26/01/2016 House of Commons

Good morning and welcome to BBC Parliament's live coverage of the

Commons. In an hour, an urgent question is being axed by the Shadow

Health Secretary about the death from sepsis of the 12-month-old

Cornwall boy, William Mead. A report said he might have lived if NHS call

handlers had realised the seriousness of this condition. The

main business is the debate on the details of the charity's protection

and social investment bill. This gives England and Wales powers to

close down unfit charities. Don't forget to join me for a round-up of

the day in both Houses of Parliament at 11pm tonight. First, questions to

the Justice Secretary, Michael Gove, and his ministerial. First question

concerns the autonomy of prison governors.

Order, order. Questions to the Secretary of State for Justice. Our

prison systems need reform and we need to give governors greater

freedoms to innovate to find better ways of rehabilitating offenders. In

December, the outgoing Chief Inspector of prisons said he was

concerned about Islamic extremism in prisons. Some prisons, including one

in my constituency, the Muslim population is 40% of inmates. What

additional powers or is about is the Government giving to tackle

extremism? Radicalisation in prison is a genuine danger not just in

England but across the European Union. That is why we have charged a

former prison governor with reviewing how we handle not just the

security concerns but also the dangerous spread of peer-to-peer

radicalisation in our organisations. In appointing a new Chief Executive

to follow in the work of Nick artwork, Peter Clark goes very much

in his favour. I welcome the steps being taken to tackle radicalisation

of prisons but the problem exists once people, outside prisons and in

a previous report of the Home Affairs Select Committee, we have

talked about the need to monitor people when they go outside. Can he

ensure that remains that connection with the Home Office, so those that

have had lessons or initiatives to do with counter radicalisation, that

they continue with that when they get outside? I make it my business

to talk regularly with the Home Secretary on this issue. I also know

that my honourable friend, the Minister for prisons and the Right

honourable member, the Minister for security, they meet regularly to

make sure we do everything possible to monitor it. There is a

recognition that we must deal with violent extremism but extremism

itself. Those who seek to ride it applies to inject the poison of

Islamist into the minds of young men need to be counted every step of the

way. We are determined to help eliminate the budget deficit and

deliver better justice. That is why we are cutting 15% from the budget

over the spending review and finding 5.3 billion to overhaul the prisoner

state so it can drive down reoffending and constituents get

better value for money and better bang for their buck out of the

justice system. At the Ministry of Justice has faced spending cuts as

deep or deeper than any other department in Whitehall. I am not

sure despite the occasional criticism and row, the public has

noted any discernible reduction in the service provided by the

Department. Will my honourable friend someone in the secretaries of

state for health, social security, international development and

defence and given -- give them a tongue lashing on how we can emulate

the private sector and create more wealth and more goods and more

enterprise and more deregulation and more lower taxation and still

provide better services? I thank the honourable gentleman for his

remarks. As a former chairman, you will appreciate we have already

slimmed back office by 600 million so we could extend rehabilitation to

the 45,000 offenders on short sentences, now we are cutting the

admin budget by 50% but investing 700 million to modernise our courts.

It shows you can drive efficiencies and deliver a more effective system,

whether it is the delays at court or the offenders passing through them.

Given the Secretary of State's U-turns on things like the criminal

court charge and a band of prisoners being sent box, can I suggest a good

way of saving money would be to avoid such mistakes and listen to

the Labour Party? With great respect, given the litany of

mistakes and errors and systemic failings that we have had to clear

up over the last five years and continue, we might reject that

particular piece of counsel. One important area in which both service

can be enhanced and value for money made, is through greater efficiency

both the court estate and court system. Is my honourable friend

satisfied that the ministry has sufficient in-house capacity to deal

adequately with major issues like restructuring where you have to

negotiate highly commercial contractual levels will he bring

outside expertise when necessary? I have already explained some of the

back-office savings that we are making, not only to deliver better

value to the taxpayer, but to find the savings to reinvest. He is right

to say that where we need to engage with the private sector or the

voluntary sector to take advantage of that ingenuity and innovation, we

will do so. Figures released yesterday by the Department show

that more Ministry of Justice staff received bonuses last year than the

previous year and that the average size of bonuses increased by 7%.

Considering the whole public sector has had a pay rise cap at 1%, is it

not a case of one rule for one and one for another? That is not fair or

reasonable to any of the hard-working public servants that we

have. There are very strict rules around bonuses within the 1% pay cap

and the guidance of RAM that is. It is important, notwithstanding the

savings that we have to make and in relation to bureaucracy and

back-office, that we recognise outstanding performance. We are the

only country in the world which uses taxpayer's revenue to pay lawyers to

sue soldiers as they return from active duty. Is it an area of saving

that the minister might consider? He is right that we need to make sure

we have a balanced approach to Access to justice and I will come on

and answer some of the specific questions around the military claims

later. One particular area we need to look at is the rules around legal

aid matters what we are doing and that is what we continue to pursue.

Talking of value for money, how much has the miscalculation of divorce

settlements cost so far? The 2200 closed cases will require legal

advice and negotiation to correct and who will pay for this? The

taxpayer or the people his department have badly let down? The

legal press has dubbed him the Minister of cock ups. Doesn't the

whole ministerial team deserve that title? When we make mistakes, we

recognise them and we have written to all of those people affected to

make sure that it doesn't happen again. Our announcement to close

Holloway prison signals a new beginning in the way that we treat

female offenders. It reflects our commitment to hold woman in

environments that better meet their specific needs and better support

their rehabilitation and helping them towards better lives upon

release. I have fostered the whole lady's prison in Derbyshire and I

wonder if she can outline the changes that are happening at

Holloway and how they will assist the prisoners and staff at Foston

Hall as well. Foston Hall is a resettlement prison and a much

better placed to support inmates throughout their time in prison and

back out into the community. She will know that many female offenders

have complex needs and that is why we have introduced a personality

disorder pathway and case management systems for female offenders. We

have ensured family engagement workers are in place at all public

sector women's prisons including Foston Hall. The minister might know

that a woman's prison is close to my constituency. Will she agree that

when we look at what happens to women in prison, very often it is

literacy that is stopping them getting back and leading a good life

and stop it is also the fact that many people in prison, winning --

women particularly can have problems and are on the autism scale and they

are never tested. Could we have more attention to looking at special

educational needs in women's prisons so we can help them all? He makes an

excellent point and we will take that into consideration. I have

visited Newhall prison towards the tail end of last year and had a look

at some of the excellent work that they are doing to help women

offenders both with literacy, numeracy in -- issues and various

other complex needs that they encounter. She will be aware of the

work of the rehabilitation of... It began its work in a prison in my

constituency where it was a category C /T resettlement prison.

-- C/ D resettlement prison. He makes an important point. We do have

so many of our female offenders coming to the prison system with

both addictions to substance tours and alcohol and it is fundamental

that, that is the key part of their rehabilitation process. On the

advice of organisations, the Scottish Government has been looking

into sentences of women of six months or less and helping them to

stop reoffending. When the minister commit to rolling this out across

the whole of the UK? I am very keen to have a look at the

Scottish moral and see what progress has been made. I am also keen to

intervene earlier on in women's offending journey to prevent as many

people as possible from ending up in prison. Every single woman in prison

represents a potential broken family and potentially children taken into

care. Instead of trying to turn the women's prison estate into some kind

of holiday camp, can I suggest that the minister instead, given that she

is normally such a great champion for gender equality, that if a woman

commits an offence, she should be treated in exactly the same way as a

man? We still have the case that for every single category of offence,

and man is more likely to be sent to prison than a woman. Why should a

female offender for burglary be any better than male offender? Mr

Speaker, I fear we may have been down this road before with my

honourable friend. But I take on board his comments. Of course,

sentencing is very much a matter for the judiciary. But I will always

defend my strong held belief that equality of outcome is what we are

looking for in the female was in a state. And at the moment, female

prisoners are much more likely to suffer lots of complex issues, lots

of Comdex needs, and far less likely to gain employment once they leave

prison. And that is something I am looking to tackle. Quite rightly, we

do not tolerate drugs in prison and we are bringing forward tough new

measures including the new legislation on psychoactive

substances. Possession in a prison will be a criminal offence, unlike

in the rest of the country. If the scale of harm demonstrated by a

significant increase in suicides was happening in other places where

there is a duty of care - hospitals, children's homes, schools - would we

not have a root and branch review of how best to tackle supply and demand

for drugs in prisons? What we must make sure is that these drugs do not

get into our prisons. Psychoactive substances have been in our prisons

now for some time. It was a request from prison officers and prisoners

around the country that we actually made sure that it should become a

criminal offence, possession. We need new sniffer dogs which can

sniff these products as well. They are in training at the moment. We

must eradicate these drugs from our prisons. The national offender

management service has revealed that the amount of alcohol found in

prisons in England and Wales has almost trebled since the government

took office. What steps is he taking on this? One thing we can do is to

make sure that individual governors have full control so that they can

work with their staff. We need to make sure that alcohol which is not

supposed to be there is not there. A lot of this is actually brewed

within the prisons, and we need to work very hard to make sure this

does not happen. Drugs use is widespread throughout every jail in

this country. Is there really any realistic prospect whatsoever of

having a drug-free prison establishment? Mr Speaker, the

Prison Service works really very, very hard to try to make sure that

we eradicate as many drugs as possible. The new legislation will

help. We know that assaults on prison officers and inmates from

people taking psychoactive substances has become a blight on

our prisons. With the new legislation, we will have powers

which were not there before. There has been recent reports of prison

officers falling ill after inhaling inmates' legal highs. I know you

have said we are introducing new legislation, but how will this come

into effect when present governors are leaving? We need a culture from

the top to implement, so how can we do this? One way we can improve the

situation for prison officers is to listen to them. They categorically

asked us for the band. At the moment it is legal. It will be banned from

once it gets royal assent. From April it is a criminal offence in

prisons. That is what the prison officers asked for, and that is what

we have given them. Mr Speaker, we are committed to making sure that

our justice system delivers faster and fairer justice for all our

citizens. Our tribunals will bring quicker and fairer access to justice

and create a justice system which reflects the way people use services

today. We have ensured that legal aid remains available for the

highest priority cases, where life or liberty is at stake, where they

face the loss of their home, in cases of domestic violence, or where

their children may be taken care. As the Lord Chief Justice

extraordinarily reported two weeks ago, and I quote, our system of

justice has become unaffordable to most. Two constituents were sacked

unfairly, one went to a tribunal, was not able to afford legal

representation, therefore lost. The other image of the gave up. With

justice now only available to the well off, does the minister have any

serious proposals to open up access to justice to ordinary people? I am

very grateful to the right honourable gentleman for raising the

issue of employment tribunals. I would like to say that it is the aim

of this government to make sure that people do not have to go to court or

tribunals in the first place, and thereby not have to incur legal

expenses or experience stress. In the case of employment tribunals, he

may not be aware, but the ACAS conciliation service, in their first

12 months, found that 83,000 people used to that service and I hope that

in future, when he has problems brought to his surgery from his

constituents, he will be able to point them to that free service. As

the government changed the criteria for access to legal aid, and since

they did this, there has been a huge increase in domestic violence. As

the government made any assessment of the link? We constantly make sure

that matters are kept under review. As far as the act is concerned, we

are committed to having a review between 3-5 years. The Law Society

describes access to justice as being on the verge of a crisis. Funding

for civil cases has fallen 62% since civil legal aid was cut. Will the

minister carry out a full review to understand the equality impact of

this change in civil legal aid? As I just said, Mr Speaker, we will be

carrying out a full review of the fermentation of this. I would say

that we still have one of the most generous legal aid budgets in the

world, not withstanding the reductions we have made. Some of

those who would struggle to pay court fees the most are those where

there has been family breakdown, often in chaotic families. What

plans does he have to simplify and reduced cost to access child

arrangement orders? And will this include any further statutory rights

for grandparents? On court fees, where there is difficulty for people

to attend court, then there is a fee remission system available which can

be remission in full or in part. We learnt this week that a district

judge is suing the Ministry of Justice, blowing the whistle on the

rise in death threats and increasingly violent claimants which

our judges are having to Dale with, day in, day out. Coming their and

after the Lord Chief Justice 's warning that judges are facing a

rising number of challenging and emotionally charged cases, what

action is the minister to address these claims, or is this just

another mission which the failed austerity parties of his party have

made our courts more dangerous both judges and the victims? May I first

of all welcome the honourable lady to her new position. She will

appreciate that a given that there is ongoing litigation, I cannot

possibly comment at the dispatch box. With your permission, Mr

Speaker, I would like to grow this question with questions in 11 and

13. Dividing prisoners with vocational and employment

opportunities are implementing important factors in preventing

reoffending. The Employers Forum For Reducing Reoffending is working with

the department to increase involvement of more businesses. It

also has an important role to play in helping ex offenders find

employment. I am grateful. I am sure he would agree with me that it is

beholden on as many employers as possible to offer training in

prisons so that when prisoners leave prison, they are ready for

employment. Could I invite him to welcome the work that Clean Sheet

does in our prison estate, especially in guys Marsh in my

constituency, which I have seen at first hand, really getting people

ready for work. I thank him for his interest and I am delighted to

praise the work of Clean Sheet and so many organisations which try and

get prisoners into work. We have a number of companies, Mr Speaker,

including Timpson's, Halfords, restaurants, and many others, who

are rising to the challenge. And we want many more to join them. Does he

agree that providing work and the right sort of work is the real key

to any effective rehabilitation for prisoners? My honourable friend is

absolutely right. We have hard evidence that if a prisoner leaves

prison and goes into work, they are less likely to reoffend. We know

reoffending costs between ?9 billion -?13 billion per year. And it

creates many more victims. That is what we can avoid by getting many

more prisoners into work. My honourable friend will know that as

access to skills is key, and whilst I welcome what he said about the

ploy is Forum, what more is the Government going to do to get more

employers to recognise the potential of providing those skills and then

the opportunities to employ ex-offenders on release? As a London

MP, my honourable friend may have noted that a week or so ago, the

Mayor of London pointed out that when employers hire ex-offenders,

they report above-average commitment and loyalty. So, not only is this an

important part of social responsibility, it is actually very

good business sense. London is actually leading the way in this

area, with more joined up work between local enterprise

partnerships getting extra skills funding into prisons. I want to see

what is happening in London spread across the whole of England and

Wales. Mr Speaker, in November, I raised the issue of insurance

premiums and the barrier that they pose to employment for ex-offenders.

I am pleased that the minister has engaged in this issue, but I wonder,

does he have an update for the House? I do indeed. The honourable

gentleman is right to pursue this issue. One issue I have come across

recently is insurers just requesting a blanket stipulation that they have

no ex-offenders on their premises. I am a former chartered insurer, and I

will be having a meeting with the Association of British Insurers

shortly in order to challenge them on this issue, to see if that is

really necessary. As a former underwriter myself, I suspect it

probably isn't. The minister has talked of this morning about

employment on release from prisons. Education and skills are crucial to

an offender's chance of making something of themselves and getting

a job on release. But he admitted in answer to a question that Prison

Service anti-riot squads were drafted in on 339 occasions in the

year to 9th of December 2015, an increase of 52% on the previous

year. So does he accept that prison overcrowding, coupled with his

governments cuts in resources, has led to a prison estate which is not

fit for educational purpose? First of all, let me warmly congratulate

the honourable lady on her new position. I look forward to debating

these issues with her in the months to come. She raises the issue of

education and she is right to do so. It is a crucial part of getting

offenders into work. But the governments whole prison reform

programme is front and centre of part of the answer to try and deal

with the issues of violence and disorder which she has identified.

More purposeful work, better education, better outcomes, better

prisons. Hampshire's community rehabilitation company plays a vital

role connecting prisons and offenders with local ploy is across

the haven't constituency. Will the minister join me in congratulating

them on their work and also to encourage more employers to

contribute to job fairs run by members of this House? I certainly

will. Get me warmly congratulate my honourable friend not only on

organising a jobs fair in his own constituency, a very practical way

to help our constituents find work, but also realising that that jobs

fair needs to be equally open to ex-offenders. He is leading the way

and I hope others will follow. Before I called the honourable

member for Barrow in Furness, I would remind the House that the

Crown Prosecution Service is reconsidering this case and a second

inquest is awaited. Members should take account of that in carefully

framing their remarks on the matter. The death of poppy Worthington is

deeply distressing and very tragic. I offer my sympathies to those who

loved her and those who cared for her. I am unable to comment on the

decisions of the. There is nothing more important than keeping children

safe. That is why the Government has given child sexual abuse the status

of a national threat in the strategic requirement. I thank the

Minister for that answer. Our community want accountability and it

wants to see improvements in the services that have failed in these

circumstances. Will she make clear that there is no reason why the

serious case review into Poppy Worthington's death and the report

needs to be delayed, pending the second inquest being carried out.

A second inquest should be done. They are independent of Government

and decide their own timescales. I can confirm that neither are

required to wait upon the coroner. Community rehabilitation companies

are responsible for supporting any of their staff at risk of redundancy

in line with employment law. We are working closely with community

rehabilitation companies to make sure they fulfil their contractual

commitments to maintain service delivery, reduce reoffending,

protect the public and deliver value for money to the taxpayer. There is

the potential for 900 probation officers to be made compulsory

redundant in the near future. These are the people who stood by the

Government at a time when there was the traditional period. They

shouldn't be penalised. They should be praised. Justice Secretary

guarantee that these professionals receive four voluntary redundancies

terms. -- full involuntary redundancy terms. I repeat what I

said just now in that we will make sure the community rehabilitation

companies comply with employment law as they are supposed to do. We

closely monitor their performance in line with the contracts which they

have signed but I can tell the honourable gentleman that last year

there were 195 extra probation officers qualified. We had 750

probation officers in training and that is the largest intact of

probation officers for some considerable period of time. Our

system of youth justice needs reform. Youth offending us down, the

care of youth offenders in custody is not good enough. There are

concerns which are heightened following Panorama's investigation

into events at the Medway secure training centre. In a statement, I

have appointed an independent improvement board to investigate

what has happened in Medway and ensure the capability of G4S, and

other organisations meet appropriate standards and that it is sufficient.

The roll-out of the new minimising and managing physical restraint

system has been delayed for a year. In 2013, there are 3000 assault

incidents in the secure state, a 7% increase even though the number of

people in custody has raised. What is he doing to ensure that near --

new systems are implemented? There has been a reduction in the number

of young people in the youth estate but as the number has reduced, so

those remaining ten to be those who have been arrested for the most

violent crimes and to pose the greatest difficulties to those who

have to care for them and those who have to keep them in custody. It is

important we ensure when restraint is applied, it is done so in a way

that minimises risks to Ian Bugler but ensure safety can be restored.

One of the purposes of the interviews is to make sure the

workforce is trained to restrain young people and protect others. I

visited Swanwick Lodge, a secure home for ten to 17-year-olds in my

constituency. Swanwick large's work tackles the root causes that led to

these young people's loss of education, substance misuse and

early intervention. Will he explain what other measures are in place to

tackle youth rehabilitation and reduce reoffending? Before she came

into this house, she did a great deal of work to help disadvantaged

children get better outcomes and she will know that some of those

children who end up in trouble with the criminal just system, they grow

up in homes where love has been absent or fleeting or when no one

has cared enough to tell those children the difference between and

wrong. The work conducted by the Education Secretary and the work

being led by the Local Government Secretary to tackle the problems of

troubled families are integral to ensuring we will reduce the number

of young people who fall into crime. It was obvious to those who watched

the Panorama programme, that the G4S workforce was underqualified,

undertrained and under pressure not to report incidents that should've

been reported because of the threat to G4S's profits. Isn't it now time

that we recognise that the most difficult and vulnerable children in

our system should not be looked after by a profit driven

organisation, but by properly trained and publicly accountable

staff? I don't doubt his sincerity in is caring for these people. What

happened in Medway was terrible. It is important to take on board the

fact that there are private sector organisations including G4S which

are responsible for the care of young offenders not least in

Bridgend and they have been doing an exemplary job in other areas. It is

quite wrong to draw conclusions about the private sector or the

public sector. What matters is getting outcomes right for children

and we should not on the back of human misery try to carry forward a

narrow ideological argument. Will he congratulate a distinguished soldier

for taking on the airborne initiative of the young offenders

institution in Portland does he agree that getting the appropriate

young offenders out onto the Moors for five testing days is an

excellent scheme which our support? I couldn't agree more. I have to say

the capacity of Cadet forces and military involvement turn round the

lives of young men who find themselves in trouble and it has

been tested over the years will stop everything we can do to support the

Education Secretary and support Sir Rupert Smith and rescue the lives of

young people, I think we should do. The allegations in the Panorama

programme on the 11th of January about Medway secure training centre

were truly appalling. I am glad the Secretary of State has listened to

the chief Insecta -- Inspector of prisons. The director of Medway has

just resigned. The three STC's in England are run by G4S and following

a damning inspection report, the contract was taken away from G4S.

This has nothing to do with ideology. On the basis of the

evidence before us, will the Government to take away G4S's Medway

contract and will it ensure G4S is not awarded any future contracts? He

is right. It is because these allegations are so serious that we

have to investigate them properly. We will investigate what went on and

ensure children are safe. When any organisation fails on the delivery

of public services, we will take steps to remove that contract. If

G4S have failed in this regard, we will take all steps to keep children

safe. I will answer this question with question 15. Violence in

prisons has increased and the nature of offenders currently in custody

and the widespread of portability of psychiatric substances have

contributed to making prisons less safe. There is no single solution to

improving safety in prisons but we are making process and trialling the

sub body warmth cameras, bringing in sniffer dogs but they are in a way

to reduce violence is to give governors the tools to reformat and

rehabilitate. One of the threats to safety inside prisons and outside

prisons is the ability of inmates to access mobile phones. On Friday, a

seven prison and Rochester prison was sentenced to 12 years for

arranging the supply of reactivated firearms via a mobile phone from his

prison cell. Random checks are only good enough and prison officers do

their best but it now is time to cut this and go for mobile phone jamming

devices. He is absolutely right. I can tell him we employ a number of

measures and her body orifice scanning chairs, metal detecting

ones, blockers and specially trained dogs. We need to refocus and

redouble our efforts in this area, particularly around blockers and

detectors and I can assure him that this is an area that the Secretary

of State and I fully engaged in. The safety of young people in our prison

state has been called into question by the Panorama programme regarding

Medway secure training centre. What assurances can be provided that the

safety of young people across the prison estate, not just in Medway,

is being prioritised? He will have heard the answer that the Secretary

of State has just given to a previous question on this issue. I

won't repeat that. We do take this issue extremely seriously and that

is the reason why the Secretary of State is commissioned Charlie

Taylor, former Chief Executive of the National College for School

leadership, to conduct a review of youth justice and youth custody

across the board. Not only safety at its heart but improved outcomes for

young people in custody. Medway prison 's shows that good order and

restraint can be exploited. Will the inquiry look into this across all

prisons because I do not think in this day and age it is appropriate?

What I would say to the honourable lady, is that there are occasions in

custody where for the safety of the young person and for the safety of

others, we do have to use restraint. The chief inspector has acknowledged

that minimising and managing physical restraint is an

improvement. That is only the case if it is used properly and if it is

used appropriately and not if it is abused. We are very mindful of that.

The ongoing chief inspector of prisons looked into Wormwood Scrubs

and one cell was so unsafe com he said he would want to keep a dog

there. I know you can't teach an old dog new tricks that I wondered if

you could tell us what is being done to deal with the Tory prison crisis?

What I would say is I hope she will be fair enough to recognise the fact

that this Government has accepted that much of our prison estate is

simply not good enough. It is too old, inappropriate and we can

provide the education or the work that we need to provide. That is why

the Chancellor has provided ?1.3 billion to build my new prisons in

addition to the new prison we are building in North Wales and the new

house blocks we have delivered and the further two blocks that we will

deliver. With permission I will take an answer four questions 12 and 16

together. I have met with many international partners from the

Council of Europe commission of human rights to the UN High

Commissioner of human rights. The Justice Secretary has met with many.

These meetings are an important opportunity to reinforce Britain's

proud tradition of promoting freedom and discuss how this comment intends

to strengthen its both at home and abroad. I'm sure if it was just the

Labour Party who are saying don't scrap the Human Rights Act, the

minister could roll with it. Prince Zeid, when he met with him, did he

say that the Government's proposals will be damaging to victims,

contrary to the country's history of global engagements and indeed many

of their states would gleefully follow suit? Is it not important

that we do listen to the United Nations? He is right we should

listen to our international partners. He did not say that to me

at all. When we have these meetings, it is a good opportunity to discuss

the reality of our plans for reform. I make clear our forthcoming bill of

Rights proposal stay within the convention. I explained the abuses

that we want to be rid of under the Human Rights Act. Some of the

challenges we have allowed us is to look at our common-sense reforms

with some of the baseless scaremongering coming from some of

our critics. The UN's special rapporteur on

torture has spoken about plans to replace the Human Rights Act with a

Tory Bill of Rights, calling it a dangerous and pernicious and

something which would set a very bad example to the rest of the world.

Isn't he right? It is not right, and I can tell him that with all the

discussions I have had with all the UN officials who have passed through

Westminster, nobody has ever used that kind of language in front of

me, and I very much doubt that they would. Since when is it the practice

of foreign legal and other entities to decide the views and produce the

sovereignty of this Parliament and the electoral mandate we have to

bring in a British Bill of Rights? It is a tragedy that the European

Convention on Human Rights, which was founded by British people, has

been distorted by perverse decisions such as trying to get an axe

murderer to get the vote, which we have rejected. Isn't it time we got

on with our manifesto commitment to have a British Bill of Rights? My

honourable friend is absolutely right. I would also point out that

the last Labour government had issues with the way the Strasbourg

court operated, too. They did not implement a prisoner voting. I do

not remember the honourable member when he was a minister calling for

it to be implemented. Nor did they implemented the Abu Qatada judgment.

Can the minister confirm that human rights have been part of our law in

this country under the common law for many years, and that they will

continue to be so after the repeal of the Human Rights Act, perhaps in

a more modern and codified way? My honourable and Learned Friend is

absolutely right. He have had a huge, long tradition and pedigree of

respecting human rights, dating back to Magna Carta and before. We have

protected human rights in this country before the European

Convention, and certainly before Labour's Human Rights Act, and we

shall continue to do so in the years ahead. The minister is yet to issue

his consultation on the repeal of the Human Rights Act and its

replacement with a British Bill of Rights. But it is eight weeks now

and to the Scottish Parliament is dissolved and it goes into Purdy,

and it is the same with Northern Ireland and Wales. Can I ask him to

guarantee that he will not squash out Scotland, Northern Ireland and

Wales from this important call some patience by issuing his proposals

before, or even worse, during the election period? Can he give that

guarantee? There will be no squashing out. We are already in

detailed soundings and when we come to it, there will be full

consultation with all the devolved administrations. In relation to the

purdah issue, we will be mindful of the Cabinet Office guidelines.

Another perverse decision of the European Court of Human Rights was

that on prisoner voting. Can the minister please confirm that there

are absolutely no plans to change our laws on prisoner voting? I thank

him for his question. As I have made clear to our partners in Strasbourg,

it is for honourable members in this House to determine whether prisoners

should be given the vote, and I see no prospect of that happening in the

foreseeable future. When the council of Europe commission of human rights

visited the United Kingdom last week, he said that the repeatedly

delayed launch of the consultation of the repeal of the Human Rights

Act is, and I quote, creating an app must fear of anxiety and concern in

civil society and within the devolved administrations. --

creating an atmosphere. Will he now tell say exactly when the

consultation will be published? As she already knows, I met with the

commissioner last week and we spoke about these issues. There is no

cause for anxiety. We will bring forward proposals for full

consultation in the near future. Those proposals are going well. She

will hear more on that shortly. The commissioner also said, and I quote,

my impression is that the debate over the Human Rights Act in

Westminster is not a true reflection of the debate outside England. Does

the minister appreciate that the impact of any attempt to repeal the

Human Rights Act on the devolved administrations would be likely to

provoke a constitutional crisis? I think she is absolutely right to say

that within the Westminster bubble, particularly if you look at some of

the scaremongering, the debate is not reflective of wider public

opinion outside of this House, which is consistently in favour of a Bill

of Rights to replace the Human Rights Act, including, she will

note, in Scotland. I want to see fewer women in the kernel justice

system. That's why in partnership with the equalities office we have

made available ?200,000 of grant funding to add to the ?1 million

already invested to support local pilots for female offenders. This is

where multiple agencies work together and intervene earlier to

help address the complexes reasons why women offend and to assist them

in turning their lives around. Does she agree that more needs to be done

to steer vulnerable women away from crime, and can she update the House

on how that is progressing and what more is being done to tackle this

issue? The system approach I have outlined in straights this

commitment to divert as many women as possible from custody by

addressing not only the causes of offending, which left unchecked

software will spiral into potentially a prison sentence and

the break down of families and children in care, which is why we

will be announcing successful bids for this pilot later in the week.

Thank you very much. I have had occasion in this House to offer my

thanks and gratitude to Nick Arnold wick, the outgoing Chief Inspector

of Prisons, and Paul iron, the outgoing chief inspector of

probation. But their expertise will not be lost because I can announce

today that I am appointing Nick Arnold wick is the new Chair of the

parole board. He will succeed the current Chair, and I would like to

put on record my thanks to Sir David for what he has done in this role.

My honourable friend the Courts Minister will know that last year I

wrote a report on form of service personnel in the cruel justice

system, which recommended among other things, training of people in

the bar and for solicitors and judges to deal with this small

cohort of offenders. What steps is my honourable friend taking to make

sure that court staff receive appropriate training to deal with

these individuals? He makes an important point. We know that he is

a distinguished veteran as well as being an outstanding... He produced

an excellent report on offenders who have been in the Armed Forces. Court

staff are trained to deal with the specific needs of veterans and we

are aware that there are particular needs which may relate to need

post-traumatic stress disorder and associated mental health concerns,

which court staff need to be sensitive to. Could I commend the

Secretary of State for his appointment of Nick Hardwick to the

Parole Board? Exactly a year ago, my right honourable friend the member

for Tooting, with his usual proceedings, said the new legal aid

contracts were making pigs ear of access to justice and should be

abandoned. Will the Secretary of State confirm the Pressel ports that

he is about to do just that? Can I thank the honourable gentleman for

his praise for temp -- for Nick Hardwick? It is precisely because

Nick Hardwick has spoken without fear or favour and has been such an

honest critic that I believe he is the right person to discharge this

role. I am sure he will appreciate the bipartisan support. On legal aid

contracts, it has been the case that we have had to reduce the spend on

legal aid, in order to deal with the deficit which we inherited. But also

we maintain more generously delayed in this country than in any other

competent jurisdiction. Diderot at the justice select committee, the

Master of the Rolls described fee increases affecting civil litigants

as a desperate way of carrying on, based on hopeless research. He

laughed when asked by the honourable member for chop them if there was

anything in the governments. Which stood up to scrutiny. It is another

car crash. Is it time for another U-turn? I can hear music from the

zephyrs, words from the honourable member for Cheltenham, suggesting

that were once the honourable member might be misinformed of what

precisely happened in the select committee. But one thing I would say

is, one of the biggest barriers to justice, as the master of the Rolls

and others have pointed out, are costs. Action needs to be taken to

reduce costs in civil justice. It is not enough simply to say that the

taxpayer must shoulder the burden. We need reform of our legal system

in order to make access to justice easier for all. I know that my right

honourable friend regards access to justice as a clear priority. With

this in mind and given the large area of north-east Cheshire which

will be without easy access to a court under the consultation, can he

tell the House what progress is being made in considering the

Macclesfield proposal for a single, combined across field justice

centre? May I first of all thank my honourable friend for the meeting

that we had and for presenting the justice centre report which he gave

to me along with his constituent. He will be aware that we are giving

serious consideration to that report and indeed to the 2000-plus

submissions made in that consultation regarding which we will

be making our response soon. Women's aid last week published a report

entitled 19 childhood asides. It tells the story of 19 children, two

mothers, killed by unknown perpetrators of domestic abuse in

circumstances related to the unsafe child contact. How will the

department helped to make sure that no further avoidable child deaths

will take place where the perpetrators of domestic abuse have

been allowed contact through the family court? We take

extraordinarily seriously concerns about child safety. I know that my

colleague the minister who is responsible for family law has been

in touch with charities who work in this area in the past. We will make

sure that we pay close attention to this report. Does my right

honourable friend share my anger and that of my constituent whose son was

tragically killed while serving his country in Afghanistan? Law firms

which are heavily involved in actions against Veterans Day and

serving them as of our armed forces, and what action can the government

take to close down this industry, which is causing so much unnecessary

distress to our Armed Forces and their families? We share my right

honourable friend's concerns. He will be aware of the prime ministers

early announcement on Friday. The professionalism of our Armed Forces

is second to none. But we cannot have returning troops hounded by

ambulance chasing lawyers pursuing spurious claims. The Justice

Secretary has asked me to Chair a working groups to look at all

aspects of this, no Win no fee, leader labels, time limits and

disciplinary sanctions against law firms who are found to be abusing

the system, so that we prevent any malicious or parasitic litigation

against our brave Armed Forces. Can the minister confirm Hamley times

contract breaches at G4S establishments have occurred under

the contract with his department, and what amount in fines have been

incurred and by G4S in respect of those breaches? I do not have the

detailed information. If she will allow me, I will write to her with

details. My right honourable friend is aware of the very serious

problems associated with radicalisation in our prisons. Can

he update the House on what steps are being taken to tackle this? I

understand my honourable friend's proper interest in this subject. As

the threat evolves, we evolve our response. We are strengthening the

training for new prison officers and we make sure they are able to tackle

criminal activity in whatever form within prison. The Secretary of

State has asked the department to review its approach to dealing with

Islamist extra that's prisons and we await that report shortly. --

Islamist extremism in prisons. Just two weeks ago, he said, our system

of justice has just become unaffordable to most. Will the

Secretary of State take heed of these comments and also, it to

abolition of tribunal fees, following the SNP lead? I take very

seriously everything the Lord Chief Justice says. I am delighted to be

able to work with him on a programme of court reform which should make

access to justice swifter, more certain and cheaper. It is important

that we learn from different jurisdictions. One thing I would say

is that even as we look to Scotland from time to time to see what we can

learn from the development of the law there, it is also important that

from time to time, those charged with what happens in Scottish courts

should look at the tradition of English justice fell as a Scotsman

myself I would have to acknowledge has certain better elements. Would

he agree with me that improving the mental health of prisoners should be

a top priority? Specifically when a prisoner is released from prison

with a known mental health condition that there should be close liaison

between the prison 40s, local GPs and health services, to put a care

plan in place? My honourable friend is absolutely right. Let me pay

tribute to his long interest and great expertise in this issue. He

will probably know that local commissioning groups in England and

the local health boards in Wales are responsible for services in the

community. NHS health care staff in prisons are responsible there. It is

their job to make sure that services provided in the prison are followed

through in the community. Will he work with the Immigration

Minister to make sure migrant families will be evicted without a

court order is contrary to the right of law and must be urgently

reconsidered? I enjoyed meeting with the Home Secretary and we must

ensure that we look at our borders. Immigration across the EU is not

being effectively controlled. We will take measures to keep our

borders secure and I thought it would be in the interests of every

citizen of the UK to take part in that fight. Further to the question,

does my right honourable friend agree that people in this house will

find it despicable that two firms, possibly more, are actively seeking

people in Iraq to make bogus claims against our servicemen overseas?

Will he rejects reports in newspapers that we still intend to

give legal aid to these appalling claims? I thank the honourable

gentleman. I am concerned about the way the system operates and it is

important we should say that there is accountability of any wrongdoing.

That doesn't mean giving lawyers a licence to harass our Armed Forces.

We will be looking at every angle as well as no-win, no fee and as well

as disciplinary powers against lawyers who try to abuse the system.

In 2012, the department spent millions refurbishing Saint Helen 's

courthouse to accommodate civil and criminal proceedings in the same

building declaring it was logical. Are we to assume that four years

later, considering the close of the same courthouse is illogical and

inefficient or would he like to rule it out today? May I say that no

final decisions have been taken and we are taking into account a whole

variety of reasons and this is a consultation concerning 91 courts

throughout England and Wales to make our system better and one of the

best in the world. Following on from my honourable friend, what steps are

being taken to ensure all prisons with mental health issues are dealt

with safely, appropriately and compassionately? I am glad my

honourable friend has raised this issue. And every prisoner comes into

prison, they have a full health assessment. That health practitioner

has the ability to refer to the prison's in reach services. We now

have either learning disability or mental health nurses available at

police stations and in courts so we can start that mental health

treatment at the beginning of their journey in the criminal system. I

had the secretary will meet with me to discuss my justice for victims of

criminal driving bill. Can I point out that the consultation on this

did start on the 6th of May 2000 and 14. It is a long time that we will

not hear anything back until later on in this year. I am grateful for

that this incident -- assistant way in which he has campaigned for this.

We will be discussing the case for change as there was widespread

agreement that we did need change but not what change. We will get

back to him in due course. Given the rate of reoffending, would it not be

better to improve rehabilitation rather than incarceration,

especially in relation to shorten prison sentences? He makes a

powerful point and few know more about what happens in our courts as

he does. It is important that would put an emphasis on rehabilitation

but it is also important that we give all our citizens the security

of knowing that those people who pose a real threat to us are

incapacitated behind bars and receiving the punishment that they

deserve the most heinous crimes. Past week, the Public Accounts

Committee heard about the infrastructure authority and he was

asked what the three projects were that kept him worried and they

caught's programme was one of them. Add that the list of a tagging and

translation service and the concerns around probation and prisons, is the

secretary of this -- Secretary of State worried that his campaign, not

cope with this? I will offer him another cup of cocoa to enable him

to sleep as well as I do. He has gone native in record time,

including hanging off every word that the Nu T says. Will the

Secretary of State get back his Mojo and put the victims of crime at the

heart of what he is doing? Come back Ken Clarke, all is forgiven. I am

not sure our members on the opposite benches would agree I have become a

sandal wearing muesli munching Cregan vague stuff. They will say I

am the same blue Tory that I always have been. It is because I am a

conservative that I believe in the rule of law as the foundation of our

civilisation and I believe that evil must be punished. It is also because

I believe in redemption and I think the purpose of our prison system is

to keep people safe by making people better. We have learned about his

personal habits and religious beliefs and are better off. The

Prime Minister agreed to meet with me about the baby Ashes scandal. My

constituent had a helpful meeting but I wondered if the Parliamentary

Secretary of State will help me to get that meeting that the Prime

Minister agreed to and if I could list her support? We are clear about

what happened and it should never happened again, which is why the

honourable lady will know we have launched our consultation in

December which will conclude in March and stop I will be happy to

make that representation on her behalf. The honourable gentleman

hasn't had a question and I would like to have one. The Minister will

be aware of the closure of Torbay Magistrates' Court. Willie helped

keep justice local in the Bay? I hear the message that my honourable

friend is saying and we have met and corresponded and I am giving serious

consideration to all that is being put forward. Urgent question, Heidi

Alexander. To ask the Secretary of State for

Health if he will make a statement on NHS England's report into the

death of William Mead and the failures of the 111 how -- helpline.

This tragic case concerns the death of a one-year-old boy, William Mead,

on the 14th of December 2014 in Cornwall. Whilst any health system

will inevitably suffer some tragedies, the issues raised in this

case have significant implications for the rest of the NHS which I am

determined we should learn from. I would like to offer my sincere

condolences to the family of William Mead. I have met William's mother

who spoke movingly about the loss of her son. Quite simply, we let her,

her family and William down in the worst possible way through serious

failings in the NHS care offered. I would like to apologise to them on

behalf of the Government and the NHS for what happened. I would like to

thank them for their support and cooperation in the investigation

that has now been completed. Today, NHS England published the results of

that investigation, a root cause analysis of what happened. The

recommendations are far reaching, with natural -- national

implications. The report concludes there were four areas of missed

opportunity by the local health services when a different course of

action should have been taken. These include primary care and general

practice appointments by William's family come out of hours calls with

their GP and the NHS 111 service. Though the report concluded these

did not constitute direct serious failings by the individuals

involved, had different action been taken at these points, William would

probably have survived. Across these different parts of the NHS, a major

failing was that in the last six to eight weeks of William's life, the

underlying pathology including pneumonia and chest infection were

not probably recognised and treated. The report cites potential factors

such as a lack of understanding of sepsis, particularly in children,

pressure on GPs to reduce antibiotic prescribing and Acute Hospital

referrals and although this wasn't raised by the GPs involved, the

report refers to the potential pressure of work load. There were

specific recommendations in relation to NHS 111 we should be treated as a

national not a local issue. Call advisers are trained not to deviate

from their script but the report says they need to be trained to

appreciate when there is a need to probe further, how to recognise

complex calls and when to call in clinical advice earlier. It cites

limited sensitivity in the algorithms used by call handlers to

red flag signs relating to sepsis. The Government and NHS England

access these recommendations which will be implemented as soon as

possible. New commissioning standards issued in October 20 15th

require commissioners to create more functionally integrated 111 and GP

out-of-hours services and sub Bruce's care of you will simplify

the way the Government interacts with the NHS for urgent care needs.

We must recognise that our understanding of sepsis across the

NHS is totally inadequate. This condition claims 35,000 lives every

year, including around 1000 children. I would like to add

knowledge and thank my honourable friend the member for Truro and

Falmouth who as well as being constituency MP to the Mead family,

has worked tirelessly to raise awareness of sepsis and work closely

with the UK's sepsis trust to reduce the number of avoidable deaths from

sepsis. In January last year, I announced a package of measures to

help improve diagnosis of sepsis in both hospitals and GP services and

significant efforts are being made to improve awareness of the

condition amongst doctors and the public. The tragic death of William

Mead reminds us there is much more to be done. Anyone who watched the

courageous interviews Melissa Mead gave this morning could not fail to

be moved by this tragic case. I pay tribute to Melissa and her husband,

Paul, who have fought to know the truth about their son's death and

who are now campaigning to raise awareness and improve care of

sepsis. It is right that we express our sorrow at what has happened and

the Health Secretary was right to apologise on behalf of the NHS. The

key now is to ensure the right lessons are learned and that action

is taken. As the Secretary of State noted, the report found a catalogue

of failures that contributed to William's death, including four

missed opportunities where a different course of action should

have been taken. I want to press the Health Secretary on these areas.

Firstly, the report said that William saw GPs six times in the

months leading up to his death but none spotted the seriousness of the

chest infection that cost him his life. Ministers were warned about

poor sepsis care back in September 2013 when an ombudsman report

highlighted and I quote, shortcomings in a initial assessment

and delay in emergency treatment which led to missed opportunities to

save lives. Can Health Secretary say what action was taken following that

report? Why was it only in December 2015, over two years later, that NHS

England finally published an action plan to help support NHS staff

recognise and treat sepsis? Second, the report found that the NHS 111

helpline failed to respond adequately to Melissa's Corp. The

report concluded that if it had been a doctor or nurse taking her call,

they would have probably seen the need for urgent action. The

replacement of NHS Direct which was predominantly a nurse led service

with NHS 111, means the service relies on call handlers who receive

as little as six weeks training. When would the Health Secretary

Daschle Wenallt... When he increased the number of clinically trained

staff available to respond to calls? The report says that the computer

programme call handlers are using did not cover some of the symptoms

of sepsis including a drop in body temperature from very high to low.

Does the Health Secretary have confidence that the 111 service is

fit to diagnose patients with complex life-threatening problems,

you may not always fit the computer algorithm call handlers have to rely

on. Finally, can I ask the Secretary of

State what he is doing to raise awareness of the symptoms of sepsis?

I know that this is an issue Melissa and Paul feel particularly strongly

about. And we owe it to them to implement the recommendations of the

NHS England report and do all we can to ensure the failures in this

tragic case are never, ever repeated again. I hope I can reassure the

Shadow Health Secretary on all the points she raised. First of all,

there has been a sustained effort across the NHS since September 2013

to improve the standard of safety in the care that we offer in our

hospitals. An entirely new inspection system was set up that

year. That is now nearly completed. Inspections of every hospital have

caused a sea change in attitudes towards patient safety. And sepsis

is one of the areas which is looked at. In particular it is incredibly

potent when signs of sepsis are identified in A departments, that

the right antibiotic treatment is started within six to minutes. That

is not happening everywhere. We need to raise awareness urgent leader

make that happen. But inspection regime is helping to focus minds on

that. I agree with her, there are some very important issues on 111,

and I will come to those. A year ago I announced an important package to

raise awareness of sepsis. It covers the different parts of the NHS. ,

for example, in hospitals, spotting it quickly. There was a big package

which was being followed in December of last year, December the 15th,

with NHS England publishing the sepsis programme board report, which

looks at how to improve identification of sepsis across the

pathway. She is right to raise the issue of faster identification by GP

is. That's why last January I announced that we would be

developing an audit tool for GPs. Because it is difficult to identify

sepsis, even for trained clinicians. And we need to give GPs the help and

support that they need to do that. We are also talking to public of

England about a public awareness campaign. It is not just clinicians

in the NHS, it is also a member is of the public and parents of young

children who need to be aware of some of those tell-tale signs. So

there is a lot happening. But because the root cause of the issue

is understanding by clinicians on the front line of this horrible

disease, it does take some time to develop that greater understanding

that everybody accepts that we need. But I can reassure her that there is

a total focus in the NHS now on reducing the number of avoidable

deaths from sepsis and other causes. This is something which the NHS and

everyone who works in it is totally committed to. With respect to 111, I

think there are some things that we can do quickly which we must do in

response to this report. But I think there is a more fundamental change

which we need in 111 as well. The thing we can do quickly is to look

at the algorithms which are used by the call handlers to make sure that

they are sensitive to those red flag signs of sepsis. this is a very,

very important thing which needs to happen. NHS 111 has in some ways

Bina victim of its own success. It is taking 12 million calls a year,

as opposed to 4 million which were being taken by NHS Direct just three

years ago. Nearly nine out of ten of those calls are being answered

within 60 seconds. But when it comes to the identification of diseases

like sepsis, we need to do better. We need urgently to look at the

algorithm followed by the call handlers. But fundamentally, when

you look at the totality of what the family of William Mead suffered,

there is a confusion in the mind of the public which the NHS needs to

address about what exactly you do when you have an urgent care need.

When you have a child with a high temperature, you do not know whether

you should just give them some kelp or whether it is something which

needs serious clinical attention. The issue is that there are too many

choices and often you cannot get through quickly to the help you

need. We need to improve the simpler city of the system so that when you

get through to anyone want one, you are not asked about Russia

questions, some of which seem quite meaningless, which gets to the point

more quickly, you are referred to clinical care more quickly, and that

we sympathise the options so that people know what to do. That is

happening as part of the urgent and emergency care review. It is a big

priority. This tragic case will make us accelerate that process even

faster. I would like to join colleagues from across the House in

sending deepest condolences to William Mead's parents. I welcome

Secretary of State solely responsible he will put into action

the recommendation from the report. Can I draw out one aspect which has

not been touched on, which is the comment that out of our services did

not have access to William Sery clinical records, and have they been

able to do so, would have seen how many times he had consulted, and

that would have been a clear red flag. Can he reassure me that this

will be addressed across the NHS so that all services have access to

patients's clinical records, of course with their consent? She is

absolutely right. There is so much in this report and it is important

we do not let some very important recommendations slipped under the

carpet and that is one of them. We have a commitment to a ablest NHS,

which as part of that commitment will involve the proper sharing of

electronic records across the system. We have also instructed CCGs

to integrate the commissioning of out of hours care with the

commissioning of their 111 services to further make sure that those are

joined up. It is a big IT project. We are making progress. Two thirds

of A departments can now access GP records. She is right, that is a

priority. As others have said, I would also like to add my

condolences for the family. It is hard to imagine anything worse for a

family to face. Like many deaths in the NHS, it is always sad to look

back and see that it was a catalogue of missed opportunities or errors.

One of the things I would like to pick up is, young children are very

hard to assess. They are quite hard to assess when you are seeing them.

They can be running around and then keel over half in a later. I think

they are particularly hard to pick up clues on the phone. When the NHS

Direct services throughout the UK were started, they were based in

local out of hours GP centres, which meant the nurse could just pass the

phone and say, can you come and chat? I am not sure. We have rules

in our local one that if it was a young child, they actually got a

visit from the mobile car. I would hope that the Secretary of State

might undertake that in this review, instead of it all being put in call

centres, there might actually be a dissemination back to a local system

so that these cases can be accelerated easily to a clinician. I

agree with the broad thrust of what she says. Of course she speaks with

the authority of an experienced clinician herself. In this case, the

tragedy was that there was actually a doctor who spoke to the Mead

family on the night before William died, and the doctor did not spot

those symptoms. So it is not simply a question of access to the doctor,

it is making sure the doctors have the training necessary. It is very

difficult. The doctor's view on that occasion was that because the child

was sleeping peacefully, it was fine to leave it until morning, when it

was tragically too late. That is a mistake I am sure other doctors

would say could be made easily by anyone. I think the report is right

to say it is not about individual blame, it is about a better

understanding of the risks of sepsis. I think she is right to say

that in the 11 service -- in the 111 service, which, because it is an

easy number to remember, and because we are trying to join up the

services, the principle of having one number that you dial, when it is

not life-threatening, and it is not a routine GP appointment, is a good

one. We support that. But we need to make sure there is faster access to

clinicians, and that those clinicians can see people's medical

records so that they can make a proper assessment. Mr Speaker, as

Chair of the APPG on sepsis, can I also pay tribute to the Mead family

move now campaigning to make sure that no other child suffers in the

same way that William did. I know that the Secretary of State is

taking a great deal of interest in the work the trust has been doing

with the APPG. He will know that we are pressing for a campaign similar

to the stroke campaign, so that early diagnosis can save lives. Will

the Secretary of State now consider very seriously funding a campaign

such as the Fast campaign for sepsis, because there are thousands

of preventable deaths which could now be brought about by some simple

funding of a campaign so that everyone is aware of the signs of

sepsis? I am very happy to undertake that my colleague, the public Health

Minister, will look urgently into whether such a campaign would be the

right thing to do. I can reassure her that the package that we put

together and which I announced last January did contain what I think

most people felt was necessary. But we can always look at whether there

is more that needs to be done. I want to commend her for her

campaigning on the issue of sepsis. The one more positive note I would

say is that in the NHS, when we have decided to tackle things like MRSA

and C difficile in the past, we have actually been very successful. In

the last three years, the number of avoidable deaths from

hospital-acquired harm, the four major ones, has nearly halved. So we

can do this and I think we should be inspired by the successes we have

had. One of the reasons that the number of calls to anyone want one

has troubled of course is that people find it impossible to get to

see their GP. But as well as the shocking failings of this family's

GP is in this case, is it not the case that the government was warned

when it abolished the popular and successful NHS Direct of the

consequences of that action, of replacing it with a non-clinician

led service? And would the Secretary of State look personally at the

performance of 111 in the south-west, which has been

bedevilled by failings ever since it was set up? I would just gently say

to the right honourable gentleman that when 111 was set up, it was

done with the support of the opposition. The Shadow Health

Secretary at the time actually looked at the risk register. And the

number of calls have increased grammatically partly because demand

for NHS services has increased dramatically. But that does not mean

to say there are not important things which need to be improved. I

think we need to look honestly at what went wrong. 111 was one of the

four areas where we should have done better. I am happy to look carefully

at what is happening with 111 in the south-west of one thing we are

improving with one want one is, in many areas, we are integrating the

commissioning of 111 with the bill and service. That is actually

something which happens in the south-west and I think on the whole

it has been positive. But I am happy to look at the problems which I know

have occurred in the south-west. Can I associate myself with the

condolences which have been paid to the Mead family? Given the

seriousness of this case, what more can Secretary of State do to

reassure us about the clinical and expert oversight of the service and

its methods? All 111 services have clinicians present at call centres.

It is not about the availability of clinicians, it is about the speed

with which they are involved in cases where they can make the

difference. It is also about the training of those clinicians so that

they can recognise horrible infections like sepsis quickly. So

it is a combination of things. I think the important opportunity here

is that if we are to give the public confidence in a simpler system,

where they have a single point of contact, albeit a phone line or a

website, then they need to be confident that if they are not

immediately speaking to someone clinically trained, they will be put

through to someone clinically trained if it is necessary. We have

not earned that confidence yet which is why it is so important to learn

lessons from this tragic case. I was the minister who set up NHS Direct.

One of the first cases where we had to review it was a case of

meningitis. Can I therefore say to the Secretary of State that just

looking at algorithms with call handlers will not be sufficient? It

is clinically exceptionally difficult and his review is too

limited to address the problem. I understand what she is saying. Of

course I would listen to her because of her experience. But that is not

just what we are doing. We are doing lots of other things. There are many

recommendations in this report. One of them is to look at the algorithms

that the call handlers use to make sure that they are more sensitive to

some of the red flag signs of sepsis and meningitis and other conditions.

But there are lots of other things, including earlier access to

clinicians, including the training of those clinicians, including the

out of hours service, the training of GPs and people in hospitals. So

there is a much bigger body of work which we will be undertaking as a

result of this review. Can I welcome him in the out of

hours service continuation? Could ease their word about what he's

doing to recruit, obtain and support GPs in providing round-the-clock air

that people clearly need? I have said before at this dispatch box, I

think successive governments have underinvested in general practices,

one of the reasons why it takes to long for many people to get a GP

appointment. That is why we have said we want around 5000 more

doctors working in general practice by the end of the parliament. On the

other side, it is improving our offer to the public. When you have a

child with a temperature are fever, and you are not sure, it is the

weekend. Very often we offer the public a choice between an out of

hours GP appointment, a weekend appointment with your GP's surgery,

111, all showing up at accident and emergency. If we have to improve

standards of care, we need to standardise safety standards across

the NHS, including standards for spotting attentional sepsis cases.

The shadow secretary of health commented about concerns of

effectiveness for call handlers of the 111 service. How many cases from

111 have been misdiagnosed? We don't know. But we believe, in terms of

the independent case notes analysis that has been done across the NHS,

not just sepsis, but hospital deaths, we think there are 200

avoidable deaths each week. That is something we share with other health

systems, not just an NHS for Norman. That is why we are asking hospitals

to publish what they estimate their avoidable deaths are, and we are

having in international summit next month. When it comes to sepsis, we

think there are 12,000 avoidable deaths each year. That is a

combination of different parts of the NHS, GP, hospital, or 111 not

spotting those signs earlier. That is what we are determined to put

right. Looking across the NHS, at how we insured learning and

behaviour change, can the Secretary of State update the House about how

the payment system is altering, and we are ensuring better outcomes and

diagnosis? We are doing that as far as hospitals are concerned. I should

clarify, when I took about 200 avoidable deaths, that is hospital

deaths. Not in relation to the 111 service. Much harder to quantify

avoidable deaths in the out-of-hospital scenarios. We are

determined to do that, going further and faster than any other country I

am aware of, as part of our commitment to make the NHS the Sega

system in the world. In his answer he said this report is far reaching

with national implications. It should have been a statement, not an

urgent question. Can I just ask him, he did not answer the question on

the number of misdiagnosis only 111 system. He needs to give us more

detail how many misdiagnosis there are. There are reports that there

are other deaths of young children associated with these deaths. Can he

give any formation on that? What I would say to the honourable

gentleman, I did think anyone could have done more than this and has

done to tackle the issue of avoidable deaths across the NHS. It

is much harder to identify when a death is unavoidable when it happens

in and out of hospital scenario. As part of our work in reducing

avoidable deaths after mid Staffordshire, we are looking at

primary care generally. Our first priority is to reduce the avoidable

deaths in hospital, making sure we can learn from reports like this,

when they point to improvements that need to be made in the 111 service.

I join in with the condolences expressed in the House. By way of

tribute to the family and their campaign to raise awareness of

sepsis, and the Simpsons, I wonder if each and every parent can take

the small and practical step to day, to Google the symptoms of sepsis, so

we know when things are not right with our children, and we are better

armed to tackle doctors when we're not getting the answers we need? I

did exactly that this morning after hearing Mrs Mead's statement on the

radio. Can I thank her for that important intervention. If we're

going to with these 1000 tragic sepsis deaths in children each year,

it needs involvement from all of us, not the NHS. I will look at what

Public Health England are doing to raise awareness. The public Health

Minister is looking at what health visitors can do to boost awareness

of sepsis. We'll have a responsibility to understand the

better. Last November, I contacted the minister because of south-east

coast ambulance 111 service carried out a trial, but three poor

governance it failed, putting patients at risk. It turned out his

department only heard about this after my contact. As part of the

statement, is it true that the garment is becoming reactive, and is

not proactive enough to tackle these before they become statement in the

House? Not at all, I would urge members in the house opposite not to

try and make political capital when tragedies like this happen. In the

wake of the Francis Report into mid Staffordshire, we have done more

than any government has ever done to tackle the issue of how we improve

the safety of care in the NHS. We know that if you take the four most

common harms, you're in every tract infections, pressure ulcers, and

falls, the number of these has fallen by 45% in the last three-year

is. -- you're in every tract infections. We are never taken

placement, that is why we are taking so seriously the report issued

today. This is a tragic case. Our thoughts are today with the Mead

family. Looking to describe antibiotics payday key part in this

tragedy. Does the Secretary of State agree this is a significant global

problem, and we need to commit significant investment to get? I'm

very grateful to my honourable friend for raising the issue, which

has not been raised so far this afternoon. He is absolutely right,

we have a pressing global need to reduce the prescribing of

inappropriate antibiotics. That is why the training of clinicians is so

important. In the case of sepsis, not only is the prescribing of

antibiotics appropriate, but it is essential to do it quickly. We

absolutely need to make sure, as we trained GPs, to reduce the

prescribing of antibiotics, we don't develop the resistance to

antibiotics which would be so disastrous for global health. That

they don't avoid doing that in cases where it is absolutely essential.

The Health Secretary said the NHS 111 was a victim of its own success.

Can I agree with my right honourable friend for Exeter, it is so

difficult to see a doctor, just as on the 2nd of January, the Daily

Mail was reporting that the Royal Infirmary with telling people not to

come to accident and emergency, but use 111. Cases like this have

national implications, with the secretary agree that there need to

be more clinicians at NHS 111? I do agree with her that we need more

clinicians and primary health care and we need to increase provisions

and secondary health care. She has a new accident and emergency system

opening in Hull. But we need more clinicians and primary care to deal

with these issues more quickly, to deal with issues like sepsis. That

is why the garment is investing ?10 million more in the NHS on an annual

basis in real terms in order to step up the improvement in the services

we offer. Will he put a higher proportion of clinicians in 111? We

will certainly look at whether we need to have more clinicians in 111.

We do have them available. My own view is it is the separation of the

out-of-hours services and the 111 service which is the heart of the

problem we are looking to deal with there. As part of the review we will

look at the availability of clinicians in 111. I too would like

to add my condolences to the Mead family. I can only imagine after

being told not to worry and this was nothing serious, this was a

catalogue of failures, not just 111. catalogue of failures, not just 111.

Is there consideration of the decision by GPs not to take

William's heart rate, that should not have happened. And reluctance

not to refer young patients to the clinic centre. If that is the case,

the behaviour needs to be changed? We are looking at all these things,

I can assure you. As with the issue of the prescribing antibiotics,

raised by my honourable friend, we want GPs to avoid inappropriate

referrals to secondary care, but it is absolutely vital that when a

referral is needed, it happens. We see this not just in cases of

sepsis, but cancer, vital it is caught earlier, if were going to

have successful outcomes of the treatment. He is absolutely right,

it will be looked at. I commend the Shadow Secretary of State for

securing this urgent question. Earlier the Secretary of State said

he felt that the public have confidence in 111, because of the

pie call volumes, and they have increased. I don't think that is the

case. Confidence in 111 is shaky at best. This case could well shatter

that confidence even further. Unlike the confidence we felt when we had

NHS Direct. What is he going to do to make sure that, as well as

listening to people, he will involve patients in determining what they

need in 111, to give back the confidence, which we need to have

two avoid the pressure on the rest of the service? She is right, the

importance of involving patients when we have these tragedies. I did

say in my response to the urgent question, how grateful I was to the

Mead family in their cooperation. One of the things the report talks

about is early involvement, and listening to parents and families in

these kind of situations, that has been important. I would caution for

about dismissing the service offered by 111 in a blanket way. There are

lots of people, clinicians, call handlers, who worked extremely hard,

dealing with about 1 million calls a month. The vast majority of those

cases have satisfactory outcomes. Does that mean there are not

significant improvements that we need to make to the service? No, it

does not, and we must do things better and learn the lessons from

this report. My thoughts are also with the Mead family today. The

diagnosis of conditions, including sepsis, must be carried out with

those with the highest level of clinical skills. Can the 111 system

be put back into the hands of highly trained clinicians? Those trained to

diagnose, instead of non-staff? Mr Speaker, I think that is a

misrepresentation of what happens with 111, because there are

clinicians in every call centre. There are not physically enough

doctors and nurses to have them answering every single call, and the

device from the clinicians in the NHS responsible for the 111 service

is that it would not be appropriate. What matters, if you are doing the

triage you talk about, when a clinician needs to be involved, they

involve more quickly than happened in the current case. That is the

lesson this government is determined to learn. Point of order. Thank you

very much, I was alarmed during questions, to see the honourable

member for Cheltenham, dissenting from a quote I prescribed in the

Justice select committee. I understand why, the quote was

correct, but it was a different honourable member. Having known the

honourable member for Cheltenham, I'm anxious to correct the error,

noting it shows that his independence of thought, that I

couldn't credited him with the question, and his magnanimity that

he trusted me to set the record straight. It is very good to know

that the honourable gentleman has been gracious, and he has been

willing to admit to error. I would be grateful for your advice

on how we can determine the governments policy on a sensitive

issue. Following the flooding, I wrote to the Prime Minister asking

him to apply for funding from a European fund. Applications for this

fund must be made within 12 weeks of the flooding taking place. I also

wrote to the Foreign Commonwealth Office asking if they would make it

their policy to apply for funding. The Foreign Office replied they

would not be able to apply in time. On the 20th of January I received an

answer from the FCO, telling me it was not their responsibility. More

than a month to tell me it was not their responsibility. On the same

day I received a letter from DEFRA, so why would the Prime Minister

transfer my correspondence to a department which does not have

responsibility for the matter? Since my ritual correspondence, six weeks

have passed, and many of my constituents are again flooding

today. We are coming closer and closer to the deadline. It might

even appear that the government was trying to delay until it became too

late to apply for assistance. But how can a member of this House apply

for government policy if the government will not tell us what it

is, or if they do not have one? I think the honourable gentleman for

his point of order and forgiving me notice of it. It appears that the

honourable member has received a most unsatisfactory response from

the weather to his question and his correspondence on a matter which is

clearly of urgent interest to his constituents. While it is for the

government to decide which department has lead responsibility

for a matter, it is clearly important to Parliamentary scrutiny

and public accountability that government is clear and consistent

on where responsibility lies. What the honourable gentleman has said

will have been heard on the Treasury benches and will I trust... Be

conveyed to the relevant ministers. If the honourable gentleman wishes

to pursue the specific matter of the unsatisfactory response to his

Parliamentary question, he may wish to write to the Chair of the

procedure committee, the honourable gentleman the member for Broxbourne,

because his committee monitors these important matters. I hope that that

will serve the honourable gentleman for now and be a useful guide to

members across the House. Point of order. Mr Speaker, this is a point

of order about the rights of backbenchers to be heard in this

Chamber. You will know Mr Speaker that some of us are very good

attenders at business questions on Thursday. Last Thursday I think the

front benches took 25 minutes in terms of their contribution, which

really does, I know you are very generous, but the predominance of

the front bench, all three front benches, went on for a very long

time. And it does squeeze the genuine backbencher. And on these

benches we are genuine backbenchers, fighting all the time to get space

against the frontbenchers, who are also backbenchers part-time. So if

you could have a little bit of a word. I also have to say, I have

never known such a nasty, acrimonious jousting between the two

front benches last Thursday. Wasn't funny and it wasn't nice. I note

what he says, to which I would just respond as follows. I note what he

says about him never having witnessed such unpleasantness in

exchanges. I have never witnessed, in nearly 19 years in the House, the

honourable gentleman being squeezed by anybody. The honourable gentleman

almost invariably gets in. But I do take on board the very serious point

he makes. Although I don't think in the end members get squeezed if they

have the time to stay, because the record shows that almost invariably,

I let business questions run until everybody has had a chance to

contribute, which was not always the practice in the past. I do accept

that people have got time constraints and they may have to go

elsewhere, including constituency and Parliamentary duties. And

therefore it is quite important that they should not have to wait an

excessive period of time. My own view is similar to that of the

honourable gentleman - I think the frontbenchers are taking too long,

and they have started to take longer recently, not only on account of the

involvement of the Scottish National Party, which is a very legitimate

and proper involvement, but also because, between the government

front bench and the official opposition, those exchanges are

taking too long. Frontbenchers have now been duly chided not just by the

Chair but very importantly by an honourable member with, in May, 37

years uninterrupted service in the House, namely the honourable

gentleman. I hope that message will be duly heeded, starting this

Thursday. And I will have the point in mind as I hear the shadow leader

and the leader. I hope that is helpful. Well, it seems only

yesterday that the honourable gentleman entered the House, he

scarcely seems old enough to have been here for 37 years, but it is

nevertheless a fact. Or it will be in May. We come now to the ten

minute rule motion, Mr Gareth Thomas.

I beg to move that leave be given to bring in a bill to make provision

about the entitlement of employees to benefit from profits made by

their employers in certain circumstances, to require a company

to allocate one seat on its board to an employee representative and for

connected purposes. Mr Speaker, if you work hard for a company and help

it succeed and make a profit, then surely the owner should share a

little of those profits with you and other employees. The best companies

already do. The best companies also want their staff involved in

decision-making at the highest level, using their knowledge and

expertise to help plot company strategy and keep senior management

on their toes. In truth, Britain has a productivity and fairness problem.

Despite numerous initiatives, we are Despite numerous initiatives, we are

behind our main competitors in terms of productivity whilst at the same

time inequality continues to grow. Changing the way companies work, how

they take key decisions and who is involved in those decisions is one

essential for sorting these problems out. We lag behind the rest of the

G7 and most of the G20 in how productive our economy is. For

2010-14, annual average labour productivity was lower in Britain