27/04/2016

:00:00. > :00:00.than we said at a lecture on time and it is very necessary because

:00:00. > :00:14.these people have suffered through no fault of their own.

:00:15. > :01:02.Order. Secretary of State for the Home Department.

:01:03. > :01:10.The Home Secretary, Theresa May. Thank you, Mr Speaker. And with

:01:11. > :01:15.permission, I would like to make a statement on the Hillsborough

:01:16. > :01:20.stadium disaster. The determinations and findings of the fresh inquests

:01:21. > :01:27.presided over by Sir John Goldring and the steps that will now take

:01:28. > :01:33.place. Mr Speaker, 27 years ago, the terrible events of Saturday the 15th

:01:34. > :01:40.of April 1989 shocked this country and devastated the community. That

:01:41. > :01:44.afternoon, as thousands of fans were preparing to watch the FA Cup

:01:45. > :01:48.semifinal, between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest, a crush developed

:01:49. > :01:55.in the central pens of the Lebens Lane terrace. 96 men, women and

:01:56. > :02:01.children lost their lives as a result. Hundreds more were injured

:02:02. > :02:08.and many were left traumatised. It was this countries worst disaster at

:02:09. > :02:12.a sporting event. For the families and survivors, the search to get to

:02:13. > :02:20.the truth of what happened on that day has been long and arduous. They

:02:21. > :02:23.observed the judicial enquiry led by Lord Justice Taylor, they gave

:02:24. > :02:26.evidence to the original inquests, which recorded a verdict of

:02:27. > :02:32.accidental death, they have seen further scrutiny, reviews and a

:02:33. > :02:38.private prosecution. They suffered the injustice of hearing the

:02:39. > :02:44.victims, their loved ones, and fellow supporters, being blamed.

:02:45. > :02:49.They have heard the shocking conclusions of the Hillsborough

:02:50. > :02:52.Independent panel and they have now, once again, given evidence to the

:02:53. > :02:57.fresh inquests Poseidon over by Sir John Goldring. I have met members of

:02:58. > :03:02.the Hillsborough families on numbers occasions. And in their search for

:03:03. > :03:05.truth and justice, I have never failed to be struck by the

:03:06. > :03:12.extraordinary dignity and determination. I do not think it is

:03:13. > :03:17.possible for any of us to truly understand what they have been

:03:18. > :03:22.through. Not only in losing their loved ones in such horrific

:03:23. > :03:26.circumstances that day, but to hear finding after finding over 27 years,

:03:27. > :03:31.telling them something that they believed to be fundamentally untrue.

:03:32. > :03:38.They have quite simply never given up. I would also like to take this

:03:39. > :03:41.opportunity to pay tribute to the Right Honourable member who has

:03:42. > :03:48.campaigned so tirelessly over the years on their behalf. And also the

:03:49. > :03:50.Honourable member for Liverpool, Garston in Hillwood, Paulton,

:03:51. > :03:56.Liverpool Riverside and Wirral South. Yesterday the fresh inquest

:03:57. > :04:00.into the deaths at Hillsborough gave its determinations and findings, its

:04:01. > :04:04.establishment following the report of the Hillsborough Independent

:04:05. > :04:11.panel chaired by a ship James Jones, the contents of the report was so

:04:12. > :04:13.significant that it led to the new inquests and two new major criminal

:04:14. > :04:16.investigations, one by the independent piece combines

:04:17. > :04:20.commission, examining the actions of the police in the aftermath of

:04:21. > :04:26.Hillsborough, and a second criminal investigation operating result led

:04:27. > :04:31.by John Stoller the former Chief Constable of Durham. Since the fresh

:04:32. > :04:38.inquests opened in Warrington on the 31st of March 2014, the jury has

:04:39. > :04:41.heard 296 days of evidence. It ran for more than two years. It was the

:04:42. > :04:46.longest running inquest in British legal history. I am sure the whole

:04:47. > :04:52.House will want to join me in thanking the jury for the important

:04:53. > :04:58.task it has undertaken and the significant civic duty the jurors

:04:59. > :05:03.have performed. Mr Speaker, I will turn out to the Jewish

:05:04. > :05:07.determinations and findings. In its deliberations, the jury was asked to

:05:08. > :05:12.answer 14 general questions covering the role of South Yorkshire Police,

:05:13. > :05:14.the South Yorkshire Metropolitan Ambulance Service, Sheffield

:05:15. > :05:18.Wednesday football club, and Hillsborough stadium 's engineers,

:05:19. > :05:25.Eastwood and partners. In addition, the jury was also required to answer

:05:26. > :05:31.two questions specific to each of the individual deceased, relating to

:05:32. > :05:38.the time and medical cause of their death. I would like to put on record

:05:39. > :05:44.the jury's determinations in full. They are as follows. Question one,

:05:45. > :05:47.do you agree with the following statement which is intended to

:05:48. > :05:53.summarise the basic facts of the disaster? 96 people died as a result

:05:54. > :05:58.of the disaster at Hillsborough stadium on the 15th of April 1989

:05:59. > :06:01.due to crashing in a central pens of the lettings Lane terrace. Following

:06:02. > :06:09.the admission of a large number of supporters to the stadium to exit

:06:10. > :06:14.gates? Yes. Question two. Was there any error or admission in police

:06:15. > :06:21.planning and preparation for the semifinal match on the 15th of April

:06:22. > :06:23.1989 which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that

:06:24. > :06:30.developed on the day of the match? Yes. Was there any error or

:06:31. > :06:33.admission in policing on the day of the match which caused or

:06:34. > :06:40.contributed to a dangerous situation developing at the lettings Lane

:06:41. > :06:43.turnstiles? Yes. Was there any error or admission by commanding officers

:06:44. > :06:49.which caused or contributed to the crush on the terrace? Yes. When the

:06:50. > :06:53.order was given to open the exit gates at the lettings Lane end of

:06:54. > :06:59.the stadium, was there any error or admission I the commanding officers

:07:00. > :07:00.in the control box which caused or contributed to the crash on the

:07:01. > :07:13.terrace? Yes. Are you satisfied so that you are

:07:14. > :07:21.sure that those who died in the disaster work unlawfully killed?

:07:22. > :07:25.Yes. Was there any behaviour on the part of football supporters which

:07:26. > :07:32.caused or contributed to the dangerous situation at the Leppings

:07:33. > :07:35.Lane turnstiles? No. Further to that question, was there any behaviour on

:07:36. > :07:41.the part of football supporters which may have caused or contributed

:07:42. > :07:46.to the dangerous situation at the Leppings Lane turnstiles? No. Were

:07:47. > :07:50.there any features of the design, construction, and layout of the

:07:51. > :07:53.stadium which you consider word dangerous or defective and which

:07:54. > :08:00.caused or contributed to the disaster? Yes. Was there any error

:08:01. > :08:03.or omission in the safety certification and oversight of

:08:04. > :08:08.Hillsborough stadium that caused or contributed to the disaster? Yes.

:08:09. > :08:11.Was there any error or omission by Sheffield Wednesday Football Club

:08:12. > :08:16.and its staff in the management of the stadium and - our preparation

:08:17. > :08:21.for the semifinal match on the 15th of April 1989, which caused or

:08:22. > :08:25.contributed to the dangerous situation which developed on the day

:08:26. > :08:28.of the match? Yes. Was there any error or omission by Sheffield

:08:29. > :08:33.Wednesday Football Club and its staff on the 15th of April 1989

:08:34. > :08:38.which caused or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed

:08:39. > :08:42.at the Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the West Terrace? No. Further to

:08:43. > :08:46.that question, whether any error or omission by Sheffield Wednesday

:08:47. > :08:51.Football Club and its staff on the 15th of April 1989 which have caused

:08:52. > :08:55.or contributed to the dangerous situation that developed at the

:08:56. > :09:01.Leppings Lane turnstiles and in the West Terrace? Yes. Should Eastwood

:09:02. > :09:06.Partners have done more to detect and advise on any unsafe or

:09:07. > :09:11.unsatisfactory features of Hillsborough stadium, which caused

:09:12. > :09:16.or contributed to the disaster? Yes. After the crash in the West Terrace

:09:17. > :09:20.had begun to develop, was there any error or omission by the police

:09:21. > :09:25.which caused or contributed to the loss of lives in the disaster? Yes.

:09:26. > :09:31.After the crush in the West Terrace had begun to develop, was that any

:09:32. > :09:36.error or omission by the Ambulance Service which caused or contributed

:09:37. > :09:44.to the loss of lives in the disaster? Yes. Finally, the jury

:09:45. > :09:49.also recorded the cause and time of death for each of the 96 men, women,

:09:50. > :09:53.and children who died at Hillsborough. In all but one case,

:09:54. > :09:59.the jury have recorded a time bracket running beyond the 3:15pm

:10:00. > :10:05.cut-off point adopted by the coroner at the original inquests. These

:10:06. > :10:07.determinations were published yesterday by the coroner, and I

:10:08. > :10:10.would urge the reading of each and every part in order to fully

:10:11. > :10:15.understand the outcome of the inquests. The jury also heard

:10:16. > :10:21.evidence about the valiant efforts made by many of the fans to rescue

:10:22. > :10:24.those caught up in the crush. There are public spiritedness is to be

:10:25. > :10:28.commended, and I'm sure that the house will want to take this

:10:29. > :10:34.opportunity to recognise what they did in those terrible circumstances.

:10:35. > :10:38.Clearly, the jury's determination that those who died were unlawfully

:10:39. > :10:45.killed is of great public importance. It overturns in the

:10:46. > :10:50.starkest way possible the verdict of accidental death returned at the

:10:51. > :10:55.original inquests. However, the jury's findings do not, of course,

:10:56. > :10:59.and up to a finding of criminal liability and no one should impute

:11:00. > :11:03.criminal liability to anyone while the ongoing investigations are still

:11:04. > :11:06.pending. Elsewhere, the jury noted that commanding officers should have

:11:07. > :11:11.ordered the closure of the central tunnel before the opening of deep

:11:12. > :11:14.sea was requested as pens three and four were full. They should have

:11:15. > :11:19.established the number of fans still to enter the stadium as the 3:30

:11:20. > :11:25.p.m., and they feel to it recognise that the three and four pens were at

:11:26. > :11:29.capacity. While the inquests have concluded, this is not the end of

:11:30. > :11:33.the process. The decision about whether any criminal prosecution or

:11:34. > :11:35.prosecutions can be brought forward will be made by the Crown

:11:36. > :11:40.Prosecution Service on the basis of evidence gathered as part of the two

:11:41. > :11:44.ongoing investigations. That decision is not constrained in any

:11:45. > :11:48.way by the jury's conclusions. The house will understand that I cannot

:11:49. > :11:53.comment in detail on matters that may lead to a criminal

:11:54. > :11:56.investigation. I can, however, say that the offences under

:11:57. > :11:59.investigation include gross negligence manslaughter, misconduct

:12:00. > :12:05.in public office, perverting the course of justice, and perjury, as

:12:06. > :12:10.well as offences under the safety of sports ground act 1975 and the

:12:11. > :12:15.health and safety at work act 1974. I know that those responsible for

:12:16. > :12:18.the police and IPCC investigations anticipate that they will conclude

:12:19. > :12:23.the criminal investigations by the turn of the year. We must allow them

:12:24. > :12:26.to complete their work in a timely and thorough manner. And we must be

:12:27. > :12:31.mindful not to prejudice the outcome in any way. I have always been clear

:12:32. > :12:35.that the Government will support the families in their quest for justice,

:12:36. > :12:38.so throughout the ongoing investigations we will ensure that

:12:39. > :12:44.support remains in place in three ways. First, the family forums,

:12:45. > :12:47.which have provided the families with the regular and structured

:12:48. > :12:53.means of engaging with the investigative teams and the CPS will

:12:54. > :12:56.continue. They will remain under Bishop Jones chairmanship in a

:12:57. > :13:01.similar format, but they will reflect the fact that they will be

:13:02. > :13:05.operating after the inquests. The CPS, the IPCC, and operation resolve

:13:06. > :13:10.will remain part of the forums. Secondly, now that the inquests have

:13:11. > :13:12.concluded, it is the intention to reconstitute the Hillsborough

:13:13. > :13:15.article to reference group whose work has been in billions during the

:13:16. > :13:28.course of the inquests under revised of reference. -- abeyance. Thirdly,

:13:29. > :13:31.we want to ensure that the legal representation scheme for the

:13:32. > :13:35.bereaved families continues. This was put in place with funding from

:13:36. > :13:40.the Government, following the original inquest verdicts being

:13:41. > :13:45.quashed. Discussions are currently taking place with the family's legal

:13:46. > :13:49.representations to see how best the skin can be continued. In addition,

:13:50. > :13:55.I am keen that we understand and learn from the experiences of the

:13:56. > :13:58.families, and they have therefore has to Bishop James to write a

:13:59. > :14:01.report which draws on these experiences. This report will be

:14:02. > :14:05.published in due course to ensure that the full perspective of those

:14:06. > :14:11.most affected by the Hillsborough disaster is not lost. I would also

:14:12. > :14:14.like to express my thanks to Bishop James, again for his invaluable

:14:15. > :14:18.advice over the years. There is further work to be done, so I have

:14:19. > :14:24.asked Bishop James to remain as my advisor, and I'm pleased to say that

:14:25. > :14:27.he has agreed to do so. Mr Speaker, the conclusion of the inquests

:14:28. > :14:31.brings to an end an important step since the publication of

:14:32. > :14:35.Hillsborough Independent panel's report. Thanks to that report, and

:14:36. > :14:39.now the determinations of the inquests, we know the truth of what

:14:40. > :14:42.happened on that day in Hillsborough. Naturally, the

:14:43. > :14:47.families will want to reflect on yesterday's historic outcome, which

:14:48. > :14:50.is of national significance. I am also clear that this raises

:14:51. > :14:54.significant issues for the way that the state and its agencies deal with

:14:55. > :14:59.disasters. Once the formal investigations are concluded, we

:15:00. > :15:02.should step back, reflect, and act if necessary so that we can better

:15:03. > :15:06.respond to disasters and ensure that the suffering of families is taken

:15:07. > :15:12.into account. But I want to end by saying this. For 27 years, the

:15:13. > :15:16.families and survivors of Hillsborough have fought for

:15:17. > :15:21.justice. They have faced hostility, opposition, and of the station. And

:15:22. > :15:27.the authorities that should have been trusted have laid blame and

:15:28. > :15:31.tried to protect themselves. -- obfuscation. Instead of acting in

:15:32. > :15:35.the public interest. But the families have never faltered in

:15:36. > :15:39.their pursuit of the truth. Thanks to their actions, they have brought

:15:40. > :15:42.about a proper reinvestigation and a thorough re-evaluation of what

:15:43. > :15:47.happened at Hillsborough. That they have done so is extraordinary. I am

:15:48. > :15:53.sure the whole house will want to join me in paying tribute to their

:15:54. > :15:56.courage, determination, and resolve. And we should also remember those

:15:57. > :16:02.who have sadly passed away while still waiting for justice. No wonder

:16:03. > :16:05.should have to endure what the families and survivors have been

:16:06. > :16:09.through. No one should have discovered the loss of their loved

:16:10. > :16:12.ones through such appalling circumstances, and no one should

:16:13. > :16:19.have to fight year after year after year, decade after decade, in search

:16:20. > :16:25.of the trip. I hope that for the families and survivors who have been

:16:26. > :16:29.through such difficult times, yesterday's determinations will

:16:30. > :16:33.bring them closer towards the peace they have been so long denied. I

:16:34. > :16:44.commend this statement to the house. Andy Burnham. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

:16:45. > :16:52.I thank the Home Secretary for her powerful statement and for her kind

:16:53. > :16:57.words. At long last, just as for the 96, for their families, for all

:16:58. > :17:01.Liverpool supporters, for an entire city, but it took too long in

:17:02. > :17:07.coming, and the struggle for it took too great a toll on too many. Now

:17:08. > :17:15.those responsible must be held to account for 96 unlawful deaths and

:17:16. > :17:20.48 27 year cover-up. Thankfully, the jury saw through the life, and I'm

:17:21. > :17:24.sure, repeating what my honourable friend said, the Home Secretary,

:17:25. > :17:28.that this house will join me in thanking the jury for their devotion

:17:29. > :17:32.to this task and in giving two years of their lives to this important

:17:33. > :17:38.public duty. When it came, their verdict was simple, clear, powerful

:17:39. > :17:44.and emphatic. But it begs the question, how can something so

:17:45. > :17:47.obvious had taken so long? Three reasons. First, a police force which

:17:48. > :17:52.has consistently put protecting itself against over and above

:17:53. > :17:58.protecting people harmed by Hillsborough. Second, collusion

:17:59. > :18:05.between that force and a complicit print media. Third, a flawed

:18:06. > :18:11.judicial system that gives the upper hand to those in authority over and

:18:12. > :18:16.above ordinary people. Let me take each of those issues in turn.

:18:17. > :18:19.Starting with the South Yorkshire Police. Can the Home Secretary

:18:20. > :18:24.assure me that there will be no holding back in pursuing

:18:25. > :18:29.prosecutions? The CPS has said that files will be submitted by December.

:18:30. > :18:33.We understand the complexity, but can she urge them to do whatever

:18:34. > :18:39.they can to bring that date forward? Of course, the behaviour of some

:18:40. > :18:41.officers, while reprehensible, was not necessarily chargeable, but

:18:42. > :18:47.through retirement, police officers can still escape misconduct

:18:48. > :18:52.proceedings. In her policing and crime Bill, the Home Secretary

:18:53. > :18:58.proposes a 12 month period after retirement where proceedings can be

:18:59. > :19:02.initiated, but one of the lessons of Hillsborough, Mr Speaker, is that

:19:03. > :19:06.there can be no arbitrary time limits on justice and

:19:07. > :19:13.accountability, so will the Home Secretary work with me to it insert

:19:14. > :19:17.a Hillsborough claws into her bill, ending the scandal of retirement as

:19:18. > :19:22.an escape route, and of wrongdoers claiming full pensions, and will she

:19:23. > :19:26.join me in making sure it applies retrospectively? The much bigger

:19:27. > :19:33.question for the South Yorkshire Police to answer today is this. Why,

:19:34. > :19:39.at this inquest, did they go back on their 2012 public apology? When the

:19:40. > :19:46.Lord Chief Justice quashed the original inquest, he requested that

:19:47. > :19:49.the new one is not degenerate into an adversarial battle. Sadly, Mr

:19:50. > :19:57.Speaker, that is exactly what happened. Shamefully, the cover-up

:19:58. > :20:02.continued in this Warrington courtroom. Millions of pounds of

:20:03. > :20:07.public money was spent retelling discredited lies against Liverpool

:20:08. > :20:11.supporters. Lawyers for retired officers through disgusting slur is

:20:12. > :20:14.around. Those for today's for a strike to establish that others were

:20:15. > :20:19.responsible for the opening of the gate. If the police had chosen to

:20:20. > :20:22.maintain its apology, this inquest would have been much shorter, but

:20:23. > :20:30.they didn't and they put the families through hell once again. It

:20:31. > :20:33.pains me to say it, but the NHS, through the Yorkshire Ambulance

:20:34. > :20:37.Service, was guilty of the same. Does the Home Secretary agree that

:20:38. > :20:42.because of his handling of this inquest, the position of the South

:20:43. > :20:47.Yorkshire Chief Constable is now untenable? Does she further agree

:20:48. > :20:51.that the problems go deeper? I honestly families the full truth

:20:52. > :21:02.about Hillsborough. I don't believe they will have it until we know the

:21:03. > :21:06.truth about him. This forces the same underhand tactics against its

:21:07. > :21:10.own people in the aftermath of the minor's strike that it would later

:21:11. > :21:15.use to more deadly effect against the people of Liverpool. There has

:21:16. > :21:25.been an IPCC report, that part of it are redacted.

:21:26. > :21:30.This is a time for transparency not seek and see. Time for the people of

:21:31. > :21:34.South Yorkshire to know the full truth about their police force. So

:21:35. > :21:39.will the Home Secretary accept the legal submission from the truth and

:21:40. > :21:44.justice campaign and set up a disclosure process? This force has

:21:45. > :21:48.not learned and has not changed. Let me be clear. I don't blame the

:21:49. > :21:53.ordinary police officers, the men and women who did their very best on

:21:54. > :21:57.that day. And who today are out there keeping our streets safe. But

:21:58. > :22:02.I do blame their leadership and culture which seems rotten to the

:22:03. > :22:07.core. Hillsborough, rather, how much more evidence to be needed before we

:22:08. > :22:13.act? Will the Home Secretary ordered a fundamental reform of this force

:22:14. > :22:17.and consider all potential options? Let me turn to collusion between

:22:18. > :22:21.police and the media. The malicious briefings given in the aftermath

:22:22. > :22:25.were devastatingly efficient, creating a false version of events

:22:26. > :22:29.which lingered until yesterday. No one in the police or media has ever

:22:30. > :22:37.been held to account for the incalculable harm they caused the

:22:38. > :22:42.whole city, smearing it in its greatest moments agree. Imagine my

:22:43. > :22:47.constituent who came through gate to see just before 3pm with his friend

:22:48. > :22:54.Carl Brown, who died but Lee survived. Days later he had to read

:22:55. > :22:56.that he was to blame. Given the weakness of the press regulatory

:22:57. > :23:02.system back then, the survivors had no ability of two correct the lies

:23:03. > :23:06.and is it any different today? Ever tragedy like Hillsborough were to

:23:07. > :23:12.happen now, victims would not be able quickly to undo the damage of a

:23:13. > :23:17.misleading front page. Levinson second stage enquiry to look at the

:23:18. > :23:21.sometimes unhealthy relationship between police and press. I know the

:23:22. > :23:25.Hillsborough families feel strongly that this should be taken forward,

:23:26. > :23:30.so will the Government end the delay and on the Prime Minister's promises

:23:31. > :23:34.to the victims of press intrusion? I'd turn to the judicial system. I

:23:35. > :23:40.have attended this inquest on many occasions, I saw how hard it was for

:23:41. > :23:43.the families, trapped for two years in a temporary courtroom, told to

:23:44. > :23:50.show no emotion as police lawyers smeared the dead and those who

:23:51. > :23:54.survived, yonder cruel. And I welcome Bishop James' new role in

:23:55. > :23:59.explaining just how cruel this was to the House and to the country. The

:24:00. > :24:04.original inquest was similarly brutal. That didn't even get to the

:24:05. > :24:09.truth. Just as the first inquest muddied the water after the clarity

:24:10. > :24:12.of the Taylor report, so this inquest at moments lost sight of the

:24:13. > :24:17.Hillsborough Independent panel report. One of the reasons why

:24:18. > :24:20.produced a different outcome though is because this time the families

:24:21. > :24:25.have the best lawyers in the land. If they could have afforded them

:24:26. > :24:30.back in 1990, history might have been very different. At many

:24:31. > :24:33.inquests today there is often a mismatch between the legal

:24:34. > :24:38.representation of public bodies and those of the bereaved. Why should

:24:39. > :24:42.the authorities be able to spend public money like water to protect

:24:43. > :24:50.themselves when families have no such help? So will the Government

:24:51. > :24:54.consider further reforms to the system including giving the bereaved

:24:55. > :25:00.and least equal legal funding as public bodies? This, the longest

:25:01. > :25:06.case in English legal history, must mark a watershed in how victims are

:25:07. > :25:14.treated. The last question is for us in this House. What kind of country

:25:15. > :25:17.leaves people who did no more than wave off their loved ones to a

:25:18. > :25:24.football match still sitting in a court room 27 years later begging

:25:25. > :25:29.for the reputations of their sons, daughters, brothers, sisters and

:25:30. > :25:33.fathers? The answer is one that needs now to do some deep

:25:34. > :25:38.soul-searching. This cover-up went right to the top. It was advanced in

:25:39. > :25:43.the committee rooms of this House and in the press room is of ten

:25:44. > :25:49.Downing St. It persisted because of collusion between elite in politics

:25:50. > :25:58.on both sides, police and the media. But this Home Secretary stood

:25:59. > :26:02.outside of that and today I express my sincere admiration and gratitude

:26:03. > :26:10.to her for the stance she has consistently taken in writing this

:26:11. > :26:15.wrong. But my final words go to the Hillsborough families. I think of

:26:16. > :26:24.those who did not live to see this day. Of the courageous and Williams,

:26:25. > :26:28.of my constituent Stephen Whittle, the 97th victim, who gave his own

:26:29. > :26:34.ticket to a friend on the morning of the match and later took his own

:26:35. > :26:39.life. I think people like Phil Hammond, who sacrificed his own

:26:40. > :26:44.health to this struggle. I think of the many people who died from

:26:45. > :26:50.outside Merseyside recognising that this was not just Liverpool's but

:26:51. > :26:54.the country's tragedy. I think of Lee Brown and his devoted mum,

:26:55. > :26:58.Delia, is still visit his grave most days. I think of Trevor and Jenny

:26:59. > :27:03.Hicks, and their heartbreaking testimony to the new inquest. But I

:27:04. > :27:09.think most of my friend Margaret Aspinall, she did not just sacrifice

:27:10. > :27:13.everything for her own son, James, she took on a heavy burden of

:27:14. > :27:18.fighting for everyone else's loved ones and by God, didn't she do them

:27:19. > :27:21.proud Western Mark editing the privilege of my life to work with

:27:22. > :27:28.them all. They have prevailed against all the odds. They have kept

:27:29. > :27:31.their dignity in face of terrible adversity, they could not have shown

:27:32. > :27:36.a more profound love for those they lost on that day, they truly

:27:37. > :27:42.represent the best of what a la country is all about. Now it must

:27:43. > :27:46.reflect on how we let them down for so long.

:27:47. > :27:54.APPLAUSE Home Secretary.

:27:55. > :28:00.Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I thank the writable gentleman for his

:28:01. > :28:05.words. And particularly for his kind words in relation to myself, but can

:28:06. > :28:09.I, as I said in my opening statement, once again commend him

:28:10. > :28:14.for the way in which he has stood by the families for so long and carried

:28:15. > :28:19.their cause in this House and indeed in Government when he was in

:28:20. > :28:24.Government. Can I just reflect, I will respond to some of his specific

:28:25. > :28:29.points, but the end point that he made, it is absolutely right and

:28:30. > :28:33.this was reflected in the statement that my right honourable friend the

:28:34. > :28:41.Prime Minister made after the independent panel's report came out,

:28:42. > :28:45.that what the families faced was a combination of the state in all its

:28:46. > :28:51.various forms, not believing them, and all the various attempts to

:28:52. > :28:55.cover up what had really happened. Together with other agencies, the

:28:56. > :29:00.media and others, and indeed, dare I say it, most of the general public

:29:01. > :29:11.who believe the stories that they read about the fans. To have stood

:29:12. > :29:19.against that for so long shows a steel and determination but also an

:29:20. > :29:27.affection for the lost loved ones and a passionate desire for justice

:29:28. > :29:31.on behalf of those who died that is, as I said, extraordinary, and I

:29:32. > :29:36.think we will rarely see the light again. On the individual questions,

:29:37. > :29:43.the writable gentleman asked me about the time for the files to be

:29:44. > :29:49.prepared by the two investigations. They've do, both say, operation

:29:50. > :29:53.resolve and IPCC, they expect to have a case filed by the end of the

:29:54. > :29:56.year. I recognised for the families, this is a featherweight and it will

:29:57. > :30:02.then be a period of time for the CPS to consider more. I think everybody

:30:03. > :30:06.recognises including those bodies, because of course they do interact

:30:07. > :30:09.with the families through the family forums, the importance of doing this

:30:10. > :30:14.in a timely fashion but also important it's done properly. And

:30:15. > :30:17.thoroughly. I don't want to see anything in the way of that being

:30:18. > :30:22.done in the right way. On the retirement of police officers, I've

:30:23. > :30:25.always felt it wrong police officer should avoid gross misconduct

:30:26. > :30:28.proceedings by merely retiring or resigning, that's why we changed the

:30:29. > :30:36.disciplinary arrangements and we have a clause in the police and

:30:37. > :30:47.crime Bill. We are happy to meet with him and discuss the various

:30:48. > :30:52.issues in relation to that matter. On the issue he raised about

:30:53. > :30:57.ordinary met representatives last year from the Honourable member for

:30:58. > :31:02.Sheffield and one spec, I then received a submission from Michael

:31:03. > :31:08.Mansfield QC on behalf of of the group and that is being considered.

:31:09. > :31:12.In relation to love as a two, we've always said their decision on that

:31:13. > :31:17.would be taken when the case investigations which were undertaken

:31:18. > :31:23.had been completed. There are still cases being considered so that point

:31:24. > :31:26.has not come. He talked about the families and about the inquests and

:31:27. > :31:29.the availability of funding for families at inquests. This is

:31:30. > :31:35.precisely the sort of issue I think it can be encompassed in the words

:31:36. > :31:40.Bishop James Jones, hearing from the families about the families

:31:41. > :31:44.experiences and reflecting it into Government and I think it's right

:31:45. > :31:51.and we should take a clear look at what further we need to do. I think

:31:52. > :31:54.nobody should be in any doubt the experience families had to go to at

:31:55. > :31:57.the inquests of not being able to show any emotion but I think

:31:58. > :32:02.something else that perhaps must be particularly difficult, many people

:32:03. > :32:08.for 27 years have not known what actually happened to their loved

:32:09. > :32:13.ones. They didn't know how they died or what time they died, and those

:32:14. > :32:16.details of only come through this inquest. And so it must've been

:32:17. > :32:23.particularly difficult for to sit through that but I hope that they

:32:24. > :32:33.have now found some peace through the fact that the truth has now come

:32:34. > :32:39.out. Mr Speaker, I'm very pleased that the efforts of a family -- the

:32:40. > :32:45.families and the independent review panel which did such outstanding

:32:46. > :32:49.work have contributed to the outcome which entirely vindicates the

:32:50. > :32:55.position that they had both adopted. And I'm also pleased, a small

:32:56. > :33:00.department at the time I lead, was able to play a role in bringing that

:33:01. > :33:07.about. It seems to me, Mr Speaker, the key issue is not that people are

:33:08. > :33:11.going to make mistakes because in human society mistakes are always

:33:12. > :33:14.going to be made, sometimes with catastrophic consequences, but the

:33:15. > :33:20.real issue which needs to concern this House is that, in a society

:33:21. > :33:23.which counts itself as civilised and subject to the rule of law, it

:33:24. > :33:29.appears that for such a long time it was impossible to get redress and a

:33:30. > :33:34.proper examination of the issues. This is not I regret to say a unique

:33:35. > :33:37.event. We have had other occasions in this House when we've had to

:33:38. > :33:42.consider the importation is of similar events happening in other

:33:43. > :33:50.circumstances. Bloody Sunday. It springs to mind. It seems to me the

:33:51. > :33:53.lesson that this House needs to take away is we have to subject ourselves

:33:54. > :33:58.and our institutions to quite a lot of self-examination and to maintain

:33:59. > :34:02.it if we are to ensure for the future that we do not have a

:34:03. > :34:08.reputation of this frankly deplorable episode. I'm not always

:34:09. > :34:12.sure the best way that should be done and I simply say to my right

:34:13. > :34:14.honourable friend the Home Secretary, who has done everything

:34:15. > :34:19.right in respect of this, and I commend her for the way she has

:34:20. > :34:23.approached it, but I say to her that it's not just a question of the

:34:24. > :34:29.systems we have in place but also I think some of the underlying

:34:30. > :34:32.attitudes that, when uncomfortable truths come across the horizon,

:34:33. > :34:37.there's always a temptation to try to them away because they confront

:34:38. > :34:43.us with difficulties which make us uncomfortable. And if we do that,

:34:44. > :34:46.then we can ensure that, not only can we do justice for the families

:34:47. > :34:50.in this matter, but we can also ensure that so far as is humanly

:34:51. > :34:55.possible, we don't repeat this in future. Can I thank my right

:34:56. > :34:59.honourable friend for his remarks and thank you also for the role he

:35:00. > :35:04.played in ensuring that fresh inquests could take place. And I

:35:05. > :35:09.think he's absolutely right it's not just a question of systems. It is a

:35:10. > :35:12.question of attitudes. I have seen this in other areas, too. The work

:35:13. > :35:18.that we are doing for example on deaths in custody, and hearing from

:35:19. > :35:22.families in those cases. What happens so often is that the

:35:23. > :35:28.institutions that should actually be the ones that people can trust to

:35:29. > :35:31.get to the truth, combined to protect themselves, have a natural

:35:32. > :35:35.instinct to look inwards and protect themselves rather than doing what is

:35:36. > :35:40.right in the public interest. And he's right, we can change the

:35:41. > :35:44.systems we wish to but it's about changing those attitudes and saying,

:35:45. > :35:47.actually, those institutions are there to serve the public and it is

:35:48. > :35:56.a public interest they should always put first. I should like to begin by

:35:57. > :35:59.thanking the Home Secretary for her immensely dignified and thorough

:36:00. > :36:05.statements. I should also like to welcome the jury 's determination

:36:06. > :36:10.and findings. On behalf of the Scottish National Party I would like

:36:11. > :36:13.to acknowledge the heroic struggle for justice of the friends and

:36:14. > :36:20.relatives of 96 dead and also to acknowledge the heroic struggle the

:36:21. > :36:24.Shadow Home Secretary and other people on the official opposition

:36:25. > :36:31.benches. Today we must also remember the 96 dead. Decent people from all

:36:32. > :36:34.walks of life who were failed by the police and emergency services. Who

:36:35. > :36:36.would very people who should have been able to help them in their of

:36:37. > :36:46.need. Yesterday's verdict follows 27 years

:36:47. > :36:55.of concealment of the truth, after mud slinging at innocence, I would

:36:56. > :37:00.like to state that this must rank alongside bloody Sunday as one of

:37:01. > :37:05.the most disgraceful establishment cover-ups of our time. The ruling

:37:06. > :37:15.confirms that some police officers have really -- have behaved

:37:16. > :37:19.dishonourably. They were also from the same force who so brutally

:37:20. > :37:22.repressed the minor's strike and I was very pleased to hear what the

:37:23. > :37:26.Home Secretary had to say in that regard. Will she acknowledge the

:37:27. > :37:30.impact that the behaviour of some police officers has had on public

:37:31. > :37:34.confidence in the police and assurers such actions can never

:37:35. > :37:39.happen again? Elements of the media, I am sure, will also lead a lesson

:37:40. > :37:43.from this, but as the Shadow Home Secretary said, will they ever be

:37:44. > :37:47.held to account? I think the party opposite has learned a lesson from

:37:48. > :37:52.this, because as has been said, the actions of the Home Secretary have

:37:53. > :37:57.been exemplary as compared to the attitude of the Cabinet at the time.

:37:58. > :38:02.Can she assure us that such a miscarriage of justice will never be

:38:03. > :38:06.allowed to happen a game? Because, Mr Speaker, justice delayed is

:38:07. > :38:11.justice denied. Now we have the truth, but in the wake of that trip,

:38:12. > :38:16.accountability must follow, is what happens next is crucial. Does she

:38:17. > :38:21.agree with me that where there are strongly founded allegations, that

:38:22. > :38:26.police officers may have perverted the course of justice, strongly

:38:27. > :38:32.founded allegations that police officers gave misleading information

:38:33. > :38:35.to the media, MEPs, and this Parliament, and strongly founded

:38:36. > :38:39.allegations that police officers may have perjured themselves, does she

:38:40. > :38:43.agree that appropriate action and prosecutions must be seen to follow

:38:44. > :38:48.swiftly? Mr Speaker, I would also like to echo what the Shadow Home

:38:49. > :38:51.Secretary said about concern that certain police officers avoided

:38:52. > :38:56.disciplinary action by retiring to enjoy a full pension. Will she also

:38:57. > :39:02.take steps to address matters so that this cannot happen again? And

:39:03. > :39:04.finally, Mr Speaker, I would like to welcome her intention to

:39:05. > :39:09.reconstitute the Hillsborough article to reference group. Article

:39:10. > :39:15.two of the European Convention of Human Rights. Without the Human

:39:16. > :39:18.Rights Act, are procedural obligation on the state to

:39:19. > :39:22.investigate deaths properly under Article two, this second inquest

:39:23. > :39:26.would never have happened and these families might never have got

:39:27. > :39:32.justice. Please will she and her Government bear that in mind when

:39:33. > :39:36.they consider their attitude toward human rights and the European Court

:39:37. > :39:42.of Human Rights. Thank you, Mr Speaker. On the various points that

:39:43. > :39:45.the honourable lady has raised, she raised the issue of public

:39:46. > :39:50.confidence in the police, and it is absolutely correct to say that they

:39:51. > :39:56.have shattered confidence. This was a point that was made is by the

:39:57. > :39:59.representative from the IPCC to the media yesterday, that there were

:40:00. > :40:03.people in Liverpool whose trust me please was severely damaged, if not

:40:04. > :40:07.destroyed, as a result of what they had seen. In talking about the

:40:08. > :40:10.action of police officers at Hillsborough that day, I think we

:40:11. > :40:15.should recognise that there were some officers who did actively try

:40:16. > :40:22.to help the fans and tried to do the right thing on that occasion. I am

:40:23. > :40:26.pleased to say that in terms of police response abilities and police

:40:27. > :40:30.attitudes, of course, the College of policing has now introduce a code of

:40:31. > :40:32.ethics for police. We need to make sure that that is embedded

:40:33. > :40:37.throughout our police forces, but I think this is an important step

:40:38. > :40:43.forward. She asks about the question of ensuring prosecutions where there

:40:44. > :40:50.is evidence of criminal activity. Of course, that is entirely a decision

:40:51. > :40:56.for the Crown property servers. -- for the Crown Prosecution Service.

:40:57. > :41:00.We must leave the IPCC to prepare independently. And on her final

:41:01. > :41:05.point I would simply observe that we have had the coronal process here in

:41:06. > :41:13.the UK for some considerable time and the request -- the right to

:41:14. > :41:20.request an inquest long before the European Court of Human Rights was

:41:21. > :41:22.put in place. May I also play -- paid tribute to those who've worked

:41:23. > :41:26.hard to ensure that justice was done in this case and to the Home

:41:27. > :41:30.Secretary and Shadow Home Secretary to the balanced way in which they

:41:31. > :41:34.have approached these matters. With the Home Secretary agree that it is

:41:35. > :41:38.important we do lessons, for example although the court process is

:41:39. > :41:41.inevitably stressful for victims and witnesses, as I know, none the less

:41:42. > :41:46.in this case, the coroner and the jury did their duty and proved that

:41:47. > :41:50.the jury system can be capable of grappling with the most conflicts

:41:51. > :41:57.and distressing of cases, that is to the system's credit. She also note

:41:58. > :42:01.that we need to ensure there is proper access to justice for these

:42:02. > :42:07.matters, which is fundamental to our rule of law and in relation to the

:42:08. > :42:11.very considerable volume of work and material the Crown Prosecution

:42:12. > :42:14.Service must now consider. I note some 238 police statements are said

:42:15. > :42:17.to have been altered. Dealing with that volume of material, would you

:42:18. > :42:24.perhaps discuss with the Treasury and with the Attorney General to see

:42:25. > :42:29.some funding to deal with the particular pressures of resource in

:42:30. > :42:32.the CPS could be done this in the same way it is done for the Serious

:42:33. > :42:35.Fraud Office when they have to undertake major and unexpected

:42:36. > :42:39.enquiries? I thank my honourable friend. I think you will have noted

:42:40. > :42:42.that the Attorney General is sitting on the Treasury bench and therefore

:42:43. > :42:46.will have heard the references he has made in relation to funding for

:42:47. > :42:49.this sort of case. The first bike that he made about the importance of

:42:50. > :42:54.the jury system I think is absolutely right. I think this shows

:42:55. > :42:58.the value of the jury system that we have and I repeat the comment I made

:42:59. > :43:03.my statement. I think for people on the jury to have been prepared to

:43:04. > :43:07.take years to ensure that justice was done in this case is absolutely

:43:08. > :43:15.commendable. They have shown considerable civic duty and our

:43:16. > :43:19.thanks go to them. Steve Rotherham. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I first

:43:20. > :43:25.of all say that the response to the statement by Mike honourable friend

:43:26. > :43:29.will reverberate throughout Merseyside and right around the

:43:30. > :43:32.country. I would also like to praise the Home Secretary for all she has

:43:33. > :43:37.done to bring about yesterday's meant his decision. Thank you from

:43:38. > :43:41.the families. On the 15th of April 1989 as fans walked away from the FA

:43:42. > :43:47.Cup final, semifinal, in Sheffield, they knew then that the disaster was

:43:48. > :43:51.not our fault. Almost immediately, however, lies and smears were being

:43:52. > :43:55.peddled within hours and orchestrated cover-up was in full

:43:56. > :44:02.swing. It's took political intervention to force the judicial

:44:03. > :44:08.process of this country 27 years to recognise what we knew on day one.

:44:09. > :44:15.That Hillsborough was not an accident. Bands did not open the

:44:16. > :44:23.gates. Drunken fans did not turn up late, hell-bent on getting in. It

:44:24. > :44:29.was not because of a drunken, tank top mob. Instead, 96 people were

:44:30. > :44:33.unlawfully killed. Those that doubt it must now recognise the true story

:44:34. > :44:37.of the efforts of my fellow supporters for their acts of

:44:38. > :44:43.self-sacrifice and heroism as they battled to save the lives of their

:44:44. > :44:46.fellow fans. And consigned it to the dustbin of history be loaded tabloid

:44:47. > :44:53.headlines that vilified them. Despite the inquest being

:44:54. > :44:57.adversarial not inquisitorial, yesterday's verdict was unequivocal.

:44:58. > :45:03.Liverpool supporters were totally absolved of any blame and did not

:45:04. > :45:10.contribute to the disaster in any way. As someone once said, I cherish

:45:11. > :45:15.the hope that as time goes on, you will recognise the truth of what I

:45:16. > :45:20.say. We'll be Home Secretary join me in paying tribute to the families,

:45:21. > :45:25.survivors, campaigners and supporters who fought for truth and

:45:26. > :45:29.justice and to the solidarity of those who stood shoulder to shoulder

:45:30. > :45:32.whether red or blue for nearly three decades and to the men and women of

:45:33. > :45:40.a proud city that never give up until it got justice for the 96. I

:45:41. > :45:43.was very happy to join the honourable gentleman in paying

:45:44. > :45:47.tribute to the families and for the way in which they kept the flame of

:45:48. > :45:51.hope for truth and justice alive over 27 years, but also to pay

:45:52. > :45:54.tribute to the city of Liverpool and the people of Liverpool, who I think

:45:55. > :46:01.we have seen and I think we will continue to see in the coming days

:46:02. > :46:06.showed a solidarity regardless, as he said, of their affiliations

:46:07. > :46:09.footballing terms, they recognise the injustice that was done and they

:46:10. > :46:18.came together and they supported the families and the trip has now been

:46:19. > :46:20.found. I think that we can learn from the honourable gentleman when

:46:21. > :46:24.he raised the question of the Stephen Lawrence police

:46:25. > :46:32.investigation and others. When people come to Parliament either as

:46:33. > :46:36.members of professional services or not and there is some kind of a

:46:37. > :46:38.cover-up going on, we hope that the leaders of these professional

:46:39. > :46:51.services such as the police and the NHS will pay attention when it is

:46:52. > :46:55.said that action needs to be taken. With the actions that happened that

:46:56. > :47:00.Hillsborough, the mistakes, and then worse of all was the cover-up. How

:47:01. > :47:03.can over 200 statements by police be changed presumably in the police

:47:04. > :47:07.service without people being able to say to members of Parliament this is

:47:08. > :47:14.wrong. There is a cover-up and it needs turning over and investigating

:47:15. > :47:18.and brought out into intelligent transparency. I think that is the

:47:19. > :47:22.lesson from now on. Mike honourable friend makes a very important point

:47:23. > :47:25.and of course he himself has also been as a member of this house is

:47:26. > :47:32.somebody who has taken forward causes that others have found and

:47:33. > :47:39.stood against and tried to resist and has been successful in some of

:47:40. > :47:44.those. But he is absolutely right. I think it is astonishing that the,

:47:45. > :47:46.and this is what came out of the independent panel report, I think

:47:47. > :47:51.people were truly shocked by the fact that they have heard that

:47:52. > :47:55.statements had been altered and that the in order to show a different

:47:56. > :47:57.picture of what had happened from what had actually happened. That is

:47:58. > :48:04.appalling and it should never happen again. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I

:48:05. > :48:07.put the record my thanks to be Home Secretary and also for her

:48:08. > :48:09.statements, but also for the magnificent courage and

:48:10. > :48:14.steadfastness of the families of the 96 and the campaign that they

:48:15. > :48:20.created. After the 2000 and publication of the independent panel

:48:21. > :48:24.report, I re-read my match day programme for the 15th of April

:48:25. > :48:27.1989, and I was struck by the comment from the chairman of

:48:28. > :48:30.Sheffield Wednesday Football Club. He said, as you look around

:48:31. > :48:33.Hillsborough, you will appreciate why it has been regarded as long as

:48:34. > :48:40.the perfect venue for all kinds of matches. If you statements, I think,

:48:41. > :48:45.which underlined a complacency and total disregard for the safety of

:48:46. > :48:48.football supporters. I want to bring my question to two points. One,

:48:49. > :48:54.going back to what the honourable member said which is regarding the

:48:55. > :48:59.current Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police. Is she aware that

:49:00. > :49:03.the statement he made in 2012, apologising to fans, is still on the

:49:04. > :49:07.website and that he said he was profoundly sorry for the way the

:49:08. > :49:12.force had failed and doubly sorry for the injustice that followed, and

:49:13. > :49:17.yet we had a representative of the police going over the same argument

:49:18. > :49:21.to gain. My final point is to focus on the South Yorkshire Police and it

:49:22. > :49:24.is about the West Midlands Police because they were responsible for

:49:25. > :49:28.the investigation. As we've seen from the result yesterday, it was a

:49:29. > :49:33.sham. It was complacent and a complete waste of time. Issue doing

:49:34. > :49:37.to make sure that they are accountable for what they did? --

:49:38. > :49:40.what is she doing. I think the comment that the honourable

:49:41. > :49:44.gentleman raised that was in the programme for the day. In a sense,

:49:45. > :49:48.as he said, it shows the extraordinary complacency that was

:49:49. > :49:50.around and as I indicated in my statement, there were several

:49:51. > :49:53.questions that related not just to Sheffield Wednesday Football Club

:49:54. > :49:57.but also to the engineers who designed the stadium and the jury

:49:58. > :50:01.were very clear that there were problems with the design of the

:50:02. > :50:05.stadium and with the certification process and I think there are some

:50:06. > :50:12.very real questions for those in authority who allowed a game to take

:50:13. > :50:16.place in a ground which had those particular problems. Obviously, the

:50:17. > :50:21.IPCC is looking at the question of the aftermath of the events that

:50:22. > :50:27.took place. Operation resolve is looking at the lead up to the depths

:50:28. > :50:34.of the 96 men, women and children, but in doing that, there will be

:50:35. > :50:37.look at the work of police officers and I can assure the honourable

:50:38. > :50:41.gentleman that evidence that has been taking, my understanding is

:50:42. > :50:44.that obviously this will cover things that have been done by West

:50:45. > :50:49.Midlands as well is Yorkshire police. I would like to begin by

:50:50. > :50:52.paying tribute to my right honourable friend and to the

:50:53. > :50:58.honourable gentleman and particularly to the families of the

:50:59. > :51:02.96 victims for the Herculean efforts in bringing about the result we saw

:51:03. > :51:08.the other day. Does my honourable friend agree with me that there were

:51:09. > :51:12.slurs made against the families. These work and injustice and it is

:51:13. > :51:18.right now that they are recognised as smears. My honourable friend is

:51:19. > :51:23.absolutely right and of course those slurs continued. They were not just

:51:24. > :51:31.at the time. They continued for far too long and it is a further

:51:32. > :51:34.injustice that the families had to endure and the supporters had to

:51:35. > :51:37.endure, not just the terrible tragedy of the day itself, but the

:51:38. > :51:42.fact that they were consistently blamed for something which was not

:51:43. > :51:46.their fault. And the verdict that came out yesterday was absolutely

:51:47. > :51:56.clear. The fans did not contribute to this disaster. The inquest

:51:57. > :52:03.verdicts proclaim the truth. And expose the deceit including the

:52:04. > :52:06.wicked lie that the fans were responsible for their own deaths.

:52:07. > :52:12.And we should never, ever forget that the truth has only been finally

:52:13. > :52:19.exposed because of the commitment of the bereaved families, supported by

:52:20. > :52:23.the city of Liverpool, whatever the rest of the country might have

:52:24. > :52:28.thought, in their determined campaign for truth, and I to thank

:52:29. > :52:30.the Home Secretary and the former Attorney General for the decisive

:52:31. > :52:36.steps that were taking is making sure that justice has now come out.

:52:37. > :52:43.But I would like to ask the Home Secretary, following her very

:52:44. > :52:48.supportive comments about the steps she intends to take forward in

:52:49. > :52:52.support of the families, as we move from exposure of the truth to

:52:53. > :52:55.accountability, will she do all within our power to ensure that now

:52:56. > :53:02.we have the truth, real accountability will follow? Yes. I

:53:03. > :53:05.thank the honourable lady for her comments and she is absolutely

:53:06. > :53:08.right. The city of Liverpool stood by the families, when the rest of

:53:09. > :53:13.the country actually took a different view as to what had

:53:14. > :53:19.happened in that terrible tragedy. I am very clear that we need to ensure

:53:20. > :53:23.that the proper processes are followed for the investigations and

:53:24. > :53:25.for the Crown Prosecution Service's decisions as to whether criminal

:53:26. > :53:33.charges should be brought, because that issue of whether truth was

:53:34. > :53:39.there and with the verdicts, justice has been seen with the verdict that

:53:40. > :53:42.came out and accountability is the next step and that of course rests

:53:43. > :54:02.with the independent investigations and the CPS.

:54:03. > :54:07.The strength of the families makes me proud to be a Scouser. There is

:54:08. > :54:12.talk of justice. I don't think it has taken -- it should have taken 27

:54:13. > :54:18.years by the fans to be found not guilty. The city and the fans were

:54:19. > :54:24.kicked when they were on their lowest. The Home Secretary agrees

:54:25. > :54:29.that justice starts when the individuals responsible are

:54:30. > :54:33.personally prosecuted. I thank my honourable friend for his comments

:54:34. > :54:42.and he is writes and it must be very difficult for the families, but have

:54:43. > :54:46.kept true to their cause and to their belief in the reality of what

:54:47. > :54:52.happened at the Hillsborough stadium in 1989. They must have felt, I

:54:53. > :54:53.think, terrible when they had been kicked to constantly over those 27

:54:54. > :55:01.years. This isn't just about finding the

:55:02. > :55:06.truth but about accountability as I've just indicated in response to

:55:07. > :55:10.the previous question. That process of accountability is now in the

:55:11. > :55:16.hands of the two criminal investigations and the Crown

:55:17. > :55:20.Prosecution Service. The inquest findings were very clear that on the

:55:21. > :55:25.day of the disaster, South Yorkshire Police failed completely in a number

:55:26. > :55:30.of respects. What is even more alarming is attempts to cover up

:55:31. > :55:33.those failings afterwards. Can I reflect on what my right honourable

:55:34. > :55:38.friend said from the front bench that this should not in any way

:55:39. > :55:41.reflect on the work that the ordinary officers of South Yorkshire

:55:42. > :55:45.Police are doing on a day-to-day basis, very important work for the

:55:46. > :55:51.security and safety of my residence in South Yorkshire. We'll Home

:55:52. > :55:55.Secretary offer complete support to the PCC in South Yorkshire to take

:55:56. > :56:00.the force through a very difficult time, recognising that the complete

:56:01. > :56:03.command structure of the force will change during the course of the next

:56:04. > :56:08.year and we'll need every bit of outside support we can get from the

:56:09. > :56:13.Home Secretary and others. Can I thank the honourable gentleman for

:56:14. > :56:17.his comments and he's absolutely right, we should recognise the work

:56:18. > :56:20.done on a daily basis day by South Yorkshire Police officers to keep

:56:21. > :56:22.their communities safe and cut crime. Could I also take this

:56:23. > :56:26.opportunity in response to him to opportunity in response to him to

:56:27. > :56:32.recognise in this House the support that was given by people living in

:56:33. > :56:37.Sheffield to those fans and others who suffered from this tragedy on

:56:38. > :56:45.the day. And he's right that South Yorkshire Police force is a force

:56:46. > :56:49.which has not just been dealing with the outcome of the Hillsborough

:56:50. > :56:55.findings, of course we've also seen issues around the Rotherham report

:56:56. > :56:58.am a number of issues around South Yorkshire force, he asks me to

:56:59. > :57:02.provide support to the police and crime commission are of course. Next

:57:03. > :57:06.week, the people of the South Yorkshire force area will be going

:57:07. > :57:12.to the polls to elect the Police and Crime Commissioner for the next four

:57:13. > :57:16.years. But of course, we will be talking to the Police and Crime

:57:17. > :57:20.Commissioner thereafter and achieve comes to about the future of the

:57:21. > :57:24.force but it is for those two individuals primarily to look-up the

:57:25. > :57:30.structures they need to ensure the fourth is doing the job it needs to

:57:31. > :57:34.do on a daily basis. I commend the Home Secretary and most certainly

:57:35. > :57:38.commend the right horrible member for league for what they've done in

:57:39. > :57:43.this and all the members from Liverpool who are taking part in

:57:44. > :57:46.debates -- league. Everyone knows my connection with football and what

:57:47. > :57:50.happened on this particular day which I've demonstrated in this

:57:51. > :57:56.House. Football suffered massively on that horrible day, the family of

:57:57. > :58:01.football looked upon that tragedy and it changed many things from

:58:02. > :58:07.stadium safety to how things are policed around football games. But I

:58:08. > :58:13.do fear coming here that the one group of people, cultures that

:58:14. > :58:18.exists in South Yorkshire, in the police force, by statement on its

:58:19. > :58:23.website and indeed statements its making, that still has not learnt

:58:24. > :58:27.all the lessons from that tragedy all that time ago. I wonder if Home

:58:28. > :58:32.Secretary could comment on what's going on in South Yorkshire and its

:58:33. > :58:38.police force at this point in time? I have to say to my honourable

:58:39. > :58:43.friend that I think everybody will be disappointed and indeed concerned

:58:44. > :58:47.by some of the remarks being made by South Yorkshire Police today. There

:58:48. > :58:54.was a very clear verdict yesterday in relation to the decisions that

:58:55. > :58:59.were taken by police officers and the action of police officers on the

:59:00. > :59:05.15th of April 1989 and I would urge South Yorkshire Police force to

:59:06. > :59:10.recognise the verdict of the jury. Yes, they must get on with the

:59:11. > :59:13.day-to-day job today policing within their force area. But I think they

:59:14. > :59:20.do need to look at what happened, at what the verdicts have shown,

:59:21. > :59:28.recognise the truth and be willing to accept that. Maria Eagle. I would

:59:29. > :59:32.like to thank the Home Secretary for a statement and in particular for a

:59:33. > :59:36.decision when she came into office in 2010 to allow the work of the

:59:37. > :59:40.Hillsborough Independent panel to continue. That has been absolutely

:59:41. > :59:46.crucial in this outcome for the one I was first elected in 1997, my

:59:47. > :59:49.constituents Phil Hammond, Doreen Jones and Jenny Hicks with some of

:59:50. > :59:55.the first people to come to see me. They were then part of the executive

:59:56. > :59:59.of the Hillsborough Family Support Group. Between them they lost five

:00:00. > :00:03.family members and they came to see me about the disaster. I campaigned

:00:04. > :00:12.with them ever since to have the truth acknowledged and to have

:00:13. > :00:16.justice done because we all knew the truth. It just seems to be the legal

:00:17. > :00:22.system in this country and I speak as a lawyer, that has been unable to

:00:23. > :00:26.get to the truth and accept the truth. For 27 years it's failed of

:00:27. > :00:32.them at every turn. Almost everything that could go wrong in a

:00:33. > :00:37.legal case has gone wrong. In those 27 years. Yesterday, it finally did

:00:38. > :00:41.its job but it has more to do I think to hold to account those who

:00:42. > :00:45.we now know for absolute certain seats are responsible and she has

:00:46. > :00:49.more to do I think to deal with the appalling culture and behaviour of

:00:50. > :00:56.South Yorkshire Police, which has persisted to this day. Mr Speaker,

:00:57. > :01:03.this disaster was filmed live and shown on television. Within months

:01:04. > :01:09.the interim report of the Taylor enquiry put the blame squarely where

:01:10. > :01:13.it actually lay. It didn't get everything right but it was

:01:14. > :01:18.substantially correct. Yet, for 27 years, the families of those who

:01:19. > :01:24.died have had to come every day, defended the reputations of their

:01:25. > :01:30.lost loved ones and of their friends and people who live in Liverpool who

:01:31. > :01:35.have been blamed for what happened. It's only the panel taking it out of

:01:36. > :01:39.the legal system that has led to that she's being acknowledged more

:01:40. > :01:44.widely than it was known and it then being fed back into the legal

:01:45. > :01:49.system. There is a deep issue here about the legal system, so will she

:01:50. > :01:53.now commit to supporting Lord Michael Wills's Public advocate Bill

:01:54. > :01:57.to ensure that the victims are public disasters, and there will be

:01:58. > :02:05.more in future, it never regain forced to spend decades of their

:02:06. > :02:09.life fighting smears, lies, official denials, indifference and cover-ups

:02:10. > :02:17.from public authorities. We have to make sure this can never ever happen

:02:18. > :02:21.again. The honourable lady is right that we need to stand back and ask

:02:22. > :02:25.what it is about our system that enabled this to happen and enabled

:02:26. > :02:32.people to suffer over those 27 years in this way. One of the reasons I

:02:33. > :02:36.asked Bishop James Jones to work with the families to hear from them

:02:37. > :02:42.their experiences is to try to learn from that and see what steps we need

:02:43. > :02:46.to take in response to that. But I think one of the things that has

:02:47. > :02:50.come out of this is that that panel model I think is a model that can be

:02:51. > :02:55.used elsewhere. If the model which I have indeed used with fewer members

:02:56. > :03:00.in relation to the necessity of looking into the killing of Daniel

:03:01. > :03:04.Morgan. Where, again, the legal system to a number of cases is

:03:05. > :03:11.failed to get to the truth. And I think it is a method and a model

:03:12. > :03:16.that we could see being used on other occasions in the future. I

:03:17. > :03:22.congratulate my right honourable friend for the statement she has

:03:23. > :03:25.made today. It is painfully clear that for over 20 years, honourable

:03:26. > :03:28.members in this place did not take the opportunities that were

:03:29. > :03:33.available to them to bring the matter to this chamber. And

:03:34. > :03:35.therefore, spread the light of transparency on something which

:03:36. > :03:40.happened because terrible I want to put it on record the Member for

:03:41. > :03:43.Liverpool Walton was far too humble to say the role he played when we

:03:44. > :03:48.were first elected in 2010, he took a group of us in the backbench

:03:49. > :03:52.business debate in a committee room and secured a debate to make sure

:03:53. > :03:56.the light shone on what was a terrible incident and we have a

:03:57. > :04:01.right where we are today and I thank him for it. My honourable friend has

:04:02. > :04:06.recognised the particular role played by a single member of this

:04:07. > :04:10.House. I might say that I think over the years a number of members of

:04:11. > :04:16.this House have raised this issue. The fact that authority didn't

:04:17. > :04:25.listen to the issue being raised is entirely separate. George Howarth.

:04:26. > :04:30.Can I add my thanks to the Home Secretary for the crucial role she

:04:31. > :04:36.has played in bringing this matter to a reasonable conclusion at this

:04:37. > :04:47.point. Could I also ask to consider alongside others the extent to which

:04:48. > :04:54.the lazy, dishonest, inaccurate, stereotyping of football fans in

:04:55. > :05:02.collusion with some sections of the media, gave some credibility,

:05:03. > :05:06.wrongly, to a failed original inquest which I attended a day of

:05:07. > :05:10.and which was agony for those families listening there day after

:05:11. > :05:16.day to their loved ones who died being denigrated in the way that the

:05:17. > :05:24.questions were put. And will she also agree with me that many other

:05:25. > :05:28.failures result from that lazy assumption that football fans in

:05:29. > :05:34.general and the people of Liverpool in particular in some way were

:05:35. > :05:40.culpable in what was a matter completely beyond their control.

:05:41. > :05:45.When she asks the Bishop and others to look at the implications of all

:05:46. > :05:51.this, ask him to look at this question as well. Why is it that

:05:52. > :05:54.some sections of the media, some sections of public services

:05:55. > :06:00.including the police and Amblin service, still feel that they can

:06:01. > :06:07.casually disregarded the truth by accepting lazy stereotypes? He makes

:06:08. > :06:13.a very important point and he's absolutely right. There was an image

:06:14. > :06:17.of football fans that people held to regardless of what they saw going on

:06:18. > :06:23.in front of their very eyes and I was struck, I was hearing radio to

:06:24. > :06:26.commentary which is taking place the time, as the event unfolded, as the

:06:27. > :06:32.tragedy unfolded and even at that time some of the commentating, some

:06:33. > :06:37.of the assumptions being made were about unruly fans rather than about

:06:38. > :06:46.people who were crying out for help as they were dying. And to see the

:06:47. > :06:49.police actually being lined up against public order problems, when

:06:50. > :06:55.there were people there whose lives were being lost at the time, is I

:06:56. > :06:58.think shocking and pulls us all now that he's right, we should never

:06:59. > :07:05.allow casual stereotypes to get in the way of the truth. That appals

:07:06. > :07:10.us. I do not represent Liverpool but I was so fortunate to live there for

:07:11. > :07:14.the best part of the 1990s and it's a wonderful city, decent people,

:07:15. > :07:16.thoroughly decent people, and I believe the way those families

:07:17. > :07:22.conducted themselves over 30 years has shown that to those of us who

:07:23. > :07:25.knew it and to everybody else, I was very fortunate to take over one of

:07:26. > :07:30.the student unions in Liverpool in the 90s and I was told in no

:07:31. > :07:33.uncertain Scouse terms why we didn't stock all newspapers in the student

:07:34. > :07:38.newspaper shop and I've never forgotten that and many shops and

:07:39. > :07:46.stores in Liverpool still don't stock the full condiment as members

:07:47. > :07:51.opposite will know. What is the main lesson that the Home Secretary

:07:52. > :07:55.thinks we should learn from this and that she thinks some elements of the

:07:56. > :07:58.British press which apologised several times since, although it

:07:59. > :08:06.means little to all of the families public in Liverpool, should take a

:08:07. > :08:10.long hard look at themselves? Well, I think it's important in terms of,

:08:11. > :08:13.when information is being spread to the public through the media, the

:08:14. > :08:20.voracity of that information must be an issue that is considered. And he

:08:21. > :08:26.asked me what the overall abiding lesson we need to take from this is

:08:27. > :08:29.about and I think it is about this whole issue that my right honourable

:08:30. > :08:34.friend, the Member for Beaconsfield, referred to, about the culture and

:08:35. > :08:39.attitude taken, about public institutions whose job is to work in

:08:40. > :08:44.the public interest, who should be institutions which can be trusted by

:08:45. > :08:49.the public, whose job often is to protect the public, when something

:08:50. > :08:53.happens, not instinctively wanting to protect themselves instead, but

:08:54. > :08:58.actually always having that a view that, whatever has happened,

:08:59. > :09:05.whatever the answer, they must find the truth for the public. I hope the

:09:06. > :09:08.House will forgive me at the risk of stating the obvious if colleagues

:09:09. > :09:12.are concerned about their own contribution, I will of course call

:09:13. > :09:17.every colleague. This is a little different from other days and

:09:18. > :09:21.therefore, there is some latitude. People must say what they want to

:09:22. > :09:24.say, so if people about other commitments, I'm sorry about that,

:09:25. > :09:31.but if people say, they will be heard. Thank you, Mr Speaker, as

:09:32. > :09:36.chair of the all-party group on the Hillsborough disaster, may I put on

:09:37. > :09:40.record my thanks to you, Mr Speaker, you've been incredibly supportive

:09:41. > :09:45.but especially on behalf of the group, thanks to the Home Secretary

:09:46. > :09:50.and her staff and to all of those officials and members of Parliament,

:09:51. > :09:54.staff as well, who have worked to help our group function over the

:09:55. > :09:59.past four years. To finally know the true verdict, that these killings

:10:00. > :10:05.were unlawful, it's just a huge weight lifted. But there is one

:10:06. > :10:10.issue, Mr Speaker, the campaign for justice, it's never been for

:10:11. > :10:16.Liverpool fans alone. Shirts of all different teams have been worn at

:10:17. > :10:21.the memorial service and for the 25th anniversary, members of this

:10:22. > :10:27.House, from all parts of the country as found with me to Anfield the

:10:28. > :10:33.scarf of the local team. That is why, at the recent memorial service,

:10:34. > :10:38.Trevor Hicks was absolutely right to ask football fans to be united in

:10:39. > :10:44.their grief though rivals in the game. Mr Speaker, I have one last

:10:45. > :10:48.thing to say. The merger of murders chant has got to stop now. What the

:10:49. > :10:55.Home Secretary agree with me that there are no excuses. We have the

:10:56. > :10:58.truth. Those who have suffered because of the Hillsborough disaster

:10:59. > :11:04.have frankly now suffered enough -- murderer's murder.

:11:05. > :11:10.I agree with the honourable lady. I think to those who've been through

:11:11. > :11:17.everything they have been through 427 years, we now have the truth.

:11:18. > :11:21.They have suffered enough I hope, as I said, that the peace they have

:11:22. > :11:27.long been denied, will now come to them and all there is still part of

:11:28. > :11:29.this process to ensure accountability, although I hope they

:11:30. > :11:34.will be able to take some comfort from the verdicts that at last what

:11:35. > :11:46.they knew on that day has been shown to be true. My constituency is part

:11:47. > :11:49.of Merseyside and I have many Liverpudlians in my constituency who

:11:50. > :11:53.welcome the determinations but for me it is but for the grace of God go

:11:54. > :11:58.I for those of us who went to football matches in the 1970s and

:11:59. > :12:01.1980s, the facilities were terrible and crushes were regular. The one

:12:02. > :12:06.thing I want to remind the house is that Hillsborough 1981 FA Cup final,

:12:07. > :12:11.if you look at the Tottenham Hotspur Wolverhampton game, there was a very

:12:12. > :12:15.similar crush and please allow the fans onto the pitch. It looks very

:12:16. > :12:20.similar to the scene many years later in 1989, and what it tells the

:12:21. > :12:25.houses that lessons clearly were not learned. As the member for Bolton

:12:26. > :12:28.who was that the game said, that facility was never fit for purpose.

:12:29. > :12:32.But I would like to pay tribute to my honourable friend the Home

:12:33. > :12:37.Secretary and for the members on the opposite benches, particularly the

:12:38. > :12:45.member who made the speech of his parliamentary career. Also the

:12:46. > :12:50.members for Will and Liverpool who have consistently campaigned on

:12:51. > :12:54.behalf of their constituents for justice and will my honourable

:12:55. > :12:58.friend the Home Secretary assure the house that lessons will be learned

:12:59. > :13:02.and I welcome Bishop James's report that no family should ever have to

:13:03. > :13:05.go through this tragedy again. I honourable friend is absolutely

:13:06. > :13:09.right and sadly the example that he shows us of that game in 1981 shows

:13:10. > :13:13.that at that time, lessons were not learned. We need to make sure that

:13:14. > :13:21.whatever comes out of the work with the families and the various other

:13:22. > :13:25.reports and all that we are now seeing, that we do learn lessons and

:13:26. > :13:32.not just say that we are doing it but actually put what is necessary

:13:33. > :13:36.into practice. The jury has determined that what happened on the

:13:37. > :13:43.day was negligent, unlawful, criminal. It was also tragic and

:13:44. > :13:48.unintended. In the 27 years since, they have not been unintended. They

:13:49. > :13:53.have been deliberate lies and deception, so when the Home

:13:54. > :13:57.Secretary is resourced Singh -- resource in the criminal charges

:13:58. > :14:00.that may be brought, will she assure that appropriate emphasis is placed

:14:01. > :14:04.on perversion of the course of justice, conspiracy to pervert the

:14:05. > :14:12.course of justice, and perjury. Because that is where the real evil

:14:13. > :14:16.lies. As I indicated in my statement to the house, both the question of

:14:17. > :14:21.perversion of the course of justice and perjury are issues that will be

:14:22. > :14:23.looked at, but it is of course for the Independent Crown Prosecution

:14:24. > :14:31.Service to decide whether they choose to bring charges on those or

:14:32. > :14:36.any other criminal charges. Can I first of all start by paying my

:14:37. > :14:43.tribute to the families who have fought longer than before some

:14:44. > :14:50.people in the cells were even born have had to fight the state and it

:14:51. > :14:53.is appalling. I would like to thank my honourable friend the Home

:14:54. > :14:57.Secretary for everything she has done and all of the members locally

:14:58. > :15:04.who've worked for so many years. I just want to paper Diggle attributed

:15:05. > :15:09.to the -- I want to pay particular tribute to the members who have been

:15:10. > :15:16.in communication with me. I just want to say that for those who are

:15:17. > :15:19.not related to the area and have found this so hard and so difficult,

:15:20. > :15:27.it is because we all have families and we all have parents. Some of us

:15:28. > :15:31.have children. We all go to events with hundreds and thousands of

:15:32. > :15:34.events and if you send someone to an event, perfectly legally, you have a

:15:35. > :15:38.right to expect that the authorities will look after you. And those

:15:39. > :15:44.people who died at Hillsborough on that tragic day got there early. By

:15:45. > :15:49.definition, they were at the front of those pens. They were ticketed.

:15:50. > :15:52.And it is a stain on the society forevermore that the state said it

:15:53. > :15:55.was their fault, because it was obvious from day one, from the very

:15:56. > :16:01.moment, that it could not have been their fault. And I fully have a huge

:16:02. > :16:06.amount of respect for the member for Sheffield South East and indeed we

:16:07. > :16:09.have debated this and he's absolutely right when he says that

:16:10. > :16:12.the police officers on the front line for South Yorkshire Police do

:16:13. > :16:16.an outstanding job every day and they deserve our respect, but the

:16:17. > :16:19.behaviour of South Yorkshire Police during this enquiry and the

:16:20. > :16:23.subsequent comments and the verdict has come out, which can leave no

:16:24. > :16:26.doubt in anybody's's mind in this country that these people were

:16:27. > :16:31.unlawfully killed, has been disgraceful. And I think it is a

:16:32. > :16:36.stain on the name of South Yorkshire Police, which I am not sure can ever

:16:37. > :16:40.be raised, so as controversial as this is, could I ask my right

:16:41. > :16:45.honourable friend, working with other members cross party, to

:16:46. > :16:51.consider very seriously, and I did not expect an answer today, whether

:16:52. > :16:55.the only way that fate can be brought back to policing in South

:16:56. > :16:58.Yorkshire and indeed to make sure that the officers who dedicate

:16:59. > :17:04.themselves to protecting the public in South Yorkshire can only really

:17:05. > :17:07.move forward by perhaps merging all for Yorkshire police forces and

:17:08. > :17:11.getting rid of the name of South Yorkshire Police. My honourable

:17:12. > :17:18.friend has asked me a question which is actually slightly wider, I would

:17:19. > :17:22.suggest, than simply the question of South Yorkshire Police when he talks

:17:23. > :17:27.about merging all four forces in Yorkshire. What I would say to my

:17:28. > :17:34.honourable friend is that he is absolutely right both to identify

:17:35. > :17:39.the fact that fans who go along to a football match, to any other public

:17:40. > :17:45.event, where organisers have put in place arrangements to ensure the

:17:46. > :17:48.safety of the people there, and if there is policing of those events,

:17:49. > :17:53.they expect those arrangements to keep them safe and secure. They

:17:54. > :17:56.expect those to have been done properly, to have been done

:17:57. > :18:00.carefully, to have been thought through and for the right decisions

:18:01. > :18:07.to have been taken. And there are many people, as he said, who were

:18:08. > :18:14.not Liverpool fans but to recognise what those families went through on

:18:15. > :18:21.that day as they themselves, week in and week out, go to similar events.

:18:22. > :18:24.Hoping to enjoy themselves and not expecting the terrible tragedy that

:18:25. > :18:30.befell the families and supporters on that terrible day. But he has

:18:31. > :18:34.asked me to reflect on an issue. I think he knows the Government's

:18:35. > :18:38.position on the merging of forces, but as I have said, I think South

:18:39. > :18:40.Yorkshire Police will meet to look very carefully at the verdict that

:18:41. > :18:49.has come out and accept that verdict. Can I commend the Home

:18:50. > :18:52.Secretary and my honourable friend the member for Leeds for the work

:18:53. > :18:58.they have done and all the members of this house. It is often the role

:18:59. > :19:02.of a member of Parliament to give a strong voice to the week and this

:19:03. > :19:07.has been one of those examples. I would like to say a word of

:19:08. > :19:12.gratitude for the kind words from the member from earlier on from

:19:13. > :19:16.Worthing West. There are comparisons here with the Stephen Lawrence

:19:17. > :19:20.family and friends and to the Hillsborough families. And they have

:19:21. > :19:24.certainly been a strong voice for themselves and an advocate for

:19:25. > :19:28.themselves and an example to us all. But they were signatories to the

:19:29. > :19:32.letter that was sent earlier this month to the Prime Minister asking

:19:33. > :19:38.him not to renege on his promise to implement Levenson two and given

:19:39. > :19:42.that that relates to the relationship between the police and

:19:43. > :19:47.the press, it would seem that that is even more imperative that we go

:19:48. > :19:51.ahead with that part of the Levenson report. So good the Home Secretary

:19:52. > :19:57.perhaps have a word with the Prime Minister and asking to expedite that

:19:58. > :20:00.as quickly as possible? I say to the honourable gentleman that of course

:20:01. > :20:03.some of the issues about the relationship between the media and

:20:04. > :20:08.the police were identified in leathers in one, in that report, and

:20:09. > :20:14.these recommendations have been taken by the police. -- Levenson. As

:20:15. > :20:19.I said earlier, we have always been very clear that any investigations

:20:20. > :20:24.that were taking place needed to be completed before a decision was

:20:25. > :20:28.taken about whether Sin two. There are still investigations in hand is

:20:29. > :20:32.being undertaken. -- whether Sin. And this is why I do not think it is

:20:33. > :20:42.appropriate at this time to take a decision. -- birdie. It is days like

:20:43. > :20:45.this that really make you think in this house. Will my honourable

:20:46. > :20:49.friend commit to making sure that all of these resources will be

:20:50. > :20:53.brought to a speedy conclusion and a thorough conclusion because the

:20:54. > :20:57.families have suffered far far, far too long already. I can assure my

:20:58. > :21:04.honourable friend that the Home Office has been making funding

:21:05. > :21:08.available for operation resolve. Specifically, as that is part of the

:21:09. > :21:14.investigation, and ensuring that the IPCC has what it needs to be able to

:21:15. > :21:20.conduct these investigations. Then, of course it will go to the CPS. But

:21:21. > :21:23.I'm very clear that the families deserve a thorough process

:21:24. > :21:24.undertaken in a timely manner which provides them with the

:21:25. > :21:33.accountability that they want. My thanks also to the Home Secretary

:21:34. > :21:36.for her statement and commitment, and to all my colleagues for their

:21:37. > :21:42.work for so many decades on this terrible atrocity. After 27 years of

:21:43. > :21:45.pain, torment and suffering, the families of the 96 people who

:21:46. > :21:51.tragically lost their lives and for the survivors, at last the dark

:21:52. > :21:53.cloud is lifting. After this statement, Merseyside MPs will be

:21:54. > :21:59.travelling back to Liverpool to commemorate what has happened. I

:22:00. > :22:03.have no doubt that the solidarity which has prevailed in Liverpool

:22:04. > :22:06.will shine bright this evening. I pay tribute to the campaigners who

:22:07. > :22:10.have fought tirelessly and never given up. They have endured the

:22:11. > :22:16.unendurable and they shouldn't have too wait any more. We heard the Home

:22:17. > :22:20.Secretary say a moment ago about the work of the IPCC and the police and

:22:21. > :22:24.their investigations which they are completing, and I echo my right

:22:25. > :22:29.honourable friend's call but the fast should happen as quickly as

:22:30. > :22:34.possible. Would she also commits that the CPS will use whichever

:22:35. > :22:39.force it had to expedite their work? We have the force rue truth, we have

:22:40. > :22:45.justice, and now we need accountability. -- we have the

:22:46. > :22:54.truth. I can assure the honourable lady, and the tourney general is --

:22:55. > :22:58.tourney general is present, I repeat what I said earlier. We want this to

:22:59. > :23:02.be done in a timely fashion but we want to make sure it is done

:23:03. > :23:11.properly and thoroughly. I can say, having visited the work of operation

:23:12. > :23:14.resolve and of the IPCC, this significant amount of material that

:23:15. > :23:22.they have had to be going through. Until now, they have been supporting

:23:23. > :23:29.the inquests. Now, their focus will be on preparing those files to give

:23:30. > :23:33.to the CPS. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Although I have always lived at the

:23:34. > :23:36.other end of the country, I have been a passionate Liverpool fan all

:23:37. > :23:40.of my life and I remember very vividly watching the start of that

:23:41. > :23:44.game, gutted I was not able to be there. Very quickly that feeling

:23:45. > :23:48.turned to relief, that I could not be there. Although nothing could

:23:49. > :23:52.compare to the grief, the pain any sense of injustice that the families

:23:53. > :23:56.that lost their lives that they have suffered, it was also true that that

:23:57. > :24:01.day Liverpool fans across the country were smeared and indeed all

:24:02. > :24:08.football fans by what was said in the aftermath. Therefore I hugely

:24:09. > :24:11.welcome that at last the truth is now known, that football fans were

:24:12. > :24:16.not responsible for what happened that day. But it is an absolute

:24:17. > :24:20.scandal that has taken 27 years to get to the truth. Can I ask my right

:24:21. > :24:23.honourable friend the Home Secretary, does she agree with me

:24:24. > :24:28.that not only must we never forget the 96 who died that day, but we

:24:29. > :24:33.must also never be allowed to forget that it was those in authority that

:24:34. > :24:36.chose to cover up their responsibility in this tragedy? And

:24:37. > :24:41.instead chose to smear the name of a great football club, a great city

:24:42. > :24:46.and Indy football fans everywhere. My honourable friend is absolutely

:24:47. > :24:49.right. As he has recognised, there are not just football fans around

:24:50. > :24:53.the rest of the country and around the globe, but Liverpool supporters

:24:54. > :25:01.around the rest of the country and around the globe. And I cannot

:25:02. > :25:07.reiterate enough how appalling it was that everybody, and it was not

:25:08. > :25:10.just organs of the state and other agencies, but actually there was

:25:11. > :25:16.just a general public feeling that somehow the fans must be

:25:17. > :25:19.responsible. And those that question seven and the supplementary to

:25:20. > :25:24.question seven of the verdicts yesterday were absolutely clear,

:25:25. > :25:27.they were asked, was that any behaviour on the part of football

:25:28. > :25:30.supporters which caused or contributed to the danger of the

:25:31. > :25:35.situation at the turnstiles, or which may have caused or contributed

:25:36. > :25:42.to the danger of the situation at the turnstiles, and the answer was

:25:43. > :25:48.clear - no. The verdicts yesterday are both truly momentous, but long

:25:49. > :25:53.overdue. Can I join and others in the House to pay tribute to the

:25:54. > :25:57.campaigners, the families, the friends and the survivors of what

:25:58. > :26:00.happened in Hillsborough, and to welcome very warmly the Home

:26:01. > :26:04.Secretary's statement and to be incredibly powerful response from my

:26:05. > :26:08.right honourable friend, the Shadow Home Secretary. Can I join with him

:26:09. > :26:14.and my neighbour, the MP for waiver tree, in urging the Government and

:26:15. > :26:17.the Home Secretary to do all that is possible to press the CPS to make

:26:18. > :26:21.their decisions of quickly as possible, because that is certainly

:26:22. > :26:28.what the families and survivors want to happen here. Certainly, it is the

:26:29. > :26:31.Government's desire and intention and hope that the CPS will be able

:26:32. > :26:36.to make their decisions as quickly as possible, immensely rich with

:26:37. > :26:42.exercising their proper independent consideration of the fact that they

:26:43. > :26:46.see. -- comments to it. What hit them about this tragedy is that for

:26:47. > :26:51.any of us who have been an away fine or stood on a terrace, we can

:26:52. > :26:54.picture ourselves in that tunnel on the way, looking forward to the

:26:55. > :26:58.match and hoping to see our team win. In the end, it ending up in

:26:59. > :27:02.tragedy. Therefore when those fans were smeared, all of us were

:27:03. > :27:07.smeared. It could have been our club, our town or our city. It was

:27:08. > :27:11.only the finger of fate which meant it was Liverpool. Looking back,

:27:12. > :27:15.there were steps which could have been taken to avoid this tragedy,

:27:16. > :27:20.not least when I speak to Coventry City fans present at the matches in

:27:21. > :27:24.1987 held at Hillsborough who recounted some of the issues during

:27:25. > :27:29.those games which were not addressed with tragic consequences. After 27

:27:30. > :27:32.years, it is time for some of the organisations involved to stop the

:27:33. > :27:36.denial, accept the verdict that have come out, accept the truth and move

:27:37. > :27:41.on to ensure those responsibility now held responsible. My honourable

:27:42. > :27:47.friend is right to refer to the issues around the stadium. Many

:27:48. > :27:52.people will think it is incredible, in a sense, not just surprising, but

:27:53. > :27:58.actually a game of this size took place in a stadium where, as I

:27:59. > :28:02.understand, there was in the proper safety certificate should. How that

:28:03. > :28:07.can be allowed to happen by the relevant authorities, I think people

:28:08. > :28:11.will question for ever. So, it is absolutely issues not just about the

:28:12. > :28:18.police and Ambulance Service, but the football club, the stadium and

:28:19. > :28:22.the design of the stadium. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I thank the

:28:23. > :28:27.Minister as a Merseyside MP and Liverpool Speaker? We are on the

:28:28. > :28:30.last chapter of an unbearably sad book. You must recognise in this

:28:31. > :28:35.world that justice doesn't compensate for loss and grief. What

:28:36. > :28:42.more needs to be done. What for the families, and foreclosure? -- for

:28:43. > :28:49.closure. I think the next stage is important for the families. I hope,

:28:50. > :28:54.also, that the families will be able to work with Bishop James Jones and

:28:55. > :28:58.will continue to work with him through the family forms, but also

:28:59. > :29:01.the work he will be undertaking to hear from them and their

:29:02. > :29:07.experiences. That is an important part of not just this process for

:29:08. > :29:11.the families, but an important part for us of being able to ensure that

:29:12. > :29:15.we have heard the experiences of the families and that we can then look

:29:16. > :29:18.at these experiences and take away from that any lessons that need to

:29:19. > :29:25.be learned and any government action that needs to be taken. Can I add my

:29:26. > :29:29.thanks to the Home Secretary for her excellent statement today, and for

:29:30. > :29:34.the work she has been doing on the Justice campaign? I look forward to

:29:35. > :29:38.her response on that. Having served as a special constable in the

:29:39. > :29:40.Metropolitan Police Service, I recognise the institutional

:29:41. > :29:44.defensiveness that was mentioned yesterday by the families. It is not

:29:45. > :29:50.a problem that is unique in South Yorkshire. We'll be Home Secretary,

:29:51. > :29:53.as part of her review, look at ending the practices of offices

:29:54. > :30:00.conferring together when recordings date means? The honourable lady is

:30:01. > :30:04.right. It is not just in policing, there are issues for public sector

:30:05. > :30:07.institutions generally about that desire to look inwards, as I

:30:08. > :30:15.described earlier, and protect themselves. I will reflect on the

:30:16. > :30:18.common she has made. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I'd like to thank the Home

:30:19. > :30:26.Secretary for her determination in this matter, along with my

:30:27. > :30:30.honourable friend the shadow secretary, and other Merseyside

:30:31. > :30:34.colleagues over the many years this has taken to arrive at. Merseyside

:30:35. > :30:41.victims came from Bootle, Birkenhead, Liverpool, Runcorn and

:30:42. > :30:48.other Merseyside communities. There were people coming from all over the

:30:49. > :30:52.country who were supporters. Cheshire, Essex, Leicestershire,

:30:53. > :30:55.Derbyshire, Gloucestershire, Middlesex, Wrexham and London,

:30:56. > :30:59.amongst other places. We'll be Home Secretary join with me and

:31:00. > :31:06.Merseyside colleagues MPs, and the people of Merseyside, in remembering

:31:07. > :31:09.those supporters and their families, wherever they came from on that

:31:10. > :31:14.dreadful day, because they are now part of the Merseyside family? I am

:31:15. > :31:17.very happy to join with the honourable gentleman in doing just

:31:18. > :31:21.that and I think you are absolutely right to draw attention to this

:31:22. > :31:25.house and the fact that many supporters that he came from all

:31:26. > :31:29.parts of the country. As he said, they are now part of the Merseyside

:31:30. > :31:36.family. Does the Home Secretary accept that although she gave us a

:31:37. > :31:39.long, miserable litany of organisations that failed,

:31:40. > :31:43.organisations whose very essence is about securing our safety, there is

:31:44. > :31:47.one institution that shines through gloriously and that is called the

:31:48. > :31:52.family, and particularly the families of those who were killed at

:31:53. > :31:56.Hillsborough? Does she accept that whatever we try and say in this

:31:57. > :32:00.house, we say it inadequately, but share in the sympathy and admiration

:32:01. > :32:09.of the whole country for those families in fighting through this

:32:10. > :32:15.case? Might I thank her, the Right Honourable gentleman for

:32:16. > :32:19.Beaconsfield and the Bishop of Liverpool, Bishop James Jones, in

:32:20. > :32:25.making those families triumph possible. Does she accept when she

:32:26. > :32:28.concluded her statement, in reading the list of possible charges that

:32:29. > :32:38.might now follow, that there will not only be... Vat that will be a

:32:39. > :32:44.chilling task in itself, but even a greater chance for us if we have, I

:32:45. > :32:49.hope, please God, the determination to see through the reform programme

:32:50. > :32:52.that will be necessary of some great institutions which, in the past, we

:32:53. > :33:00.have unquestionably thought were on our side, and who were on somebody

:33:01. > :33:03.else's side on that fateful day? The Right Honourable gentleman raises a

:33:04. > :33:08.number of points and he's absolutely right that it will be necessary for

:33:09. > :33:14.us to stand back and look at how this happened, how it is and how

:33:15. > :33:18.it's been 27 years which have been allowed to pass before we've come to

:33:19. > :33:24.this point. That may mean taking a very difficult look, as he said, at

:33:25. > :33:27.some of the institutions which people expect to protect them, but

:33:28. > :33:37.on this occasion simply did the opposite. As a Doncaster and South

:33:38. > :33:42.Yorkshire MP, can I express my and many people'sdiscussed at what

:33:43. > :33:46.happened by the services we are meant to trust on that day in

:33:47. > :33:53.Sheffield, but also our disgust at the manipulation and the delay in

:33:54. > :33:58.tactics which have contributed to 27 years of heartfelt pursuit and grief

:33:59. > :34:02.by the families, but also the survivors. Including the 730 people

:34:03. > :34:06.who were injured on that day, many with life limiting injuries that

:34:07. > :34:11.they have had to live with and face the consequences of. I believe in

:34:12. > :34:16.the rule of law, and I believe in justice. But it can't take 27 years

:34:17. > :34:23.to achieve the outcome that we saw yesterday. And outcome that has not

:34:24. > :34:26.only validated the actions of the families and others who pursue

:34:27. > :34:33.justice, that was called into question the very faith we putting

:34:34. > :34:37.procedures to bring public services to account for failure. Can I ask

:34:38. > :34:42.the Home Secretary to pick up on two issues which have already been

:34:43. > :34:46.raised? One is about equality of access to justice. From what I have

:34:47. > :34:51.seen and heard, having access and money to the legal services made a

:34:52. > :34:57.big difference to these families. Secondly, we have to look at whether

:34:58. > :35:01.it is right any more to have police services investigating other police

:35:02. > :35:04.forces, or hospitals investigating other hospitals. Maybe there's a

:35:05. > :35:09.time to look at whether we should have a more independent body that

:35:10. > :35:17.oversees and looks into where our public services, sadly, failed. The

:35:18. > :35:26.honourable lady raised to specific issues in her question, and it is

:35:27. > :35:30.certainly the case as she raised the issue of the independent inspection

:35:31. > :35:34.and the regime that should be there for inspecting public authorities.

:35:35. > :35:40.It is certainly in relation to policing, one of the things we are

:35:41. > :35:43.doing is changing arrangements for police complaints and the way they

:35:44. > :35:48.are looking to say that serious and sensitive cases are not investigated

:35:49. > :35:53.by police forces themselves, but they are taken to the IPCC. We will

:35:54. > :35:56.be making changes to the IPCC and the policing and crime Bill going

:35:57. > :36:03.through the House at the moment. The point that she makes about how long

:36:04. > :36:06.it took, the 27 years, the fact that most of the procedures we seem to

:36:07. > :36:11.have didn't allow for the truth to come out, in fact in some cases

:36:12. > :36:15.stopped the truth from coming out, is an absolutely crucial point that

:36:16. > :36:20.underpins all of this. I would hope that the other point she raised, but

:36:21. > :36:23.Bishop James Jones is able to bring forward his review of the

:36:24. > :36:26.experiences of what we need to learn from that, and this will cover

:36:27. > :36:28.points that have been raised by a number of members of this house

:36:29. > :36:37.today. Can I could the comments of those

:36:38. > :36:40.who have banked and congratulated everyone who has campaigned,

:36:41. > :36:49.including beat Home Secretary for yesterday's verdicts. 18 people who

:36:50. > :36:55.died from the borough of Sefton commemorated on a memorial and as

:36:56. > :36:59.today we remember all of those who died and those who were injured, it

:37:00. > :37:06.is important to remember that in those 27 years, many more people

:37:07. > :37:11.have full so died whilst wishing to see yesterday's verdict and not

:37:12. > :37:14.living long enough to do so, including Anna Williams who

:37:15. > :37:19.campaigned so long and hard for her son Kevin who was just 15 when he

:37:20. > :37:24.died at Hillsborough. In her statement, she spoke about the range

:37:25. > :37:32.of possible investigations of a criminal nature, and I wonder if she

:37:33. > :37:36.could just sale at the bit about the potential for criminal investigation

:37:37. > :37:40.into those who reported completely full sleeve what they were fed by

:37:41. > :37:47.those in authority -- completely full sleeve. Which led to cover up,

:37:48. > :37:54.smear and the downright lies told about firms, the people of Liverpool

:37:55. > :38:06.at that time, that have added hugely to the 27 year wait for today's

:38:07. > :38:11.verdict. I take the point the gentleman makes about the public

:38:12. > :38:15.impression. I did, in fact, indicate the offences that are included in

:38:16. > :38:20.the work that is being done. The investigation is a matter for the

:38:21. > :38:26.two bodies that have been set up to undertake the two elements of the

:38:27. > :38:31.investigation for Operation Resolve and the IPCC. As I have said in

:38:32. > :38:35.response to a number of honourable members, decisions about any

:38:36. > :38:43.prosecutions will be entirely independently taken by the CPS. As a

:38:44. > :38:47.football fan I will never forget the 15th of April, 1989, hearing the

:38:48. > :38:51.unimaginable news that 96 people had gone to watch a football match, men,

:38:52. > :38:59.women, children, and never would come home. Let me just say that

:39:00. > :39:04.there were many, many football fans around this country who never

:39:05. > :39:07.believed the official verdict and always believed what Liverpool fans

:39:08. > :39:11.were saying. Let meal so pay tribute to all those involved in the

:39:12. > :39:16.campaign, they are not only heroes of the proud city of Liverpool, for

:39:17. > :39:20.the extraordinary fight for truth and justice which will go down in

:39:21. > :39:26.the history of our democracy, they are British heroes. As well as

:39:27. > :39:30.dealing with the cover-up, can the Home Secretary give the House a

:39:31. > :39:34.clear assurance that the appalling ways families of the victims were

:39:35. > :39:39.treated in the aftermath of the disaster will never happen again.

:39:40. > :39:43.With police officers sitting eating food in the gymnasium as the bodies

:39:44. > :39:48.were lying there, families told they could not hug their loved ones in

:39:49. > :39:54.body bags because they work the property of the coroner, and worst

:39:55. > :40:00.of all, the initial coroner said, forced alcohol testing on all of

:40:01. > :40:06.these victims of this unlawful disaster, including children, that

:40:07. > :40:13.is a disgrace and we want to know that that will never ever happened

:40:14. > :40:19.to a single victim again. The honourable gentleman is absolutely

:40:20. > :40:23.right to refer to those, what was done and how families were treated,

:40:24. > :40:27.and I think how appalling it must have been not only to learn that one

:40:28. > :40:31.of your loved ones had died in these appalling circumstances, to be

:40:32. > :40:34.unable to touch them, but also probably not to know properly be

:40:35. > :40:40.details of when they died and how they died, the cause of death.

:40:41. > :40:46.People have had to live with that for far too long. I hope that it is

:40:47. > :40:50.exactly the sorts of issues which come from the experiences of the

:40:51. > :40:58.families that can be brought to light by the work that I have asked

:40:59. > :41:01.Bishop James Dennis to do. I want to thank the Home Secretary for the

:41:02. > :41:04.work she has done but I want to raise with her the point I raced in

:41:05. > :41:07.2012 when she made the same statement that the rest of the

:41:08. > :41:20.country fell for the story. The rest of the country did not fall for the

:41:21. > :41:29.story, I think I want to pick up on the point that was raised by my

:41:30. > :41:36.honourable friend, seven years after that, South Yorkshire Police paid

:41:37. > :41:42.compensation to silence 39 minus and not one of those police was even

:41:43. > :41:51.dissident of what they had done. They used public money to bury bad

:41:52. > :41:56.news on that day. The point raised by the honourable member for Leeds

:41:57. > :42:07.that they actually tested young people, children who were dead,

:42:08. > :42:11.shows how irresponsible they were. I would like to ask the Home Secretary

:42:12. > :42:15.to do what the Prime Minister did not do today. What specific action

:42:16. > :42:22.would be taken to expose everybody at every level in this country,

:42:23. > :42:25.elected official, appointed officials of her previous

:42:26. > :42:30.government, mine government, at any level who played any role in this

:42:31. > :42:34.cover-up either by omission or commission, because they are as

:42:35. > :42:42.guilty as making people suffer for 27 years as many people who went to

:42:43. > :42:46.their graves vilified he would have been vindicated if this had been

:42:47. > :42:52.sorted out at least a quarter of a century ago. There are other people

:42:53. > :42:57.who should be called to account, even if they didn't commit and not

:42:58. > :43:03.hacks, they have done things that delayed justice and they should be

:43:04. > :43:08.made to account for that. Importantly, I think the report of

:43:09. > :43:15.the independent panel that came out showed the truth of what happened

:43:16. > :43:18.and obviously, in that work, required a number of organisations

:43:19. > :43:23.which had previously been silent on what happened to be prepared to come

:43:24. > :43:28.forward and give their evidence to that panel. In terms of the criminal

:43:29. > :43:34.investigations and potential prosecutions, I have answered that

:43:35. > :43:37.point. I would hope, I would say this, there has been a collective

:43:38. > :43:43.recognition across this House today from all sides of this House that,

:43:44. > :43:49.yes, there were verdicts on what happened on that day in 1989, but

:43:50. > :43:54.subsequently, it was the procedures and processes that should have

:43:55. > :43:57.sought out and found the truth that bailed and we do have to ask

:43:58. > :44:05.ourselves the question as to how that happened and what we can do to

:44:06. > :44:10.make sure it does not happen again. Yesterday's verdict was a historic

:44:11. > :44:15.one and I would like to thank the Secretary of State for her statement

:44:16. > :44:22.and for the embassies that she -- emphasis that the fans were not to

:44:23. > :44:26.blame. I was a teacher in 1989 and remember that day well. I remember

:44:27. > :44:30.how the city was affected at the time and in the years to follow. 27

:44:31. > :44:35.years as a long time and the families of the 96 who lost their

:44:36. > :44:38.lives at Hillsborough have had to fight for the truth. It takes a

:44:39. > :44:45.special kind of courage to fight for 27 years and I would like to pay

:44:46. > :44:48.Burma on the courage of the families.

:44:49. > :44:56.I hope the verdict will be some comfort and I hope the 96 will not

:44:57. > :45:01.been forgotten. The honourable lady is right, they will not be forgotten

:45:02. > :45:05.and she has rights to pay tribute to the families who have kept alive the

:45:06. > :45:12.hope of truth and justice and I hope that they will take some comfort

:45:13. > :45:17.from the verdicts yesterday. Can I pay tribute to the Home Secretary

:45:18. > :45:24.and the right Honourable member the lead is not just for the power of

:45:25. > :45:27.poignancy of their words today but also for the decisive and responsive

:45:28. > :45:35.character that they have both respectively shown in relation to

:45:36. > :45:44.this whole matter. I salute not only my fellow members in this House to

:45:45. > :45:56.represent the families of the Hillsborough tragedy, they have made

:45:57. > :45:59.that journey from victimhood through vilification to vindication, that

:46:00. > :46:08.torturous journey to justice that Mayan constituents faced, and the

:46:09. > :46:14.honourable member for league brought the Hillsborough families over to

:46:15. > :46:19.Derry to meet the bloody Sunday families and I know the bloody

:46:20. > :46:22.Sunday families would give the biggest hugs they could possibly

:46:23. > :46:29.give to the Hillsborough families today. I think what we need to

:46:30. > :46:33.learn, other lessons, rather than just comparing what happened in this

:46:34. > :46:37.case and other cases, the points that were made about what families

:46:38. > :46:45.still had to go through even after what the panel report told us, the

:46:46. > :46:48.fact they had to show carmine chamber as they listen to callous

:46:49. > :46:57.cynicism as they listen to death of their loved ones. We also need to

:46:58. > :47:04.addressed once and for all this insensitivity and arrogance of

:47:05. > :47:09.power, and system defensiveness that the Home Secretary has rightly

:47:10. > :47:15.identified, that the system tells us to move on, there is nothing more to

:47:16. > :47:22.know. I note that is exactly what the system was telling the Right

:47:23. > :47:27.Honourable member fully. In relation to questions about possible charges

:47:28. > :47:32.that arise, one issue that does occur to me arising from the bloody

:47:33. > :47:36.Sunday experience as well, could we get clarity soon on whether or not

:47:37. > :47:41.the law officers in this situation are replying the same rubric that

:47:42. > :47:47.they applied to the Bloody Sunday situation which is to say that

:47:48. > :47:53.questions of charges in the line of perjury cannot be considered until

:47:54. > :47:58.the issues of any other possible charges relating to the events of

:47:59. > :48:04.the day have been. Because that is a rubric, deeply troubling to Bloody

:48:05. > :48:08.Sunday families. I say to the honourable gentleman that I think

:48:09. > :48:16.that is a point I will take away and look into and I thank him for the

:48:17. > :48:21.remarks he made about the importance of a justice system. We rightly are

:48:22. > :48:25.proud of our system of justice in this country that sometimes it has

:48:26. > :48:29.failed to get to the truth. Sadly, we have seen that on board this

:48:30. > :48:34.occasion in relation to Hillsborough, once again it is the

:48:35. > :48:38.families who have been prepared to fight over 27 years, that have got

:48:39. > :48:43.to the truth from the independent panel 's report and now to the

:48:44. > :48:47.verdicts vary clear verdicts that have vindicated what they have said

:48:48. > :48:57.about fans and their loved ones all along. As a teenager I followed my

:48:58. > :49:03.team and that stand on many occasions so this was a victory for

:49:04. > :49:07.all of football today. The crime was exacerbated by the cover-up, so why

:49:08. > :49:12.would like to ask the Home Secretary, apart from going to hell,

:49:13. > :49:23.what does she see as the consequences for those who ball. To

:49:24. > :49:31.many? --. Testimony. Criminal charges should be brought, and that

:49:32. > :49:33.is a matter that will be the decision of the Crown Prosecution

:49:34. > :49:41.Service after seeing the results of the investigations. Can I add my

:49:42. > :49:51.congratulations and commendations to the Home Secretary for the statement

:49:52. > :49:55.and conduct so far. Can I recall the words of my right honourable friend

:49:56. > :50:01.who praised and Williams from Chester who sadly did not live to

:50:02. > :50:04.see this day. I can assure the Home Secretary and the House that she

:50:05. > :50:13.will be in the forefront of the mind of many of my constituents in

:50:14. > :50:19.Chester. Hillsborough was a tragedy got it may have remained so that

:50:20. > :50:23.instead it became a scandal. Does the Home Secretary share my concern

:50:24. > :50:28.that the toxic legacy of Hillsborough is that there is a

:50:29. > :50:36.generation not just on Merseyside but perhaps more widely in the North

:50:37. > :50:38.West and across the country that have absolutely zero confidence in

:50:39. > :50:44.elements of the state and elements of the justice system and frankly,

:50:45. > :50:49.it is up to all of us in this House to rebuild that confidence based on

:50:50. > :50:52.the judgment yesterday. I absolutely agree with the honourable gentleman

:50:53. > :50:57.that we have a role to play in this House to ensure, as I have just said

:50:58. > :51:03.in response to a previous question. We have always felt huge confidence

:51:04. > :51:06.and pride in the justice system we have in the country, but we need to

:51:07. > :51:13.make sure it operates properly and provides justice for people.

:51:14. > :51:20.Can I press the Home Secretary to recognise the importance of the

:51:21. > :51:24.European Convention on Human Rights in ensuring justice in this case?

:51:25. > :51:27.The reference group which she says is being reconstituted it

:51:28. > :51:33.specifically to protect the Hillsborough families' writes. This

:51:34. > :51:39.system does not always work as it should, and victims' families rely

:51:40. > :51:44.on article two, the right to life, to ensure that the deaths that take

:51:45. > :51:49.place when people are in the care of the state of properly investigated.

:51:50. > :51:52.Will she think carefully before pursuing her desire stated this week

:51:53. > :51:57.for the UK to withdraw from the convention? I say to the honourable

:51:58. > :52:02.gentleman that human rights weren't invented when the convention was

:52:03. > :52:05.drafted, but in relation to the convention, my right honourable

:52:06. > :52:09.friend the tourney general responded to an urgent question yesterday and

:52:10. > :52:15.responded well to many questions that he was axed by many members of

:52:16. > :52:21.this house. What I would say to the honourable gentleman is that the

:52:22. > :52:25.whole question of how death that happen where there is some

:52:26. > :52:29.involvement of some element of the state is one of the concerns that

:52:30. > :52:34.I've had and one of the reasons why I've set up an enquiry looking, for

:52:35. > :52:40.example, into death in custody, people held by police custody.

:52:41. > :52:43.Because I think those examples that we see of whether or not the system

:52:44. > :52:47.is actually getting to the truth in the way that it should do, and it's

:52:48. > :52:55.right that we should look into that and investigated. This statement has

:52:56. > :52:58.been one of those moments where I've thought is very proud to be a member

:52:59. > :53:05.of Parliament, and I'd like to commend the Home Secretary for her

:53:06. > :53:08.role. I don't think we mention Liverpool football club, who have

:53:09. > :53:13.never told the fans that it was time to move on, but have always taken

:53:14. > :53:18.ownership of the terrible, terrible tragedy. This was allowed to happen

:53:19. > :53:22.because in the eyes of the establishment, football fans were

:53:23. > :53:28.less than human. As soon as the police and the establishment see

:53:29. > :53:32.groups of people not as individuals but as less than human, then we

:53:33. > :53:37.enter into very dangerous their consensus. Before then, the miners

:53:38. > :53:41.were less than human. We look today at how we treat disabled people,

:53:42. > :53:45.asylum seekers or the victims of child sex abuse and wonder if we

:53:46. > :53:51.also think they are less than human. That is a lesson for all of us to

:53:52. > :53:54.consider. When this tragedy unfolded, the first instinct of

:53:55. > :53:58.South Yorkshire Police was to protect their institution, to

:53:59. > :54:02.protect their reputation and to think nothing of the people who

:54:03. > :54:08.died, their families, because they consider these people to be less

:54:09. > :54:12.than human. That instinct that they had instantly in April 1989 appears

:54:13. > :54:15.to be just as strong and 27 years later by the way that they have

:54:16. > :54:21.conducted themselves during this latest enquiry. In commending

:54:22. > :54:26.everything that the Home Secretary has done, can I ask her to consider

:54:27. > :54:28.whether she believes that people of South Yorkshire should have

:54:29. > :54:34.confidence in the currently the ship of South Yorkshire Police, and

:54:35. > :54:39.whether she has confidence in the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire

:54:40. > :54:44.Police. -- current leadership. Whether she might take this moment

:54:45. > :54:47.to come to that dispatch box and asked the Chief Constable of South

:54:48. > :54:51.Yorkshire Police to consider his position, not just for the families

:54:52. > :54:56.but for all the people who rely on that police force? What I would say

:54:57. > :54:59.is the honourable gentleman has talked about the leadership of South

:55:00. > :55:04.Yorkshire Police. As I indicated earlier, people will be voting for

:55:05. > :55:10.the policing crime commission a position later next week given the

:55:11. > :55:13.democratic accountability on this. I responded earlier to questions about

:55:14. > :55:24.the words that South Yorkshire Police have put out and I will say

:55:25. > :55:26.this again. I think it behaved South Yorkshire Police to recognise the

:55:27. > :55:34.import of the verdicts at work brought out yesterday. And I hope

:55:35. > :55:39.that we will not see attempts to try and somehow suggest that those

:55:40. > :55:50.verdicts were not clear or in any way wrong. That jury sat through 296

:55:51. > :55:57.days of evidence, and they were clear about the role of South

:55:58. > :56:00.Yorkshire Police officers. Let me thank the Home Secretary, the Shadow

:56:01. > :56:05.Home Secretary and all colleagues for what they've said, and for the

:56:06. > :56:11.manner in which the exchanges on this statement have been conducted.

:56:12. > :56:21.Point of order. Thank you. Can I seek your advice on how I can

:56:22. > :56:24.express my deep sorrow for something the Prime Minister referred to

:56:25. > :56:28.earlier. As you know, if a government minister makes a mistake,

:56:29. > :56:33.they can, The Record. I hope you would allow me to say that I fully

:56:34. > :56:36.acknowledge that I have made a mistake and I wholeheartedly

:56:37. > :56:40.apologise to this house for the words are used before I became a

:56:41. > :56:44.member. I accept and understand that the words are used caused upset and

:56:45. > :56:51.hurt to the Jewish community, and I deeply regret that. Anti-Semitism is

:56:52. > :56:56.racism. As an MP, I will do everything in my power to build

:56:57. > :57:01.relations between Muslims, Jews and people of different faiths, and

:57:02. > :57:05.non-. I'm grateful and very thankful for the support and advice I have

:57:06. > :57:11.received from many Jewish friends and colleagues. Advice I intend to

:57:12. > :57:15.act upon. I truly regret what I did, and I hope, I sincerely hope, that

:57:16. > :57:21.this house will accept my profound apology. The honourable lady has

:57:22. > :57:25.found an opportunity to apologise. I thank her for what she has had and

:57:26. > :57:33.it will have been noted by the House, I think that's all I should

:57:34. > :57:40.say on this occasion. Point of order, Mr Alex Ammons. I commend the

:57:41. > :57:45.honourable lady for the words she has just spoken. On a wider point,

:57:46. > :57:50.would it be possible for us to develop an opportunity for the Prime

:57:51. > :57:54.Minister to rapidly collect any misleading impressions he

:57:55. > :57:56.inadvertently gives at Prime Minister's Question Time. For

:57:57. > :58:07.example, I know the Prime Minister would be incredibly anxious today.

:58:08. > :58:10.To acknowledge that 45% of the total orders of five injured and ?40

:58:11. > :58:14.million were placed with Scottish companies regarding the fourth

:58:15. > :58:18.crossing dog I know the pro minister would want to release the misleading

:58:19. > :58:26.impression by acknowledging that steal from his -- but Steele was at

:58:27. > :58:30.either end of the bridge. He would want to acknowledge that the reason

:58:31. > :58:36.there was no Scottish bidder for the main subcontract was the closure of

:58:37. > :58:40.a Scottish steel mill by the previous Tory government in the

:58:41. > :58:45.1990s, removing our capacity to supply such deal. I know that

:58:46. > :58:49.prevailing such an opportunity would swallow up the entirety of this

:58:50. > :58:54.house, given the many mistakes that this Prime Minister makes. But given

:58:55. > :58:58.the clarity of the titular example, perhaps you could consider my new

:58:59. > :59:05.innovative prime ministerial correction procedure? I am very

:59:06. > :59:11.grateful for the point of order. It has been commented upon many a time

:59:12. > :59:19.and often in recent years that I have sometimes judged it necessary

:59:20. > :59:22.and desirable, somewhat, to extend for ministers questions, if I have

:59:23. > :59:28.thought that there has been excessive noise. -- Prime Minister's

:59:29. > :59:32.Questions. I have done that because I wanted backbench members to have

:59:33. > :59:39.that opportunity. However, there are limits and even I would not seek to

:59:40. > :59:43.extend question Time to more than two and a half hours.

:59:44. > :59:50.Notwithstanding the assiduous advocacy of the honourable gentleman

:59:51. > :59:58.and his enthusiasm for my doing so. Point of order. I am seeking your

:59:59. > :00:04.help in perhaps finding a mechanism whereby this house might be able to

:00:05. > :00:08.force a binding vote on the Government following the new law

:00:09. > :00:12.amendment made to the immigration bill in the House of Lords.

:00:13. > :00:15.These vulnerable, unaccompanied children require help now and it

:00:16. > :00:20.would seem as though this house is not likely to consider the

:00:21. > :00:23.immigration bill for a further two weeks, resume the blue to avoid

:00:24. > :00:32.further embarrassment to the Government. Finally, -- to avoid

:00:33. > :00:37.embarrassment. -- presumably. I would like to enable the fry

:00:38. > :00:39.minister to retract his comment that other European countries are able to

:00:40. > :00:46.cope with this country because they have asked them to participate in a

:00:47. > :00:49.relocation scheme. Vulnerable children have been identified as one

:00:50. > :00:58.of the most concerning issues in relation to the refugee crisis.

:00:59. > :01:01.Thank you for the point of order. He is, in a sense, performing a double

:01:02. > :01:07.act today with the right honourable gentleman two seats to his left.

:01:08. > :01:10.What I would say to the honourable gentleman, who is experienced in

:01:11. > :01:15.this house having previously said as its deputy leader, is twofold.

:01:16. > :01:22.First, as he knows the scheduling of business is in the hands of the

:01:23. > :01:26.Government. Notably, in respect of government business. Although his

:01:27. > :01:30.expectation, as things stand, as to when that matter will next be

:01:31. > :01:36.treated by the House of Lords may well be correct, it has not been

:01:37. > :01:42.announced. Secondly, it will, in all probability, the announced at

:01:43. > :01:49.business questions tomorrow by the Leader of the House. If it is not,

:01:50. > :01:53.there will be an opportunity for that matter to be probed. I know I

:01:54. > :01:58.can say with complete confidence and with no fear of contradiction that

:01:59. > :02:03.just as the honourable gentleman is in his case now, so he will be at

:02:04. > :02:07.the appropriate time tomorrow. I think there is more than a passing

:02:08. > :02:15.possibility that he will catch my eye. I'm not sure there is, but I

:02:16. > :02:20.always like hearing the honourable gentleman, the member for West

:02:21. > :02:26.Worthing. Especially as he has such a beaming countenance today. Let's

:02:27. > :02:29.hear the attempted further. We heard the suggestion that the Prime

:02:30. > :02:33.Minister said something was wrong. We heard from the honourable member

:02:34. > :02:37.for the Scottish National Party that the bid between the ends, which I

:02:38. > :02:43.would call the bridge, was made with steel which wasn't produced in this

:02:44. > :02:47.country. Whatever else may be said, that may be a point of enormous

:02:48. > :02:53.interest. It is manifestly not a point of order. We will leave it

:02:54. > :02:59.there for now. If there are no further points of order? Perhaps we

:03:00. > :03:06.can now come to the ten minute rule motion. Whatever the honourable

:03:07. > :03:12.member may have two said tomorrow, I assume he intends to address today.

:03:13. > :03:16.Mr Speaker, I beg to move that lead be given to bring in a dull to amend

:03:17. > :03:22.the landlord and tenant reform Bill to make provision about the

:03:23. > :03:25.renovation of landlords in private rented accommodation to extend

:03:26. > :03:29.tenants' rights, particularly in relation to the sale of occupied

:03:30. > :03:34.property, to cap letting agencies and fees, to require the Mayor of

:03:35. > :03:39.London to establish a mandatory licensing fee in respect of private

:03:40. > :03:43.landlords in Greater London. It is no exaggeration to say that we have

:03:44. > :03:47.a national emergency in housing. It is unacceptable that in 2016

:03:48. > :03:53.millions of people still suffer daily from poor housing and live in

:03:54. > :03:57.fear and desperation without a secure, affordable place to call

:03:58. > :04:01.home. This fear is Terrington amenities apart and risks further

:04:02. > :04:06.dividing our country between a very well off minority and the rest of

:04:07. > :04:10.us. -- tearing key amenities apart. We have soaring costs where the

:04:11. > :04:16.average two-bedroom property in London is now out of reach of 80% of

:04:17. > :04:19.people. A renting sector where people on low and middle incomes are

:04:20. > :04:23.spending around two fifths of their salaries on housing. Something

:04:24. > :04:28.confirmed by the Evening Standard in a report yesterday. And often suffer

:04:29. > :04:33.at the hands of rogue landlords. This problem isn't going to go away

:04:34. > :04:38.soon. Over the less decade, London's private renting sector has doubled

:04:39. > :04:42.in size to become the second-largest housing tenure in the capital. There

:04:43. > :04:46.are now almost 1 million private rented or produced in London,

:04:47. > :04:50.housing over 2 million people, around one third of the population.

:04:51. > :04:53.For many of these people, living in a private renting sector works well

:04:54. > :04:57.with short-term agreement offering them the flexibility they need to

:04:58. > :05:01.move homes quickly for new jobs opportunities. Many of their private

:05:02. > :05:05.landlords are responsible, carrying out repairs in a timely manner and

:05:06. > :05:09.returning deposits properly. For many others, the sector has become a

:05:10. > :05:16.tenure of last resort, rather than the halving destination of choice.

:05:17. > :05:19.There have been huge changes in the demographics of the private renting

:05:20. > :05:22.sector in recent years with an increasing number of families,

:05:23. > :05:26.low-income and vulnerable housing living in the sector. But conditions

:05:27. > :05:33.remained poor. A third of homes failed to meet decent homes standard

:05:34. > :05:37.with over 60% of renters having experienced damp, mould, leaking

:05:38. > :05:40.roofs or Windows, electrical hazards, animal infestation or

:05:41. > :05:50.Catholics, according to a recent survey by the housing charity

:05:51. > :05:54.Shelter. -- animal infestation. One woman broke down in tears last week

:05:55. > :05:58.after describing the conditions. She and her young son could no longer

:05:59. > :06:03.face waking up to live or dead rodents. The landlord is trying to

:06:04. > :06:08.help, but the quality of the housing stock makes it very difficult to

:06:09. > :06:11.stop rodents getting in. A few weeks before, a young woman came to see me

:06:12. > :06:14.with her mother. They have repairs are standing on their rented

:06:15. > :06:19.property, which the landlord is refusing to sort out whilst putting

:06:20. > :06:23.pressure on them to leave the flat. These types of cases I'm sure every

:06:24. > :06:28.member of Parliament will be all too familiar with. This is why I'm

:06:29. > :06:32.supporting the measures put forward by Caroline Pidgeon's London Liberal

:06:33. > :06:41.Democrat team to overhaul the London sector. We believe they will -- was

:06:42. > :06:45.the exact number of rogue landlords operating remains unknown, there is

:06:46. > :06:49.a growing sense that the problem is getting worse as demand for housing

:06:50. > :06:54.and profits that can be made from renting out any accommodation in

:06:55. > :06:58.whatever condition continues to increase, with one in 20 renters are

:06:59. > :07:07.saying they have rented from a rogue landlords in the past 12 months.

:07:08. > :07:14.The enforcement standards in the private rented sector by local

:07:15. > :07:18.authorities is highly variable with recent cuts to local authority

:07:19. > :07:22.budgets further diminishing resort is available to councils to tackle

:07:23. > :07:32.those landlords that provide poor or unsafe living conditions. The

:07:33. > :07:36.resulting patchwork of enforcement has left many people in precarious

:07:37. > :07:39.conditions. Tougher enforcement which the residential landlords

:07:40. > :07:48.Association which represents small Private landlords would welcome. And

:07:49. > :07:53.fourth Jeanette Lee, -- unfortunately, it is very difficult

:07:54. > :08:02.to prosecute landlords. On average, London borough is inspected one in

:08:03. > :08:05.every 55 homes at the private rented sector. There is a significant

:08:06. > :08:11.variation in the level of enforcement activity with some

:08:12. > :08:16.councils inspecting one in 14 properties, and others in one in

:08:17. > :08:24.500. The private rented sector may have meant the needs of tenants in

:08:25. > :08:25.years gone by, but the needs of tenants have changed magically in

:08:26. > :08:43.recent years. The plans I have about to refer to

:08:44. > :08:48.would reform the private sector. All landlords in London should be

:08:49. > :08:52.registered, this would make it easier to identify the scale and

:08:53. > :08:57.trends in the Private rented sector and to ensure landlords can be

:08:58. > :09:00.traced easily. To crack down on rogue landlords with a licensee

:09:01. > :09:03.scheme, the government should introduce a licensing scheme for all

:09:04. > :09:07.private landlords in London with the aim of professionalising the sector,

:09:08. > :09:11.improving conditions and removing rogue landlords from housing market.

:09:12. > :09:22.I accept this proposal will not be welcome by all landlords but some,

:09:23. > :09:26.except the limited role. Scrap unfair letting agent fees for

:09:27. > :09:33.renters. Moving from one of rented home to another can be very

:09:34. > :09:38.expensive. I am told that agents tried to poach landlords from each

:09:39. > :09:46.other to secure the fees that are triggered to secure for themselves

:09:47. > :09:53.and they dangle the prospect of higher rents in front of the

:09:54. > :09:59.would-be landlord. In Sutton, a quick check suggests fees of 400 to

:10:00. > :10:02.?500 when signing up a new tenant and when that is added to the

:10:03. > :10:10.six-week deposit which currently would be approximately ?1500 for a

:10:11. > :10:15.two bedroom flats, that would be a total of ?2000 that the tenant would

:10:16. > :10:22.need to find up front. Give renters extra rights when landlords sell up.

:10:23. > :10:28.They should be given first refusal to buy the home they are renting.

:10:29. > :10:34.Finally, give councils powers to manage properties and offer longer

:10:35. > :10:41.tenancies. This would allow councils to develop, manage Private homes

:10:42. > :10:45.outside of the revenue account to improve quality of homes in the

:10:46. > :10:49.sector. Also call on the government to work with Private landlords,

:10:50. > :10:54.mortgage companies and freeholders to enable private landlords to offer

:10:55. > :10:57.longer tenancies because often it is mortgage companies or freeholders

:10:58. > :11:01.who are standing in the way of those longer tenancies. This is about

:11:02. > :11:07.issues that will make a real difference. I am not claiming these

:11:08. > :11:12.measures are the silver bullet that will solve London's housing problems

:11:13. > :11:15.because the fundamental issue is a lack of supply, particularly of

:11:16. > :11:21.affordable homes, an issue that is no closer to a solution given that

:11:22. > :11:25.only 5000 affordable homes were built last year, the lowest figure

:11:26. > :11:30.since the mayor was first elected in 2008. We do believe these proposals

:11:31. > :11:40.will improve the lot of private renters, some of you suffer -- some

:11:41. > :11:51.of whom suffer in unsuitable conditions. This has got to stop. I

:11:52. > :11:57.urge the House to support this bill. As many as are of the opinion, say

:11:58. > :12:04."aye". To the contrary, "no". I think the ayes have it. The ayes

:12:05. > :12:11.have it. Who will prepare and bringing the bill? Norman Lamb, and

:12:12. > :12:35.Greg Mulholland, Stephen Pugh and myself.

:12:36. > :12:50.Landlord and tenant reform Bill. Second reading, what day? Friday

:12:51. > :12:54.13th of May. Friday the 13th of May. We now come to the programme motion

:12:55. > :13:02.on the Trade Union Bill. Minister to move formally. The questionnaires as

:13:03. > :13:09.on the order paper, As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the

:13:10. > :13:14.contrary, "no". The ayes have it. The clerk will now proceed to read

:13:15. > :13:21.the orders of the day. Consideration of Lords amendments. We begin with a

:13:22. > :13:28.Lords amendment to with which we consider government amendments a and

:13:29. > :13:33.B to Lords amendment to. The government motion to disagree to

:13:34. > :13:38.Lords amendments 17 and government amendments a to C two words restored

:13:39. > :13:46.to the bill. I call the minister to make government amendment a to Lords

:13:47. > :13:49.amendment two. The measures in this bill aimed to modernise the

:13:50. > :13:52.relationship between trade unions and their members and strike a

:13:53. > :13:57.fairer balance between the rights of trade unions and the rights of

:13:58. > :14:03.people who rely on public services. By making sure strikes only happen

:14:04. > :14:07.where unions have secured a clear, positive and recent democratic

:14:08. > :14:12.mandate. Consideration in the House of Lords has made important changes

:14:13. > :14:16.to this bill, the great majority of which the government believes

:14:17. > :14:20.improve the bill. But the first group today deals with those issues

:14:21. > :14:24.where the government did not support the changes proposed. This first

:14:25. > :14:29.group is about electronic balloting and facility time. We have reflected

:14:30. > :14:32.carefully in the light of the strong views expressed both in debates in

:14:33. > :14:39.this House and in the other place and I would take issue -- each issue

:14:40. > :14:42.in turn. As I have said before, the government has no principled

:14:43. > :14:47.objection to electronic balloting and I have said before and I'm happy

:14:48. > :14:51.to say again that I think it is likely to be common in 20 years'

:14:52. > :14:59.time. We are seeking a degree of sensible caution. I am happy to give

:15:00. > :15:05.way. He will remember our many conversations during the committee

:15:06. > :15:08.stage of the bill. Given he says he accepts it may come in, we see the

:15:09. > :15:13.Lords amendment down before us on this issue and moving towards a

:15:14. > :15:18.pilot scheme, it remains the fact that electronic ballot is used by

:15:19. > :15:25.many organisations. Why not just bring it about now? If the

:15:26. > :15:30.honourable gentleman with whom I enjoyed greatly debating many of the

:15:31. > :15:34.detailed clauses of this bill over a longer period when he occupied a

:15:35. > :15:40.different post on the opposition front bench, if he gives me a bit of

:15:41. > :15:46.time, I will explain that I am not quite yet ready to Russian to the

:15:47. > :15:51.Nirvana that he paints for us. -- to rush in. We are asking for a degree

:15:52. > :15:55.of sensible caution to ensure that important votes are safe and secure.

:15:56. > :16:00.I am not asking honourable members today to reject the clause added to

:16:01. > :16:06.the bill in the House of Lords on electron it balloting. But I am

:16:07. > :16:10.asking for a small but important change to ensure we proceed

:16:11. > :16:18.prudently on the basis of evidence as we take this important step. He

:16:19. > :16:24.will no doubt has been the evidence from the electoral reform Society

:16:25. > :16:29.whose say that the instances of fraud in Elektra on it balloting is

:16:30. > :16:35.no different to the instances of fraud in postal balloting. Given

:16:36. > :16:39.that, what is his objection? He, too, will have to be patient because

:16:40. > :16:43.I will come on and talk about evidence from around the world on

:16:44. > :16:48.some of the problems that other systems have encountered when trying

:16:49. > :16:51.to embrace electronic balloting to quickly and without adequate

:16:52. > :16:55.preparation. I appreciate from previous rates in this House that

:16:56. > :17:00.there are differences in opinion about whether electronic balloting

:17:01. > :17:05.is sufficiently safe and secure. The noble Lord Kerslake said he

:17:06. > :17:08.personally has convinced that the case has been made and we have heard

:17:09. > :17:13.rather members that they are also convinced. Lord Kerslake was good

:17:14. > :17:17.enough to say he appreciates others are not and I would remind the House

:17:18. > :17:22.that the open rights group gave evidence to the speakers commission

:17:23. > :17:30.and neatly summed up concerns about the security of online voting. I

:17:31. > :17:37.quote, voting is a uniquely difficult question. The system must

:17:38. > :17:41.already know if you have already voted and allow for audits and

:17:42. > :17:45.recounts yet it must always preserve your anonymity and privity. That was

:17:46. > :17:52.the view of the open rights group and that is the view that we must

:17:53. > :17:55.investigate more carefully. Lord Kerslake explained this is why his

:17:56. > :17:59.clause added to the bill in the other place requires that a review

:18:00. > :18:03.is commissioned and there have already been many reviews looking

:18:04. > :18:11.into this such as that mentioned by the honourable member by

:18:12. > :18:19.organisations like the electoral reform service. These have indeed

:18:20. > :18:24.made encouraging comments about the potential of a move to electronic

:18:25. > :18:29.ballots, but none have been able to provide assurance on managing the

:18:30. > :18:33.risks. I will just get a little further and will be happy to give

:18:34. > :18:38.way again. While there is still this doubt, I can see merit in exploring

:18:39. > :18:43.the issues further. The important difference is that this review will

:18:44. > :18:48.specifically be in the context of electronic balloting for industrial

:18:49. > :18:52.action. In accepting that should be this review, we accept the spirit of

:18:53. > :18:57.the clause on electronic balloting. We accept that to leave the entirety

:18:58. > :19:10.of the amendment made by the Mogul boards. -- noble Lords. I understand

:19:11. > :19:13.the position he is setting out. I am struggling to understand the logic

:19:14. > :19:20.because if he is saying electronic balloting is neither secure nor

:19:21. > :19:25.anonymous, is he inferring that when Conservative Party members vote for

:19:26. > :19:32.a particular candidate online in an internal Tory party election, it is

:19:33. > :19:37.neither secure nor anonymous? With the greatest respect, I would point

:19:38. > :19:41.out to the honourable gentleman that that is an internal election for an

:19:42. > :19:49.independent organisation. Here we are talking about static tree

:19:50. > :19:54.elections. They reported because the public has a deep interest in their

:19:55. > :19:58.resultant it is quite right we hold them to our highest standard. I am

:19:59. > :20:06.happy to give way to the honourable member. He is sounding almost guilty

:20:07. > :20:12.of double standards on this issue and whilst he says he has accepted

:20:13. > :20:16.the majority of the noble Lords's amendment, he is neglecting to adopt

:20:17. > :20:19.any of those components that would require any substantial action by

:20:20. > :20:25.the government. What could possibly be wrong and what reasonable

:20:26. > :20:29.objection could he have two piloting an electron it balloting scheme? I

:20:30. > :20:33.think he realises he doesn't have a reasonable argument against it. If

:20:34. > :20:36.the honourable members on the other side would give me a minute, they

:20:37. > :20:42.may hear my argument and then they could decide whether it is

:20:43. > :20:46.reasonable on art. I am now going to satisfy them with my argument and I

:20:47. > :20:51.will be happy to give way if they wish to comment. There is one

:20:52. > :20:55.element, and only one, in the amendment moved by the House of

:20:56. > :21:02.Lords with which we cannot agree and that is the strategy for roll out.

:21:03. > :21:07.This is because it produces is -- pre-judges the outcome of the review

:21:08. > :21:11.and commits the Secretary of State to press ahead with the roll-out

:21:12. > :21:15.irrespective of the review's findings. The House will be

:21:16. > :21:22.interested to know, they may not welcome it, that there are lots of

:21:23. > :21:26.examples where electronic balloting has been tried but found not to work

:21:27. > :21:32.and even where it has had to be rolled back. The speaker's

:21:33. > :21:37.commission on Digital democracy identified 14 countries that have

:21:38. > :21:43.tried Internet voting for statutory elections. This includes five

:21:44. > :21:48.countries including the UK but also Finland, USA, the Netherlands and

:21:49. > :21:50.Spain which either piloted or fully adopted electronic voting and then

:21:51. > :22:01.decided to discontinue its use. What the minister says on that

:22:02. > :22:04.point, the last Labour government did pilot Bertrand voting and a

:22:05. > :22:09.report afterwards indicated that there was no evidence at all in

:22:10. > :22:17.terms of fraud or other types of things. -- electronic voting. I was

:22:18. > :22:22.a scandal around postal voting. There was no evidence in that report

:22:23. > :22:26.that e-voting was any more inefficient than any other type of

:22:27. > :22:31.voting. If the honourable jasmine is correct and there is no problem, the

:22:32. > :22:36.review will conclude so and it will report to Parliament. I will not

:22:37. > :22:40.give way again. I will not give way again, I'm going to carry on with my

:22:41. > :22:45.argument. The review will conclude that and will report accordingly to

:22:46. > :22:50.the House. We already have the power to permit electronic balloting in

:22:51. > :22:55.section 54 of the employment relations act 2004. But we have not

:22:56. > :22:59.exercised it because we have not been convinced and nor has any

:23:00. > :23:04.previous government, including a Labour government that held office

:23:05. > :23:07.for 13 years, has not been convinced that the system would ensure

:23:08. > :23:12.privacy, opportunity and minimise the risk of fraud and malpractice.

:23:13. > :23:16.I'm going to carry on a second further, but I will be happy to give

:23:17. > :23:20.way. There has been much positive progress in the way that technology

:23:21. > :23:24.has helped to address these issues, reflected in the reports but I have

:23:25. > :23:29.cited. We have been clear that we will be willing to use that power

:23:30. > :23:32.when we are convinced that the concerns are adequately addressed.

:23:33. > :23:35.The legislation is framed in a way that requires us first to be

:23:36. > :23:40.satisfied on these matters, and for good reason. That is why inside of a

:23:41. > :23:43.strategy for roll out, I am today seeking agreements to which

:23:44. > :23:48.statutory the choir and for the Government to publish its response

:23:49. > :23:53.to the review which will be laid before Parliament. -- statutory

:23:54. > :24:00.requirements. Questions can only ask and it can be raised in the House in

:24:01. > :24:03.the usual way. The minister before the Trade Union Bill was heard

:24:04. > :24:15.before the Lords wrote to ministerial colleagues, can the

:24:16. > :24:20.Minister confirm that should the electronic balloting be successful

:24:21. > :24:27.but he will use that mechanism to put a balloting in place? --

:24:28. > :24:31.electricity letting. I can assure you that my relations with the

:24:32. > :24:35.Socialist party and newspaper probably rather less good than the

:24:36. > :24:41.honourable gentleman's. It was not through my good offices that they

:24:42. > :24:46.got hold of any document, not that I accept that they did get hold of any

:24:47. > :24:50.document. He asked a reasonable question and I think I have made

:24:51. > :24:55.very clear that the Government has no objection in principle and that

:24:56. > :24:59.we do expect statutory elections to move towards online voting. But we

:25:00. > :25:05.will do so in the case of trade union strike ballots when we are

:25:06. > :25:11.convinced that they are safe and that is why we want to have a

:25:12. > :25:14.review, that is why the review will be an independent review. That is

:25:15. > :25:18.why we were caught to Parliament and I'm not going to prejudge the

:25:19. > :25:21.outcome of the review because if I did, frankly, it would be slightly

:25:22. > :25:30.pointless to have the review in the first place. I will give way. He's

:25:31. > :25:32.said before that it was OK to do it for the election for the Tory mayor

:25:33. > :25:42.because they were independent organisers. Did the Tory party carry

:25:43. > :25:46.a review into how secure the systems were before they set up the

:25:47. > :25:54.discussions around having electricity rating for the Tory now?

:25:55. > :25:59.-- electronic voting. You must recognise that these are statutory

:26:00. > :26:03.elections. Internal elections for candidates, in any party, are not

:26:04. > :26:08.statutory elections. They might be subject to problems, but that is a

:26:09. > :26:13.problem for the organisation, not the public. The public have a right

:26:14. > :26:15.to expect a higher standard in the consideration of statutory

:26:16. > :26:20.elections. I'm not going to give way, he has had a go. I will give

:26:21. > :26:25.way to the ladies who have not, but then I will make some progress. They

:26:26. > :26:28.are all welcome to speak to this debate in their own right and it

:26:29. > :26:37.would be correct to make some progress. I think that the Minister

:26:38. > :26:41.that like I thank the Minister. It has been said it would be pointless

:26:42. > :26:47.to have a review in the various stages. I agree, it is pointless

:26:48. > :26:52.because the technology already exists. It has already been said

:26:53. > :26:55.that the Conservative Party has used that as a previous programmer, I can

:26:56. > :27:01.tell you it's already exist and is already secure. Not only has it been

:27:02. > :27:04.used in various businesses or independent organisations, but it

:27:05. > :27:09.has been used in X factor and various shows on TV. I can tell the

:27:10. > :27:14.Minister, you don't need to do a report, you just need to move onto

:27:15. > :27:19.the next stage. The honourable lady is a fan of X factor and so are many

:27:20. > :27:24.of us. But she will recognise that important though it is, it isn't a

:27:25. > :27:28.statutory election. Well I'm happy to acknowledge her expertise, I hope

:27:29. > :27:34.that she will to acknowledge the evidence given by the open rights

:27:35. > :27:38.group she can investigate, it isn't a Tory front organisation, it is an

:27:39. > :27:41.independent and specialist organisation which gave evidence

:27:42. > :27:46.only last year and said that there were specific issues to overcome.

:27:47. > :27:51.She will also have to explain and will have a chance to explain why it

:27:52. > :27:54.is that several countries in the world have experimented with online

:27:55. > :28:01.voting and then reversed it, because they found it to be unsafe. This

:28:02. > :28:07.review will allow us. Macro oh, I did say I would give way.

:28:08. > :28:15.Could the Minister be specific and say how electronic voting is less

:28:16. > :28:21.secure than postal voting? No, I would be specific because what we

:28:22. > :28:25.are going to do is set up an independent review of people who

:28:26. > :28:29.have real expertise in this issue. She will be welcome to give evidence

:28:30. > :28:34.to that review. They will produce a report which they will label for

:28:35. > :28:40.Parliament and she can interrogate that review and the Government's

:28:41. > :28:46.response. I'm happy to give way. On the point of the other opposition

:28:47. > :28:50.bench regarding the Conservative Party online voting, I found it

:28:51. > :28:56.impossible to get onto it so I was unable to vote in the male election.

:28:57. > :29:01.Did my honourable friend have the same issue that I did? I did not

:29:02. > :29:06.have that issue, but I think that does show that there can be issues

:29:07. > :29:11.with online voting, as indeed we know that there can be issues with

:29:12. > :29:15.postal voting. While it is not a matter of enormous public interest

:29:16. > :29:17.because this was not a statutory election, it's never the less is

:29:18. > :29:26.something which we would be very worried about if a statutory

:29:27. > :29:30.election like a union strike ballot were subject to the same level of

:29:31. > :29:36.problems. One more time, then I will get on. Are you seriously suggesting

:29:37. > :29:43.that whoever the Conservative candidate is for London Mayor is not

:29:44. > :29:49.a matter of public interest? I am happy to explain again that it is

:29:50. > :29:53.not a statutory election. But this review will allow us to consider

:29:54. > :29:56.again the case for e-voting and ensure that we have assessed the

:29:57. > :30:03.latest technology coming into view. I believe that taking together the

:30:04. > :30:07.review and the Government's response will enable the Secretary of State

:30:08. > :30:10.to create a properly informed and transparent decision about the risks

:30:11. > :30:18.of curing safe and secure electronic lighting and whether such a system

:30:19. > :30:21.should be rolled out. You have invited us to contribute to the

:30:22. > :30:24.review and I wonder will you accept electronic submissions, or do we

:30:25. > :30:30.have to get our work will and parchment out? She makes a very good

:30:31. > :30:36.point and my honourable friend suggests we should be inscribed on

:30:37. > :30:40.vellum. She will know that my honourable friend, the Minister for

:30:41. > :30:43.the Cabinet Office, has a particular enthusiasm for this means of

:30:44. > :30:46.communication, but I prefer the more modern methods. Perhaps a submission

:30:47. > :31:02.by what that might be appropriate. The Government does not agree with

:31:03. > :31:06.the Lord's in that amendment. As my right honourable friend knows, I am

:31:07. > :31:10.in favour of e-voting and I think the route he is taking is the

:31:11. > :31:14.correct one. But there is one real fear out there and that is what this

:31:15. > :31:19.approach is designed simply to delay the onset of online voting. Can he

:31:20. > :31:22.tell the House that when the minister receives viewport, he or

:31:23. > :31:30.she will deal with it appropriate dispatch? -- receives the report.

:31:31. > :31:34.Thank you for the contribution on this and on other important matters.

:31:35. > :31:38.I believe he has made a significant contribution to helping to improve

:31:39. > :31:45.this ill. On the particular question he asked, the amendment that we are

:31:46. > :31:50.proposing suggests that this review should be commissioned within six

:31:51. > :31:54.months, and then reported to Parliament. Of course, as I have

:31:55. > :32:01.made clear, we have no objection in principle. If the review suggests

:32:02. > :32:04.that it is safe to embrace e-voting, we will be able to proceed. He will

:32:05. > :32:10.have noted that the amendments physically suggest that we should be

:32:11. > :32:14.able to introduce pilots. -- specifically suggest. One of the

:32:15. > :32:18.issues with the existing provisions is it might not be the case that you

:32:19. > :32:25.could do a pilot without going for a full application. Such pilots might

:32:26. > :32:30.be an appropriate phase after the review has completed. If I may now

:32:31. > :32:35.return facility time and the facility time cap. The Government

:32:36. > :32:39.does not agree with the Lord's in that amendment and in consequence I

:32:40. > :32:43.move amendment 17, which brings back the reserve cap, but with safeguards

:32:44. > :32:48.which respond to the concerns that were expressed here in our debates

:32:49. > :32:53.but also which led to the deletion of the clause in the other place,

:32:54. > :32:58.and with the subject of quite frenzied inquisition in both houses.

:32:59. > :33:01.Together with the publication requirements, it is my view that

:33:02. > :33:05.they reserve power to cap facility time to a reasonable level delivers

:33:06. > :33:10.our manifesto commitments to tighten the walls around taxpayer funded

:33:11. > :33:14.facility time for union representatives. -- tighten the

:33:15. > :33:18.rules. I shall reiterate what I said when this house was considering the

:33:19. > :33:24.bill before. We are not seeking to ban facility time. This has never

:33:25. > :33:26.been our intention. Our strong preference is the transparency alone

:33:27. > :33:32.should be enough to change practices in the public sector with employers

:33:33. > :33:37.voluntarily reducing their costs where they are found to be spending

:33:38. > :33:44.more on facility time than is reasonable. I'm happy to give way.

:33:45. > :33:48.You have been most generous. In the aforementioned memo which I referred

:33:49. > :33:54.to earlier, there was an indication in that memo that they would be

:33:55. > :33:58.concessions and discussions with the devolved administration in relation

:33:59. > :34:04.to facility time. Can he confirm if consultations are taking place, or

:34:05. > :34:08.is it his intention to dictate to the devolved administration what

:34:09. > :34:14.facility time should be for their own workforce? I'm sure the

:34:15. > :34:18.honourable member will understand that I never comment on articles in

:34:19. > :34:21.the Socialist worker, but he will understand that we have regular

:34:22. > :34:25.conversations with ministers in the devolved administrations. All of the

:34:26. > :34:29.matters addressed in this bill are reserved matters. It's not a matter

:34:30. > :34:34.of dictating, it is simply of this government fulfilling its duty to

:34:35. > :34:39.legislate on the matters for which we have exclusive responsibility. I

:34:40. > :34:45.have to give way. Specifically on that point about devolved powers, is

:34:46. > :34:49.it not the case that in that letter, the minister himself has received

:34:50. > :34:54.legal advice that they have a very weak case about enforcing those

:34:55. > :34:59.powers on the Welsh government? The honourable lady, who made an

:35:00. > :35:03.admirable and, for me, rather challenging contribution to our

:35:04. > :35:10.deliberations in committee, knows that we do not comment on legal

:35:11. > :35:13.advice. Only if publication and the proper monitoring and recording that

:35:14. > :35:19.it necessitates does not achieve the aim of bringing excessive spending

:35:20. > :35:23.on facility time back down to a reasonable level, only then will it

:35:24. > :35:29.be necessary to consider the imposition of a cap. A reserve power

:35:30. > :35:33.is very much a power of last resort. I will carry on and explain what we

:35:34. > :35:37.are now proposing, because it is a little different than what we

:35:38. > :35:44.previously proposed. I will give way before I conclude. A reserve power

:35:45. > :35:48.is very much a power of last resort. While amendment 17 brings back the

:35:49. > :35:52.reserve power, we are not simply replicating the provision that this

:35:53. > :35:56.house considered before and that was deleted from the bill in the other

:35:57. > :36:00.place. The amendment before the House today incorporates a number of

:36:01. > :36:03.important safeguards which will trigger how and when the reserve

:36:04. > :36:08.power to cap the time would be exercise. We have listened to the

:36:09. > :36:14.concerns of members for this house and the other place and have sought

:36:15. > :36:18.to address those concerns. The published data in this bill will

:36:19. > :36:22.provide valuable information about the levels of spending across the

:36:23. > :36:27.public actor and informed decisions about what should be regarded as a

:36:28. > :36:31.reasonable level of spend on facility time, taking into account

:36:32. > :36:33.the needs of the relevant sector as well as the particular circumstances

:36:34. > :36:38.of individual employers within the sector.

:36:39. > :36:46.I will just finished this bit and then I will be happy to give way. It

:36:47. > :36:51.is our intention and, of course, that the exercise of reserve power

:36:52. > :36:55.will not even be considered before there are at least two years of data

:36:56. > :36:58.from the body is subject to the publication requirement. Following

:36:59. > :37:03.the publication of the second year's data, should a particular employer's

:37:04. > :37:06.facilities I be a cause for concern, having regard to all relevant

:37:07. > :37:10.factors, the minister will send and publish a letter to the employer

:37:11. > :37:17.drawing attention to the concerns. The Arroyo will have the opportunity

:37:18. > :37:25.to set out the reasons, -- employer, will then have a further year from

:37:26. > :37:29.the date to make progress in relation to facility time levels.

:37:30. > :37:33.Nothing will be done until a third year's data has been published. Only

:37:34. > :37:38.then will be Minister be at liberty to exercise the reserve power and

:37:39. > :37:44.make regulations to cap facility time for those employers. I will be

:37:45. > :37:48.happy to give way. As somebody who enjoyed facility time, spent a lot

:37:49. > :37:53.of that time trying to manage through huge reorganisations and

:37:54. > :37:56.redundancies a lot of the responsibility of his former

:37:57. > :38:00.government, can he explain what he means by terms like excessive and

:38:01. > :38:09.reasonable, because by example, we have just gone through the last four

:38:10. > :38:17.years, we lost 48% of our budget with lots of redundancies, and we

:38:18. > :38:25.have been engaged in a night trying to retrain people. The honourable

:38:26. > :38:29.gentleman is right. It can vary on the organisation and on the

:38:30. > :38:33.situation of that organisation what is reasonable, and that is why we

:38:34. > :38:38.want to collect two years of data before we establish what seems to be

:38:39. > :38:41.a reasonable level are looking at comparable organisations. I will

:38:42. > :38:47.come onto the fact that we are also going to be creating the of removing

:38:48. > :38:50.the cap from an organisation if it has a particular situation such as

:38:51. > :38:54.the one he describes which would justify a much higher level of

:38:55. > :39:00.spending on different kinds of facility time. I give way. Most

:39:01. > :39:05.grateful to my honourable friend. I think what my will friend is try to

:39:06. > :39:07.make explicit is across the trade union movement there are shop

:39:08. > :39:12.steward to do an excellent job day in day out and whereas some

:39:13. > :39:17.situations where the facility time is taken advantage of. One thinks of

:39:18. > :39:25.the example of the Grangemouth situation. Could my honourable

:39:26. > :39:28.friend make it clear, at no time is he saying that all shop stewards are

:39:29. > :39:33.swinging the lead and there is actually a lot of valuable work

:39:34. > :39:39.going on. I am happy to confirm and applaud what my honourable friend

:39:40. > :39:43.said. In truth, I would be as worried if an organisation was

:39:44. > :39:46.declaring no spending on facility time as if they were declaring

:39:47. > :39:53.excessive spending, because helping people with training, all with

:39:54. > :40:00.health and safety issues is an absolutely vital role in a well-run

:40:01. > :40:04.organisation. But he will recognise, and I know on members across the

:40:05. > :40:08.House will also, there have been organisations, we have had direct

:40:09. > :40:12.dealings of this within the civil service, there were agencies and

:40:13. > :40:16.departments that were allowing an abuse of the system and we want to

:40:17. > :40:21.restore confidence in the system by making it clear that we we need

:40:22. > :40:28.transparency and then if there is still excessive behaviour, then we

:40:29. > :40:32.will introduce a cap. I give way. I am grateful to the Minister for

:40:33. > :40:37.giving way. In order to try and help the House understand why you feel

:40:38. > :40:43.there is the need for this cap, I wonder, could you tell the House in

:40:44. > :40:47.what percentage of public sector employers presently do you feel

:40:48. > :40:51.there is an excess of granted of facility time and this cap would be

:40:52. > :40:57.beneficial in your view of stopping that? I am not at all sure if you do

:40:58. > :41:03.believe there is a need for a cap, but I think the honourable gentleman

:41:04. > :41:09.was referring to me. The honourable gentleman will get used to the fact

:41:10. > :41:15.that if you say, if one says EU, it means me. If one says the honourable

:41:16. > :41:22.gentleman, it means the Minister. Minister. I thought for your sake I

:41:23. > :41:27.should clarify that. And he asks a reasonable question. I hope you will

:41:28. > :41:31.understand that until we have applied the transparency clause, we

:41:32. > :41:34.do not know what is the level of spending that is currently happening

:41:35. > :41:38.across the broader public sector and so therefore, we cannot judge which

:41:39. > :41:45.organisations are currently spending in excess. What we do not is that

:41:46. > :41:48.when we introduced a similar provision in the civil service, we

:41:49. > :41:54.did find that some organisations were acting perfectly responsibly

:41:55. > :41:58.and others were allowing an abuse of the system and hence we introduced a

:41:59. > :42:02.cap in the civil service. It has saved the taxpayer money and not in

:42:03. > :42:06.anyway undermined the proper fulfilment of responsibilities by

:42:07. > :42:11.trade union representatives. I am now going to make a bit more... I

:42:12. > :42:18.have such a soft spot for the honourable gentleman. I appreciate

:42:19. > :42:22.his generosity. Does he appreciate given some of the rhetoric we have

:42:23. > :42:25.seen from his ministerial colleagues and others that people may have a

:42:26. > :42:29.reasonable suspicion that the government might seek to use these

:42:30. > :42:33.powers in a very pernicious way going up the particular groups of

:42:34. > :42:38.people they happen not to be happy about the practices of. Does he not

:42:39. > :42:42.accept that is a reasonable suspicion to have? I do not, really,

:42:43. > :42:45.because after all, I am the Minister and I will be in charge of this

:42:46. > :42:52.until the Prime Minister decides otherwise and I think he has had

:42:53. > :42:57.enough time to judged whether I am sincere. In the proposals we are

:42:58. > :43:03.putting forward today there have to be three year's data before we can

:43:04. > :43:07.introduce a cap, we have two, responding in part to what is

:43:08. > :43:11.honourable friend said, we have to allow the organisation where there

:43:12. > :43:14.is some concern, we have to allow them the opportunity to explain why

:43:15. > :43:19.the level of spending is appropriate. There are now, partly

:43:20. > :43:22.through the good offices of the honourable members in this House and

:43:23. > :43:29.the other House, greater safeguards to ensure there can be no abuse. I

:43:30. > :43:35.am a bit confused to know what the cost will be of this. In terms of

:43:36. > :43:39.Minister of civil servants sitting down, sifting through mountains of

:43:40. > :43:44.data from every council, every body that are covered by it to determine

:43:45. > :43:47.whether or not something is being abused when from his own lips he has

:43:48. > :43:52.just admitted he does not know if there was any abuse. If there is not

:43:53. > :43:59.a problem, why are we bringing in this very expensive and I think

:44:00. > :44:03.totally possible -- impossible system to regulate. I would put him

:44:04. > :44:08.to the fact that there are estimates, while there has not been,

:44:09. > :44:11.because there has not been the transparency clause is applied,

:44:12. > :44:18.estimates that the public sector as a whole spends on average 0.14% of

:44:19. > :44:24.its total pay bill on facility time. The civil service spends 0.07%, half

:44:25. > :44:29.of that, and the private sector spends 0.04% and I can promise him

:44:30. > :44:32.that if he multiplies up the pay bill of the public sector by that

:44:33. > :44:36.percentage, he will arrive at a very large figure indeed and a great deal

:44:37. > :44:43.more than the cost of implementing these clauses. I will make progress.

:44:44. > :44:48.I will be generous again, that I am going to try and make some progress.

:44:49. > :44:58.In addition, as I indicated to the honourable member, the cap may be

:44:59. > :45:01.these applied for as long as necessary for individual employers,

:45:02. > :45:04.a temporary lifting of the cup or one or more specific employers and

:45:05. > :45:09.we propose to use it in circumstances where the employer and

:45:10. > :45:12.ministers consider it necessary. We envisage that should a particular

:45:13. > :45:17.employer experience they need for more facility time, perhaps during a

:45:18. > :45:22.period of change of following a particular incident, ministers can

:45:23. > :45:28.allow this to respond to the circumstance. The reserve power this

:45:29. > :45:31.amendment would deliver is considerably improved and I would

:45:32. > :45:38.urge the House to support it. I commend these amendments to the

:45:39. > :45:45.House. The question is the government amendment a Lords

:45:46. > :45:49.amendment to be made. I want to make it clear right at the outset that we

:45:50. > :45:56.remain opposed to this bill and despite some of the changes that it

:45:57. > :45:58.has undergone in the other place, it remains a dreadful mean-spirited

:45:59. > :46:04.partisan piece of legislation. Having got that off my chest, I want

:46:05. > :46:08.to recognise that members in the other players have made a valiant

:46:09. > :46:14.attempt to make a silk purse out of this particular malformed thing.

:46:15. > :46:28.After today it may hand up being a slightly less ugly thing but not the

:46:29. > :46:32.less will remain. Many of the changes peers made to the bill

:46:33. > :46:38.welcome if we consider the crudeness of the bill in its original form.

:46:39. > :46:41.Turning to the first group of Lords amendments we are considering in

:46:42. > :46:47.this group and the government's response, Lords amendment to to

:46:48. > :46:53.clause four of the bill was passed in 320 one votes to 281 requiring

:46:54. > :46:58.the government to commission a review of electronic voting in

:46:59. > :47:01.industrial action ballots within six months of Royal assent and after the

:47:02. > :47:07.review, amendment to would require the government to publish a strategy

:47:08. > :47:13.for rolling out electronic voting. The government's amendment Awe are

:47:14. > :47:16.considering would revise the amendment to state ministers would

:47:17. > :47:20.only be required to publish a response to the review but not take

:47:21. > :47:26.further action to introduce e-balloting. The government has

:47:27. > :47:30.consistently resistant e-balloting on the grounds they had concerns

:47:31. > :47:37.about the safety of this. Despite the fact that the Conservative Party

:47:38. > :47:41.use electronic ballots for the selection of the London mayoral

:47:42. > :47:44.candidate. Although I suppose they may be regretting that given the

:47:45. > :47:48.poor performance of the candidate they selected using that particular

:47:49. > :47:52.method and perhaps that explains the government's concern. It is clear

:47:53. > :47:58.that the government's real objection to e-balloting and workplace ballot

:47:59. > :48:03.in which we argue for successfully in the south and the other place has

:48:04. > :48:07.been that they do not want high turnouts in these ballots, because

:48:08. > :48:11.that would mean there is new threshold barriers would be more

:48:12. > :48:15.easily reached if more people were more easily able to vote. Not only

:48:16. > :48:22.will all ballots for industrial action require more than 50% turnout

:48:23. > :48:26.under the bill, but those working in the loosely defined important public

:48:27. > :48:31.service group will face an additional hurdle of needing a 40%

:48:32. > :48:37.yes vote from all those eligible to vote. And that means these

:48:38. > :48:40.thresholds place higher requirements on the industrial action ballot of

:48:41. > :48:45.this kind than on any other democratic process within the United

:48:46. > :48:50.Kingdom. For example, 50% turnout threshold was not reached for the

:48:51. > :48:56.last London mayoral election almost local government and devolved

:48:57. > :48:58.elections. The government's tabled amendment Alpha, revising the Lords

:48:59. > :49:04.amendment we are considering a day it is agreed that ministers should

:49:05. > :49:08.be required to commission ended independent review on the use of

:49:09. > :49:12.e-balloting within six months of Royal assent. It is agreed that it

:49:13. > :49:17.will be possible to run pilots as part of that review but it is

:49:18. > :49:21.proposing that after the review ministers would need to publish a

:49:22. > :49:26.response but not necessarily to take any further action and there would

:49:27. > :49:31.be no requirement to publish a strategy for rolling out electronic

:49:32. > :49:36.voting. I will give way. I am grateful to my honourable friend. Is

:49:37. > :49:40.there not a slight concern that this is a delaying tactic by the

:49:41. > :49:44.government that does not in tend to introduce these measures and given

:49:45. > :49:49.that in 2016 many people are quite used to banking online, registering

:49:50. > :49:55.to vote online, submitting their tax returns online, do not these

:49:56. > :50:02.questions about these questions and anonymity for by the wayside? I take

:50:03. > :50:07.the minister his words at when he says this is not his intention but

:50:08. > :50:12.to coin a phrase, here's a here today, gone today Minister and I say

:50:13. > :50:15.that from experience as a former minister myself. Somebody else

:50:16. > :50:20.eventually may well in the future occupy his place and may well not

:50:21. > :50:24.have the good intentions that he has outlined to the House today on the

:50:25. > :50:28.record. We have do legislate for that possibility rather than assume

:50:29. > :50:38.that somebody with goodwill will occupy that seat in the future. It

:50:39. > :50:42.is proposing after the review it would not have to publish a

:50:43. > :50:47.strategy. B be clear about this, we do not think the government's

:50:48. > :50:53.amendment is necessary and we accept, and I do except it has moved

:50:54. > :50:55.a long way in accepting the review, pilots and requirements before

:50:56. > :50:59.Parliament and accepting the need to consult experts and get advice and

:51:00. > :51:03.recommendations and the need to commission a report within six

:51:04. > :51:08.months of the passing of the act. These are significant changes and go

:51:09. > :51:11.part of the way to achieving what we have argued for right from the start

:51:12. > :51:15.of the bill in the Commons and indeed, they achieved most of what

:51:16. > :51:19.was agreed by peers in the other place on a cross-party basis with

:51:20. > :51:25.crosspatch support down in the Lords. I give way.

:51:26. > :51:32.As someone who considered that electronic balloting is probably the

:51:33. > :51:34.right way to go, would he not recognise the ministers and the

:51:35. > :51:43.Government 's progress in this direction, and welcome that? I

:51:44. > :51:47.believe the Minister and any future Minister will ensure that the

:51:48. > :51:50.evidence is looked at and provided the evidence shows electronic

:51:51. > :51:55.balloting is the right way to go, we will go forward with that.

:51:56. > :52:01.Obviously, I can't comment on how long the Minister will remain in

:52:02. > :52:04.this particular post. We will see. But I did, I think, recognise the

:52:05. > :52:08.move that the Government has made and I want to make it clear that I

:52:09. > :52:11.do recognise that, although I've made it clear that we do think this

:52:12. > :52:15.is an unnecessary amendment that the Government is making and that the

:52:16. > :52:19.whole matter could have been dealt with in a much more straightforward

:52:20. > :52:23.manner. But we are where we are having received amendments from the

:52:24. > :52:29.Lords, and that's all we can discuss today. Ultimately, it seems in can

:52:30. > :52:34.either ball that any minister having received a report on how e-balloting

:52:35. > :52:39.could be introduced safely would then denying trade union members the

:52:40. > :52:45.opportunity to participate in a ballot using modern Elektra nick to

:52:46. > :52:49.medication. The only possible reason for ministers to reject an expert

:52:50. > :52:54.report outlining the appropriate way to introduce modern technology and

:52:55. > :52:58.to offer the opportunity for easier participation in a democratic vote

:52:59. > :53:01.would be a desire to suppress turnout. -- electronic

:53:02. > :53:06.communication. That would be the only possible explanation. Thank you

:53:07. > :53:09.for giving way and you come right to the point. He does not have to rely

:53:10. > :53:20.on the goodwill of this minister, who I'm sure the Cabinet supports.

:53:21. > :53:23.The reason I asked him to say the intent of the Government on receipt

:53:24. > :53:27.of the report were that if another minister were tempted to not follow

:53:28. > :53:33.the explicit policy right now he and I could hold him to account in this

:53:34. > :53:36.chamber. Indeed. I don't know whether the future Prime Minister

:53:37. > :53:40.goes well pointing to the Cabinet or not, we will have to wait and see.

:53:41. > :53:46.-- future prime ministers Mr Gove. That is why the Government's

:53:47. > :53:50.amendment is unnecessary and still is likely effect of the acceptance

:53:51. > :53:56.of the rest of the Lords amendment. However, I'm seeking to put on

:53:57. > :53:59.record the fact that should any future Minister take another path

:54:00. > :54:03.having had a clear recommendation on this report, one could only

:54:04. > :54:07.interpret their intentions as being less than honourable if that were

:54:08. > :54:13.the course of action but a future Minister were to take. Could you

:54:14. > :54:16.advise me whether those an order for the House to spend so much time

:54:17. > :54:23.talking about my career prospects because I do not feel they are

:54:24. > :54:28.really helping? Is that good or bad for the House? I am happy to leave

:54:29. > :54:32.him alone for the rest of the debate, apart from the issues that

:54:33. > :54:37.we are discussing here today. If any minister did take that path, there

:54:38. > :54:40.would be considerable anger and opposition not just from us but from

:54:41. > :54:44.other parties and also in the other place who worked so hard to crack

:54:45. > :54:49.this amendment on electronic balloting. In practice, the momentum

:54:50. > :54:53.for e-balloting would be unstoppable if that report was published and

:54:54. > :54:56.comes to those conclusions that we think it probably will. We prefer

:54:57. > :55:02.the Lords amendment and we would seek this afternoon to keep it in

:55:03. > :55:05.the bill. Moving to Lords amendment 17 on facility time, the other part

:55:06. > :55:10.of this group and the Government's motion to disagree with the Lords

:55:11. > :55:14.amendment, and the Government's proposed additions to be reinstated

:55:15. > :55:20.clause 13, if in fact the House decides to reinstate that clause by

:55:21. > :55:28.voting to disagree with the Lords. The laws passed amendment 17 by 248

:55:29. > :55:32.votes to 160, which removed the power for ministers to impose a cap

:55:33. > :55:37.on union facilities by deleting clause 13 from the bill. The

:55:38. > :55:42.Government has tabled a motion this afternoon to disagree with Lords

:55:43. > :55:46.amendment 17 so that they can restore their ability to impose a

:55:47. > :55:50.cap on facility is. They proposed a further amendment to a mentally

:55:51. > :56:00.reinstated clause in line with assurances that they gave in the

:56:01. > :56:05.Lords. And that no caps can be imposed after the first three years.

:56:06. > :56:09.Before ministers could impose a cap, they would need to review the

:56:10. > :56:12.published data on facilities, the cost of facilities for the relevant

:56:13. > :56:17.employer, the nature of the service is run by the public authority, and

:56:18. > :56:22.any particular factors relevant to the employer and relevant matters.

:56:23. > :56:24.They would also need to consider the type of relevant organisation and

:56:25. > :56:28.any relevant matters if the organisation was facing a major

:56:29. > :56:31.restructure. If the Minister has concerns about the level of

:56:32. > :56:35.facilities in a public authority under the provisions that they are

:56:36. > :56:41.posing, they would be to write to the employer expressing their

:56:42. > :56:49.concerns. The ministers seem to skate over this. What is this going

:56:50. > :56:51.to cost the taxpayer in terms of reviewing all this information?

:56:52. > :56:57.Surely if it will be done orally and effectively it will, at great cost

:56:58. > :57:06.to the taxpayer. -- done orally and effectively. Given that the --

:57:07. > :57:10.thoroughly. It is ironic that what my honourable friend is exactly the

:57:11. > :57:13.case. As I said earlier, we are dealing with what we've got back

:57:14. > :57:17.from the laws. We would not wish this to remain in the bill at all

:57:18. > :57:21.and indeed we would support the Lords amendment to remove this from

:57:22. > :57:27.the bill completely. I am simply setting out to the House be

:57:28. > :57:30.consequences of not doing so. The original clause 13 introduced

:57:31. > :57:34.included a reserve power for government ministers to introduce

:57:35. > :57:37.regulations imposing an arbitrary cap on the amount of time which

:57:38. > :57:43.union rights in the public sector can spend in the workplace promoting

:57:44. > :57:50.learning and training opportunities, consulting on redundancies,

:57:51. > :57:52.negotiating better pay and conditions, and even representing

:57:53. > :57:56.members in grievances and disciplinary hearing. We want to

:57:57. > :58:00.make it clear that we agree with the Lords that the clause should have

:58:01. > :58:04.been removed altogether from the bill on facility time. It is an

:58:05. > :58:08.unnecessary interference in the conduct of good industrial

:58:09. > :58:18.relations. The Government's professed desire to support

:58:19. > :58:22.devolution, as has been pointed out. It goes against what the Government

:58:23. > :58:25.has said is its professed desire to do a devolution and it has been

:58:26. > :58:30.resisted, as he would know, why the devolved administrations. We

:58:31. > :58:34.acknowledge, however, that significant advances have been made

:58:35. > :58:38.in the Government amendment letter A. It is our position that we

:58:39. > :58:49.support the Lords and we want this removed from the bill. However,

:58:50. > :58:52.government amendment capital they will provide some improvement in a

:58:53. > :58:56.memo in which should never have appeared in the first place.

:58:57. > :59:06.I'd like to speak today on Lords amendment two. Comments I make, I

:59:07. > :59:10.hope are met with a spirit with which I hope to make them. Which is

:59:11. > :59:17.first of all to outline a frustration that I have when I spoke

:59:18. > :59:22.on second reading about thresholds are lots within the private sector.

:59:23. > :59:29.I made clear in those marks at the time that trade unions have a very

:59:30. > :59:32.important part to play in the workforce, whether that be through

:59:33. > :59:39.health and safety, whether it be through bullying, whether it be

:59:40. > :59:43.through contractual negotiations in terms of a changing working

:59:44. > :59:50.practice, funding, many of those issues. I think it is the wrong

:59:51. > :59:53.thing to do to be seen to not appreciate the work that trade

:59:54. > :59:58.unions do, and indeed as I've already mentioned in my intervention

:59:59. > :00:02.there are many shop steward in the country who do an outstanding job. I

:00:03. > :00:09.have had experience when I was a member of Unite with some excellent

:00:10. > :00:15.shop stewards who worked very hard. The reason at the time of that

:00:16. > :00:19.speech that I said I wasn't keen on thresholds her lots in the private

:00:20. > :00:25.sector was because I wondered at the time that the threshold to go on

:00:26. > :00:30.strike in the private sector is much higher than the public sector.

:00:31. > :00:36.Because whatever the rights and wrongs of it may be, going on strike

:00:37. > :00:40.in the public sector generally means there will always be a job to go

:00:41. > :00:44.back to because it is being funded largely through government through

:00:45. > :00:50.taxation. That threshold in the private sector can be guaranteed,

:00:51. > :00:53.especially in smaller businesses. If workforce withdraws its labour, it

:00:54. > :01:00.certainly have gone through a much higher threshold in its own mind to

:01:01. > :01:02.put at risk, perhaps, the ongoing viability of the company. And

:01:03. > :01:07.therefore to take strike action in those circumstances relates to a

:01:08. > :01:12.couple of things. First of all, the conditions that have led to that

:01:13. > :01:15.strike must be very bad indeed. Secondly, there has been a complete

:01:16. > :01:23.breakdown between the shop stewards and the owners of those companies. I

:01:24. > :01:29.cited at the time, and I go back to, the example of Grundig in the 1970s.

:01:30. > :01:36.I will state once more that I do not associate myself with the support of

:01:37. > :01:43.the then Conservative Party in the 1970s to break that strike run by

:01:44. > :01:48.George Ward. Because the conditions that those people were working under

:01:49. > :01:53.were indeed absolutely appalling. Strike action was taken to try and

:01:54. > :01:57.improve the conditions, conditions which today would simply not be

:01:58. > :02:04.acceptable. As I said back at the time, I applaud the law brought in

:02:05. > :02:08.by the last Labour government to give a legal requirement to allow a

:02:09. > :02:14.trade union in the workplace if that is the requirement of members in the

:02:15. > :02:20.workplace. So, I hope the House understands that I feel that it is

:02:21. > :02:24.with a regret that movement wasn't made on not having a threshold

:02:25. > :02:29.turnout in the private sector. The flip side of that is I do believe

:02:30. > :02:34.it's right to have a turnout threshold in the public sector. Yes,

:02:35. > :02:40.I will give way. Is he aware that also a lot of trade unions with

:02:41. > :02:45.their own rule book have thresholds in terms of ensuring that a centre

:02:46. > :02:53.of those that vote after vote in better. The idea that somehow it is

:02:54. > :03:00.uniform across all uniform to let unions or businesses is not the

:03:01. > :03:06.case. -- all unions or businesses. I accept the comment, but it is not

:03:07. > :03:14.uniform across all trade unions and within the public sector, I think

:03:15. > :03:16.the right to a threshold to take action when they raise a lot of

:03:17. > :03:21.employment protection in terms of having jobs to go back to is the

:03:22. > :03:28.right thing. As I say, I'm eating too amendment a two Lords amendment

:03:29. > :03:33.two. What I wanted to say to my honourable friend 's afternoon is

:03:34. > :03:38.that recognising the regret I have over thresholds for the private

:03:39. > :03:51.sector, recognising that I believe that a lecture in balloting will

:03:52. > :03:58.lead to a higher turnout in strike thresholds... As long as it is

:03:59. > :04:03.secure and can be seen to be genuine it is the right thing to do. As a

:04:04. > :04:09.policy goes through it should be applied as quickly as possible

:04:10. > :04:15.because that will enable the private sector to meet those thresholds more

:04:16. > :04:20.easily than perhaps is there now. I just wanted to say that there is a

:04:21. > :04:25.balance to be struck here. There is a balance between ensuring that

:04:26. > :04:28.those in the public sector who caused great disruption to people

:04:29. > :04:31.who work in the private actor and may not have the terms and

:04:32. > :04:42.conditions of those in the public sector... Private sector -- I don't

:04:43. > :04:48.have that same regard in the private actor and members can refer back to

:04:49. > :04:51.my comments in the very first reading of the second reading of

:04:52. > :04:55.this bill and the comments I made them to explain further. I think the

:04:56. > :04:59.approach taken by the Government is the right one on an electronic

:05:00. > :05:04.balloting but when it can be proven to be safe and reliable but it is

:05:05. > :05:07.put in place. I do believe that there is an unintended consequence

:05:08. > :05:11.of this bill but it's going to have a big reflect on union members in

:05:12. > :05:27.the private sector than it will in the public. Thank you. What we've

:05:28. > :05:30.seen in the last few days in the media, and I want to commend

:05:31. > :05:36.government ministers for this, is the performance of somersaults of

:05:37. > :05:41.Olympian proportions. Having voted down sensible amendments at

:05:42. > :05:44.committee and third Reading to allow for an alternative voting in

:05:45. > :05:48.industrial action ballot, many find themselves in a position so out of

:05:49. > :05:54.step with the work of trade unions and how trade unions organise

:05:55. > :06:00.themselves or even Thatcherites are seen as a friend of the worker in

:06:01. > :06:04.comparison. -- that even. If I was a member of the Conservative Party, I

:06:05. > :06:07.would be very worried about that. I'd like to welcome this line of

:06:08. > :06:15.change. As we have argued previously, if e-balloting is good

:06:16. > :06:18.enough for the Conservative Party's vote for London Mayor, surely it is

:06:19. > :06:24.good enough elsewhere. I cannot for the life of me understand why the

:06:25. > :06:27.Government are arguing against a system that the Conservative Party

:06:28. > :06:31.thought was good enough for the selection of a candidate for London

:06:32. > :06:35.Mayor. Listen very carefully to what the Minister's said and the reasons

:06:36. > :06:42.he gave for the Conservative Party using that choice, and denying it to

:06:43. > :06:46.the trade unions. Can I say to him gently that if there was a vote

:06:47. > :06:51.taken now between trade unions and the current Mayor of London as to

:06:52. > :06:54.who has disrupted the public's lives, I don't think the answer

:06:55. > :06:59.would be quite what the Government would think.

:07:00. > :07:06.We firmly believe access to electronic balloting will enhance

:07:07. > :07:09.engagement and participation as today more people use electronic

:07:10. > :07:18.devices every day to communicate. We believe online balloting and we

:07:19. > :07:25.cannot father the reasoning given in relation to suggesting that online

:07:26. > :07:29.balloting is unsafe and secure. I heard the honourable ladies think

:07:30. > :07:34.she had difficulty in conducting and accessing that ballot. I was going

:07:35. > :07:38.to ask a number of questions. I was going to ask if the e-mail that

:07:39. > :07:44.accompanied the link to the ballot paper said that if you press this

:07:45. > :07:48.link, this website may be unsafe and an secure. Or perhaps it may have

:07:49. > :07:55.said that clicking this link may lead to a fraudulent act. Does it

:07:56. > :07:59.mean the honour roll member, for Richmond Park, what does it mean for

:08:00. > :08:05.him? Does it mean here is unsafe and an secure? Or is it the case that

:08:06. > :08:11.some -- some government members are nodding their heads! Or is it the

:08:12. > :08:16.case that only Conservative Party members have access to safe and

:08:17. > :08:22.secure e-mails, have more privileges than you would find on a gold

:08:23. > :08:27.American Express card? Because that is what the trade union movement are

:08:28. > :08:31.asking. They are asking themselves, why is it one rule for them and

:08:32. > :08:41.another rule for the rest of us? The other issue which I I know has been

:08:42. > :08:45.raised before, is that the number of postboxes across the UK has reduced

:08:46. > :08:51.by 17% in the last ten years so it is difficult for people to

:08:52. > :08:57.participate in a postal ballot. Electronic balloting... I give way.

:08:58. > :09:00.Would my honourable friend agree that with the increase in postal

:09:01. > :09:08.charges that it will cost more to do postal balloting to? I do agree and

:09:09. > :09:16.also take the view that electronic balloting is more efficient, and

:09:17. > :09:19.unlike postal balloting, where the problem is the prolonged length of

:09:20. > :09:23.the dispute because of the length of time it takes, electronic balloting

:09:24. > :09:30.would allow greater flexibility and efficiency. We are disappointed that

:09:31. > :09:35.the honourable member has said the pilots does not extend to workplace

:09:36. > :09:38.balloting because that would increase tomography in the

:09:39. > :09:42.workplace. The TUC have previously argued there is no evidence that

:09:43. > :09:46.workers feel intimidated into betting a particular way when

:09:47. > :09:53.ballots take place in the workplace as has been argued by the

:09:54. > :09:56.government. There are amendment effectively means that ministers

:09:57. > :10:00.would only have to publish a response to the review and therefore

:10:01. > :10:03.would not be obligated to bring forward the strategy to allow

:10:04. > :10:10.electronic voting. That is simply unacceptable. The Lords amendment is

:10:11. > :10:13.actually a moderate one. The question before us today is whether

:10:14. > :10:16.the government response is good enough or whether it weakens the

:10:17. > :10:20.intent behind the Lords amendment. Having listened carefully to what

:10:21. > :10:24.the Minister has said, we can only conclude that the amendment before

:10:25. > :10:33.us does weaken the other place's intentions. The government are

:10:34. > :10:42.proposing to revise the amendment so they do not have to take any action.

:10:43. > :10:45.To do nothing, no strategy on how to proceed and therefore no actual

:10:46. > :10:49.commitment to allowing electronic balloting in the future. That is

:10:50. > :10:53.absurd. If the government truly are intent on modernising the law, they

:10:54. > :10:57.would allow for electronic balloting and allow for secure workplace

:10:58. > :11:01.balloting and it will be interesting to hear the Minister's response in

:11:02. > :11:11.that regard. Electronic balloting will bond and I is our democracy and

:11:12. > :11:18.inclusion. -- will modernise. Having such a clause in the bill signals

:11:19. > :11:23.intent. It signals intent that the government will interfere with the

:11:24. > :11:26.arrangements, basic industrial industrial relations, not just that

:11:27. > :11:32.of devolved administrations that that of local authorities across the

:11:33. > :11:37.UK. As Lord Kearsley put it in the other place, the government are

:11:38. > :11:40.saying the cost should be proportionate to benefits however

:11:41. > :11:50.this is fully secured through clause 12. There is no need for reserve

:11:51. > :11:54.powers in clause 13. It has its own democratic mandate and is answerable

:11:55. > :11:59.to its own electorate to the cost. Given the financial pressures, do we

:12:00. > :12:03.think they are incapable of making this judgment? While we acknowledge

:12:04. > :12:09.that some amendments have been made by the government possibly not good

:12:10. > :12:13.enough, any attempt wide government to instruct institutions on how to

:12:14. > :12:23.treat workers should be robustly resisted.

:12:24. > :12:28.Representatives promote training opportunities, negotiate better pay,

:12:29. > :12:36.terms and conditions by employees, amongst many of their roles and

:12:37. > :12:45.responsibilities. Limiting the role of unions will have a damaging

:12:46. > :12:52.impact on workers across the UK. They play an important role in

:12:53. > :13:01.maintaining the democracy in the workplace. In Scotland, the SNP

:13:02. > :13:08.government has taken a different approach, a modern, approach to

:13:09. > :13:13.industrial relations and believe unions at the heart of being able to

:13:14. > :13:16.achieve their work. The UK Government should offer trade unions

:13:17. > :13:24.are social partnership approach, not launch more attacks against them.

:13:25. > :13:31.The industrial relations mechanisms should be devolved at a local level.

:13:32. > :13:37.It beggars belief that the UK Government feels it should dictate

:13:38. > :13:41.policy in this areas. There will be no formal opportunity for the

:13:42. > :13:44.Scottish Government to influence such regulations. Today, we need a

:13:45. > :13:49.commitment from the UK Government that the rights of workers across

:13:50. > :14:07.the UK will not be restricted by the imposition of this. Julie passage of

:14:08. > :14:17.the bill, -- during the passage. It was ask... The Minister replies

:14:18. > :14:23.devolved administration would maintain some control. I asked at

:14:24. > :14:30.the time but it seems the UK Government seems intent on dictating

:14:31. > :14:34.to devolved administrations. The Minister answered the government

:14:35. > :14:37.would not change as proposals relating to facility time that the

:14:38. > :14:44.current bill, however, in an infamous letter leaked by the

:14:45. > :14:48.Socialist worker newspaper and published widely in other media

:14:49. > :14:52.outlets, contained a number of concessions that the government

:14:53. > :14:58.planned to make to the bill during its passage in the House of lords.

:14:59. > :15:03.It would be helpful if the Minister could confirm today that devolved

:15:04. > :15:09.administrations will maintain this controls on facility time. We on

:15:10. > :15:13.these benches will continue to push to derail any attempt at the

:15:14. > :15:16.government to dictate to Scotland and other devolved administrations

:15:17. > :15:28.how it treats its public sector workers. I declare an interest in

:15:29. > :15:32.being a member of the GMB and my wife works for a trade union as

:15:33. > :15:37.well. The cry we have an ear from the Conservative benches is that

:15:38. > :15:46.turnout in union ballots is not high enough. Where before us we have a

:15:47. > :15:50.mechanism to at least assist that to ensure we get more people to

:15:51. > :15:56.participate in terms of e-balloting. What we have before us today is, I

:15:57. > :16:03.think I have seen some pretty poor excuses brought forward, but today's

:16:04. > :16:09.I have to say, must get the prize for the poorest argument. Why we

:16:10. > :16:17.cannot introduce e-balloting for trade union ballots. This government

:16:18. > :16:21.prides itself in that it wants to be an electronic government, everything

:16:22. > :16:24.from driving licence right through to the introduction of the Universal

:16:25. > :16:30.Credit which you can only do on line. We heard from the Minister

:16:31. > :16:36.that he was saying that somehow the government needs to be convinced

:16:37. > :16:39.that this is secure. But didn't actually articulate on numerous

:16:40. > :16:44.interventions on their the reasons why he thought the process of

:16:45. > :16:49.e-balloting was in any way in secure. I respect his position more

:16:50. > :16:56.if the government had come forward and said these are the reasons why.

:16:57. > :17:01.The idea of a review is clearly the classic civil servants kick into the

:17:02. > :17:04.long grass approach to the subject. I don't want to take time because

:17:05. > :17:07.there are lots of members who wish to speak that I would like to draw

:17:08. > :17:14.the honourable gentleman's attention to an election conducted in the

:17:15. > :17:18.Philippines where interestingly, a company chaired by a former Labour

:17:19. > :17:24.minister was given charge of conducting online voting for the

:17:25. > :17:29.entire Philippines population. There was a hack, 70 million people's

:17:30. > :17:32.identity data was stolen, there was then a report that said that every

:17:33. > :17:40.registered voter's Dato was open to abuse. -- data. I know this

:17:41. > :17:45.government loves things foreign but can I just say to the Minister with

:17:46. > :17:52.great respect, he doesn't need to go very far to look for examples where

:17:53. > :17:59.electronic voting worked. I refer to the pilot of 2004 in the north-east

:18:00. > :18:05.where the electoral commission's report afterwards found no problems

:18:06. > :18:09.in terms of it. He doesn't have too... If he wants to go on a

:18:10. > :18:12.fact-finding trip to the Philippines, we would all welcome

:18:13. > :18:19.him to go there, but he just have to look at what is happening here. He

:18:20. > :18:23.also put up a very flimsy defence that it it is all right for the

:18:24. > :18:28.Conservative Party, it is not all right for the trade union movement.

:18:29. > :18:33.I would have respected his position if he had come back with concrete

:18:34. > :18:37.reasons why he thought electric... He quits the Philippines but did he

:18:38. > :18:41.actually look at the electoral commission report on electronic

:18:42. > :18:47.voting in 2004? Because that stated quite clearly there was no issue

:18:48. > :18:53.around fraud or any other risk to security. The fact the government

:18:54. > :18:56.then got cold feet over the rather hysterical campaign against postal

:18:57. > :19:00.voting is neither here nor there. I'm grateful to my noble friend and

:19:01. > :19:06.is not just the electoral commission, it is also the electoral

:19:07. > :19:11.reform Society who obviously are experts at e-voting. They conduct a

:19:12. > :19:15.number of internal e-voting elections for the Labour Party and

:19:16. > :19:19.would be quite capable of running similar elections will be trade

:19:20. > :19:22.union movement to. My honourable friend makes a good point because

:19:23. > :19:27.the Minister then tried to back into the corner that somehow it was so

:19:28. > :19:38.important these boats that therefore you could not do them and electronic

:19:39. > :19:41.way. -- these votes. Other organisations are happy with the

:19:42. > :19:47.security of this method. The Minister may not think this is

:19:48. > :19:50.important but said to my constituency, the person running the

:19:51. > :19:56.local hospital is a pretty important decision. It is used by many

:19:57. > :20:02.organisations, including private companies and charities, to consult

:20:03. > :20:07.their members. Organisations like the electoral reform Society which

:20:08. > :20:16.are used by many organisations to conduct ballots have not only

:20:17. > :20:20.attract record of impartiality that are respected in this country and

:20:21. > :20:26.internationally. I think it is pretty the better it to come back

:20:27. > :20:31.and say we need the... We don't need the evidence. In terms of the other

:20:32. > :20:36.witness in this, I am not convinced that they will after we've had this

:20:37. > :20:40.so-called review, actually implement the proposals. It was a proposal

:20:41. > :20:46.that came from trade unions, I congratulate them that have been

:20:47. > :20:51.back in theirs. It is a move forward that would improve access to voting

:20:52. > :20:57.for the members and improve the situation. Briefly, on the facility

:20:58. > :21:02.cap. This one, I think is just remarkable. The Minister clearly

:21:03. > :21:07.stated he didn't know what the abuse was. If you do not know what it is,

:21:08. > :21:10.why are you trying to fix it? We all know why he has tried to fix it,

:21:11. > :21:13.that is because it is the way of attacking the shady unions, but the

:21:14. > :21:22.system they have come up with in terms of this cap -- attacking the

:21:23. > :21:25.trade unions. He has not said how much it is better cost to sift

:21:26. > :21:33.through these organisations and then go into detail for those individuals

:21:34. > :21:44.to justify why they go in Arab -- need facility time.

:21:45. > :21:50.We have another example of this Government saying it committed

:21:51. > :21:55.devolutionary decision-making to local authorities but doing the

:21:56. > :21:59.opposite when it comes to dictating to local authorities what they

:22:00. > :22:02.should do. Remember they are democratically accountable and it is

:22:03. > :22:10.up to be electric to decide. The other important thing he didn't

:22:11. > :22:18.touch on is, it is all right talking about... There is no indication

:22:19. > :22:23.given what money is saved by organisations, councils, in having

:22:24. > :22:33.good industrial relations and ensuring redundancies and such are

:22:34. > :22:38.done in an efficient way. I am challenging the Government over the

:22:39. > :22:42.way it is handling the Lords amendment, clearly scrutinised in

:22:43. > :22:46.order to make sure there is evidence behind what is said. Today's example

:22:47. > :22:57.is yet another one we have Government evidence... Can I quickly

:22:58. > :23:05.declare my interest. I am a Member of Unite and the GMB and was an

:23:06. > :23:08.official for 17 years. On the issue of evidence would my Honourable

:23:09. > :23:14.Friend agree that the evidential basis for this entire Bill is

:23:15. > :23:19.nonexistent even today as the Bill is passed. Levels of industrial

:23:20. > :23:24.action at at historic lows in the UK and the number of days lost to

:23:25. > :23:30.strikes are down 90% since the 1980s. I'd like my Honourable Friend

:23:31. > :23:35.for the points particular on the levels of intraday -- industrial

:23:36. > :23:37.action at an all-time low. Industrial action occurring is in

:23:38. > :23:42.the public sector where the Government, like today with junior

:23:43. > :23:47.doctors, is failing to negotiate with trade unions. We have to

:23:48. > :23:53.examine why we are in our situation, but the evidence does not sit on the

:23:54. > :23:58.Government's side. I have overseen many industrial action ballot, paper

:23:59. > :24:02.ballots and electronic ballots, and what we have seen is there is a

:24:03. > :24:06.greater engagement with the electronic ballot, and there is a

:24:07. > :24:11.reason for that. It is convenient but also more accurate. We know also

:24:12. > :24:17.that we don't have the issue of papers. Electronic ballots are

:24:18. > :24:23.clear, either yes or no, whereas it can be more ambiguous with all forms

:24:24. > :24:29.of voting, we all experience that on election night, so it is very clear,

:24:30. > :24:33.the intention of the person voting, in electronic ballots. I would say

:24:34. > :24:38.and challenge the Minister in that when he talks about his tour of the

:24:39. > :24:42.world, we are talking about ballots in the UK and evidence base in the

:24:43. > :24:48.UK, and the evidence is overwhelming. I would challenge the

:24:49. > :24:52.Minister and save 100% to show security of electronic balloting.

:24:53. > :24:56.Other countries may not have rigour like this in their processes so I

:24:57. > :24:59.think it is inappropriate to bring them into the equation. I think it

:25:00. > :25:06.was very telling when the Minister was unable to say why it was less

:25:07. > :25:11.safe using electronic balloting than postal balloting. The evidence

:25:12. > :25:18.simply is not there. I would also say that it is very important that

:25:19. > :25:22.the Government realise that in the public sector particularly, the

:25:23. > :25:27.temperature of industrial relations, and why people are expressing a view

:25:28. > :25:29.about the decision-makers on terms and conditions, because it is

:25:30. > :25:35.essential that the Government response to that, therefore a high

:25:36. > :25:39.turnout will help inform the Government in its decision-making

:25:40. > :25:43.processes, and that is vital. Like many colleagues of mine I also want

:25:44. > :25:48.to draw on the point that while the Government depends on electronic

:25:49. > :25:54.means for far more, I would say, serious matters like tax returns,

:25:55. > :25:57.local Government, council tax collection, all done and

:25:58. > :26:02.chronically, driving licence application, the means of Reg chip

:26:03. > :26:06.-- registering to vote in a parliamentary election, and we know

:26:07. > :26:10.many if not all bank transfers of millions of pounds in which the

:26:11. > :26:16.Government will engage is done electronically. So why does a vote

:26:17. > :26:18.of an independent trade union have to have even more rigour than the

:26:19. > :26:24.processes the Government already use? It doesn't add up other than

:26:25. > :26:29.that this is a political tool the Government is using. I want to turn

:26:30. > :26:35.to one more issue on electronic balloting, which is this process of

:26:36. > :26:39.review and roll-out. We do not have confidence in the Government's

:26:40. > :26:44.intentions behind this. I would say that I think the Government should

:26:45. > :26:48.set out today exactly the timetable for this review, saying to start in

:26:49. > :26:53.six months but when will it end? How long will it last? And how will it

:26:54. > :26:59.positively leading to roll out? I would also say that we need to start

:27:00. > :27:04.looking now, enabling trade unions to provide that evidence and build

:27:05. > :27:10.the evidence on pilots which they can run in parallel to prove to you

:27:11. > :27:14.that electronic voting is safe, accurate and gets a clear result on

:27:15. > :27:22.the intentions of the workers over the dispute. I also want to move on

:27:23. > :27:26.to the issue of the cap, the facilities time cap, because I think

:27:27. > :27:30.what was behind what the Minister was saying is again there was no

:27:31. > :27:36.evidence. If we look at the cost, the cost of administration, the time

:27:37. > :27:41.taken out of ministers hands reviewing what the administration

:27:42. > :27:45.has put together doing this review, how only personnel... Will hell

:27:46. > :27:52.whole unit be set up concerning itself with this review, a review

:27:53. > :27:55.over three years, and what about the employers? It public sector

:27:56. > :27:59.employers will also have to dedicate loads of time providing evidence

:28:00. > :28:05.into that review, time they do not have and as we see they are already

:28:06. > :28:09.challenge with cuts to local Government, NHS and elsewhere, how

:28:10. > :28:12.will they have the resources to supply the Minister with the

:28:13. > :28:17.information that he will spend hours, I am sure, day and night,

:28:18. > :28:21.scrutinising, to make an assessment whether or not there has been access

:28:22. > :28:30.of cost in place. How will the Minister balance the minuscule cast

:28:31. > :28:36.of the facilities time with the amount of money trade unions save

:28:37. > :28:42.through not going to employment tribunal is, not seeing sickness

:28:43. > :28:44.levels so high, and adding value to organisations, increasing

:28:45. > :28:48.productivity. How will the Minister address that? I would like a

:28:49. > :28:52.response to how that particular question. On health and safety,

:28:53. > :29:05.learning, and the value wrap spring, how will he assess that cost. At

:29:06. > :29:09.every stage in this Bill I have asked what the calamity years in

:29:10. > :29:13.industrial relations in our land that requires us to bring forward

:29:14. > :29:17.new primary legislation, and I have yet to receive an answer to that

:29:18. > :29:21.because of course there is none. This proposal is unique amongst many

:29:22. > :29:26.we have considered in this House because it is not a proposal to

:29:27. > :29:33.change public policy as a result of a prominent identified in society,

:29:34. > :29:38.but something motivated purely by the ideology of factions inside the

:29:39. > :29:42.Conservative Party who have scores to settle and whose antipathy

:29:43. > :29:46.towards the trade unions is manifest. I know we have heard some

:29:47. > :29:50.of them, we are -- they are not in their place at the moment, some

:29:51. > :29:55.members do not share that view, but overall that is where the centre of

:29:56. > :30:01.political gravity lies in the party of Government. It has said in itself

:30:02. > :30:05.-- has set in itself an attitude towards trade unions which is not

:30:06. > :30:10.shared by any other Government in Europe nor indeed in the advanced

:30:11. > :30:13.capitalist world. Why is it that this Government is going so far out

:30:14. > :30:18.on a limb to set itself apart from everyone else? I accept that the

:30:19. > :30:21.Bill we have before us today with these amendments and the

:30:22. > :30:25.Government's position is slightly less bad than it was on the 11th of

:30:26. > :30:30.January when we had the second reading, but the is no doubt, this

:30:31. > :30:37.is still very much an anti-trade union Bill. This is designed to

:30:38. > :30:42.detail the expression, capacity and effectiveness of free trade Unions

:30:43. > :30:45.in our country. I have to speculate if this is a genuine change of heart

:30:46. > :30:52.on behalf of the Government or whether other factors may be

:30:53. > :30:57.involved in its consideration of how many things you can fright on at

:30:58. > :31:03.once. I wonder of the proximity of the referendum in June has persuaded

:31:04. > :31:06.the Government that it ought to try not to engage into larger conflict

:31:07. > :31:11.with the trade unions of this land because it needs their support to

:31:12. > :31:15.secure the Government position of staying in the EU. That is why I

:31:16. > :31:20.think we all want to see the words written down in black and white

:31:21. > :31:27.rather than Act set the spoken Word of ministers at the dispatch box at

:31:28. > :31:32.this time. I am glad that in Scotland the situation is different

:31:33. > :31:35.as my model friend the Member of the Glasgow South West confirmed, the

:31:36. > :31:38.Scottish Government is committed to working in partnership with Scottish

:31:39. > :31:43.trade unions to build our economy and build prosperity, and we believe

:31:44. > :31:48.they are a vital component of civil society. If my party is re-elected

:31:49. > :31:52.this note -- next week we will pledge to do Everything within the

:31:53. > :31:58.law we can do to compromise this Bill and prevent them frustrating

:31:59. > :32:03.the operation for free trade unions. I want to dwell on two things under

:32:04. > :32:07.consideration, the first is electronic ballots. When the

:32:08. > :32:11.Government first announced the attitude to electronic balloting, it

:32:12. > :32:14.seemed like an analog Government in a digital age scared of the

:32:15. > :32:21.possibility of electronic balloting, and it is a matter of irony that it

:32:22. > :32:24.takes the contemporary modern and forward-thinking institution of the

:32:25. > :32:29.House of Lords to persuade them of the error of their ways. I accept

:32:30. > :32:33.what the Minister said and the Government's position that they have

:32:34. > :32:37.moved slightly. They can no longer defend the intervention, which is to

:32:38. > :32:40.say they will not allow an electronic balloting in a society

:32:41. > :32:46.where that is the norm and commonplace for most citizens. You

:32:47. > :32:51.are looking at me, Mr Deputy Speaker, I will try to be as quick

:32:52. > :32:55.as I can. That is why we are concerned, when the Minister gets

:32:56. > :32:58.himself a get out clause, if he had come with an amendment that said

:32:59. > :33:04.that unless it can be shown that there are clear problems to the

:33:05. > :33:08.introduction and roll-out of electronic balloting it will

:33:09. > :33:12.go-ahead, we might have sympathy, but he is trying to give himself a

:33:13. > :33:16.get out clause to rent this happening in future. And in our

:33:17. > :33:21.post-referendum situation he may not be so well disposed to favouring the

:33:22. > :33:26.trade unions. They think it is up in defence about a statutory matter. It

:33:27. > :33:32.is only statutory in the sense that trade unions operate within the

:33:33. > :33:36.framework of legislation, but so do charities and private companies, so

:33:37. > :33:41.indeed do political parties. I find that a thin defence. I will wind up

:33:42. > :33:47.by talking about the facility cap. I did want to make this point because

:33:48. > :33:51.I have witnessed some bizarre debates in this chamber, but this

:33:52. > :33:58.one is frankly bordering on the surreal. We are being asked to pass

:33:59. > :34:04.legislation to try and prevent something which the Minister accepts

:34:05. > :34:11.we don't know exists. LAUGHTER. This is fantasy legislation and

:34:12. > :34:15.lawmaking, and I think the proposals for the facility time cap should be

:34:16. > :34:21.checked and weight should reject the Government's attempt, and if we get

:34:22. > :34:27.the chance, vote against this legislation. I will be brief, I want

:34:28. > :34:32.to welcome the Government's shift in position particularly relating to

:34:33. > :34:39.the point on check off, because I don't think it has any intrinsic

:34:40. > :34:45.cost to the employer. It is a check in a box on a payroll system. But I

:34:46. > :34:48.see this shift in viewpoint as testament to the hard work of

:34:49. > :34:52.thousands of ordinary working people who in their own time take on

:34:53. > :34:58.additional responsibilities to support and protect their fellow

:34:59. > :35:02.workers rights, often not a task that is thanked either by their

:35:03. > :35:07.co-workers or employers on some occasions. They really do go above

:35:08. > :35:10.and beyond in that role. The trade unions have a history of

:35:11. > :35:15.International is and I want to use this occasion to raise the point

:35:16. > :35:20.that tomorrow is international Workers Memorial Day, a day

:35:21. > :35:25.supported by the TUC, the trade union movement as a whole, lawyers,

:35:26. > :35:29.the Health and Safety Executive, and I will not be able to attend the

:35:30. > :35:38.events tomorrow so I want to pay tribute to Herbert Stiles, who

:35:39. > :35:43.religiously organises this event in Immingham, groups B and Cleethorpes.

:35:44. > :35:49.The event is growing every year -- back Grimsby and Cleethorpes. I am

:35:50. > :35:54.grateful to the work he puts in to take the time Tehran that those who

:35:55. > :36:04.lost their lives in the course of their work -- the time to remember

:36:05. > :36:09.those. Someone will be there in my place to lay a wreath, and I would

:36:10. > :36:14.like that day recorded on our calendars. Can the Minister assist

:36:15. > :36:23.in getting that recorded in calendars and diaries across the UK?

:36:24. > :36:29.This is supposed to be a modernised, that was the word the Minister used,

:36:30. > :36:34.modernised ballot. It is trying to stop people taking strike action. If

:36:35. > :36:41.electronic balloting was allowed he knows the turnout would go way

:36:42. > :36:42.beyond the limits. The party opposite have realised they will set

:36:43. > :36:55.themselves a tug of war. They have set a precedent. Cuban

:36:56. > :37:00.genuine, -- if you are genuine, but have as many as possible. In the

:37:01. > :37:06.1980s when the Tory government tried to control the rights of people to

:37:07. > :37:11.take industrial action, they were told that if you do away with

:37:12. > :37:16.workforce ballots, you will reduce the turnout and the figures proved

:37:17. > :37:23.that for over 30 years the average turnout was 80%. If you get 40% now

:37:24. > :37:28.you are doing well. In terms of facility time, this shows the real

:37:29. > :37:34.ignorance from the party opposite. They don't know what is going on in

:37:35. > :37:42.the world. In 1986I spent every day for a fortnight visiting a hospital

:37:43. > :37:51.and a man who had been buried under 50 tonnes of coal. Five years later

:37:52. > :37:55.I was working for Newcastle City Council encouraging home care

:37:56. > :38:00.workers who were working themselves into an early grave to say it is in

:38:01. > :38:04.your interest with retirement agreement when they would not talk

:38:05. > :38:09.to personal officers because they were frightened of the authority

:38:10. > :38:17.figure. I was able to convince them that it was the right thing for them

:38:18. > :38:21.to do. What is proposed now from the likes of meat will not be there,

:38:22. > :38:25.they will have some clerk who will be filling in forms to send the

:38:26. > :38:29.London for someone in London. It is an absolute nonsense and should be

:38:30. > :38:47.thrown out. I thank him for giving way. For the

:38:48. > :38:53.past 50 or 60 years, every Tory government manifesto has had a

:38:54. > :39:03.clause to protect trade unions. He referred to facility time, it shows

:39:04. > :39:05.how out of touch they are. Any major employer and welcomes facilitating

:39:06. > :39:14.because it saves them a lot of money in the end. That's absolutely right.

:39:15. > :39:17.If they had spoken to enable reasonable employer 's company, any

:39:18. > :39:28.trade union, they would get a picture of the real story. I realise

:39:29. > :39:33.that time is short so I will be brief. Welcome as it is that the

:39:34. > :39:39.government have been forced into a series of rather embarrassing

:39:40. > :39:46.U-turns, the bill, and I say this from our side, which does not

:39:47. > :39:48.receive funding from the trade union movement, we regard this not as a

:39:49. > :39:51.sensible attempt to look at some of the issues around party funding

:39:52. > :39:59.which clearly should be done in the round and fairly, and we would

:40:00. > :40:02.support, but this always was set out to be eight cynical politically

:40:03. > :40:08.motivated bill that undermines the important role that trade unions

:40:09. > :40:14.play in the democratic process. It is very encouraging that the other

:40:15. > :40:19.place have acted in a measured way, in a cross-party way and rather than

:40:20. > :40:23.simply striking down a raft of the bill as many would have liked to

:40:24. > :40:28.have seen, have suggested cross-party sensible measured

:40:29. > :40:37.amendments. I will briefly give way. I thank him for giving way. It is

:40:38. > :40:43.amazing that they have resorted to a high-handed regulation. It said set

:40:44. > :40:47.out as an extremely draconian bill that was not done in any

:40:48. > :40:56.collaborative way. I do think this change of heart, and it has not gone

:40:57. > :40:58.far enough, it is clear that the government have realised they cannot

:40:59. > :41:06.make enemies of the trade unions when they need that movement to

:41:07. > :41:10.secure a Yes vote in the EU referendum. I looked bored to

:41:11. > :41:17.working with the trade unionists and people with all parties to achieve

:41:18. > :41:22.that. On this particular amendment, the government have made a U-turn

:41:23. > :41:27.and it is welcome and we will not be opposing it but they have simply

:41:28. > :41:31.failed to make the case that electronic voting is not a sensible,

:41:32. > :41:36.moderate way forward. That exposes the fact that what this is about is

:41:37. > :41:38.trying to stop trade unions getting to the threshold rather than

:41:39. > :41:44.sensibly reforming the system, something we would oppose. We will

:41:45. > :41:49.continue to make the case for that alongside others. I believe the

:41:50. > :41:53.government should think again about their attitude to trade unions

:41:54. > :42:02.during this and work together with parties. I draw attention to the my

:42:03. > :42:08.membership of the GMB and Unison and I want to make one brief point in

:42:09. > :42:11.relation to my early intervention on the Welsh government. The minister

:42:12. > :42:14.is placing the government on a collision course with the worst

:42:15. > :42:18.government which will end up in the Supreme Court at great cost to the

:42:19. > :42:24.public pulse on facility time and where the UK Government will come on

:42:25. > :42:29.its own legal advice can lose, so I ask the Minister to reconsider his

:42:30. > :42:31.approach to this area of the bill. The question is, the government

:42:32. > :44:20.amendment to be made. The question is that the amendment

:44:21. > :51:04.to be made, as many of that opinion. The ayes to the right, 312, the noes

:51:05. > :56:33.to the left, 260. The ayes to the right, 312, the noes

:56:34. > :56:37.to the left, 260. The ayes have it. Unlock.

:56:38. > :56:44.Under the order of the House earlier today I must now bring to conclusion

:56:45. > :56:51.proceedings on consideration of the first group. I called the Minister

:56:52. > :56:58.to move amendment be. The question is that the amendment be made, as

:56:59. > :57:05.many are of that opinion say I, of the country, no, the ayes have it.

:57:06. > :57:13.Amendments two as amendment. The question is that the amendment be

:57:14. > :57:20.agreed to. The ayes have it. Minister to move to disagree to

:57:21. > :57:28.Lords amendments 17 formally. The question is that this has disagrees

:57:29. > :59:29.with the Lord in amendment 17. Division, clear the lobby.

:59:30. > :59:39.The question is that this has disagrees with amendments 17.

:59:40. > :00:58.Tellers for the ayes and tellers for the noes. Thank you very much.

:00:59. > :09:31.Order, order. The eyes to the raid, 307. The nose to the left, 268.

:09:32. > :10:03.As many that opinion, say I. The have it. It will be commuted -- will

:10:04. > :10:07.be considering the Government motion to disagree to Lords amendment

:10:08. > :10:13.eight. Government amendment is key to P, in the blue of Lords

:10:14. > :10:21.amendments seven to eight and nine to 16 and 18 to 29. I called the

:10:22. > :10:25.Minister to move to Italy to Lords amendment one. Madam Deputy Speaker,

:10:26. > :10:28.I beg to move that the house agrees with the words and their amendment

:10:29. > :10:34.one and we will turn to the other amendments made to the Bell Centre

:10:35. > :10:37.left the service, which I hope will be welcomed. These amendments I

:10:38. > :10:40.believe improve the Bell and take account of a number of points of

:10:41. > :10:45.concern raised by members both of their cellars and of the other

:10:46. > :10:48.place. There are a whole raft of amendments to consider is what hope