29/02/2016 House of Commons

Hello and welcome to BBC Parliament's live coverage from the

House of Commons. In an hour cosmic time, there'll be two urgent

questions. The first on child refugees in Calais and the second on

guidance to civil service under the EU referendum. MPs will then be to

record -- approve the referendum which takes place on the 23rd of

June and the start of the official referendum period on the 15th of

April. After that, the Labour Party will lead the debate and the UK

steel industry, calling on the government to publish a full

industrial strategy which includes the procurement policy which commits

to using British steel wherever possible for publicly funded

infrastructure projects. Join me for a round up of the day in both houses

of parliament at 11pm this evening. Now over two House of Commons live.

Order, order. We will not proceed to read the title of the bill. Set down

for consideration this day. Transport for London billboards to

be considered. Objection taken. Monday the 7th of March. Thank you.

Order. Questions to the secretary of state defence,. With permission I

will answer this question together with question seven and 11. On the

20th of January I attended the defence minister Boss meeting where

we reviewed options for intensifying the military operation against Daesh

in both Iraq and Syria. On the 11th of February I attended a full

counter Daesh military meeting where we agreed on accelerated plan

including the liberation and importance of the liberation of both

rack and another city and pressing on the Daesh on all sides. I think

we have -- the community has previously asked the government to

do more in the fight against Daesh. Having just returned from

parliamentary delegation in Saudi Arabia, understood and that the

Saudi authorities have sent ground troops into Syria to defeat Daesh

but require air cover. Will the United Kingdom and other partners

and look at that request. I welcome the cooperation, contribution of

states including Saudi Arabia and they were president of the meeting

in Brussels. I welcome the Saudi redeployment of those 15 aircraft to

the Coalition air campaign. I have also seen the reports that my

honourable friend has referred to and Saudi Arabia is prepared to send

troops to the fight in Syria and we will wait to see the details of any

plan before commenting on what support the UK will provide as part

of the global Coalition. Russian air strikes have clearly targeted

civilian populations in Syria. Killing and maiming many innocent

men, women, and children and degrading the Syria moderate forces

that we are relying on to defeat Daesh in the region. With these

Secretary of State align what actions we are taking now to protect

these populations and underpin our military strategy in the region? I

know my honourable friend will welcome these disassociation of

hostilities at the weekend which appears to be largely holding. Able

only to succeed if there is a major change in behaviour by the Syrian

regime and by its principal backer, Russia. It is Russia that has

honoured this agreement by ending the attacks on Syrian civilians and

opposition groups and using its influence to ensure the Syrian

regime does the same. As part of the second part of the question, there

has been some progress in the last few weeks and reaching the seeds

areas. Over some 60,000 people have been reached with aid through the

United Nations food programme. Continuing with the Russian bombing,

can I ask what my honourable friend and the government is doing to

highlight Russia's indiscriminate behaviour and what contact has he

had with the Russian authorities to end this outrage? Both my right

honourable friend the Foreign Secretary and I have been very clear

and public that the Russian actions here have been undermining the

prospects for ending the conflict in Syria. We welcome the Russian

contribution to the most recent agreement that came into effect on

Saturday. Russia can and should play a positive role in the fight against

Daesh, ending the conflict in Syria. But I have to tell the House that

over 70% of Russian air strikes have not been against Daesh at all, there

have been against civilians and moderate opposition groups in Syria.

And appalling contribution. This was to a conflict that must end. Can I

ask the Secretary of State what the members of governments have had with

discussions about extending military action including air strikes to

Libya? There have not been discussions about extending air

strikes to Libya because of the moment there is no government in

Libya, we have been working to assist the formation of a new

government in Libya and it is for that government to make clear what

assistance it requires. We are party to the Libyan international mission

and we will see what kind of support the new government wants, whether

that is assistance with advice, or training, or any other kind of

support. Last week in Iraq, members of the defence committee were

informed of the full horror of Daesh as they forced out of territory.

Specifically the minefields and IE D's that were left behind, including

toilets that are being left with the resources to being removed are not

available. What conversations are you having with partners to ensure

this is taking care of? The honourable Lady is quite right.

Daesh have been seeking these towns and villages, seeding them with

improvised explosives and the British contribution to the Iraqi

forces has focused indeed on counter IED training which we now supply at

all four centres and if there is more we can do to assist the Iraqi

and Kurdish forces in that training we will certainly do so. What

support will the UK government be giving to the UN who are today

giving fresh aid to Syria under the cease-fire? We have been making our

contribution to the United Nations and we are ready to help do more.

This is not easy for convoys to get through to some of the very hard to

reach areas, and the a drop carried out last week was not entirely

successful. It was dropped from a great height into a high wind, a

number of the pallets do not reach the ground in the best way to get

aid is by land convoys, but that is not easy in some of these

particularly hard-to-reach areas. Parts of the defence committed he

visited Jordan and Lebanon and we were concerned to see that Daesh

were threatening borders of countries that are relatively

stable. Where Britain has made a huge and impressive investment in

trying to assist those countries, what more can my right honourable

friend do and the government do to support these countries in dealing

with a clear and present danger from this organisation? The Daesh

represents a threat to the stability of the entire region, including the

neighbours to Iraq and Syria. We have already made a huge

contribution towards training in Jordan, with the Jordanian forces,

we have more to do there as well. We have recently been playing a role in

Lebanon as well with helping the border defenses of that country.

Thank you Mr Speaker. Can the secretary of State tell us whether

he believes that the use of the much... Missile against Daesh that

the prime minister assured us it would cut off the head of the snake

in Raqqa? Room Stone is one of the munitions available to our armed

forces alongside bombs and the hellfire missile. We can tell the

honourable Tubman, the United Kingdom forces have flown over 2100

combat missions against Daesh and have carried out over 600 strikes,

including the use of brimstone missiles. But one of the points for

review in the Minister review is what more can we do to target the

infrastructure that supports the Daesh, the logistics and its supply

routes, as well as the effort we have been making in support of Iraqi

forces. Could the Secretary of State then comment on recent reports in

the New York Times that says that although Daesh numbers have fallen

in both Iraq and Syria, the numbers and Libya have actually doubled in

that same time period? And isn't it the case that the bombing campaign,

rather than diminishing Daesh have actually simply displaced them? I do

not think there is direct evidence of moving from one country to

another. Daesh as in the back foot in Iraq, the Iraqi forces and

Kurdish forces with support from the Coalition have liberated a number of

cities and Daesh is being pushed back. That is not happening yet in

Syria and I am can send about the proliferation of Daesh along the

Libyan coastline which is why we have been urgently assisting the

formation of a new Libyan government. -- concerned. Coalition

efforts have a effect on stopping Daesh as well. In Iraq, but also

domestically in Syria. With the Secretary of State agree with me

that the full frontal assault on recto might have the opposite effect

and possibly try to do something about the poisonous ideology and

funding, it is more important than conventional attacks? I do agree. We

have to look at all of these things and deal with Daesh across the

border. From its ideology, we have to cut off its financing, we have to

deal with the message that it is putting out to local populations and

yes, preparations for the liberation of both cities are going to require

very careful reparation to assure the Syria population that it will be

able to enjoy better security once the Daesh are thrown out. As we

considered these issues are thoughts are with the members of our Armed

Forces currently serving in the Middle East. And all those living

under the brutality of Daesh and the victims of terror attacks across the

world. The secretary of state is right to simultaneously welcome the

progress towards cease-fire in the contributions made while condemning

the previous Russian attacks on moderate forces that the Coalition

is working with. Can he tell us at this stage how reliable he feels

with the 70,000 moderate Syrian forces at this moment in time? I am

grateful to the honourable Tillman and indeed, the official support

that has been given to the campaign against Daesh. The 70,000 figure was

not the government's figure but a figure produced independently by the

joint intelligence committee. We have no reason to believe that that

figure is the wrong one, indeed the Civil War in Syria has been raging

for six years now so there have been considerable forces engaged against

the Syria and regime of which the 70,000 are a formidable part. Just

two days ago, Isis launched a series of attacks the Kurdish forces to the

north of rack up. Given that we were hoping that moderate forces were

waiting to take the fact to -- that the macro fight to do Daesh is

concerning. Can you tell us a little more about how effective you think

the UK strikes have been in achieving our objectives with Daesh

and supporting moderate forces to take back control and liberate rack

a? UK is playing the second most important part and Coalition air

activity and strikes. Surveillance and intelligence as well. Daesh are

being pushed back in Iraq, no doubt about that. They have pushed up the

Tigris and pushed back west along the Euphrates. It is much more

complicated and we are concerned that some of the more recent reports

that may suggest coordination between Syrian Democratic forces and

the Assad regime, which is not helpful for the long-term state of

defeating Daesh. Question number two. With permission I would like to

answer questions two and 16 together. In the SDSR published last

November, the Minister of defence agreed to new strategic objective to

contributing to the nation pause my prosperity, we do this in many ways,

not the least through procurement spending of 22 million a year with

UK industry, half of which is in the manufacturing sector. The security

defence industry is the largest in Europe and plays a vital role in

providing battle winning capabilities for our Armed Forces.

We are driving greater innovation for the defence procurement,

maximizing opportunities for investing in skills, and contribute

into a more prosperous economy. That sounded good Mr Speaker, and I am

glad the department has such an objective but manufacturing industry

in my constituency tell me that this government has seen far too little

action in favour of manufacturing, not least in business rates. In

pursuit of those objectives, what with the Minister tell me when he

last spoke to the Department of business about refreshing and

improving their industrial strategy? I can tell the honourable Lady that

I have meetings with colleagues in the Department of business

innovation skills on a monthly basis, I was in their offices

earlier this month. We are constantly looking for better ways

to encourage particular medium and businesses in engaging in the supply

chain and I am pleased to tell the House that we have confirmed a

target of 25% of minister he defence spending through direct and indirect

spending. I am genuinely interested in the Minister's approach because I

would like him to explain to the House why for example a new Royal

navy offshore boats, 60 presented the steel for those boats has been

procured from Sweden when in my part of the where old and Wales, we have

a crisis on the behalf of the steel industry? I am happy to try and

respond to the honourable gentleman in relation particularly to the

specifics he raised. 20% of the steel used in the three offshore

patrol vessels has been sourced from UK steel mills. The systems is the

prime contractor and has 24 companies to tend to the steel

contract, only for Mac or returned, one of which was from a British

contractor which won the contract to provide steel which was been sourced

from a wide range of suppliers. Not only did I see the skills that

helped manufacture parts for Typhoon and joint strike fighter, but I saw

the millions of pounds that they are investing in the training academy

for the places opening later this year and also into 3-D printing what

they will be able to make parts and prototypes vote in plastic and in

metals. Does he agree with me that it is these investments that help to

keep the systems at the forefront in their field in the world? I think

the honourable gentleman speaks not only magnificent for his

constituency but also for the defence contractor who's the main

centre of innovation in his constituency. I would like to

congratulate and applaud him for that. Given that the Ministry of

defence procurement operates under European law, what assessment has

the Minister made of the potential exit from the European Union on the

UK businesses that rely on EU contracts? As the honourable

gentleman knows, the UK defence and security industry is the largest in

Europe, we continued to place as a default position, contracts on open

competition basis. The EU procurement directives apply to our

procurement, which means that EU contractors are eligible to compete

for our contracts in the same way as UK and other international companies

are other than those where we have declared the article 346 exemption

from our stalls which accounts for about 35% of our procurement. On

procurement, I hope that my honourable friend also applied to

Arab territories and with the last recess, I had the chance of reaching

out to men and women there. Will the government join me in playing,

contribute... And will work closely with the fork Islands government to

increase Erki Erm and their two British providers? I am grateful to

my honourable friend for his question. I think he might prefer to

ask that question to the Secretary of State, he just visited the

foregoing islands, the first secretary of state to do so for over

a decade. I can confirm to him that as part of the SDSR conclusions, we

have committed to ?180 million from the Ministry of defence in the fork

when islands, including... There are more than 14,000 high skilled value

jobs in the sector in the Northwest alone. 40% higher than the national

average. We heard before about the lack of a proper defence industrial

strategy with respect to steal, so when is the government going to look

at the other economic benefits when it comes to protecting those high

skill, high value jobs but also creating new ones in the context of

the defence procurement? I think the honourable gentleman should have a

word with the leader of his party. We care about both security and

prosperity on this side and the honourable gentleman might want to

remind his leader that grandstanding on a Saturday places not only the

ultimate security of the nation at risk but also the tens of thousands

of jobs and hundreds of thousands of companies in the submarine industry

in this country at risk. Thank you Mr Speaker, perhaps if the Minister

listens to the questions and stops during allegations of grandstanding

and takes serious the issue of the steel industry in this country, the

chronic underinvestment in this country by this government is

nothing less than national disgrace. As my honourable friend said

earlier, 60% of steel required for the Royal Navy's offshore patrol

vessels came from Sweden, to name just one. Doesn't the Minister agree

that with the way employment, industrial and economic factors in

this policy, which is obviously not working when he has such a low level

of interest in these companies... UK supplies to make a significant

contribution to supplied steel for our defence programmes, including

some 94% of the steel in the aircraft carriers, 77,000 tonnes

sourced from UK mills. But I do recognise and the government

recognises that there is an issue affecting the UK steel industry and

that is why we have established the UK steel procurement group which

ministers are presenting and I instructed the department to our

major defence contractors to ensure that the guidance on steel

procurement is spread across the fence. Disengages the UK steel

market through pipelines and will ensure cost copulations taken into

account over the whole life and not the initial price. Exchanges today

are a tad more windy. There are a lot of questions to get through.

What is required is a pithy question and a pithy answer. It is not

difficult. Question number three. With permission Mr Speaker I should

like to answer questions three and ten together. Our civilian workers

doing an excellent job and reductions in our workforce would

require the MOD to continuously list the way we operate. The majority of

plan reductions are already under way and there is now an opportunity

to identify further efficiencies in defence. We want to deliver a small

productive workforce that will ultimately generate savings for

reinvestment into front-line capabilities. Does the Minister

acknowledged that further cuts to the civilian workforce will

inevitably shift the burden onto our armed forces personnel and how does

he think that will affect the retention, recruitment, and morale

of our troops which according to service men and women in my

constituency, is already worryingly low was white know I do not because

ultimately I think the savings which we will be able to make of ?300

million will be able to be reinvested into front-line

capability. How does he think the cut to civilian force will affect

the expertise that he may lose as a result of those cuts? Under the

whole force approach we try to find the balance between regular and

reserve service personnel as well as MOD civilians and contractors. This

is a mix that successive governments have followed and we try to use the

right people in the right place at the right time. Civilians defence

equipment and support for one of the MOD is most important responsible it

is, making sure our troops have the right care. Along with other things

they face cuts. DNS requires a high expertise such as making sure our

aircraft are safe. Can the Minister explain how they propose a 30% cut

without losing such vital skills? I am afraid I think the honourable

Lady may be misinformed. The E and S to not... They do not have a 30%

cut. There is not a blanket 30% cut across the fence. If anything she is

slightly skimming and she should reflect on her comments. So the

Minister is telling us that although there'll be 30% cut across the

civilian staff there will be some areas where we will have higher than

30% cuts to civilian staff and in some areas 20%. If it is in the

strategic defence review, 30% cuts to civilian staff, they say they

will not be in DES, so where would they be? The fact of the matter is,

the last two years alone, DN as have lost 5000 staff, and at the same

time at the cost of contractors have spiralled so that we are now in a

ludicrous position where the public accounts committee says we're

spending ?250 million on contractors who are advising us on how to

reduced reliance on contractors. Perhaps the Minister should take

these cuts in a strategic way as opposed to using arbitrary cuts. I

am grateful for the pithy question. LAUGHTER There is a basic

misunderstanding here where the honourable lady needs to understand

that many of these programmes are already in place, for example the

footprint strategy which will see our reduction of our footprint by

some of 30% will actually mean that we will have less need for civilians

in certain parts of the estate. Some of these measures are already under

way so we do not simply have to impose a blanket 30% cut, in DENS.

They tell is the cornerstone of the United Kingdom's defence. -- Nato

is. The European Union plays an important role in supporting Nato's

response to international crisis, applying economic humanitarian and

diplomatic levers, that Nato does not have. The government therefore

believes that the United Kingdom continued membership of a reformed

European Union will make us safer and stronger. A cyber threats pose a

significant risk to the B defence of the UK, and this has been identified

as one of the four security challenges in the 2015 review. But

the BU network and Director was created in 2014 to enhance the

security of EU member states and is vital that cyber security continues

to be a priority for the MOD. As the Minister agree that remaining as a

member of the EU greatly enhances our ability to respond to future of

cyber threats? Our recent statistic -- strategic review identifies cyber

as one of the key threats facing this country. My department has

taken over our responsibility for that for cyber security and we are

spending over ?2 billion on it. So we can ensure that we keep the

institutions of government properly protected, and we do our best to

spread good practice amongst our industry as well. On a scale of

1-10, and in terms of preserving our national security, I would be

Secretary of State rate and compare our membership of Nato with our

membership of the EU? I have already said that Nato is the cornerstone of

our defence. The EU plays a complementary role. I have not come

across any Nato Defense ministers who thinks we should leave the EU or

that we would be safer and stronger outside of it the European Union.

These two -- the memberships of these two organisations, taken

together, does keep a stronger and safer and -- in an uncertain world.

Does he think that President Houston, which edits here is the UK

left the EU, isn't it clear that we are better off being part of that

collaboration, sitting around a table with France, Germany, thinking

about all of those security issues. I would not in her office and safer

remain part of the EU? -- President Clinton. He was the EU that was able

to oppose sanctions on President Clinton 40 dead in... -- Putin. I

think Putin would welcome any fracture of either Nato or the EU.

Was he not accept that by advancing this point idea that somehow our

membership of the EU enhances our national security, is merely playing

into the hands of those like Chancellor Merkel, who wants this

boat is taken if Britain where the rural vote to remain in the EU, with

advanced towards a European army, the result of which will be to

undermine Nato, that the organisation he says it the

cornerstone of national defence. Let me make it clear that we would not

support any move towards a European union army of the kind that my

Honorable friend suggests. These two organisations have different

memberships at slightly different objectives. Nato is the key part of

our defence. It is the cornerstone. But there aren't levers available to

the EU, legal, economic, and diplomatic that Nato does not have.

Different membership that the numbers above gives of the best of

both worlds. That's big number the boat. He must the knowledge that

some would prefer a European defence force to ultimately replace Nato.

Can you tell the House with his dues are on that and will he also

acknowledged that most of our European security successes are

bilateral and not as part of the EU? I have not had a fellow European

defence minister called on us to create any type of defence force. It

was interesting that at the last minute meeting, --/NATO, Germany

asked for Nato to help police the UG GMC to have the would-be migrant

pressure. Though the role of some of these operations for Nato, a role in

other areas for the EU. We are fortunate of being numbers above.

Does the Secretary of State agree that it is essential that all

members of our Armed Forces serving away from home lesbian being able to

vote in the general referendum? -- June referendum. Yes. I will of

course, following her reminder, I will ensure that we make every

effort to ensure a higher turnout by the Armed Forces as possible. Ngosso

the house on the 16th of December that doctors diagnosed after that

date -- veterans diagnosed, would receive a payment of ?140,000. I

also committed to look at whether this can be extended to veterans

diagnosed before that date. We have kept our work and I'm delighted to

confirm that this option of a lump sum payment will be extended to

veterans who received the war pension, diagnosed before the 2nd of

December 2015 as well. That is good news. Many of us in the house, this

will be very welcome. I will people affected be able to claim this money

going forward? I have instructed the veteran agency to contact all those

who we know with immediate effect and I hope these payments will be

made shortly after the 11th of April. Will the Minister Dummy

impact every to those members who have campaigned and others on this

issue and I welcome, where he also paid tribute but the Navy sailor who

was recently diagnosed as has to benefit when he got the one issue

that more research is to be done and to this devastating disease. I

recognise the actions of of of both sides of the house who attend --

campaign to ensure the changes. The last. I'm delighted to stay ahead

today to make this announcement. It is directing to do. -- stand here

today. -- it is the right thing to do. I have recently got me contacted

that's been contacted, who is concerned that services are not

being properly funded. Does the Minister find research... It is

rightly a matter for the Department of Health, but a more than happy to

pick that up with them to see what can be done. I'm delighted to

welcome the information. They were cautioned. To make sure that when

people are given the option, that there is no unintended consequences,

specifically for what was -- what words. For many years, to make sure

that if the option of a lump sum, and does not have an impact on her

in terms of getting benefits over the years. I page every to him. He

is absolutely right. I simply emphasise to the house, this is an

option. I will ensure that when recipients are notified, but there

are fully informed as to what the options actually mean.

The OAD have been undertaking site monitoring rules and stood up alone.

We are capable to the next days when the other third parties of agree to

site access. Discussion around the taken place at it it is anticipated

that an agreement will be signed shortly. We will continue to work

closely with all parties to ensure that the matter is resolved as

quickly as possible. After 26 years, this nonaction is just not good

enough. In recent weeks, the officials have cancelled meetings

with landowners to discuss access. They have failed to turn up to

meetings with local elective officials, and oxidant at local

community with content. When I'm at the Minister on Wednesday, I hope I

can get a detailed timeline of when action is going to be taken. I don't

accept as the he says. Per my understanding, we have been making

positive progress. Action has been taken through monetary and removal

is available. There will be him of the responsibilities are in this

matter. I look forward to meeting with the honourable gentleman later

this week but I look forward to meeting with the honourable

gentleman later this week by how we can have constructive approach to

moving this issue forward. The new purpose figure, will be

crucial for the longer-term future of the UK's for shipbuilding

industry. And form a central part of the national shipbuilding strategy,

which is due to be published later this year. The decision is expected

to be made on the build location into the programme is prepared.

Given the expectations that the government raised following the

SDSR, that answer is most unwelcome. Does he not agree with me that given

the finest ships, anywhere in the world were built, will be the

perfect location for this to take place. Three and a half billion has

been spent to date on the aircraft carrier programme in Scotland. In

2014, we placed the hundred 48 million contract for three of the

fees, hoping to sustain a hundred Scottish jobs. And helping to zoo

the skills for the eight type 20 type global sales to be constructed.

They also may be built on the clock, but too early to commit now. That's

on the Clyde. On making this isn't, what a given that the need to avoid

the difficulties of the type 45 have had in the electrical and mechanical

motion systems? Yes. They are friendships. There were mistakes

made under the last government. -- find ships. The Lord heard today,

how the patrol vessels, the Minister has admitted that the have been made

in Korea with Bristol. They can commit where distillate is going to

come home for the type essay. How will we know that but it still will

be used for these? Desperate stuff. He is our genetic Opera answer on

the use of steel. They will have the opportunity to bid as they always

have. We clearly cannot commit in advance of that. We don't even know

for certain that British companies will be dusted. We can not commit at

this stage. As part of the defence programme, we are reviewing a series

of options that are expected to change the way we please bug are

some of our establishment. It is early to say what the impact will be

on a number of them of the police. -- it of the police. Can you tell me

what legal advice he has sought or seek in relation to potentially

removing the arm and said Defense police from civilian establishments

and replacing them with forces personnel? There are a number of

options we are looking at of how we can make the best use of our

ministry of Defense police. So the gap a more proactive role in the

communities and our service communities. There have been a

number of discussions, but the doctors had yet to be explored fully

and I will, to the house in due course. Not wishing to the in any

way from the wonderful work done by the Ministry of Defense, we've this

opportunity to present the work of the world Marines, who police are

nuclear facilities in Scotland? I am delighted to join him and the

present the work that the Marines have done. I have seen first-hand in

recent years. Where there are allegations of

serious wrongdoing, they need to be investigated. We are aware of the

stressed that the places on our service personnel. We must honour

our duty of care to them. This will involve an independent legal advice

and support, however where are also aware that a great many allegations

are being made on grounds of malice, all by some law firm for profit.

Will shortly bring forward measures to close down the shameless and

shoddy record. Of allegations were found to be false by the Inquirer.

Does my friend agreed that we should all began to reclaim Loughran who

shamefully promoted this allegations that anybody who received financial

backing from them will be well biased to either return or to make a

donation to help the heroes? I thank him for writing this point. The

Casey raises the cost of a taxpayer 31 million to defend. The law firm

involved have been referred to the solicitors do so -- tribunal. We're

looking at ways we can would improve cost, and in others. Those who have

their own associations with that firms will need to make their own

judgements. Contact him and said to have clarity of intent is picking

over the heads of the present soldiers and brave soldiers and

servicemen to those who I joined the Army, very worrying for getting

people thinking that they might be serving their country and finish up

to be accused of that full-time. -- accuse a dreadful crimes. This is a

huge stress to service personnel. It corrupts their operations and it

also undermines human rights by undermining international

humanitarian law. I can totally see why some one who want to join the

Armed Forces would be concerned about all three of those things.

That is why we bring forward a number of measures that will address

all three. The minister and the Secretary of State, have been very

vocal about the importance of bringing forward a bill to protect

service personnel from spirits, costly, and stressful legal action.

There have been one of form reports that the bill is ready to proceed,

but is being held of an Downing Street for fear that it might

somehow impinge on an forthcoming EU referendum debate. Can she confirm

that her department will do as much as possible to ensure that this

legislation is brought forward at the earliest opportunity and not

delayed for any external political reasons? I can give my friend those

reassurances. In all respects, the information he is working on is not

correct. There will be a number of measures that will be brought to. So

maybe attached to pieces of legislation and we are hoping to be

able to make announcements on this before local government kicks in. We

do not envision the point ground forces to Libya in a combat role.

The United Kingdom is considering with our partners have a and new

Libyan government. Lang to focus on capacity building and security

sector reform, but it's too early to say what form that support would

take. Before taking any military action in Libya, we would seek an

invitation on the new Libyan government. I thank him for that

response. I've disappointed to read the comments in the media stating

that he had authorised the use of UK bases for US air strikes. The matter

has not brought to the server in advance. And yesterday of papers,

the government is now also the point British advisers to Libya. Will he

commit to stopping this mission, and making sure that no further such

actions happen without comment to the house. And he explained whether

the action than it was lawful under UK standards, the use of force, and

human rights laws? The United States, follow standard procedures

and medical request to use our basis was we had desk-bound about

legality. I granted permission for them to use our basis to support.

They are trying to prevent the Daesh from using with the a base from

which to plan and carry out attacks that threaten the stability of Libya

and the region and potentially the United Kingdom and our people, too.

I was satisfied that the operation, which was a US operation, would be

connected on that international law. Could he set out what level of

military involvement in the government believes the British

military has to engage in in Libya, is for the diamonds that would bring

any decisions regarding military intervention to the house? Would

deny intent deploy ground forces in any combat role. -- we do not plan

to deploy. We would, of course, have to seek an invitation from the

government and what also involved this problem. We have, as part of

the international community, and we are ready to provide advice and

training and support of the new Libyan government. I can also form

the house that a shining team of some 20 troops on the fourth

industry grade is now moving to Tunisia to help counter illegal

cross-border movement from Libya and support of the Tunisian authorities.

Go to bed. A very sad and miserable away. So the last question. Their

words have been proactive in terms of submitting reports of civilian

casualties. We are grateful for the efforts. -- air war. Each case has

been reviewed, and has the demonstrated that visibly casualties

were not caused by UK activities. Our process are robust in the

respect than others. But I would welcome any other further ideas

about how they can add value. The department is now suing people to

discuss accurate civilian casualty numbers. I am most grateful to the

department if that is accurate. But will there were four that has been

in the department now, some about compensation for the families of

innocent victims of our bombing, will that report now be serviced? I

have committed to review any such reports of the visit that civilian

casualties. I have oversight at the whole process, including

compensation. If he has specific cases that he wishes to raise,

please do so. It is our operation against Daesh, which I reviewed

earlier this month. 40, international counterparts in

delivering our review commitments. To increase the size and power of

our Armed Forces, to keep this country safe. With the Russian

aggression that doesn't Daesh and growing cyber attack, can my right

honourable friend confirm that the government is committed to spending

2% of GDP every year, for this Parliament understands? And doesn't

the Honorable Lady data to match this commitment so that labor is a

risk to our security? That staggered to match. Questions must be about, I

appreciate the earnestness and commitment. Question must be about

government policy for which ministers are responsible. Order! Be

quiet. Ministers are responsible for government policy, not that of the

opposition. On the government's policy, he will not.

Can I confirm, that this government is committed to spending 2% of GDP

on defence every year of this Parliament. The defence budget will

rise by North .5% above inflation every year this decade. The

additional funding will be made available to the Armed Forces and

intelligence agencies through the joint security funding. We have the

largest defence budget and the European Union, and the

second-largest in Nato. This keeps us safe. We circulated without

delay, as all members of the Cabinet. I

continues to create serious health risk, including leading to the loss

of life in the Armed Forces. The Times higher in an civilian

population. It is now a year since the defence select committee

highlighted that the government strategy with the Armed Forces has

not made any noticeable difference. What steps is the Minister now

taking to set targets to manage alcohol consumption patterns and

address this serious issue? In the Army, under the new Army leadership

code, is taking steps to address this particular problem. I will

write to the lady with further details. Clinical Lab government

look at all the alternatives to our continuous. -- the old government.

None are the operative protection. Does he agree with a two former

lover defence secretaries, it is self-evident that a British nuclear

deterrent will be essential to our security for decades to come. --

former labor costs. In 2013, the alternative review concluded. That

no system is a stable, or cost-effective at the current

database deterrent. There is no alternative, the part-time

deterrents are half-baked measures currently being suggested by some

members of the body opposite, could be exploited by our adversaries. And

to present a real danger to the safety and security the UK. Russian

bomber targets, civilians, Sarah, driver refugee crisis to the shores

of Europe. New -- Russia's Vegas to haul and short on the civilian

population to design was established in for the second quarter. --

Russia's failure. That is why it is important that the cease-fire holds

and Russia returns to a more constructive part, and working with

us to get this terrible civil war ended. With the body of the

sophistication of cyber attacks gone so rapidly, and number of which are

sorted by the GHQ, what that survey taken to assure our rotting defence

budget actually translates to enhance sovereign capability in

cyber? I patiently to all of his constituents that worked there

protecting against cyber attacks. We have increased spending in this area

to 2.5 billion, and 80% of cyber attacks are able to be prevented by

answering the simple, straightforward to practice. A lot

of that investment will be going to protect British businesses and

private individuals in that respect. The SDSR in 2012,... 16 billion

allocated for nuclear submarines, some that has been massive cuts

elsewhere to support that. The that's a clever plan, which asked on

the subject is. Can the Minister then commit to providing for the

clarity of the changes that will affect... That is a bit of a

subject. We will be publishing the next annual alliteration and an

excellent with them straight there will be an addition of public and

bounds committed to spending on military equipment over the next ten

years. Cohabitation before he sees how that is allocated. It was in

December 2014, will the Secretary of State told this house that the legal

aid to Cave, should be reimbursed. Add this to do that it will be

reimbursed and given the timescales that I pass so far, when has he

think the money will be received? We are waiting the little ad agency

response to our request to revoke the legal aid award on the grounds

that it would not have been made in the first place, have the agency

been made aware of all relevant document dictation in the case. We

are waiting on that judgement but we believe it is imminent. Not content,

with comparing himself to our country's wartime leader, a Sevilla

the free world. This weekend, the Mayor of London compared his

opposition to the EU, to James Bond, taking on a sinister, supernational

organisation. Can ask the Secretary of State weather in all his dealings

with intelligence and security services, such as similarity has

ever occurred to him? I don't think it would be wise, and would not be

proper to discuss in the conversations I have had it with the

intelligence and security communities.

Can my friend confirm that would have to spend hundred million

pounds, and that the money is spent on iTunes and give give them the

best support in the equipment? I think he read of a good point. The

money that we are having to spend on a malicious allegations against him

forces will be better spent on equipment and training for them. I

can give some assurance that commercial, legal spending end of

the department is down at third on last year. In specific relation, the

amount spent, we are doing our what we can to assure that it works more

effectively and efficiently. I've had good conversations with the

Attorney General's Office. He'll be busy to them shortly. Given the

increasing double counting of this expenditure to the ODA and Nato

target, mechanisms such as the conflict security and stability

fund, with discussion has they had with the Chancellor about the

redefinition of always be? It is for the OED, development aid spending

and for Nato to classify what is acceptable as defence spending,

which will do Given the importance of our new

Google national security, can my honourable friend tell the House

would support the government has in this policy in this important area?

I have so far received conflicting representations on the future of our

nuclear deterrent. There are mainstream members of the party

opposite as there are right across this house who support us -- support

every previous government the nuclear church deterrent that has

kept discovering -- government say. Other parts of the party seemed to

think we can turn our nuclear sub greens into water taxis. Germany and

Sweden have stopped selling weapons to Saudi Arabia as a result of

concerns over Saudi Arabia and -- Saudi actions in Yemen. What about

the ban of arms sales to Saudi Arabia? All of our defence exports

to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or any country goes through the same

rigorous export control system that we have in place which we are proud

of. It is more rigorous we believe than any other country. That will be

the case while this government is in power. I recently visited the

Marines on Arctic warfare training in Norway, my honourable friend is

and the honourable lady from their various constituencies. Will my

honourable friend join me in applauding one group, one of the

elite, forces in the world and explain how the strategic defence

and security review will be supporting more Marines. My

honourable friend is very brave to have joined the Royal Marines in the

Arctic. I pay tribute to her and her colleagues for doing so. We are

committed to maintaining fitness capability, we will be making

modifications to one of the two Queen Elizabeth carriers to ensure

that persists for the for suitable future and the life of that

platform. Under this prime minister, police personnel has dropped 340

from 1482 1140. Police numbers have dropped 80 from 1700 to 1620 and

Royal Navy police numbers have dropped 40 from 342 300. Does the

Secretary of State think these cuts under the Prime Minister are

acceptable? The task that we allocate our personnel are there for

operational reasons. That is how we allocate, not only the liability of

each of our services but also the trades that sit within them. Along

with many of my colleagues I also talked during recess and had the

pleasure of visiting the fourth. They were concerned about the

economic point of view. From a national security point of view will

my right honourable friend confirm if government will always defend the

right to the Islanders to defend them I could determine their own

future? As I said earlier it was a pleasure to be the first defence

secretary to visit the island for over a decade to meet over the 1200

service personnel who are based there and to confirm our investment

programme of 180 million over the next ten years. Unlike the Labour

Party, there is nobody who can be in any doubt about our commitment to

the right of the Islanders to determine their own future and not

have it bargained away by a possible labour government reaching some

accommodation with Argentina. My constituent Chris Hartley was

wounded while serving our arm versus in Syria by a rocket to know --

rocket propelled grenade. He lost his right leg above the knee. He is

unable to get funding or in HS support for a life-changing

operation that would allow him to work and restore some of the pride

he had before his injury. Will you meet with the Department of health

and myself to discuss what can be done to help my constituency who

gave so much to this country? I would be delighted. Is it not the

case of the United Kingdom left European Union and it is more

rightly that France and Germany would dominate Europe's defence

structures. Meaning the median term over the horizon that we are more

likely to see European defence structures compete rather than

complement Nato? My honourable friend has made his views in this

great debate very clear. As I said to the House earlier, Nato is the

cornerstone of our security, the European Union compliments that with

a number of other levers and weapons at its disposal. Humanitarian,

diplomatic, and economic and there is no doubt in my mind that the

fracturing of either the alliance or the union would not aid the

collective security of the West. Have any embedded British pilots

flown in emissions at all into Libya? -- missions. No. Since the

parliamentary vote on Syria at the beginning of December, there have

been 319 RAF air strikes against Daesh in Iraq and 43 RAF air strikes

against Daesh and Syria. Since we have been targeting the head of the

snake, why have the bed and seven and a half times more air strikes in

Iraq? There are more I struck -- air strikes in Iraq and then Syria in

December and indeed January because we were engaged in assisting the

Iraqi forces liberate Ramani which is where most of the military action

was and assisting the Kurdish forces in the liberation of a city further

north. But as I discussed with my fellow ministers in Brussels, it is

also important to continue to attack the infrastructure that supports the

Daesh, including the oil wellheads from which it derives its revenue

and some of our strikes have been on those oil fields in eastern Syria.

Urgent question, Eva Cooper. To ask the home Secretary to make a

statement on child refugees in Calais. Thank you very much Mr

Speaker, last Thursday a judge in France ruled that the authorities in

Calais could proceed with clearing the tents and makeshift

accommodation from the southern section of the migrant camp located

there. Over recent weeks, the authorities working with NGOs have

ensured that the migrants affected by the clearances which began today

were aware of the alternative accommodation that the French state

had made available. For women and children, this means that the

specials accommodation for around 400 people in and around the centre,

or the protected accommodation elsewhere in the region. For others,

this means that the recently erected heating containers which can house

1500 people. The government with the support of UK funding established

over 100 welcome centres elsewhere in France, where migrants in Calais

can find dead, meals, and information about their options. To

be clear, no individual needs to remain in the camps and Calais and

Dunkirk. The decision to clear parts of the campaign Calais is of course

a part of the French government. The declaration decided in August last

year committed the UK and France to a package of work to improve

physical security, to co-ordinate law enforcement response, to tackle

the criminal gangs involved in people smuggling, and to reduce the

number of migrants in Calais. Both governments returned a strong

protection of those vulnerable to trafficking -- trafficking and

exhortation. We can identify and help potential victims in the camps

around Calais. -- extortion. The UK is playing a leading role in

tackling people smuggling, and we managed to target the games that

exploit human beings for their own gain. The UK shares the French

government is not objective of increasing the number of individuals

who can offer safe and fully equipped accommodation further away

from Calais so they can engage with the French immigration system,

including launching an asylum claim. It is important to stress that

anyone who does not want to live in the makeshift camps in Calais has

the option of engaging with the French authorities who will provide

accommodation and support. This is particularly important with regards

to unaccompanied children. Where an asylum claim is watched by a child

with close family connections in the UK, the government are ensuring the

cases prioritise. It isn't -- it is vital that they engage with the

government as quickly as possible. This is the best way to ensure these

vulnerable children receive the protection and support they need and

the quickest way to reunite them with any close family members in the

UK. The UK is committed to safeguarding the welfare of Anna got

-- unaccompanied children and we take our response ability seriously.

No one should live in the conditions in Calais. The French government has

made huge efforts to provide suitable alternative accommodation

for all of those who need it. And has made clear that the migrants and

Calais in need of protection should claim asylum in France. This morning

the French authorities started to move people out of the southern part

of the Calais refugee camp. In theory to contain shelters and

reception centres elsewhere. They say it is not enough of alternative

accommodation, around 2300 people have nowhere to go. That means many

from Syria, Afghanistan, and includes over 400 children and

teenagers with no one to look after them. Like a 12-year-old boy I met

in Afghanistan with a huge scar across his face which had happened

when his home was attacked. Unaccompanied children are not

allowed into containment shelters and the very centre for women and

children is now full. The tents and volunteer support network, there is

no safeguarding plan in place. There is a massive reality gap between

what he said and what is happening on the ground. Save the children

warned that things are extremely chaotic and this is making an

appalling situation for children even worse. This is dangerous. He

knows well there is a serious risk that those children will now just

disappear into the hands of traffickers or criminal gangs for

prostitution. Another 400 children on top of the 10,000 that polls have

said already disappeared in Europe. Some of those children have some of

those closest family in the UK. Up to 150 children as an estimate. That

is why they are there heading to Germany or Sweden and the government

says it agrees that child refugees should be reunited with their

family. It also agrees that if their closest family is in the UK, they

should be able to apply here for asylum and has promised funding to

help that happen, a court case conference relatives in Britain

should be able to look after children while they apply. And the

UNHCR has cases that sped things up. That is not happening for the kids

and Calais. Even if they managed to apply their cases are taking nine

months. They do not have nine months, they are remaining -- the

remaining tents are being bulldozed now. With a minister make urgent

representations to the French government to provide immediate and

safe support for children and young people and not to remove their

accommodation until there is somewhere safe that they can go.

Will he accept the offer from the UNHCR to help process applications

and set up a fast system to reunite children with family who are here

and third, would he agree to make a commitment to help child refugees.

The Minister has talked a good game on stopping trafficking and modern

slavery and he is right to be appalled at the criminal gangs, but

this is where it gets real. The Minister has the power now to stop

the trafficking of hundreds of children on our doorstep. Will he do

it was light I can say to the right honourable lady that we do take our

responsibility seriously, as I have already indicated in the statement

that I made to the House. In relation to the level of alternative

accommodation, I equally reference the welcome centres that are

available around other parts of France at over 100, and 2500 people

have left those camps to go to the reception centres that are there.

The important thing to stress is ensuring that we are getting asylum

claims into the system in France. She rightly highlights the interest

of children in and around the camps and we are obviously aware of the

container situation which is adjacent to the camp, we understand

that is been given to women and children and other asylum seekers,

and this is in addition to other places available for women and

children. I can say to her in response to the claim of making sure

the arrangements under Dublin, that we do remain committed to our

arrangements. The UK and France are running a UK camp which in... It

gives them information on family reunification. Equally to assist

with the handling of such cases, the UK and France have established a

senior-level committee, on single points of contact and respected

Dublin units and tears about asylum experts in the French ministration

to facilitate the stages of the process in identifying, protecting,

and transferring any cases to the UK. She references this period of

nine months and it should not take anywhere near that. We remain behind

our commitment and respect to see that there is an efficient and

effective process. What we judge is a small number of cases that may

have that direct connection to the UK. Equally sure will be aware of

the broader family reunification procedures over and above Dublin

which would allow children to be reunited with their parents, direct

applications from France not only, but also anywhere around Europe or

the region itself where there is that direct link to a parent that

exists. To also reference the additional funds that the government

has committed to the Department for international development, ?10

million to support the better reunification, to assist children in

Europe in transit. But we are very cautious on seeing that we do not

make an already difficult situation even worse. Therefore it is with

that emphasis that we give on practical support to the French

government who art in the lead to relation to this, the expert support

provided, but also the support we are given in Greece and other

countries to see the better identification of children and to

see they are held at the earliest opportunity. My honourable friend is

right that the best way to protect the maximum number of vulnerable

children is to minimise the number who are taken to live in squalor in

camps outside of Calais in an attempt to make a dangerous and

illegal crossing into this country. The way to do that is to maintain a

very close cooperation with the French authorities and to do what we

can to strengthen the Dublin convention, would he agree with me

that the worst thing this country can do is to do anything that will

disrupt our close relation to the French authorities on this matter? I

would agree with my right honourable friend. We have established I think

a good and close working relationship between the UK and

French governments between the home secretary and others. There are

regular meetings that take place at that level but also an operational

level as well, highlighting the exchange of experts I have

referenced. My right honourable friend is right, it is that support

that we will continue and need to maintain in the months and years

ahead. Can I think the right honourable member for raising this

issue. We on this site have repeatedly been raising the plight

of the 26,000 or so unaccompanied children in Europe who are in

desperate need of protection. I have listened to what the Minister said

this afternoon and what the Minister said before but there is, as

mentioned before, a reality gap here. I have been to the camps and

Calais and in Dunkirk and the squalor is hard to describe for

members of this house. It is worse in Dunkirk minute is in Calais.

There are 300 or so unaccompanied children in Calais, they are not

there through choice. In Dunkirk, the conditions are such that the

volunteers and eight of them are in Dunkirk, they are desperately trying

to keep people safe with somewhere to sleep that they cannot count the

number of unaccompanied children. There is no process on the ground

for these children. There is no... The reunification rules are not

working. That is the reality on the ground and we have to start from

that position. That is all borne out by the judgement of the upper

tribunal in January of this year. And the situation is now urgent

because of the action being taken today. I do urge the Minister to

look again at the issue and consider what practical support can be given

in the next 24 hours to these desperate children who have not had

the support they need until now. I can't say that the joint declaration

that was signed -- can say. That actually does have a direct

financial support in the way that the governments are providing

centres outside of the immediacy of Calais. As I have already

highlighted, the centre that exists, the work that we are doing on a

regular basis to identify and highlight the appropriate support

that is there, and I stress again, there is no need for people to be in

those conditions. There are services, facilities and services

away from the camps that are available to support them. I do make

and stress that point yet again. We do take our responsibility seriously

which is why, the honourable Lady keeps interjecting from the front

bench. We are working closely with the French government to see that

there are experts in place, I have already indicated additional persons

going out next week to see that there are those procedures in place

so we can see an efficient and effective process for a small number

of cases. But there are support and accommodation available and I would

urge people to take those choices. I am glad the government puts a high

priority on reuniting children with their parents or close relatives,

that is the best answer. But isn't it also the case that the European

Council conclusions last meeting is to stop this from happening in

future by DU reinforcing its border controls when they first enter the

European Union a whole and safeguarding support for those who

need it. When they first entered the EU, rather than putting them through

the long journey across the whole of the territory. I would say to my

right honourable friend, it is also in ensuring there is support in and

around the region to prevent people from actually going out and is

children's lives being put at risk which is why the risk, code the

London conference provided additional education to ensure there

is that sense of positive hope and that is absolutely the right thing

to do. That is backed up by our ?2.3 billion commitment to assistance

around the region and he is right about ensuring the hotspots

initiative is in place to see that help and support is given at the

first opportunity and that is what this government is committed to do.

Does in the Minister understand that these Dublin procedures for

unaccompanied children are not fit for her best and it takes up to a

year for charger quest to be issued. In that light shouldn't we be

walking the recent Tribunal decision to short cut the commission of three

children from the Calais camps to join families here. And at the lady

suggests, we should be looking to welcome the other hundred or so

Calais children identified by people as having family in the UK so they

can also be reunited with loved ones. Just how much money has been

spent on this litigation, trying to stop refugee children and Calais

reaching their families here. Wouldn't that money be far better

spent ensuring the doubly Dante Dublin three... -- Dublin three

programme is insured? The most appropriate thing to do is to see

those young children receive the help and support at the earliest

possible opportunity. Which is why I emphasise again the need to seek

asylum claims are made quickly and speedily within the system. The

Dublin three arrangements can operate effectively and senior

representations say they see no reason why those programmes cannot

be completed within a period of two months. There are clear processes

and procedures that should be adopted and we urge everyone to

support and get behind them and make them work effectively. As members

have said, the conditions in those camps are awful and action needs to

be taken so long as it is not done by the French government. When I

talked to migrants there, they were wary of the French government and

officials. I welcome the governments working with the French, but can the

honourable friend talk about the outreach we are doing to encourage

people to apply for asylum through the French system so they can't come

here and have a right to do so? I would say to my honourable friend

that the number of claims that have been made for asylum in the area

around Calais is around 2800 over the recent year or so and there has

been a significant increase which we support and encourage. I can equally

say to her that we have people that go into the camps to deliver and

make those very clear and need to make those claims quickly so

assistance can be provided. On our visit last week, the home affairs

select committee was told that 90% of migrants, 90% to enter the

European Union had done so because they were unable to do so because of

criminal gangs. Would he tell the House how many people have been

prosecuted by individual countries as a result of that smuggling? The

long-term solution of course is the proper operation of the hotspots

that have been created in Italy and Greece and the tracking of children

before they have to make, as the honourable member said, that long

journey to Calais. But the short-term solution is for him to

look at the opposite number in France and see if a more

humanitarian approach can be arrived at. This is the fault of the French

government, they have been warned about Calais and they have done

nothing about it. Mac I think that is... I think that is a unfair

assessment. Different government have taken steps to ensure there is

information and people have been able to make asylum claims

effectively. The gentleman makes a powerful important point though in

relation to organised crime. The number he highlighted around 90% is

one the European poll have made clear and therefore the work that we

are doing with organised immigration crime task force is absolutely

right, getting the intelligence into us and taking action against the

gangs that could not care whether these young people live or die. I

have a great deal of time from the United Nations committee for

refugees, could I ask my honourable friend if he can outline what the

UNHCR's role is in Calais? What I would say to my honourable friend is

that we are working with the UNHCR in relation to the resettlement

programme and in particular, the work in region to potentially see

how unaccompanied children could come to this country. UNHCR is

obviously monitoring the situation in and around France, but as far as

I am aware they have no formal agreement. The Minister is aware

that for 12 years we have had juxtaposed immigration controls in

the north of France. How does he believe that one official will be

able quickly to determine those 50 children identified by respectable

charities as having family in the UK to determine their asylum claims to

be refugees here in refuge, code written quickly. One person cannot

do that job? The honourable John lady should be aware that it is not

one person but a senior level connection between officials in both

governments. So there are broader teams that are working on those

exchanges and if there is information, there is that claim

that is made that highlights that Is as well groomed the considerable

efforts the government have made to keep families together." Places

where many of the rapid is come from. If there were 300 minors

living in a cab, Andover, they would be taken into care and given a place

of safety. And there will be an investigation into the out of for

getting them there. Why is that not happening in France? I cannot

comment on the operations of the French government. What I can say,

The minister is describing the process of colluding with the French

government and a process that will push them into the hands of people

traffickers. Is he really saying that he applies such a different

standard to the children of refugees as we do to our own.

The joint work that our enforcement agencies are engaged in, and

confronting new people chapters done after the games, finger is that

exploitation. It is precisely part of the joint agreements, which was

signed last August. We are supporting the French government to

identify the vulnerable and to see they are given support. And that is

what continue to do. That we will continue. Will he give a categorical

assurance that those children and young people, web legitimate claim

to be in the UK because of family relatives, will not be disadvantaged

by starting their asylum claims in France? And can he, make clear that

currently any involvement formal process for the new UNHCR to be

involved, will he considered that for the teacher? -- consider that

for the future. I can say if there are children who qualify under the

double regulations, and have close family here. We will stand by their

obligation. -- Dublin regulation. We will see those are processed, and

see that those are processed efficiently and effectively, which

is why we are taking the action that we are with the French government.

She highlights the issue. There is a clear process that we have. We are

working to see that that does operate. As I've already indicated,

we believe it can be made to operate efficiently and effectively and will

work with the government and French government to achieve that. I'm a 7%

debate, because the insistence of the applying that it is the

responsible the of children to declare themselves to the relevant

authorities. -- I must of missed her. That cannot be correct. It is

our facility, here, to make sure that children are cared for. Can't

we be specific? -- can we be. The UNHCR have offered to settle for a

steadfast process. The Minister has applied, but I said he has said no

to them. Will he say yes or no to them quiz back --? They operate in

the ditch and student identify the company children helped him to

register with the authorities. So that they can be properly looked

after. That is the right approach and what the French government are

seeking to do. There is a process between the French government, the

asylum system, that is the way it assistance can be given. I would

strongly urge everybody to get behind that process, deceived that

children in need receive the care that they require. -- to see that

children. Many of the company children wander across Europe

without any means of support is the biggest stage on the way the

European Union is operating as Porter and asylum policy. Can the

Minister confirmed there will be many thousands more children in such

apply, where not for the fact that this government is providing such a

huge amount of aid into Syria, and neighbouring countries so that other

children do not make this perilous journey? I support what he has said

in relation to the impact that aid assistance is given to the regions

and saying that there is that sense of support and hope and opportunity,

but young people to get the education that they need are well

looked after. Equally, we'll continue to work with other European

partners, around the edge of points into the EU, so people who have made

the journey is, the see that the process and where judges with claims

of settlement to see that they are reunited with their parents. Cannot

say to the Minister, that's cannot, that this response is just not good

enough. The real danger for those children, is now a mud during the

demolition and dispersal of the current camps in Calais. Where they

are at real risk of being picked up by the gangs, responsible for child

sexual exploitation and people trafficking. Can he get on with

putting in place a proper, and coherent registration system so that

those children can be picked up by the relevant authorities and looked

after as they should be? In terms of a which the work of been taken

place, my understanding is that the way the French government are part

of this is on a phased basis, that places like schools will not be

subject to the clearance of the consequence of the court wrote. That

the different authorities are focused on the areas what I'm

occupied. To move to the new accommodations. I think they're

taking that approach. In respect to children in need of support, I

underlined the need to assure the claims are made, and that that I'm

going to help identify children in need of help. The Minister or member

of the mayor of Calais -- will remember, that the majority of those

in the camp haven't formed any to claim asylum in France, but they do

not want to because they want to come to the UK. When he agreed that

it is incumbent on French government and the Calais authority to ensure

that children who cannot make asylum applications on their own, are

assisted in doing so that adults are informed that they must claim asylum

in France, which is a safe country? I will agree. I underlined that

there have French injuries in the region, and the cab operating to

identify the company children and said the claims can be made. --

unaccompanied. The Minister has said that unaccompanied children with

family connections, the process should take two months. How long

that the UK Government say the asylum process should take, for

those children with family connections in the UK, and what

radical step if the Minister going to take to sure is achieved? And

respect to the asylum process in this country, but with the claims

are held, we have done a great deal to see that claims are properly

assessed as straightforward claims are that within a period of six

months. I think the government has done a deal of hard work to see that

effectiveness is brought into the system and that has been recognised

by recent independent inspectors report. The Minister agreed that our

efforts should be convertible to seek assistance in France for the

authorities, and not delude themselves living in squalor

vulnerable to the gangs that the addition we need to make sure we

have strong security at our borders so that people realise it is not

worth their life in the hands of the people traffickers? He will know

that the work government has done to secure it the port area around

Calais in the Giro Tunnel terminal. We keep that security under review

with a drug group difference government. He makes a powerful

point, that some claims should be made at the earliest opportunity, so

the help and assistance can be given at the earliest opportunity. And our

poor that afternoon, that and water cannons are being used by riot

police... -- in a report this afternoon. Given that there are

plenty of money to provide fencing and bilateral cooperation, why can't

he simply get it signed counterpart to identify the people who have a

legal right to come to the UK and get them over here immediately? I

say to him that it is a clear question of people can't claim

asylum. Young people being supported with the work of the NGOs of the

French government had been a place for that. The consistent adjoint

approach that we have taken, built on the agreement from last August,

to support the French government and their word. And insane help getting.

That's insane those in need of help get it. Concern for vulnerable

children in the camps. Have you identified, if they have relatives

in the UK, could the Minister tell the House committee those relatives

that the UK Government is prevented from travelling to travelling to

France to be reunited with us children and why did I think

refugees rather be in the UK that France? That's why does he think.

Often these issues are complex. In terms of what is in the best

interest of the child, that is always the factor at the forefront

of our minds. When we are seeing those applications, we always have

to assess what is in their best interests and whether the parents or

other close family members are able to support that child. It is that

focus that we get to every case. That would give to. A week ago

today, I asked the Prime Minister for assurance that the United

Kingdom government response to the crisis will be driven entirely by

humanitarian aid and not insult in any way by considerations as to how

they might impact on the referendum. That is not likely to happen in

June. The premise there was unable or unwilling to give assurance last

week. Minister give that assurance. Test the Prime Minister was unable.

I think the gentleman can say by the actions of a government that would

take our facilities very seriously, with the funding that we have

committed, not just in it or Regents to read, but also in Europe as well

with the addition to Megan found. -- additional ten Megan found. The city

that children need help or support can get that. -- ?10 million.

Have the Minister had any discussions with his French

counterpart to find out the bridge is wide the migrants and Kelly did

not claim asylum in the other state countries that have had travelled to

before arriving in France? The originals are complex. The chairman

of the select committee highlighted the roles of people traffickers and

smugglers and those who self also do a host of different means and

networks including through social media. You can be in relation to

communities, and language. It is a clear message that we give to the

activities that we are supporting the French government and that we

are taking ourselves in those camps to say that people should claim

asylum in France. I say to the Minister, with little evidence of UK

expertise on the ground in any of these cams, he is wrong to say it

that a Christian place of worship is wiped out by the French authorities

just a few weeks ago. He is wrong about that. Can I also say, what

advice does he get to the likes of the social action network, citizens

UK, organised nations elected members and in about a charge of

individuals with a right to remain in the UK have a close family

connection, what advice has he given on the dispatch box about how they

can carry on with help? -- given from the dispatch. I stated anybody

to claim asylum in France so sure there is that direct connection. So

that we can make the system work. I stressed that it has been given does

not have that situation. In respect to the issue the first of the camps,

I understand that the court rules specifically that they should go

ahead in the camps would the excesses of place if were substance

cool that it is that approach that difference government should be

adopting and the action that they are taking. Prior to coming to this

house, I worked on hundreds of asylum in trafficking cases. An

appraisal of the double rape guessing, the first country of

anticipate response for the claimant, importing fairness and

equity to the system. -- -- -- --. Clement to describe the legal bases

will be undemocratic and illegitimate? I agree on the

benefits and the strength of the Dublin arrangements. It is something

that we believe should be upheld and not undermined. It does have that

core principles on those that have made a claim of doing so in the

first safe country that they arrive. Equally, that principle under Dublin

three, that is coming reunification, that they equally operates and that

is what this government stands by. That family reunification. I

recently met with constituents who have been to the cab of the

situation that is described for children was appalling. The

situation or, at the grandchildren missing out on food. I agree to a

bed in the camp should be claim asylum, but this is not happening

over a long period of time. What more can be do to reach out and get

that information to them? And make sure that humanitarian assistance

resist those camps and the most vulnerable. I know learn the

specifics facilities that are there, the 400 places for women and

children. That's underlined the specific. The support that we are

giving with 100 to send it away from the area for people to be able to go

to. That's wider than two. To ensure that there are able to make the case

of there. There is a specific element around vulnerable guilty

which we are supporting the French government. And equally far on the

opposite, going into the cans to reiterate that message, the help and

support can be given. The way to do that if the claim asylum in that way

we can see that assistance is given as early as possible. Urgent

question. I asked the Minister if he will make a statement about the

instructions issued by the Cabinet Secretariat to permanent secretaries

in respect of referendum guidance with the civil service as special

about this. -- cabinet secretary. The referendum on the 23rd of June

on the EU represents the biggest constitutional decision for the

nation and a generation. And the government position is clear,

Britain will be stronger, safer, and better off by remaining in a

reformed European Union. Today's government document setting up the

process of leading, underlines that case. Shown that able to lead could

lead to up to a decade of war of damaging uncertainty, with real

consequences for putting jobs, and investments at risk. I concur with

that assessment. Because of the significant of the referendum, as

the house knows, the Prime Minister took the decision to allow

collective responsibility to be suspended on the referendum

question. This approach was discussed and agreed by cabinet on

the 20th of February. The process is clear. Ministers made apart from the

government position in a personal capacity on the specific question on

the referendum. -- ministers may depart. On other matters, government

operates as normal, and often, civil servants support the government

position. Guidance on how this will work in practice was set out and

published by the Cabinet Secretariat last week. The guidance is clear.

Other than on the specific question of the referendum, all ministers can

commission and see all documents as normal. On the question of the

referendum, and on this question alone, ministers who disagree with

the government position naturally cannot commission policy work on the

in and out question, or see documents setting out details of the

case to remain. All ministers can ask for factual briefings, and for

packs to be checked in any matter. All ministers can see documents on

EU issues not related to the referendum question. So the guidance

is clear, it is published, and the process was agreed at cabin at the

best way to manage the unusual situation a ministers who disagree

with the government, remaining impulse. I hope this clarity will

allow members on all sides not to focus on the main debate, on whether

Britain will be better served in leaving or staying in a reformed

European Union and then let the people decide. Clarity on this issue

is one thing that we do not have. The body adjust to the government

making his case in this referendum. -- nobody is. Placebos but the civil

service to be impartial and caring out in support for ministers. It is

established in law, that ministers are terrible for the departments,

and voters expect government expects figures to be impartial and

accurate, whether they are used by ministers who support remain, or

leave. By Dusty cabinet secretary's let her go far beyond the limits

actually placed on the assessment ministers during the 1970 bribe

referendum? Bid and industry secretary -- the van, was quoted as

saying, it was difficult putting forward anti-, and briefs to Mr

Shaw. But I hope we did what he asked. What a different atmosphere

from today. Worsen this, there has been a Q and a briefing circulated,

following the letter which states that ministers may not see any

papers, and that has a bearing on the referendum question. Or are

intended to be accused in support of their position of the referendum.

This is being described as one minister as unconstitutional. How

can such a wide be justified? How does my friend reconcile this with

his comment on radio this morning, saying the government is functioning

on all question other than the in and out question, in an entirely

normal way. And he said there is no other rules other than those set out

last Monday in the letter from Jeremy. What about the Q and a? Does

the Minister denied that permanent secretaries have been instructed to

conceal information requested by Downing Street from a dissenting

minister? The secretary's letter states, and a call, departments may

check facts. Civil servants have also been told they cannot provide

arguments or new fax. How is this consistent with the civil civil

service code duty of honesty, which required a civil servant to set out

the facts and relevant issues to the league? That the Minister agree that

any guidance or instruction complex, the code must prevail. How does the

situation best serve the democratic process, and ministers on opposing

sides of the debate finish up, disagreeing about information for

the same government department which is meant to be impartial and

accurate information, provided by professional civil servants.

I'll will answer the points and turned. The first answer is on the

function of government. Of course a government is functioning well. I

come to the house from a meeting is functioning well. I come to the

house, and meetings but the Honorable member for wisdom, about

childcare policy, which was carried out entirely the normal way. And

Friday, I was visiting a prison with the Justice Secretary and I think

those two points demonstrate that things are functioning as normal. On

the civil service code, the civil service code on and indeed in law

and the constitutional ferret act of 2010, makes it clear that it is the

duty of civil servants to support the position of the government of

the day. It's only because the Prime Minister is allowing ministers to

remain in government, while disagreeing with a single policy,

which is the in out position, that this situation arises at all. In the

letter from the Cabinet secretary made clear. Factual briefing is

allowed. I like to come to the point about the 1975 guidance, because

that 9075 guidance is to make clear that no briefing, or draft speeches,

can't carry to the government consideration, were allowed to be

drafted by civil servants. That's contrary to. It went further because

it said if you wanted to oppose the government position, you had to

inform number ten of any invitations to appear on radio or television and

we have not put that in place. On all of these things, the clarity

around publishing the guidance, that comes from the Cabinet Secretariat,

which was published on Monday of last week, shows the rules they are

consistent with the cold, and indeed the law. -- cabinet secretary. I

fear the Minister is having a Jim hacker moment. And 140 days' time,

the education and imported the system. The referendum will dictate

how in the future of the UK handles export and import. The world of

work, human rights, intelligence sharing, the fight against crime and

how we adapt, change. Here we are, all today, discussing the guidelines

to civil servants and special advisers. Sadly, I am not in the

strongest oppositions to lecture the port minister on handling space in

his own party. In the way the opposition front bridges are duty

bound to do so, I would like to give him some advice. -- front benches.

The Justice Secretary, had a history of letting the devices off the

Leeds. Does the Minister have really think, that a is going to change

that situation? When we have a Prime Minister alone his own spin doctors

debrief that the Justice Secretary will be sacked, after the

referendum, or that his friend the Mayor of London Asberry see

old-school cold that the prominence or it's of the prominence there is

hurt and upset, I can see how the Minister would have been overcome

with the wave of injury at the prospect of answering an urgent

question from the chair committee. About the conduct of special about

this. Yet, answer for the conduct he must. A lot to ask him, how many

special advisers have an unbiased Number ten other intentions to work

on the no campaign? In the event of ministerial benches, where minister

and the advisor go on a campaign for after the event, will the cost of

travel be carried out by the Minister and how does be monitored

and made public? The guidelines state that special advisers are not

allowed to campaign for a no vote in office hours. For the avoidance of

doubt, please defined office hours. When the inevitable happens, when

the special advisor to the ministers who are defying their leaders

completely ignored the memo random and the Cabinet secretary, on a

scale of 1-10, how competent is he that the Prime Minister will and

force to:? Does the Minister have confidence to admit that these

attempts to dilute the freedom of rebellious ministers would only

detract from the key issues that matter to voters and the referendum?

It seems to me that the out campaign are attacking the referee, not the

captain of the opposing side. Get the Prime Minister does have a

simple choice. It he gets his ministers free reign to run the

department, or he sacks them. It cannot be fudged for the next 140

days. Unfortunately, I had to scrap most of my proposed reply to the

members. Given his gracious acknowledgment that he was not best

placed to throw rocks on this particular subject. I will agree

with him on this, which is that questions over this are a

distraction to the management. And the main substance, which is the

question of whether Britain is better off inside or outside a

reformed European Union. I strongly believe that thanks to the deal that

the Prime Minister achieved, we are better off and more secure inside a

reformed European Union. On some of the specific questions, first about

the efficacy of the guidance, the guidance is for civil service to

follow. And civil servants to follow guidance of that and have every

confidence that they will. The question of what constitutes office

hours, I will only say that office hours mean the working day. I hope

that clears that up. On the broader question, of whether this is

necessary, and his point that ministers need to run their

departments and able to differ on this one question, that is why this

guidance is specifically about the out question, not about EU business

because we had apartments to run. -- we have the to run. My friend is

hugely able and has shown his ability today to dance on the head

of a pin. Will he take it from me, this is a huge blunder? I has earned

the general public will think that this decision has been petty and has

been vindictive. Moreover, they will say to our government and his party