, there are terms and conditions that say if you

:11:57. > :11:59.want to change the contract, break out of it, there is a price to pay.

:12:00. > :12:09.Why pensions any different? deafening this is a contract people

:12:10. > :12:14.have entered into and it is now being broken. These women have done

:12:15. > :12:20.exactly what was asked of them. They have worked hard all their lives, a

:12:21. > :12:26.bigger national insurance. If the government chooses to continue with

:12:27. > :12:30.this policy, it completely ignores the years of genuine inequality

:12:31. > :12:34.these women have lived through. Another constituent of mine explains

:12:35. > :12:37.she worked until her children came along. A husband could no longer

:12:38. > :12:43.work due to disability. She was determined not to depend on the

:12:44. > :12:49.benefits, so she studied, she became a primary school teacher. She cured

:12:50. > :12:53.her husband and she has never claimed anything, but she has based

:12:54. > :13:00.whole carb ones around a retirement age of 60. She has now found out she

:13:01. > :13:05.cannot retire until she was 66. Unpaid carers are the unsung heroes

:13:06. > :13:10.of our economy. They have saved the state and absolute fortune, time and

:13:11. > :13:16.time again. Sadly, we come from a society where women have had to live

:13:17. > :13:21.with gender roles where the vast majority of unpaid carers are women.

:13:22. > :13:25.That is a type of people this policy is hitting. It's hitting the kind of

:13:26. > :13:30.people who can't afford to go six years without any care or attention.

:13:31. > :13:34.Some women are being left penniless. They have nothing and I been forced

:13:35. > :13:41.to turn to the state for benefits. How does that fit into the logic of

:13:42. > :13:44.reducing public spending? The government will see that women will

:13:45. > :13:49.do better under the new single tier state pension, but we have the

:13:50. > :13:56.existence of a campaign, a collection against you inequality of

:13:57. > :13:59.the state pension. This is a collection of women pointing out

:14:00. > :14:04.another issue, which is you only receive the higher rate of the new

:14:05. > :14:08.pension if you have paid 35 years of national insurance. Many women

:14:09. > :14:14.haven't had the chance to build up that level. It is a separate issue,

:14:15. > :14:18.but I made it to raise awareness and in the hope that it will earn a

:14:19. > :14:21.debate in its own merit. The government has said the policy

:14:22. > :14:25.decision to increase women's state pension age is designed to remove

:14:26. > :14:33.the inequality between men and women. That is a strange definition

:14:34. > :14:40.of equality, if I being shafted and short-changed because of the fact

:14:41. > :14:45.that I am a woman. That's not my definition of equality. There are

:14:46. > :14:51.two problems at the heart of this. First is that the communication that

:14:52. > :14:56.has happened throughout the years. I accept that mistakes have been made

:14:57. > :15:02.and we need to make sure they are not repeated. But in the 2011 act,

:15:03. > :15:07.the rapid changes this government have made, that is something we can

:15:08. > :15:12.do something about. Unlike most things come from this government, I

:15:13. > :15:14.don't believe this policy is vindictive, I don't believe it's

:15:15. > :15:20.done in the knowledge that it will hurt people, I genuinely think we

:15:21. > :15:25.ended up in the situation because of mistake after mistake and we found

:15:26. > :15:29.ourselves in this position. Any mess can be cleared up. This policy does

:15:30. > :15:34.continue in the full knowledge of everything that has been outlined,

:15:35. > :15:37.then it will become vindictive. It will become deliberate and it will

:15:38. > :15:42.be done in full knowledge that people will be heart. I understand

:15:43. > :15:46.that we have to work in tandem and work with responsibility when it

:15:47. > :15:51.comes to the economy, but not by punishing people who are about to

:15:52. > :15:55.retire. Every topic we speak about comes down to where will you find

:15:56. > :16:00.the money, and the answer is or was austerity, now matter how brittle.

:16:01. > :16:04.Since I was elected, we have had a go at people on low wages, ago at

:16:05. > :16:10.the disabled, we have had a go at women, now were having a go at

:16:11. > :16:14.pensioners. We can afford to send it strikes into Syria, we can afford to

:16:15. > :16:19.pay for nuclear weapons, but we can't afford to look after our

:16:20. > :16:23.pensioners? I just don't buy it. Women who are setting up a Nat

:16:24. > :16:28.Gallery right now, they did not cause the financial crash, they did

:16:29. > :16:31.not cause the state of the economy and they did not make the

:16:32. > :16:35.irresponsible decisions that have got us here. I fully understand the

:16:36. > :16:39.question, where will you find the money, but I refuse to accept

:16:40. > :16:49.believe that it has become out of the pensions of older women. The

:16:50. > :16:58.question is as on the order paper, there will be a six minute limit on

:16:59. > :17:02.each backbench speech. Can I congratulate her work leading on

:17:03. > :17:06.this debate today? There is an extraordinary turnout and it shows

:17:07. > :17:12.what a considerable interest that is for all members of this house. I

:17:13. > :17:16.became involved in this campaign by accident. I was approached by

:17:17. > :17:20.several constituents, who said they were going to be disadvantaged by

:17:21. > :17:26.this. None of us really realise the extent of the hundreds of thousands

:17:27. > :17:31.of women who stand to be treated disproportionately unfurling. I went

:17:32. > :17:36.along to the Westminster Hall debate led by Lady Eccles. I expressed my

:17:37. > :17:44.sympathies and I recorded a short podcast on the subject, which has

:17:45. > :17:50.now been followed by 145,000 people, many of whom have written to me

:17:51. > :17:54.about it. I will be judged it to the campaign, who have articulated the

:17:55. > :17:59.case so well, the petition has now been signed by 103,000 people, and

:18:00. > :18:03.to thank them for the help and support they have given me in

:18:04. > :18:06.selling non-constituents to write to the lawn MPs, rather than writing to

:18:07. > :18:12.me, for which I am exceedingly grateful. With the equalisation of

:18:13. > :18:15.the pension age, we all agree with that, but then are large sums of

:18:16. > :18:20.money involved in this sand that are difficult decisions that have to be

:18:21. > :18:23.made. But it is important that the role of fairness is applied as much

:18:24. > :18:28.as possible and it is clear that a sizeable group of women seem to be

:18:29. > :18:39.wearing the brunt of these changes disproportionately. He is making an

:18:40. > :18:45.important speech. I would ask him, when he is talking about fairness,

:18:46. > :18:48.if he realises how this feels, the woman of my generation who all

:18:49. > :18:53.everything to those women who were born in the 50s, who fought for the

:18:54. > :18:58.equal pay act and for all the advantages that have given us any

:18:59. > :19:02.chance. Does he feel that I'm fairness to those women as I do? I

:19:03. > :19:08.have had representations from constituents who women low paid jobs

:19:09. > :19:12.with huge caring responsibilities for children and other family

:19:13. > :19:16.members, where they didn't have access to free childcare and other

:19:17. > :19:19.things, and we have them to thank for that, yet it is those people,

:19:20. > :19:25.for whom I think there has now been a breach of trust with those changes

:19:26. > :19:31.affecting them disproportionately. I don't think we will be fulfilling

:19:32. > :19:36.our duty of care for them. I very much agree with everything he's

:19:37. > :19:41.saying. But he also concede that the other pension forms, we were anxious

:19:42. > :19:47.to make sure there was protection for those unable to choose

:19:48. > :19:53.circumstances, and Beth operates unfairly on people who have worked

:19:54. > :19:57.all their lives but are unable to return to work because of medical

:19:58. > :20:00.conditions. Satisfy fairness these to be applied to everybody and in

:20:01. > :20:06.this case, there is a core water women who are not being treated

:20:07. > :20:13.fairly. Our pension system is funded on the contributory principle, this

:20:14. > :20:17.is not a state benefit for which no contribution is involved. Yet, this

:20:18. > :20:22.group of women who have been paying contributions in good faith, face

:20:23. > :20:27.being short-changed retrospectively. That many other factors be a

:20:28. > :20:31.reminder. Fewer than one in four women who qualify for the state

:20:32. > :20:38.pension next year will get the full amount. Fuel women than men will

:20:39. > :20:42.qualify. Women are significantly more likely to work part-time and

:20:43. > :20:49.for long periods of lives, largely driven by caring roles, they're

:20:50. > :20:53.there for ten to have less tension. I welcome the fact that the new

:20:54. > :20:59.single tier pension will recognise periods of time spent caring and

:21:00. > :21:02.that will help in the future. I acknowledge the government made

:21:03. > :21:07.progress in shrinking the gender pay gap, and that is no consultation on

:21:08. > :21:14.this. Progress has been made, with more women in work. There have been

:21:15. > :21:18.lots of generous reforms about entitlement to childcare and the

:21:19. > :21:23.National living wage. But these are all too late for the generation of

:21:24. > :21:30.women who worked without those advantages and bringing up their

:21:31. > :21:31.families. Many of them now have appealing responsibilities were

:21:32. > :21:39.grandchildren as well as having to hold down part-time jobs. I would

:21:40. > :21:43.give way now, because of our so many people who want to speak. It is

:21:44. > :21:45.right that the rise in pension age should reflect growing life

:21:46. > :21:54.expectancy, but studies show that life expectancy for women fell in

:21:55. > :22:00.2012, while the usual men continue to rise. There are discrepancies for

:22:01. > :22:05.those who are the Buddhist and society. They're the ones most

:22:06. > :22:16.reliable on the state pension and therefore most vulnerable to pension

:22:17. > :22:20.changes. Where they given proper and adequate notice? We all agree that

:22:21. > :22:26.didn't happen. The money expert Paul Lewis, who has helped this campaign,

:22:27. > :22:32.has detailed how little noticed someone and received. Approximately

:22:33. > :22:37.650,000 worst affected were only listened to in February 2012, which

:22:38. > :22:43.means they got the letters between the ages of 57 and 59 that there

:22:44. > :22:49.pension age would not be 60. Some received no notification at all.

:22:50. > :22:51.Precious little time to make alternative arrangements, even if

:22:52. > :22:59.they could afford to. That didn't happen now, because of changes to

:23:00. > :23:06.the state pension review. But as one of my constituents pointed out, a

:23:07. > :23:10.very important point is that if one considers what if ten or 15 years

:23:11. > :23:16.notice had been given, for women like ourselves who are low earners,

:23:17. > :23:20.they would not have had enough to pay into private pension on top of

:23:21. > :23:25.their contributions to national insurance. But this in perspective.

:23:26. > :23:32.In order to save enough into private pension for ?6,000 a year, you're

:23:33. > :23:35.looking at ?100,000. This is why, for low-paid people, the national

:23:36. > :23:41.insurance contributions are all the can afford and consequently totally

:23:42. > :23:44.depend on. So ten years notice is not enough time to pay enterprise at

:23:45. > :23:48.pension that the diesel the state pension. What she suggests is the

:23:49. > :23:52.reintroduction of pension credits, which is means tested and would

:23:53. > :23:57.alleviate the strain for those who find themselves in this position.

:23:58. > :24:01.This would let those who are genuinely hit the hardest out of

:24:02. > :24:09.extreme poverty. That is a consideration I would ask the

:24:10. > :24:15.Minister to consider. It's difficult for many older women to stay in the

:24:16. > :24:21.workplace back into the workplace. In any case, rates for unemployment

:24:22. > :24:25.for women over 50 are well above the national average. The gender pay gap

:24:26. > :24:30.is at its worst for women in their 50s, exactly the sort of women we're

:24:31. > :24:35.talking about here. Recent comments from Steve Webb strongly indicate he

:24:36. > :24:40.acknowledged the DWP were at fault and failing to provide adequate

:24:41. > :24:43.notice of women affected, when he made a fuss of negotiating a

:24:44. > :24:48.concession of six months at the time, and that has been compounded

:24:49. > :24:51.by his comments that the government made a fair decision. During

:24:52. > :24:55.previous debates, when the last changes were made, the Minister

:24:56. > :24:58.gives strong indications then that transition arrangement would be made

:24:59. > :25:03.for the worst affected, yet that has not happened. Why not and can the

:25:04. > :25:09.Minister please revisit that undertaking? I received many e-mails

:25:10. > :25:16.from around the country and from my own constituents. Let me finish with

:25:17. > :25:21.the closing paragraph of a letter from a woman in Worthing. I also

:25:22. > :25:27.heard some MPs say that older women should downsize their houses to free

:25:28. > :25:32.opposing stock for younger families. I did this, but we are quickly using

:25:33. > :25:36.up any money we made for normal day-to-day expenses. It seems that

:25:37. > :25:38.we all do women are considered unimportant and not worth the

:25:39. > :25:43.financial support we have earned over the years. I believe we had at

:25:44. > :25:46.risk of a breach of trust to those women who have made many sacrifices

:25:47. > :25:57.and are not getting the retirement the domains they would. -- the

:25:58. > :26:04.retirement they believed they would. Could I join in congratulating the

:26:05. > :26:08.Honourable lady first of all for securing this important debate and

:26:09. > :26:14.secondly by the forceful way in which she put the case, and she was

:26:15. > :26:20.indeed backed up by the speech of the honourable gentleman from East

:26:21. > :26:29.Worthing and Shoreham. I just want to make two points by way of

:26:30. > :26:35.introduction. The first is to also congratulate Women Against State

:26:36. > :26:39.Pension Inequality for the powerful way they have booked this case and

:26:40. > :26:45.conducted their campaign. Secondly, I want to say there is a basic and

:26:46. > :26:55.fairness about this problem that does need to be addressed. Into the

:26:56. > :27:00.bargain, there is a broken promise or a broken contract, as she

:27:01. > :27:14.described it, between the state and these women, who are affected.

:27:15. > :27:23.I have a letter from a constituent, and I would like to use her words as

:27:24. > :27:29.much as possible, somebody who has been directly affected by it. The

:27:30. > :27:33.point she makes of have already been reflected by the speeches so far but

:27:34. > :27:39.they bear repetition in her words. The first point she makes was that

:27:40. > :27:44.she was given inadequate notice and communication regarding the age

:27:45. > :27:49.change. She received less than four years, instead of the recommended

:27:50. > :27:51.10-15 years. This has had a disastrous consequence on the

:27:52. > :27:56.important financial and life changing decisions I made in

:27:57. > :28:05.anticipation of my retirement at 60 and the receipt of a state pension.

:28:06. > :28:09.I will give way, yes. I'm sure, like me, he's had a number of women make

:28:10. > :28:14.representation to him, and one particular case I had on Monday

:28:15. > :28:20.changed her life for the worse. This is discrimination against women.

:28:21. > :28:27.Would you agree? I was going to come onto that very point. The second

:28:28. > :28:32.point she makes is that she was hit by two pension age increases. First

:28:33. > :28:45.to six D5, and in rapid succession, to 66, resulting in the loss of over

:28:46. > :28:50.?35,000. -- first to 65. The final point she wanted to make, she's no

:28:51. > :28:53.longer eligible to receive the old state pension into which she paid

:28:54. > :29:01.full contributions for than 40 years. She will not receive a full

:29:02. > :29:07.state pension because of the shortfall of contributions between

:29:08. > :29:11.60 and 66. The fact that she wanted to retire at 60, she had paid more

:29:12. > :29:18.than 39 years of contributions required for the full state pension

:29:19. > :29:24.at that time. I will give way to the Right Honourable gentleman. This is

:29:25. > :29:28.a crucial debate, not least of all for my constituents, Jackie Williams

:29:29. > :29:33.and Debbie Watkins, active in the campaign. My right honourable friend

:29:34. > :29:36.might be pleased to know that the minister responsible for this issue

:29:37. > :29:43.says the reason she can't carry out the terms of this motion is because

:29:44. > :29:50.it would be impossible. She was a very effective advocate of pensions

:29:51. > :29:54.issues when I was the Work and Pensions Secretary. When we were

:29:55. > :29:59.arguing that pension credit and the protection fund we had introduced

:30:00. > :30:02.should not be applied retrospectively, as she wished, I

:30:03. > :30:14.said it was impossible. She said to me that that word didn't... Order,

:30:15. > :30:23.Mr Johnson, we are in a very tight time limit. Short interventions so

:30:24. > :30:28.nobody drops off the list. My right honourable friend brings a wealth of

:30:29. > :30:31.experience and understanding in this subject in the contribution he has

:30:32. > :30:42.just made, and I'm very rate fall for it, lengthy though it may have

:30:43. > :30:48.been. -- very grateful for it. If I can continue the quote I was midway

:30:49. > :30:53.through from my constituent, she goes on to say that this requirement

:30:54. > :30:59.has been reduced to 30 years, to be faced with an overpayment in the

:31:00. > :31:01.old-age pension requirements of ten years contributions which are no

:31:02. > :31:07.longer eligible for, to have a shortfall of six years on the new

:31:08. > :31:16.pension requirements is beyond belief. I want to conclude with two

:31:17. > :31:21.further points. The first is to quote from my constituent, who says

:31:22. > :31:27.that... And I think this is why the campaign has been so reasonable, and

:31:28. > :31:30.she reflects that. She says, I understand that the equalisation of

:31:31. > :31:39.state pension had to be addressed, but I object to the fairway in which

:31:40. > :31:43.this was handled, bringing more inequality into the process. Future

:31:44. > :31:47.generations will be given ten years notice on age changes. Whereas I and

:31:48. > :31:53.many like me were not. All I'm requesting, she says, is

:31:54. > :32:00.transitional protective arrangement be provided for the 1950s women

:32:01. > :32:04.affected by these changes. Of course, every government has to look

:32:05. > :32:09.to the financial situation and make proper arrangements and I understand

:32:10. > :32:17.the economic difficulties any government has to face. But, as I

:32:18. > :32:22.started out to say, this is... I can't give way any more, but this is

:32:23. > :32:28.a basic question of, firstly inequality, and secondly,

:32:29. > :32:32.unfairness. I think this has to be addressed. I do hope the minister

:32:33. > :32:36.will understand the strength of feeling that exists out there from

:32:37. > :32:41.those affected, but also in this house. We feel there is an

:32:42. > :32:49.injustice, and all injustices have to be put right, just as this should

:32:50. > :32:52.be. I would like to join as well with the honourable member for

:32:53. > :32:59.Knowsley, a great pleasure to follow him in this debate. And plays the

:33:00. > :33:03.reasonableness of the campaign. I've had several campaigners in my

:33:04. > :33:07.constituency offices, and they put their arguments in a very cogent,

:33:08. > :33:11.respectful and thoughtful manner. Since 2010 this government has been

:33:12. > :33:14.taking the difficult decisions necessary to get Britain's deficit

:33:15. > :33:19.under control. This has often been contentious, involving disagreements

:33:20. > :33:28.with the party opposite. However, pensions have been one area in which

:33:29. > :33:32.all members of the house were in agreement over. For more than a

:33:33. > :33:37.decade, MPs of all parties have worked together to challenge the

:33:38. > :33:40.problems posed by an ageing population, and ensure the long-term

:33:41. > :33:46.financial security of elderly people. This consensual politics,

:33:47. > :33:49.quite unusual, I have to say, has been necessary and heartening in

:33:50. > :33:55.dealing with a long-term issue. It's no secret that the current pension

:33:56. > :33:59.state arrangements are not financially sustainable. People are

:34:00. > :34:06.living longer than ever. A teenager today can expect to live until 90.

:34:07. > :34:09.It imposes serious burdens on welfare system is designed in

:34:10. > :34:13.another age. In the last parliament the government estimated the cost of

:34:14. > :34:19.abandoning state pension reforms is completely unaffordable at ?23

:34:20. > :34:25.billion. Equivalent to 7p on income tax. As much as this debate focuses

:34:26. > :34:28.on the impact on women, we should reflect on how much this government

:34:29. > :34:34.has done to improve the position of women within the pension system. I

:34:35. > :34:40.will give way. Before the honourable gentleman says it's OK, would he

:34:41. > :34:44.like to hear the experience of my constituent who says, I have worked

:34:45. > :34:50.full time since leaving school at 16. I now 61. I have worked through

:34:51. > :34:54.10-year is of kidney failure, dialysis, and finally a transplant,

:34:55. > :34:58.but the effects of the illness have taken their toll. I cannot afford to

:34:59. > :35:03.retire without a state pension, so I have another five years of my

:35:04. > :35:07.current life to look forward to, assuming my kidney doesn't fail or I

:35:08. > :35:13.die of something else. Surely that level of hardship is unacceptable. I

:35:14. > :35:16.feel you are putting words in my mouth by saying that I said

:35:17. > :35:21.everything is OK. But you were a member of the party opposite in

:35:22. > :35:26.government from 1997 to 2010, and if there is anything about them in

:35:27. > :35:29.terms of publicising these particular changes, I think they

:35:30. > :35:35.ought to look to themselves in this respect. In a motion before this

:35:36. > :35:39.house, it regrets that the government has failed to address a

:35:40. > :35:44.lifetime of low pay and inequality faced by many women. I do not

:35:45. > :35:51.recognise this. Take two central planks of this government policy.

:35:52. > :35:55.Raising personal allowances and equating the minimum wage to the

:35:56. > :35:59.living wage. Both of these initiatives benefit tremendously. In

:36:00. > :36:03.addition the present government is looking at options to reform

:36:04. > :36:12.pensions tax relief, which was left in the same situation by the party

:36:13. > :36:16.opposite. Following the budget, research carried out by the House of

:36:17. > :36:21.Commons library show that as a result of the Chancellor's measures,

:36:22. > :36:29.women would be twice, if not more likely, to be hit by men as a result

:36:30. > :36:34.of these measures. If the disproportionate way in which women

:36:35. > :36:39.have been affected by this, it will be added to a list of ways in which

:36:40. > :36:44.the women of this country have been failed by this government. I don't

:36:45. > :36:47.agree with that whatsoever. The raising of personal allowance

:36:48. > :36:51.combined with the raised in minimum wage will give a huge boost to

:36:52. > :36:56.British workers and women in this country. I think you should

:36:57. > :37:00.recognise that fact. In addition of the government is looking at options

:37:01. > :37:04.to reform pensions tax relief. If ministers choose the option that I

:37:05. > :37:08.and others are calling for, and dispense with the top rate of tax

:37:09. > :37:13.leaf, and moved to a single rate of relief, somewhere around 30p in the

:37:14. > :37:17.pound, this would hugely advantage women in the workforce, a game

:37:18. > :37:24.changer for millions of hard-working British women. Equalising the

:37:25. > :37:26.pensions age may pose short-term challenges, but it's an overdue

:37:27. > :37:31.acknowledgement of the role women play in the modern workforce. It's

:37:32. > :37:34.quite wrongful women to structured the pension system around the

:37:35. > :37:40.assumption that women's careers... I will give way. You raise an

:37:41. > :37:43.important point about women in the workforce. Evidence that women

:37:44. > :37:46.directly affected by the state pension age equalisation have

:37:47. > :37:52.increased employment rate by 6.8%, increasing it up to 40.7% according

:37:53. > :37:56.to the Department for Work and Pensions in November last year.

:37:57. > :38:03.Older working age women are now more likely to be in employment than at

:38:04. > :38:07.any time in the past 30 years. Thank you for making that point. To add to

:38:08. > :38:11.that point, the fact is that many people actually come to retirement

:38:12. > :38:17.age and it's before they collect their state pension in that regard,

:38:18. > :38:21.but what we need to do is encourage older people to be involved in the

:38:22. > :38:26.workforce as well. I can't give way any more. It's one of the most

:38:27. > :38:31.encouraging thing is we've seen from this government, the fact people

:38:32. > :38:41.asked Ainge in work for longer. -- people are staying in work for

:38:42. > :38:45.longer. We are also enacting important forms of the period.

:38:46. > :38:49.Somebody has to pay National Insurance before qualifying for

:38:50. > :38:55.state pension. Until recently this tour that 39 years for women and 44

:38:56. > :38:58.for men, the worst of both worlds, structurally unequal while at the

:38:59. > :38:59.same time long enough to penalised women who had taken time out to have

:39:00. > :39:14.children. Moreover, by bringing contribute and

:39:15. > :39:19.time periods down to the same level, the government has recognised that

:39:20. > :39:24.many men may also desire a different work-life balance than was a

:39:25. > :39:27.traditional case in the past. I'm not in the habit of quoting the

:39:28. > :39:31.Liberal Democrats, but I will make an exception in this instance over

:39:32. > :39:36.the government decision to defer state pension age to 66, while in

:39:37. > :39:40.office, a cost of ?1.1 billion, Steve Webb, former pensions

:39:41. > :39:42.minister, put it as a billion quid being a serious amount of money.

:39:43. > :39:47.This decision means that almost a quarter of a million women who face

:39:48. > :39:52.an increase in 18 months or more in their pension age no longer face

:39:53. > :39:56.that possibility. We have also instituted the triple lock, which

:39:57. > :40:01.ensures that pensions are increased by the highest of three measures,

:40:02. > :40:12.price inflation, growth in earnings, or 2.5%. This means no more of this

:40:13. > :40:18.sort of small bag of peanuts increase we saw under the

:40:19. > :40:23.opposition. We in Britain are rightly proud of the care we take of

:40:24. > :40:26.our elderly citizens. This is shown by a marked reduction in the levels

:40:27. > :40:32.of pension and poverty in the previous two decades. It would be

:40:33. > :40:35.wrong to take serious risks with long-term economic sustainability

:40:36. > :40:42.and our pension system for the sake of winning short-term political

:40:43. > :40:47.battles. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. Can I congratulate the

:40:48. > :40:56.honourable member of Paisley and Renfrewshire south for her speech.

:40:57. > :41:03.I'm heartened to see support from the front bench colleagues including

:41:04. > :41:08.my neighbour, the Right Honourable member for Leigh, Newcastle North,

:41:09. > :41:13.and Stretford End Urmston. All of whom I know strongly support this

:41:14. > :41:19.campaign and the women affected by it. Can I congratulate the women

:41:20. > :41:25.against the state pension equality campaign who have worked tirelessly

:41:26. > :41:32.on this issue. They have now gained 107,000 signatures, possibly more

:41:33. > :41:37.since this debate started. The increases made since 1995 have had a

:41:38. > :41:40.proportionate impact on 1950s born women, and may have received little

:41:41. > :41:44.or no notification of the changes. Despite the government saying they

:41:45. > :41:47.should have at least ten years notice, indeed financial journalist

:41:48. > :41:50.Paul Lewis found that none of the 1950s born women had been given ten

:41:51. > :41:56.years notice, and in a worst case, and we have heard one of them from

:41:57. > :42:00.my honourable women were told at 57 and a half that their pension age

:42:01. > :42:08.would rise to 626. Women expecting to retire at 60 now have no job, no

:42:09. > :42:11.pension and no money to live on. Former pensions Minister Steve Webb

:42:12. > :42:14.admitted the government made a bad decision on these changes and his

:42:15. > :42:19.excuse was that ministers had not been properly briefed. It appears

:42:20. > :42:23.civil servants did a poor job on the legislation. Astonishingly the

:42:24. > :42:27.impact assessment for the 2011 pensions act says this in its

:42:28. > :42:30.conclusion... Overall, based on the available evidence, the change to

:42:31. > :42:32.the previous timetable will not have a disproportionate effect on any

:42:33. > :42:43.group compare to another. It should be a message to the

:42:44. > :42:48.Government that people want action on this. Would she agree with my

:42:49. > :42:53.efficient Linda Gregory who has worked since 15. So it has been more

:42:54. > :42:57.penalised than people entering the workplace than normal standards now.

:42:58. > :43:02.I thank my honourable friend for that. It seems unbelievable that

:43:03. > :43:06.civil servants could believe taking billions away from a particular

:43:07. > :43:11.group, adding years to their pit pension age and not informing them

:43:12. > :43:16.in good time would not have a disproportionate impact on that

:43:17. > :43:21.group. I raise these concerns brought to me by the class of 1970

:43:22. > :43:26.in the second reading debate, to which, when I raised the concerns,

:43:27. > :43:29.the Secretary of State at that point said he had had letter from the

:43:30. > :43:33.public stirred up by a number of people. Does she agree with me this

:43:34. > :43:37.is not a matter stirred up by a number of people, this is a very

:43:38. > :43:41.real matter that we have known about for some time? I do agree with my

:43:42. > :43:47.honourable friend. I thank him for the work he's done on this since the

:43:48. > :43:53.second reading. These changes are having a disproportionate affect.

:43:54. > :43:57.Many have health problems which stop them working. Others have given up

:43:58. > :44:01.work to care. I have a constituent affected by these changes who has

:44:02. > :44:09.worked for more than 44 years and raised two children, suffered from s

:44:10. > :44:14.osteoarthritis. She had to attend the Jobcentre who told her she was

:44:15. > :44:21.entitled to six months job seeker's allowance. She said, I must watch my

:44:22. > :44:26.savings dwindle on living costs. I wish I had not been frugal all my

:44:27. > :44:32.life, by the time I get my pension I will be broke or dead. I am thankful

:44:33. > :44:36.for my honourable friend giving way and for the sterling work. Does she

:44:37. > :44:40.agree with me there is a particular problem for those whim had in places

:44:41. > :44:44.like Blackpool only been able to work part-time for a long period of

:44:45. > :44:50.time. Nevertheless have to take on some of the carer and other issues

:44:51. > :44:54.that people have described? Before the 1995 pension act changes the

:44:55. > :44:59.independent advisory committee said, savings made on raising the state

:45:00. > :45:03.pension age should be spent on the most vulnerable group, with help for

:45:04. > :45:08.low-paid women, women returning to work and carers. This advise was not

:45:09. > :45:11.followed. Recently a court in the Netherlands ruled that raising the

:45:12. > :45:16.age could be a breach of the human rights. A woman in her 60s appealed

:45:17. > :45:19.against a two-year rise in her pension age, as creating an

:45:20. > :45:25.individual and excessive burden on her. The court found in her favour.

:45:26. > :45:29.It is welcome that some members opposite, who voted for the

:45:30. > :45:35.acceleration of the state pension age in 2011 are now supporting the

:45:36. > :45:39.campaign. I know other members opposite are blaming European

:45:40. > :45:47.legislation for which I feel is shabby treatment of the 1950s born

:45:48. > :45:52.women. When the Justice Minister answered he said that equalisation

:45:53. > :45:59.was necessary to meet obligations under EU law. The same point has

:46:00. > :46:02.been made to campaigners in reply from Conservative MPs. Research done

:46:03. > :46:06.by the House of Commons Library and my own research shows this is not

:46:07. > :46:12.the case. EU law allows countries to have

:46:13. > :46:15.differences in state pension age. It allows lengthy transitional

:46:16. > :46:20.arrangements to be made. The library research notes that directive 77

:46:21. > :46:25.EEC, requires the progressive implementation of the principal of

:46:26. > :46:30.equal treatment for men and women in matters of social security. On that

:46:31. > :46:34.point, she's making an excellent point about the fact that we need to

:46:35. > :46:39.reach a level of equality in this issue. She is right, it is about the

:46:40. > :46:46.pace of change and transitions which are unfair. Does she not agree that

:46:47. > :46:50.the continual changing of the goal post goes against the justice this

:46:51. > :46:55.country should be based on? And this background of EU law does not really

:46:56. > :47:00.cause this. The directive allowed for different state pension ages.

:47:01. > :47:05.Article 7 states that the determination of the age is the

:47:06. > :47:08.right of member-states. And 2007 European Commission report confirmed

:47:09. > :47:13.different state pension ages are allowed. Equalisation is therefore

:47:14. > :47:16.described as an objective to be strived for. The Netherlands,

:47:17. > :47:22.Portugal and France have no current difference. Austria and Hungary are

:47:23. > :47:26.equalising the age with long trans sessional arrangements. In other

:47:27. > :47:33.states the difference is currently maintained. Although making the

:47:34. > :47:40.changes slowly. State pension ages will not be implemented in Poland

:47:41. > :47:46.until 2040 and Bulgaria and Romania are retaining different state

:47:47. > :47:49.pension ages. So it allows different ages and long transitional

:47:50. > :47:56.arrangements. It is not an excuse this Government can hide behind to

:47:57. > :48:01.hide behind a ?30,000 billions grab from 1950s-born women. Transitional

:48:02. > :48:06.protections were discussed on the Pensions Act of 2011, but not

:48:07. > :48:10.brought forward by ministers. Other countries have had transitional

:48:11. > :48:15.arrangements or have had help for specific groups. Denmark has a

:48:16. > :48:22.bridge pension. It tagly brought in extensive changes but made

:48:23. > :48:26.exemptions to people made redundant. Italy realised public sector workers

:48:27. > :48:33.could be left with no job and no pension. They then legislated six

:48:34. > :48:38.adjustments between 2015-2015 to protect the workers by special

:48:39. > :48:42.derogations. So the UK should and can put in place additional

:48:43. > :48:46.arrangements to address the unfair consequences of this Government's

:48:47. > :48:53.Pensions Act. One of these unfair consequences is having to pay

:48:54. > :48:58.national insurance contributions, even though many 1950s-born women

:48:59. > :49:03.have contributed for over 40 years. Differences exist at the regional

:49:04. > :49:06.level. The Greater London Authority restored free travel to Londoners

:49:07. > :49:13.aged between 60 and the state pension age lost due to the Pensions

:49:14. > :49:19.Act. Bringing in the 6 oh of plus -- 60-plus Oyster card, the mayor said,

:49:20. > :49:24.Londoners who have grafted all their life and expected free travel feel

:49:25. > :49:29.cheated. What about women living outside of London, who have grafted

:49:30. > :49:35.all their lives? And who also feel cheated when the Government's 2011

:49:36. > :49:39.pension age removed both their retirement and their free travel.

:49:40. > :49:42.The reforms cannot be justified on the forms that it was unsustainable,

:49:43. > :49:50.as the honourable member tried to do. The UK's state pension has been

:49:51. > :49:58.one of the lowest in the OECD. As I have detailed, EU law allows

:49:59. > :50:01.transitional. The lack of transdecisional arrangements for

:50:02. > :50:06.1950s women is due to the decision of this Conservative Government. I

:50:07. > :50:09.urge the minister to look at the issue and ways of providing adequate

:50:10. > :50:17.transitional cover. Thank you very much indeed Mr Deputy

:50:18. > :50:21.Speaker. I am pleased to be able to take part in this debate today. I

:50:22. > :50:26.congratulates those who have secured it and those who are working so hard

:50:27. > :50:30.outside this space to contact Members of Parliament and to talk

:50:31. > :50:35.about a very, very important issue of public policy and personal

:50:36. > :50:42.impact. My starting point, Mr Deputy Speaker

:50:43. > :50:45.s a passionate belief that a civilised country protects family,

:50:46. > :50:49.helps the vulnerable, helps those in work and provides in retirement. I

:50:50. > :50:53.am looking to the trins pals we might apply to this debate base ond

:50:54. > :50:56.the petition presented. As I understand it, the petition raises

:50:57. > :51:01.three concerns - it raises the problem of there being little

:51:02. > :51:06.notice, of the changes being faster than expect and the concern of there

:51:07. > :51:10.not being enough time to plan. And I can recognise some of those

:51:11. > :51:21.concerns in what I have heard from my own constituents. If I turn, for

:51:22. > :51:25.example, to the first concern that many of us have hard from

:51:26. > :51:29.constituents, somebody who has worked since a teenager, they are

:51:30. > :51:35.concerned at the direct prospect of what is facing them in terms of

:51:36. > :51:39.their health challenges, in terms of caring burdens and in terms of the

:51:40. > :51:45.prospect of replanning. Others are concerned at the way that the

:51:46. > :51:51.retirement dates work. Indeed a constituent told me in 2011, this is

:51:52. > :51:56.in connect to the debate, she was concerned a woman who is two months

:51:57. > :52:02.older than her could retire a year earlier. Another example from 2011,

:52:03. > :52:07.I have a person who was concerned about the double attack on her, in

:52:08. > :52:11.her words. She tells me she didn't like it, but accepted it, made the

:52:12. > :52:15.necessary changes to her plans, mentally and financially when she

:52:16. > :52:21.received her first notification of change and received another and was

:52:22. > :52:25.forced to adjust a second time. If I then look at a further constituent

:52:26. > :52:29.you hear a powerful and emotional argument. She said, when I first

:52:30. > :52:37.heard my retirement age had gone up from 60 to 64, I was shocked and

:52:38. > :52:41.tried to ignore it. She and I wonder, many Deputy Speaker if that

:52:42. > :52:44.is one of the seeds, if it is perhaps an explanation of the

:52:45. > :52:48.community problem which is here, if a person felt so shocked that their

:52:49. > :52:52.response was to try and ignore a problem, we might understand how

:52:53. > :52:57.powerful this problem is for these people. I like her and many others

:52:58. > :53:01.in this chamber have had many e-mails from constituents. Does she

:53:02. > :53:06.concern my concern that people who have worked all their live and have

:53:07. > :53:14.had to change plans around and in terms of notification when which

:53:15. > :53:20.have to work doubly hard. You get to a certain age, of which I am there

:53:21. > :53:24.now. I think my honourable friend puts it

:53:25. > :53:28.very well. If I turn to what a constituent has recently told me, a

:53:29. > :53:32.person who came to my surgery and explained it has come as a shock to

:53:33. > :53:37.her that she would have to wait until she was 66 until she could

:53:38. > :53:41.retire, she was not informed and found out only when she requested a

:53:42. > :53:45.pensions statement. We go to the question of being informed and

:53:46. > :53:50.having time to plan. Thank you to the honourable lady for

:53:51. > :53:55.giving way. I would like to clarify, despite suggesting that information

:53:56. > :53:58.was not sent out until the late 2000s, whether she is actually

:53:59. > :54:06.implying that all these women who say they were not contactsed were

:54:07. > :54:13.contacted after -- contacted after '95 and ignored it. I find it hard

:54:14. > :54:17.to understand what she is saying. I am citing directly from

:54:18. > :54:21.constituents. I will make sure the official record cites this. I do not

:54:22. > :54:27.know if a woman in question received the letter or not. I know what my

:54:28. > :54:30.constituents come to tell me. I look forward to the minister's

:54:31. > :54:33.explanation to what has happened historically. I hear from the

:54:34. > :54:37.honourable lady who opened the debate. I hear her point that the

:54:38. > :54:41.past is the past and there's only a certain amount you can do if you

:54:42. > :54:46.look at a problem which has routed in 1995. Let me go back to what I am

:54:47. > :54:51.looking for as we move forward. I think we have a set of principals

:54:52. > :54:54.that we could apply here. The first is we should protect those who can

:54:55. > :54:58.no longer work. The second is we should provide the right support for

:54:59. > :55:05.those who can. I think the third is that we should maintain sound

:55:06. > :55:10.publicfy nansss. To fail to do so -- public finances. To fail hurts all.

:55:11. > :55:15.We should produce better communications to enable people to

:55:16. > :55:19.plan. It is that that is my main message to ministers here today. Let

:55:20. > :55:26.me dwell first on the point of equalisation. I heard earlier in the

:55:27. > :55:30.debate a hubbub that said, yes, we all agree on equalisation. Let's

:55:31. > :55:38.have some figures why we need to do. That when the state pension age was

:55:39. > :55:45.first set at 65 in 1926, male life expect tabsy was 64, compared to 89

:55:46. > :55:51.today. If the state pension age had rised in terms of 65, since 1966, it

:55:52. > :55:57.would be 75. We have a significant gap that we need to make up. Indeed

:55:58. > :56:02.I understand when the state pension was even earlier set up in 1908, if

:56:03. > :56:10.we look further back into the history books. The average life

:56:11. > :56:14.expect pansy was 41. You see the -- expectancy was 4 # 1. You see the --

:56:15. > :56:21.41. You see the differences that we have to deal with. The Government

:56:22. > :56:24.acknowledged a more generous state pension had to be funded by an

:56:25. > :56:28.increase in the pension age. Let's make sure we are aware of the cost

:56:29. > :56:34.of these measures. I understand it would be to the tune of ?30 billion

:56:35. > :56:38.to return to a 1995 timetable. Let's compare that to a few other things

:56:39. > :56:47.so we have a well-informed debate. If we look at the 2015/16 spending

:56:48. > :56:52.figures, as soon in the July Budget, we see an expenditure of ?28 billion

:56:53. > :56:57.on housing and the environment. We see ?34 billion on public order and

:56:58. > :57:01.safety. All that we spend on housing and all that we spend on public

:57:02. > :57:06.order and safety is equivalent to the sum we are talking about here

:57:07. > :57:16.today in broad terms. Does she not recognise the

:57:17. > :57:21.reasonableness of what -- off their Waspi campaign and the issue of

:57:22. > :57:27.implementing the pension credit entitlements. Those as she will know

:57:28. > :57:31.are often key to people in terms of what they claim. I think the

:57:32. > :57:35.honourable gentleman cars I thank the honourable gentleman for that

:57:36. > :57:39.and I recognise the grounds of the campaign and as I hope I have made

:57:40. > :57:43.clear I do recognise the importance of this point for every single one

:57:44. > :57:46.of those people affected. I will leave it to the Minister to reply

:57:47. > :57:50.specifically about pension credits. Let me answer with one further

:57:51. > :57:56.example of what ?30 billion can buy you. It can buy you some of the debt

:57:57. > :58:01.interest on his government's financial catastrophe, to the tune

:58:02. > :58:06.of ?36 billion that we have to spend in this financial year. So let me

:58:07. > :58:14.conclude. I have only a few minutes left. Let me conclude. We do have to

:58:15. > :58:20.listen very, very carefully to such a competitive and well informed

:58:21. > :58:25.campaign, that is quite right. I want to hear my constituents'

:58:26. > :58:28.concerns that I have put into my comments balanced with all else the

:58:29. > :58:32.government has to do. I strongly sympathise with this campaign and

:58:33. > :58:36.indeed in 2011I was active in representing my constituents to the

:58:37. > :58:42.then pension Minister to mitigate the of two years in receiving their

:58:43. > :58:45.pension for around 250,000 women at that time. My call is for the

:58:46. > :58:48.government to communicate considerably better than has been

:58:49. > :58:53.done to date full stop it seems we cannot go back. Equalisation does

:58:54. > :58:57.have the mean equalisation. You cannot delay forever on it, nor

:58:58. > :59:01.Duckett. We need to maintain the principles I have set out and

:59:02. > :59:05.communicate better. Thank you very much. I'd like to apologise for not

:59:06. > :59:10.being present at the beginning of this debate. There is no doubt that

:59:11. > :59:14.this government's treatment of women in general has been abysmal. With

:59:15. > :59:18.more women in part-time, low paid work and women being hit harder by

:59:19. > :59:23.the tax and benefit changes compared to men. So it comes as no surprise

:59:24. > :59:26.that they are completely resolute in refusing to address the financial

:59:27. > :59:35.disadvantage they have forced on women born in the 1950s. The

:59:36. > :59:39.pensions act of 1995 and 2011 have resulted in millions of women's

:59:40. > :59:43.pensions being delayed. Then in -- this in itself is of concern.

:59:44. > :59:46.However, when most of these women have not been notified of these

:59:47. > :59:50.changes, it becomes more than a concern. It becomes a situation

:59:51. > :59:56.where some are already struggling to get by and being pushed into

:59:57. > :00:00.poverty. Of course Mr Deputy Speaker I am in favour of equalisation, as

:00:01. > :00:04.are all of the women whom I have spoken to, and I accept that

:00:05. > :00:08.increases in life expectancy mean any government needs to consider

:00:09. > :00:12.very carefully state pension age and the extension of working lives. But

:00:13. > :00:17.if such changes are to blame implemented is it not the mark of an

:00:18. > :00:20.irresponsible government, any government that cares about the

:00:21. > :00:25.people they are legislation affects, to make sure those affected no and

:00:26. > :00:32.that they do not introduce legislation that directly

:00:33. > :00:35.disadvantages millions of people. As others have probably already said,

:00:36. > :00:41.many of the women affected simply weren't notified. Those who have

:00:42. > :00:46.been notified since the 2011 acceleration, have only received two

:00:47. > :00:49.years' notice, get as we all know the appropriate minimum notification

:00:50. > :00:55.period for a state pension age increases generally agreed to be ten

:00:56. > :00:58.years. I will give way. Why Bob and I thank my honourable friend. My

:00:59. > :01:02.grandma taught me that two wrongs don't make a right and these women

:01:03. > :01:06.have been wronged time and time again. Given that there has been a

:01:07. > :01:10.successful legal action in the Dutch court, isn't it better that we form

:01:11. > :01:14.transitional arrangements rather than go to the law courts with this

:01:15. > :01:18.issue? I thank my honourable friend for that in the direction and she is

:01:19. > :01:22.spot on. It would be very embarrassing for this government

:01:23. > :01:32.decided to take individual legal action. Think of the lawyers' fees!

:01:33. > :01:37.I will give way. Was she also recognise that for many of these

:01:38. > :01:45.women who are our constituents there is a real, real threat of stress and

:01:46. > :01:50.stress-related illness as a result of that failure to inform? And the

:01:51. > :01:54.government should take that very, very seriously when understanding

:01:55. > :02:00.why so many members want these transitional arrangements. Thank

:02:01. > :02:03.you. I thank my honourable friend for that intervention and I'm going

:02:04. > :02:07.to come onto some examples from my own constituency of women who are

:02:08. > :02:11.experiencing that very stressed that he refers to. In my constituency in

:02:12. > :02:16.South Shields we have a higher than average level of people with

:02:17. > :02:20.illnesses such as COPD and others left over from our proud heavy

:02:21. > :02:24.industrial days. This means that we have a large number of women who are

:02:25. > :02:28.caring for relatives or husbands, women who fall into the group who

:02:29. > :02:33.have been disadvantaged by these pensions changes. One woman such as

:02:34. > :02:39.my constituents Lynne Wilson, she got a letter sometime in 2011-2012

:02:40. > :02:44.and told she would not be getting her pension at 65, but at 66. This

:02:45. > :02:49.was a complete and utter shock to her as she was still of the view she

:02:50. > :02:53.was getting her pension when she was 60 years old. Her husband Derek was

:02:54. > :02:57.diagnosed with lung cancer four years ago. In -- due to these

:02:58. > :03:01.pension changes Lynne has had to continue working but has had to

:03:02. > :03:07.reduce her hours so she can care for Derek. She does a difficult and

:03:08. > :03:10.physical job. She herself suffers from serious back problems and

:03:11. > :03:14.arthritis. If her back got worse she tells me she has a small private

:03:15. > :03:18.pension she and Derek could manage to live on, but that would not last

:03:19. > :03:22.for the whole six years that she needs to wait for her state pension.

:03:23. > :03:25.She told me she continues to struggle on but I am her both in

:03:26. > :03:33.agreement that this should not be the way. I will give way. Does my

:03:34. > :03:36.honourable friend agree with me that women like her constituents face the

:03:37. > :03:39.double barrier of discrimination in the workplace as women are being

:03:40. > :03:45.forced to work longer, this government has put barriers in the

:03:46. > :03:47.way to their access to employment tribunals as well? I agree

:03:48. > :03:51.completely with my honourable friend. But my constituent is not

:03:52. > :03:58.the only one who knows things should not be this way. Baroness Altman,

:03:59. > :04:01.when director general of Saga, now in the other plays as Minister of

:04:02. > :04:03.State for pensions, said the government's changes to state

:04:04. > :04:09.pensions were clearly discriminatory. The Secretary of

:04:10. > :04:12.State for Work and Pensions in 2011 made a firm commitment to look at

:04:13. > :04:18.transitional provisions to help women hit hardest by these changes.

:04:19. > :04:22.And the previous pensions Minister stated only last year that the

:04:23. > :04:28.changes made were a decision we got wrong. What is outrageous is that

:04:29. > :04:32.despite knowing this the government are not prepared to do anything

:04:33. > :04:37.about it and seem content to let these women continue to suffer.

:04:38. > :04:42.Another one of my constituents, Diane Dawson, it took voluntary

:04:43. > :04:47.redundancy from her job when she was 60 years old. This was assuming that

:04:48. > :04:53.she was to reach state pension age at 62. She then found out not from

:04:54. > :05:00.the DWP, but from a friend, that she would reach state pension age not at

:05:01. > :05:05.62, but at 64. She is now living off dwindling savings and as a result is

:05:06. > :05:12.having to sell her family home. She has never received anything at all

:05:13. > :05:15.from the DWP. No wonder she feels completely let down and completely

:05:16. > :05:19.cheated. Mr Deputy Speaker there are many more women in these difficult

:05:20. > :05:23.situations who have worked their entire lives only to find out at the

:05:24. > :05:28.11th hour that the system they trusted and paid into four decades

:05:29. > :05:31.has let them down. I would urge the Minister is seriously listen to the

:05:32. > :05:36.motion before the House today because if transitional arrangements

:05:37. > :05:40.are not introduced the women affected and those of us on this

:05:41. > :05:43.side of the chamber are not going to give up pressing for them. I'm also

:05:44. > :05:48.sure the Minister agrees it would be a lot more costly and a lot more

:05:49. > :05:53.embarrassing for this government if those individuals began to seek some

:05:54. > :05:56.legal redress. I just hope Mr Deputy Speaker that the work of the

:05:57. > :06:02.Wimmer-macro campaigners and others that led to this debate today will

:06:03. > :06:08.see this government listen, for once -- the Wimmer-macro campaigners. I

:06:09. > :06:15.have sympathy with people when they are expectations change and I thank

:06:16. > :06:21.my constituents who have e-mailed me to highlight this issue. I want to

:06:22. > :06:26.start by looking at the background of this whole issue. The fact is

:06:27. > :06:30.that the longevity of our population is rising and that's a good thing.

:06:31. > :06:37.It's great to live longer and women live longer than men and women have,

:06:38. > :06:44.I won't give way, thank you, and women on average are having a more

:06:45. > :06:50.healthy longevity and that is rising at a greater rate than it is for

:06:51. > :06:53.men. We as a nation spends a massive and increasing amount on our health

:06:54. > :06:57.care system and our pensions system in order to make that a happy

:06:58. > :07:04.retirement for as many people as possible. By way of background, it

:07:05. > :07:08.was in 1908 that they're then Liberal government and a Lloyd

:07:09. > :07:13.George actually brought in the first provisions, no, not at all, I

:07:14. > :07:17.certainly wouldn't blame, I thank for the intervention, but I'm not

:07:18. > :07:26.blaming the Liberals for that! When it was first brought in...

:07:27. > :07:30.Churchill... Exactly, there was a great man, Mr Churchill, who was

:07:31. > :07:34.involved as well. But what happened back then was the age at which it

:07:35. > :07:38.could be claimed was set at 70 years old, that compared with the average

:07:39. > :07:44.longevity at that point of 55 years of age, which gives you some idea,

:07:45. > :07:54.which gives us some idea, of the changes that have taken place since.

:07:55. > :08:00.In 1995, the retirement ages were raised so that they would be equal

:08:01. > :08:06.between women and men in the future and then this was further looked at

:08:07. > :08:12.in the mid-2000 by Lord Turner and there was pretty good cross-party

:08:13. > :08:14.support at that time for those ages to be raised further, given the

:08:15. > :08:21.increases in longevity I've been talking about. Under there is this

:08:22. > :08:27.last government, in correlation with the Liberal Democrats, when I wasn't

:08:28. > :08:30.in this Parliament a decision was taken based on even further

:08:31. > :08:40.increases in the longevity, to increase those ages even faster for

:08:41. > :08:45.a few of the people involved in it -- coalition. One of the principles

:08:46. > :08:50.behind all of these more recent changes was the affordability over

:08:51. > :08:57.all of the system. We've heard about the price it would cost to reverse

:08:58. > :09:03.this as being ?39 billion. Now, that is a liability that would apply to

:09:04. > :09:08.all age groups and in my submission it would be very unfair for us to

:09:09. > :09:15.continue trying to burden the younger generations with extra taxes

:09:16. > :09:23.in order to make more concessions than we already have, but at the

:09:24. > :09:31.moment. -- not at the moment. There was a concession of over ?1 billion

:09:32. > :09:34.made at the time of the last decision 2011, to actually help

:09:35. > :09:40.these particular age groups who are contacting us now. I want to talk a

:09:41. > :09:43.little bit about equality, because I have two very young daughters and

:09:44. > :09:51.I'm very keen that they should have as equal opportunities as possible,

:09:52. > :09:57.to take part in the workplace and to be equal citizens in every right

:09:58. > :10:03.with men of this nation. I want to highlight a few things that make me

:10:04. > :10:08.think that we the government on this side are actually very well on

:10:09. > :10:14.behalf of women. Yes, on behalf of women. The introduction of a single

:10:15. > :10:23.tier state pension will have a very good effect on women and it being

:10:24. > :10:32.equally available to them as the men, based on the same types of

:10:33. > :10:35.approach to national insurance. Certainly, yes I will. You talked

:10:36. > :10:40.about equalisation of the state pension and it's important to note

:10:41. > :10:44.we talked about women living longer, women living as long as men now, and

:10:45. > :10:47.equalisation of the state pension age is a reflection that women and

:10:48. > :10:54.men play an equal role in our society and our economy. I thank the

:10:55. > :10:59.Honourable lady for her intervention and she makes an excellent point.

:11:00. > :11:06.Equality is at the heart of what we are trying to do for women. One of

:11:07. > :11:11.the ways that we are looking to do that is to decrease the gender pay

:11:12. > :11:18.gap is. That will be helped by increasing the minimum wage,

:11:19. > :11:21.increasing the availability of jobs and work, and increasing the

:11:22. > :11:27.personal tax allowance, so there are many incentives and programmes that

:11:28. > :11:33.we are pursuing to allow women to participate successfully for a short

:11:34. > :11:39.extra time longer than they may have expected. This takes us back to the

:11:40. > :11:43.issue at the heart of this debate, which seems to be the extent to

:11:44. > :11:51.which women were given notice and the ability therefore the plan for

:11:52. > :11:54.their retirement -- to plan for their retirement. Now I have some

:11:55. > :11:59.sympathy and obviously anyone who is going through a stressful personal

:12:00. > :12:05.situation, I am sympathetic to, but we do also need to be responsible.

:12:06. > :12:14.It's very hard to say who exactly was contacted and not, but it is, I

:12:15. > :12:17.think, from what I have seen and I obviously wasn't involved in any of

:12:18. > :12:20.the previous decisions, but most people were given that notice and

:12:21. > :12:31.that allows them to actually plan. I would give some advice to the

:12:32. > :12:38.younger generations who might be listening to this debate, I have

:12:39. > :12:44.some experience in the pension world and the main thing you have to

:12:45. > :12:48.remember when investor in for our retirement it is that the earlier

:12:49. > :12:54.you get started saving the more money you will have at the end. That

:12:55. > :13:02.is because of the power of compound interest which has a tremendous,

:13:03. > :13:08.tremendous effect. Certainly. I thank... I thank my honourable

:13:09. > :13:13.friend forgiving way, in this wide-ranging speech. Would he join

:13:14. > :13:19.with me in hoping that the minister in his closing remarks will address

:13:20. > :13:23.some of those communications going forward with those who work now and

:13:24. > :13:26.are hoping to retire in the future, so that his young daughters and my

:13:27. > :13:33.young daughters will know where they are? I thank the honourable lady for

:13:34. > :13:38.her intervention. She makes an excellent point, on which I was

:13:39. > :13:43.going to conclude my remarks. We have a duty to the young people of

:13:44. > :13:47.this nation to keep their taxes down so that they have as much scope to

:13:48. > :13:51.plan for their retirement as possible. They are already being

:13:52. > :13:57.asked to shoulder a completely unacceptable burden which was put

:13:58. > :14:01.upon them by the benches opposite and in my view it would be entirely

:14:02. > :14:06.wrong to reopen the decision which was taken by the Liberal Democrat

:14:07. > :14:19.and Conservative coalition back in 2011. Can I just say to the member

:14:20. > :14:22.of Yeovil, I am sure that the debate will feel really glad he feels

:14:23. > :14:26.sympathy for them. He might want to think when he is telling people

:14:27. > :14:31.about saving early in their lives that a lot of the women we are

:14:32. > :14:37.talking about was barred from paying into secondary pension schemes. I

:14:38. > :14:42.congratulate this debate, this should have been a statement from

:14:43. > :14:46.the party opposite, she said it was complicated and people always hide

:14:47. > :14:54.behind pensions being complicated but the truth is, this is a very

:14:55. > :14:59.simple debate. We are here today, this is not a pensions debate this

:15:00. > :15:02.is a debate about public policy. We have a Chancellor who has a

:15:03. > :15:08.long-term economic plan, you might have heard about it! It was supposed

:15:09. > :15:14.to end the deficit in four years complete and utter flop. Cannot even

:15:15. > :15:18.put forward a plan which lasts for weeks. He came last year with a

:15:19. > :15:22.budget to this house which is going to be detrimental to those people

:15:23. > :15:28.facing welfare cuts to their pensions in this country. A few

:15:29. > :15:31.weeks later he came back with ?27 billion in his pocket which he found

:15:32. > :15:37.down the back of the couch and that was going to be the way forward. But

:15:38. > :15:41.this morning he is older than media telling us hang on, you have got it

:15:42. > :15:46.wrong, we are in a mess again and have to put the brake on again.

:15:47. > :15:51.People have to realise we are still facing austerity. Give them credit,

:15:52. > :15:55.the people speaking from the benches opposite have trotted that line out

:15:56. > :16:00.today. Said how hard it is going to be, all these billions of Pope to

:16:01. > :16:04.put right what has gone wrong. But what we have to accept is that this

:16:05. > :16:12.is not like the weather -- billions of pounds. This is a political

:16:13. > :16:15.choice. They are knowingly and deliberately making women in this

:16:16. > :16:27.country pay for the mistakes for the rich and wealthy which resulted in

:16:28. > :16:32.the ash in 2008 -- the crash. Yesterday I read the National Audit

:16:33. > :16:35.Office had identified the UK's complex weapons programme has

:16:36. > :16:39.increased to 14 billion a year over the past few years, with the

:16:40. > :16:43.honourable member agree that it is clear evidence that pensioners are

:16:44. > :16:47.suffering from the poor decisions and the priorities of this

:16:48. > :16:51.government? Absolutely correct. One of the members said to put this

:16:52. > :16:55.right we have to raise income tax, we would not. We could stop spending

:16:56. > :16:59.on things, stop doing things like giving more money to the children of

:17:00. > :17:08.dead millionaires with inheritance tax. We could stop giving businesses

:17:09. > :17:13.cut in corporation tax. The truth is that this has been a choice and we

:17:14. > :17:19.are a country, where two days ago the chief executive of the top 100

:17:20. > :17:23.companies, they are salaries passed at the average wage of working men

:17:24. > :17:28.and women in this country. That is the inequality in this country. At

:17:29. > :17:32.the same time we are seeing these women and we are saying you have to

:17:33. > :17:36.carry the can for the failures of global capitalism. The truth is the

:17:37. > :17:39.party opposite by and large don't care. They don't care because they

:17:40. > :17:45.don't understand the reality of life at the sharp end. My mother was one

:17:46. > :17:49.of the women who worked all her life, in jobs where she was never

:17:50. > :17:53.allowed to join a pension scheme and was only able to build up a

:17:54. > :17:58.secondary pension scheme so in the end she did in relative poverty. My

:17:59. > :18:06.mother died 15 years ago but things have not changed for the majority of

:18:07. > :18:09.women in this country. My constituency and my constituents

:18:10. > :18:17.wrote a long heartfelt letter to me and I will quote some small parts.

:18:18. > :18:27."My Pension has changed twice, once in 1995, from 60, 264, and again I

:18:28. > :18:32.was not notified, I was 59 with five years to work that my retirement age

:18:33. > :18:40.had been changed from 64, two 66. This is not enough time to prepare.

:18:41. > :18:44." He is making a powerful speech and it reminds me of an e-mail I had

:18:45. > :18:48.from a constituents which also said she was double locked. The first

:18:49. > :18:51.time because she was younger she wasn't thinking about these things

:18:52. > :18:57.but she has health problems and worries she will be knocking on the

:18:58. > :19:01.door of job-seekers. The truth is that everyone of us in this room,

:19:02. > :19:06.including the people opposite, could all have read cases from people who

:19:07. > :19:09.have written to us, come to see us about the inequality and the

:19:10. > :19:14.disgrace going on here today and should not have been allowed to

:19:15. > :19:19.happen. My constituent goes on to say "This is not enough time to pay,

:19:20. > :19:24.I start work at 16 and for 25 years received my pension at 60, to have

:19:25. > :19:30.this changed not once but twice in my lifetime. I feel betrayed by the

:19:31. > :19:34.government and women my age have been discriminated against most of

:19:35. > :19:37.their working lives, denied the ability to prepare for retirement

:19:38. > :19:45.and taking the biggest hit of all so the government can the retirement

:19:46. > :19:48.age in a attempt to save money. " Is I believe the minister is a decent

:19:49. > :19:51.man and I don't think he will have the power or authority to do today

:19:52. > :19:56.what we believe should happen but let's look at the reality, the

:19:57. > :20:02.former minister responsible for this, the human shield of the

:20:03. > :20:04.Liberal Democrats, I would ask a question Mr Deputy Speaker, where

:20:05. > :20:09.are the Liberal Democrats today? Is anybody here from the Liberal

:20:10. > :20:13.Democrats? Perhaps they are ashamed of him as they should be for him

:20:14. > :20:18.being the shield for the hostility agenda forced through through five

:20:19. > :20:28.years of college. -- the austerity agenda. -- five years of coalition.

:20:29. > :20:31.This is a contract with the people of this country, a contract that the

:20:32. > :20:39.people of this country did not have any say in. It was a contract, this

:20:40. > :20:47.contract has been breached, it needs to be put right and they need to do

:20:48. > :20:52.the right thing. It would do the world of politics are very positive

:20:53. > :20:57.service if when we get it wrong, we say we get it wrong and put it

:20:58. > :21:04.right? Wrecked, in putting it right I am

:21:05. > :21:12.glad, what we don't want is the shifty thing which happens when the

:21:13. > :21:16.Chancellor came here in December and said I am not going to go ahead with

:21:17. > :21:20.tax credit cuts but he had moved it so it will come and hit people in

:21:21. > :21:28.universal credit. We want this put right and put right now and quickly.

:21:29. > :21:33.Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for calling me to talk in this debate

:21:34. > :21:39.which in some ways is a rerun of one held in December in Westminster

:21:40. > :21:42.hall, organised by the member for Worsley and Eccles South who has a

:21:43. > :21:49.long track record of campaigning on this issue and I congratulate also

:21:50. > :21:54.my colleague on the select committee for bringing this up and bringing to

:21:55. > :21:59.life in a sense the emotional feelings by many women of the most

:22:00. > :22:04.affected by changes to the state pension. In a way that everyone here

:22:05. > :22:09.can relate to, because we all have pensions and members of our own

:22:10. > :22:15.family who are affected. I do think Mr Deputy Speaker there is a risk

:22:16. > :22:19.today of overstating the case. My colleague in the select committee

:22:20. > :22:27.will not mind me, I hope, saying that when she said nobody was aware

:22:28. > :22:31.of the 1995 changes, there was no correspondence, that simply is an

:22:32. > :22:38.exaggeration of the situation. We will never know exactly who was

:22:39. > :22:42.communicated to, and who, probably most importantly, noticed it and

:22:43. > :22:48.paid attention. Not yet, not at the moment. We do know that in 2004, the

:22:49. > :22:52.previous government did a study on this from the DWP and Labour Party

:22:53. > :22:57.members will remember this. That study concluded that three quarters

:22:58. > :23:02.of those affected had been to be negated to effectively. Not at the

:23:03. > :23:06.moment. Members on the opposition side bench may care to comment on

:23:07. > :23:09.that. The fact is there are quite a lot of people who either were told

:23:10. > :23:14.at that time and thought it was a long way off and not something we

:23:15. > :23:16.had to be attention to all were not communicated to in which case for

:23:17. > :23:20.some of them it's been a difficult wake-up call. No doubt about that,

:23:21. > :23:25.lessons for accreditation which I will come onto and I hope the

:23:26. > :23:32.menaced will address. A lot of people want to talk so let me carry

:23:33. > :23:37.on. On the second point she brought up, and she was right to quote the

:23:38. > :23:41.previous pensions minister saying that not everybody knew and that is

:23:42. > :23:46.a point he has accepted and we all recognise. But nonetheless, the

:23:47. > :23:51.argument that no transitional arrangements were made, which is

:23:52. > :23:56.what the honourable members are calling for today, is of course also

:23:57. > :24:00.wrong. There was a significant transitional arrangement and

:24:01. > :24:05.concession made in 2011 which affected 250,000 people and cost the

:24:06. > :24:12.government ?1.3 million, cost the tax payer ?1.3 billion. The reason

:24:13. > :24:17.that arrangement was made was precisely because they then pensions

:24:18. > :24:23.minister in the then government recognised that advice from the

:24:24. > :24:28.Department only increase of waiting time for some women born in the

:24:29. > :24:35.1950s was as much as two years and they wanted to juice it to 18 months

:24:36. > :24:39.which would indeed benefit the 250,000 people from that

:24:40. > :24:43.arrangement. What is interesting today is that whilst the motion

:24:44. > :24:48.calls for transitional arrangements, further transitional arrangements,

:24:49. > :24:52.it does not spell out, nor does any member speaking so far spell out,

:24:53. > :24:58.exactly what transitional arrangements are being called for?

:24:59. > :25:03.Hold on, let me finish. Where the intention to simply change all the

:25:04. > :25:08.arrangements for all the women in the 1950s and go back to the

:25:09. > :25:13.original proposal, that would, I believe, and the minister may want

:25:14. > :25:19.to bid a more detailed figure on it, cost the taxpayer about ?10 billion.

:25:20. > :25:24.Yesterday we had the Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary call for changes

:25:25. > :25:27.to universal credit, which were not costed, to which he offered no

:25:28. > :25:32.alternative in terms of where the money would come from, today we have

:25:33. > :25:34.something which might cost ?10 billion but actually the

:25:35. > :25:38.transitional arrangement being proposed hasn't been spelt out now

:25:39. > :25:42.has the cost of it or how it would be paid for. Mr Deputy Speaker I do

:25:43. > :25:48.believe that it is incumbent on all of us as MPs, partly to represent

:25:49. > :25:52.the emotional feelings of our constituents, which has been done

:25:53. > :25:55.very well by a number of members today, but also to reflect on the

:25:56. > :26:00.reality and the cost and the obligations of what is being

:26:01. > :26:03.proposed. That, I think, does remain an open question and I am happy to

:26:04. > :26:08.take a question on that specific point. To the honourable member,

:26:09. > :26:13.with the honourable member except that what we have was the quest for

:26:14. > :26:17.equalisation in pensions which has resulted in an iniquitous outcome

:26:18. > :26:20.for the women discussed here this afternoon? The social justice

:26:21. > :26:23.demands that whatever the transitional arrangements should be

:26:24. > :26:28.and I believe he makes a strong point, that he and other members of

:26:29. > :26:29.the DWP committee will work to find transitional arrangements which will

:26:30. > :26:40.ease the iniquitous outcome. We have that discussion is select

:26:41. > :26:44.committee. We heard evidence from the Waspi campaign, which has been a

:26:45. > :26:47.very good, reasonable, sensible campaign, and it did focus on the

:26:48. > :26:50.hole in their evidence to the select committee on the issue of

:26:51. > :26:53.communication. Partly so that lessons can be learned, so that in

:26:54. > :26:57.the future when announcements are made, which may well be for ten

:26:58. > :27:01.years ahead, that actually all those who are going to be affected really

:27:02. > :27:06.are communicated to effectively, so we don't have a situation in ten

:27:07. > :27:11.years' time where another generation of women are complaining about not

:27:12. > :27:17.knowing. I'm happy to give way. Would he agree with me that there,

:27:18. > :27:21.we hope the minister in his summing up, addresses the whole point of the

:27:22. > :27:26.failure of communication strategy since 1995, right up to the current

:27:27. > :27:30.day. I have a constituent who was told in October they had qualified

:27:31. > :27:33.for their state pension a few weeks later they were told no, they had

:27:34. > :27:39.another three years. We really need to address this point. Yes, I think

:27:40. > :27:42.that's right, I'm sure the Minister will comment on communication

:27:43. > :27:46.because as I said in the debate in December there are clear lessons and

:27:47. > :27:48.it would be good to have it clarified that future changes, and I

:27:49. > :27:54.know there's a further review planned in 2017, given the longevity

:27:55. > :28:00.increases that are still going on, in fact I think the average life of

:28:01. > :28:05.women as projected by the Office of National Statistics has already

:28:06. > :28:08.increased 2.6 years since the 1995 proposals, and I dare Turner, whose

:28:09. > :28:12.report really gave the consensus that this House had for many years

:28:13. > :28:16.said not very long ago that if he was doing the report now he would

:28:17. > :28:21.have planned for faster changes ahead the state pension ages. It's

:28:22. > :28:25.also worth reflecting the honourable member for Paisley and Renfrewshire

:28:26. > :28:31.rightly said that at some point we would want to discuss the effect on

:28:32. > :28:34.women of the future state pension, and in answer to the honourable

:28:35. > :28:40.member's point about discrimination against women, I think it is really

:28:41. > :28:43.important that all members and our constituents are aware that the new

:28:44. > :28:49.state pension will be much fairer to women than the old system. Let me

:28:50. > :28:52.just point out this if I make, then I will come to you. National

:28:53. > :28:56.insurance credits will be given four years taken out of work for caring

:28:57. > :28:59.or bringing up a family. This is the first time this has happened in the

:29:00. > :29:03.history of the pension. It's a really important point. It will give

:29:04. > :29:07.women the same entitlements as National Insurance contributions

:29:08. > :29:09.through earning. That's a significant change and I do think

:29:10. > :29:13.the honourable members who brought forward this motion would want to

:29:14. > :29:17.allude to that. Of course I give way. I have listened very carefully

:29:18. > :29:22.to him and what he said today as the government made a policy decision in

:29:23. > :29:26.2011 to accelerate which impacted on a lot of people. He said they had

:29:27. > :29:29.failed to communicate the effects of that decision to the people

:29:30. > :29:32.affected. So why does he conclude the government doesn't now have a

:29:33. > :29:39.moral obligation to put that mistake right? Actually what I said was the

:29:40. > :29:44.communication issue goes back to 1995, a time when I certainly wasn't

:29:45. > :29:51.in this House and during that period of 1995-2010, for the bulk of that

:29:52. > :29:53.period his party was in power, so the communication issue, there's no

:29:54. > :29:58.point in pointing fingers at different parties on this, but the

:29:59. > :30:02.point is that during that period between 1995-2010, that is at the

:30:03. > :30:08.heart of the issue of communication, which the motion addresses, and the

:30:09. > :30:11.important thing now is in terms of what good advice can we give our

:30:12. > :30:15.constituents, the important thing is for those who are not sure what they

:30:16. > :30:20.are going to receive an retirement is to ask for a statement and that

:30:21. > :30:24.is what the pension wise campaign, which is available to everybody free

:30:25. > :30:28.of charge, is there to do. Ask for the statement. Half a million people

:30:29. > :30:31.have already taken advantage of that. That is the most effective

:30:32. > :30:36.communications tool that we should be using to address this issue of

:30:37. > :30:43.making sure that women and men, everybody approaching retirement,

:30:44. > :30:49.knows what they will receive. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. When the

:30:50. > :30:53.latest changes were made in 2011 act regarding pensions we on this side

:30:54. > :30:57.of the House objected and there were many debates about this particular

:30:58. > :31:01.issue and we talked about especially the 11 minute -- the double whammy

:31:02. > :31:04.effect on women and remember speaking on this debate but the

:31:05. > :31:08.government went ahead and passed this legislation. I want to explain

:31:09. > :31:11.to the Minister what my constituents have been writing to me about the

:31:12. > :31:16.women who have been affected by these changes and I'm going to read

:31:17. > :31:24.out some of them. Every one of the women who has contact Lee has said

:31:25. > :31:26.that they agreed the state pension age equality but what they have

:31:27. > :31:30.objected to and what they found difficulties the way that it has

:31:31. > :31:36.been implemented particularly the acceleration of the increase and

:31:37. > :31:40.lack of information. Some of my constituents directly affected by

:31:41. > :31:47.these changes have told me that even now they have not received any

:31:48. > :31:51.communication or formal notification of the changes from the Department

:31:52. > :31:55.for Work and Pensions. This is utterly unacceptable, given the

:31:56. > :31:59.gravity of these changes. Posting notices on women's magazines and

:32:00. > :32:04.Sunday supplements is both patronising and ineffective. None of

:32:05. > :32:10.the women I spoke to our readers of such publications. They found about

:32:11. > :32:14.the changes to word of mouth. As the increase in pension age is literally

:32:15. > :32:19.life changing, far more notice should have been given a head of the

:32:20. > :32:22.changes and the government should have ensured that everyone who is

:32:23. > :32:27.affected can plan for their future. One lady I spoke to told me that she

:32:28. > :32:34.had lived at the same address for the past 30 years and said that

:32:35. > :32:37.there have been no excuse she had not received any thing, and

:32:38. > :32:43.therefore to suggest that somehow people did know what was happening

:32:44. > :32:49.is wrong. Can I thank the honourable lady for giving way. I fully

:32:50. > :32:52.recognise there's obviously been a great deal of communicate -- there's

:32:53. > :32:57.been a breakdown in communication from government as a whole but can I

:32:58. > :33:03.ask was that she has any practical solution as to how the try and deal

:33:04. > :33:07.with this. I will come onto the practical solution in the remaining

:33:08. > :33:13.part of my speech. The other major concern that women have told me is

:33:14. > :33:17.that even when they have been notified there hasn't been enough

:33:18. > :33:21.time for these women to actually prepare for these major changes in

:33:22. > :33:28.their lives. One of my constituents, who is 62 years of age, and she was

:33:29. > :33:32.due to retire at 62 years and three months, however she will now have to

:33:33. > :33:36.work until she is 65. Understandably this is caused a great deal of

:33:37. > :33:41.distress and uncertainty for her because she had been planning to

:33:42. > :33:48.retire in two months' time. A plan had been to coordinate their

:33:49. > :33:52.retirement with her grandchildren so she could look after them so she

:33:53. > :33:55.would not have the as the government to pay for the child care of her

:33:56. > :33:58.grandchildren. By changing this around its turn her life into

:33:59. > :34:03.turmoil and the government is going to end up paying for those

:34:04. > :34:08.childcares. Another constituent has told me that anticipating retirement

:34:09. > :34:14.at 60 she took voluntary redundancy at aged 58 and a half when her

:34:15. > :34:19.company received -- was seeking to downsize. She was later informed she

:34:20. > :34:22.would not be able to access her as their -- Access her state pension

:34:23. > :34:26.until she is 66 years of age. She is now unemployed and riding difficulty

:34:27. > :34:31.finding another job because of her rage. She has been left in financial

:34:32. > :34:34.hardship as a result of not being notified about the changes to the

:34:35. > :34:39.state pension age and Tully was too late. She is not just one example.

:34:40. > :34:45.There are many thousands of women across the United Kingdom who are in

:34:46. > :34:49.those boats. Let me go onto another discrepancy, the discrepancy of the

:34:50. > :34:55.two years and two months for women born between April and December 1953

:34:56. > :35:00.is simply confusing and unfair. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was told

:35:01. > :35:04.this, the government was told this in the previous debates in 2011, and

:35:05. > :35:09.what it means is that for some constituents this is a difference of

:35:10. > :35:15.about ?14,000, which is a lot of money for them. Again, it's not just

:35:16. > :35:19.my constituents that have been affected. Women across the country

:35:20. > :35:23.have been affected by this. Hundreds of thousands of women have had a

:35:24. > :35:28.significant change imposed on them not just once but twice, with a lack

:35:29. > :35:33.of appropriate notification and retirement plans have been shattered

:35:34. > :35:36.with devastating consequences. The government seems to have failed to

:35:37. > :35:40.recognise the severe impact that the speed of the implementation of these

:35:41. > :35:45.changes has had on these women. These changes have not affected men

:35:46. > :35:48.to the same extent, as their state pension age has not been increased

:35:49. > :35:52.by such a large amount and they have had much more notice. The pensions

:35:53. > :35:58.system has historically discriminate against women and these changes are

:35:59. > :36:06.yet another example of this. I would ask and urge the government that now

:36:07. > :36:10.in 2016 will they reconsider these provisions and try to diminish the

:36:11. > :36:13.impact of these plans and make transitional arrangements which

:36:14. > :36:21.would be fairer for these women affected. I have listened with great

:36:22. > :36:26.interest to her speech and the speech of other members who sit

:36:27. > :36:28.beside her and in particular to the references to transitional

:36:29. > :36:33.arrangements. I wonder, could she help me, what does she mean by

:36:34. > :36:42.transitional arrangements? What does she suggest? How much will they cost

:36:43. > :36:50.and how will we find the money? Well I'm glad you've given me extra time

:36:51. > :36:56.on this. I think there are many different ways that you can deal

:36:57. > :37:01.with these issues. The recent one simple panacea solution to it. If

:37:02. > :37:05.the government wishes to receive a comprehensive response from me as

:37:06. > :37:13.the way forward I am very happy to put a very detailed as to how to

:37:14. > :37:19.deal with this. I thank my honourable friend for giving way. We

:37:20. > :37:22.are constantly hearing from members opposite for what is a practical

:37:23. > :37:28.transition plan looked like. Surely the responsibility of government is

:37:29. > :37:32.to come forward with a plan which this House can debate. This is an

:37:33. > :37:37.abdication of response ability. I entirely agree with my honourable

:37:38. > :37:43.friend. I think it's typical of this government's approaching these

:37:44. > :37:49.things. It should be my right honourable friend would maybe recall

:37:50. > :37:52.that when the bill went through in 2011 and a further transitional

:37:53. > :37:57.arrangement was proposed, in October 2011 and arrangement was proposed

:37:58. > :38:00.that nobody would have made -- been made to wait more than a year for

:38:01. > :38:05.their pension update and that would have cost ?10 million over ten years

:38:06. > :38:09.and it would have had the common state pension age coming to the

:38:10. > :38:15.2022, but it was rejected by the government. Correction. I'm grateful

:38:16. > :38:20.for my friend's intervention and hopefully that has helped the

:38:21. > :38:24.honourable member opposite. As I said I'm very happy to pen down very

:38:25. > :38:28.detailed things that can be done to help these ladies, but I would like

:38:29. > :38:33.a promise from the government that when I do right they will actually

:38:34. > :38:35.commend what I said. Maybe I can have that reassurance from the

:38:36. > :38:39.government that when I come up with these suggestions as to how to deal

:38:40. > :38:43.with the various different problems they will actually say yes, you are

:38:44. > :38:47.right, the honourable member for Bolton South East has got the

:38:48. > :38:50.solution and we are going to actually implement what she says.

:38:51. > :38:58.Will I get that promise from the Minister? Thank you Mr Depp is

:38:59. > :39:02.bigger. I wish to congratulate -- thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I wish

:39:03. > :39:07.to congratulate the honourable members for securing this debate. In

:39:08. > :39:10.the last few months I've met a number of constituents of mining

:39:11. > :39:14.Bexhill and Beth Hill who have been impacted by these changes. These

:39:15. > :39:17.constituents have detailed how the state pension increases have

:39:18. > :39:22.impacted them due to being on the wrong side of the date line. I have

:39:23. > :39:27.every sympathy with anyone who has been impacted by these changes. I

:39:28. > :39:31.can see why there has been so much frustration from those impacted. I

:39:32. > :39:37.congratulate the Waspi campaign for driving this debate. Mr Deputy

:39:38. > :39:40.Speaker, while it is true that any criteria change regarding pensions,

:39:41. > :39:44.benefits or taxation in general is always going to impact some, I'm

:39:45. > :39:48.conscious that these individuals that we are talking about today have

:39:49. > :39:52.in many circumstances worked for decades and did so on the basis that

:39:53. > :39:57.their pensions would be there for them at the prescribed time. However

:39:58. > :40:00.Mr Deputy Speaker, I'm also conscious that when actuaries were

:40:01. > :40:04.calculating life expectancy and therefore the amount of years for

:40:05. > :40:07.which a pension would pay out, they would not have calculated the life

:40:08. > :40:12.expectancy levels which are currently being enjoyed. Neither

:40:13. > :40:16.would the rising levels of health been -- have been appreciated. These

:40:17. > :40:19.factors have therefore driven successive governments and most OECD

:40:20. > :40:26.nations to increase the state pension age. With the honourable

:40:27. > :40:31.member not accept though that life expectancy is not the same for

:40:32. > :40:33.everybody everywhere and there are places in Glasgow where life

:40:34. > :40:39.expectancy is significantly lower than other parts of the country?

:40:40. > :40:44.Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. I absolutely do take that point. But I

:40:45. > :40:47.think it would be naive not to recognise that as we do live

:40:48. > :40:50.healthier lives and would expect to live healthier lives than we are not

:40:51. > :40:54.only able to work longer but we would want to work longer in

:40:55. > :40:59.addition to that as well. I will make some progress, if I may. Mr

:41:00. > :41:03.Deputy Speaker, the question therefore remains, what if anything

:41:04. > :41:08.can be done to lessen the impact on those who will have to now work

:41:09. > :41:12.longer before qualifying for their state pension. I make particular

:41:13. > :41:17.reference to those whom it can be demonstrated were not notified as

:41:18. > :41:23.they should have been on overtime. Thank you. Would my honourable

:41:24. > :41:27.friend agree with me and constituents in my constituency of

:41:28. > :41:32.Eastleigh that that notice period for some of these women was simply

:41:33. > :41:35.far too short and that we hope to hear also from the Minister today

:41:36. > :41:40.agreeing that it's a great cause of regret from those, for those women

:41:41. > :41:46.that the largest group of state pension age increases got less than

:41:47. > :41:49.sadly eight years to plan for this? I thank my honourable friend is

:41:50. > :41:52.making that point and I know she's led a campaign in her constituency

:41:53. > :41:56.to descend and it would be ideal to hear from a minister. I believe is

:41:57. > :42:02.the pensions act requires ten years' notification for the 95 change I

:42:03. > :42:05.believe 15 years was implemented but for the 2011 my understanding is as

:42:06. > :42:09.my honourable friend has mentioned it has been a to five years and

:42:10. > :42:10.having not been in this place at that time I'm very keen to find out

:42:11. > :42:19.more. Where I have issues with the motion

:42:20. > :42:23.is that whilst I agree very much with the concerns being raised I do

:42:24. > :42:28.not ultimately see a remedy before us. Having stood on a manifesto

:42:29. > :42:32.commitment which pledged to deliver our budget surplus by 2020 it would

:42:33. > :42:38.mean that compensating for this matter would have to be paid for by

:42:39. > :42:43.another group of my constituents. I have real concerns over another age

:42:44. > :42:47.group in my constituency, those in their 20s and 30s who are sometimes

:42:48. > :42:52.referred to as the packhorse generation. Because they asked at

:42:53. > :42:56.all the debts from university, which I and many others from my age group

:42:57. > :43:00.and above did not have to endure. They are not in receipt of

:43:01. > :43:03.occupational pension schemes, they are paying high rent levels and

:43:04. > :43:09.struggling to afford a home of their own. They are perhaps also likely to

:43:10. > :43:14.be the subject of future changes in decades to come if life expectancy

:43:15. > :43:18.levels continue to increase. I will not, I will make some progress if I

:43:19. > :43:22.may, with respect. Whilst I would be keen for the government to assess

:43:23. > :43:26.what more can be done to help those women who are being impacted by the

:43:27. > :43:31.pension changes, I am conscious that before my election to this place the

:43:32. > :43:35.government conducted a review and allocated over ?1 billion to

:43:36. > :43:39.mitigate against the worst affected. Further mitigation, if introduced,

:43:40. > :43:43.would then reveal the next class of age group to be impacted and we will

:43:44. > :43:47.never move on. If the manifesto of my government is to be enacted this

:43:48. > :43:53.further mitigation would have be paid for by others in society in the