11/05/2016

:00:09. > :00:17.Urgent question. Maria Eagle. Can I ask the Secretary of State for

:00:18. > :00:26.culture, media and sport to make a statement on the white Paper on the

:00:27. > :00:32.BBC charter. I can inform the House that I will be making a statement

:00:33. > :00:38.tomorrow. And laying before the House our white paper on the BBC.

:00:39. > :00:42.The BBC's roll charter expires at the end of December, I launched a

:00:43. > :00:45.public consultation in July last year, and in March we published the

:00:46. > :00:51.summary of responses along with an independent review into the BBC's

:00:52. > :00:57.governance. Over the last ten months we have listened to the views of

:00:58. > :01:01.hundreds of organisations and institutions, and 180,000 members of

:01:02. > :01:11.the public. As well as working very closely with the BBC and the BBC

:01:12. > :01:15.Trust. -- 190,000. We have also had input from Hollywood, Cardiff and

:01:16. > :01:20.Stormont. The proposals in our White Paper are the result of one of the

:01:21. > :01:24.largest and most open consultations ever conducted. I have always been

:01:25. > :01:28.clear that I would publish our proposals as soon as we were ready

:01:29. > :01:32.to do so, and at a time when the House would have an opportunity to

:01:33. > :01:41.debate them. I look forward to doing so tomorrow. The BBC is one of the

:01:42. > :01:44.most valued and successful institutions ever created. It

:01:45. > :01:48.belongs to the people of this country, who pay for it. It has

:01:49. > :01:54.levels of public approval but any politician would die for. It is the

:01:55. > :01:57.linchpin of a unique ecology of broadcasting in this country, which

:01:58. > :02:02.enables our creative industries to grow at twice the level of the rest

:02:03. > :02:06.of the economy, employing more people than its size would suggest

:02:07. > :02:11.is possible. It enables the UK to create goodwill for Britain around

:02:12. > :02:15.the world. The Secretary of State has been displaying seemingly

:02:16. > :02:21.implacable hostility to the BBC during the charter renewal process.

:02:22. > :02:25.He has also been avoiding public -- parliament, and has had to be

:02:26. > :02:31.dragged to this House after weeks of almost daily leaked briefings to the

:02:32. > :02:35.media. He has not come willingly to Parliament, he seems intent on using

:02:36. > :02:41.his brief sojourn in office not to strengthen the BBC but to diminish

:02:42. > :02:46.it. Not received -- seek value in it, but to denigrate it, not to

:02:47. > :02:50.enable it, but to control it. So does he accept that a good charter

:02:51. > :02:55.needs to do three things, it is to guarantee the BBC's financial

:02:56. > :03:01.independence, it needs to guarantee the BBC's editorial independence, it

:03:02. > :03:05.needs to help the BBC fulfil its mission to inform, educate and

:03:06. > :03:10.entertain us all? Does he accept, given that the BBC has agreed to

:03:11. > :03:17.take on the ?1.3 billion cost of funding free TV licences for over

:03:18. > :03:22.75-year-old people, that any top slicing or direction from Government

:03:23. > :03:26.over how licence fee payers' money should be spent, is an unwarranted

:03:27. > :03:31.interference in independence and threatens the financial independence

:03:32. > :03:34.of the BBC? Does he accept, in respect of governance, that his

:03:35. > :03:41.proposals, which we have read about in the newspapers, to appoint a

:03:42. > :03:46.majority of the BBC's new unitary board, go further than the review of

:03:47. > :03:52.BBC governance, and does he accept that they raise a widespread concern

:03:53. > :03:55.that he is seeking thereby to control editorial decision-making by

:03:56. > :03:59.appointing a majority of the BBC board responsible for editorial

:04:00. > :04:03.decisions, something which has never happened before? Does he agree that

:04:04. > :04:08.any such move would be catastrophic for the reputation of our national

:04:09. > :04:13.broadcaster overseas, and would diminish its credibility and the

:04:14. > :04:17.respect in which it is held around the world for its objective

:04:18. > :04:20.reporting? We on the side of the House believes that appointment to

:04:21. > :04:24.any new unitary board must be made through a process which is

:04:25. > :04:27.independent of Government. The recent consultation on the BBC

:04:28. > :04:31.charter, which had the second-largest response to a

:04:32. > :04:34.Government consultation ever, showed that three quarters of the public

:04:35. > :04:41.want the BBC to remain independent. Will he listen to that result? The

:04:42. > :04:45.BBC does a brilliant job in entertaining, informing and

:04:46. > :04:52.educating, four fifths of the public believe it is serving its audiences

:04:53. > :04:56.well. Today we read that he is intending to rewrite the BBC's

:04:57. > :05:03.mission. He is wrong to do so and we will oppose any such revision. He is

:05:04. > :05:07.seeking to turn the BBC away from a mission which has succeeded

:05:08. > :05:12.brilliantly for 90 years, of which the public approve, just who does he

:05:13. > :05:20.think he is? The Secretary of State claims time and time again that he

:05:21. > :05:24.is a supporter of the BBC. Though he told Cambridge students recently

:05:25. > :05:28.that the disappearance of the BBC is a tempting prospect. He didn't like

:05:29. > :05:32.the results of the public consultation, so he is simply

:05:33. > :05:35.ignoring them. But the public love the BBC and want it to carry on

:05:36. > :05:40.doing what it has been doing so well for more than 90 years. Let me

:05:41. > :05:45.finish by giving him a bit of advice. It is not too late for the

:05:46. > :05:49.Secretary of State to start listening to the public. Indeed, he

:05:50. > :05:54.had better start doing so. He will not be forgiven and nor will his

:05:55. > :05:58.party if he continues on the path he has been briefing to the newspapers,

:05:59. > :06:04.that will lead to the destruction of the BBC as our much loved national

:06:05. > :06:14.broadcaster and turn it instead into a mouthpiece of the Government of

:06:15. > :06:20.the day. Let me first of all, Mr Speaker, said that the opening

:06:21. > :06:25.comments I agree with, the BBC does have a very trusted place in British

:06:26. > :06:28.life, it does a huge amount to support creative industries and its

:06:29. > :06:34.global influence is enormous. Those are things which are determined to

:06:35. > :06:39.preserve. But say that I have been dragged to Parliament I think is a

:06:40. > :06:42.little rich, went it has always been our intention to make a full

:06:43. > :06:46.statement when the House was sitting and that that would take place

:06:47. > :06:50.tomorrow. She set out three concerns of which she said she would judge

:06:51. > :06:54.our White Paper. I am not going to reveal the contents of the White

:06:55. > :06:59.Paper until it is published. But I can tell her that I think she will

:07:00. > :07:03.find that all three of her concerns are ones that are -- which we agree

:07:04. > :07:10.with her about and which will be met. We have had an extensive

:07:11. > :07:13.consultation and have taken account of that, but I would simply say in

:07:14. > :07:16.terms of the other question she has asked, they are legitimate questions

:07:17. > :07:22.for tomorrow when she has actually had the chance to read the White

:07:23. > :07:26.Paper. Rather than reading some comments in the newspapers which

:07:27. > :07:29.have ranged from what I would have to say at complete fan to say, two

:07:30. > :07:37.others which are quite well-informed but certainly not informed by me or

:07:38. > :07:41.my department. -- complete fantasy. Well it is occasionally the case

:07:42. > :07:45.that we criticise the BBC for repeats, in tomorrow's case I

:07:46. > :07:49.suspect we will have an awful lot of repeats from the honourable lady,

:07:50. > :07:56.since that is a time when she should ask her questions and when I will be

:07:57. > :07:59.happy to provide her with answers. Does my right honourable friend

:08:00. > :08:04.agree that worldwide reputation of the BBC, which she and I admirers,

:08:05. > :08:08.depends above all on it's obvious independence, and the fact that it

:08:09. > :08:12.seemed to be independent of Government and all other pressure

:08:13. > :08:16.groups? And would he reassure me that tomorrow's White Paper will

:08:17. > :08:21.reinforce bad reputation, and it will be played on the face of it

:08:22. > :08:27.that there is no threat to the BBC, which he has just been trying to be

:08:28. > :08:30.sure us a few minutes ago? I have always made clear that editorial

:08:31. > :08:34.independence is an incredibly important principle, and that they

:08:35. > :08:38.be -- and that we will do nothing to undermine that. I hope that when he

:08:39. > :08:45.comes to see the White Paper people find that we have done our best to

:08:46. > :08:49.strengthen it in some areas. Across the House we are waiting with some

:08:50. > :08:58.trepidation for the publication of the White Paper. But the Government

:08:59. > :09:02.should be in no doubt the level of support from editorially independent

:09:03. > :09:05.public service broadcasting throughout the United Kingdom. But

:09:06. > :09:11.there often seems to be something of a gulf between some of the wacky

:09:12. > :09:14.notions floated by the Government via the press and broadcasting

:09:15. > :09:19.reality. One of the most bizarre must be the idea that the BBC should

:09:20. > :09:24.desist from broadcasting popular programmes at the same time that ITV

:09:25. > :09:28.broadcast popular programmes. Presumably the BBC should only show

:09:29. > :09:38.dull, unpopular programmes at these times. The reports that this remains

:09:39. > :09:41.a sticking point between the Government and the director-general,

:09:42. > :09:51.can the Secretary of State reassure us that there is no truth in this

:09:52. > :09:55.absurd suggestion? Yes. I was concerned, and I think my committee

:09:56. > :10:01.was concerned earlier this year, but the process of the White Paper might

:10:02. > :10:04.be delayed by the volume of resort -- responses the Secretary of State

:10:05. > :10:08.has received. As he and the House will know, my committee made several

:10:09. > :10:13.serious recommendations on governance, much of which was picked

:10:14. > :10:16.up by the committee and development group himself. Can the Secretary of

:10:17. > :10:19.State reassure me that in the crucial role of the chair of this

:10:20. > :10:27.union -- new unitary board, the selection process will be

:10:28. > :10:31.wide-ranging and robust? My honourable friend is right that it

:10:32. > :10:35.has taken a considerable time to go through all the consultation

:10:36. > :10:38.responses, and we have had some very valuable recommendations both from

:10:39. > :10:41.his own committee and from the committee in the upper house, but it

:10:42. > :10:47.was always the case that we would make this statement as soon as

:10:48. > :10:51.possible and when the House is sitting, and I'm delighted to do so

:10:52. > :10:54.tomorrow. With regard to appointment to the new BBC board if that is the

:10:55. > :10:59.recommendation contained in the White obviously that is something

:11:00. > :11:02.which he will see what we suggest and I will be happy to talk to him

:11:03. > :11:08.about further once the White Paper's been published. Can I say to the

:11:09. > :11:11.Secretary of State that the pre-briefing from whatever --

:11:12. > :11:17.wherever it came to the BBC hostile press has not helped his cause. If

:11:18. > :11:19.when he publishes tomorrow the White Paper follows the recommendations of

:11:20. > :11:23.the excellent select committee report published last year, a

:11:24. > :11:29.committee which he had the time shared and a report he signed up to,

:11:30. > :11:32.I will support it. But if there is any suggestion of anything that

:11:33. > :11:40.intrudes on the BBC's independence, he will have the fight of his life

:11:41. > :11:45.on his hands. I ask the Secretary of State whether he agrees with

:11:46. > :11:49.himself. I share the honourable gentleman's view that the report

:11:50. > :11:53.issued by the select committee was excellent, and he played a very

:11:54. > :11:57.important role in framing the conclusions as well. But I repeat

:11:58. > :12:02.what I said earlier, I am committed to the editorial independence of the

:12:03. > :12:06.BBC, and I hope he will find the reassurance he is seeking in the

:12:07. > :12:09.White Paper. Earlier this week the Prime Minister described the BBC is

:12:10. > :12:12.one of the most recognised brands on the planet. It is indeed. It is also

:12:13. > :12:28.one of the British institutions which is recognised worldwide as a

:12:29. > :12:31.great achievement of this country, and a great advert for it. It is

:12:32. > :12:34.clear across the House but one of the key reasons for this long-term

:12:35. > :12:36.success is the BBC's independence. So can my right honourable friend

:12:37. > :12:38.assure us that nothing in the appointment system or the board

:12:39. > :12:40.system in the White Paper will expose the BBC to greater direct

:12:41. > :12:46.interference from any Government, because that would be a hugely

:12:47. > :12:50.retrograde step? I repeat again, I am absolutely in agreement about the

:12:51. > :12:54.importance of editorial independence. In terms of the

:12:55. > :13:00.appointments process, he will be aware that the BBC Trust -- trusts

:13:01. > :13:03.were entirely appointed by the Government is indeed where the BBC

:13:04. > :13:09.governors before then. However, the BBC board is a different beast, and

:13:10. > :13:16.I hope that he will find that we have taken steps to ensure the BBC

:13:17. > :13:28.independence is beyond doubt. Parents across the country value the

:13:29. > :13:33.BBC's children's channels, they BBC and Cbeebies. The BBC like the NHS

:13:34. > :13:42.is a world-class institution, and it is the envy of other nations. If it

:13:43. > :13:46.is not broken, he must not fix it. I share the honourable lady's

:13:47. > :13:50.admiration particularly for the programming the BBC produces for

:13:51. > :13:53.children, particularly as most of the commercial sector has now

:13:54. > :13:57.withdrawn from children's programming. I consider that a very

:13:58. > :14:00.important part of the BBC's public service role, and I hope she will

:14:01. > :14:05.find measures in the White Paper which she also will be able to

:14:06. > :14:12.welcome. I doubt there is anybody on either side of this House who is not

:14:13. > :14:15.a major supporter of the BBC, but for someone who served on the

:14:16. > :14:18.national heritage select committee, and the culture, media and sport

:14:19. > :14:22.select committee for many years, and having worked for the BBC it is a

:14:23. > :14:26.bit rich for the honourable lady to make some of the points she has

:14:27. > :14:29.made. I remember some of the appointments that were made to the

:14:30. > :14:34.Board of Governors by Tony Blair. And as for the comment that may the

:14:35. > :14:39.BBC should be showing programmes which are different from that of ITV

:14:40. > :14:44.are not competing, that was a point which was made by Kris Smith when he

:14:45. > :14:53.was culture, media and sport Secretary in Tony Blair's

:14:54. > :14:56.Government. -- Chris Smith. I think those observations well well made,

:14:57. > :14:58.and I hope he will come along and make some more tomorrow. -- were

:14:59. > :15:16.well made. Thank you, S4 see provides popular

:15:17. > :15:22.programming in Welsh, as popular as possible in fact. It is now largely

:15:23. > :15:28.funded by the BBC. -- S4C. Is he concerned his reported proposals are

:15:29. > :15:29.seen as likely in Wales to hamper S4C's ability to fulfil this prime

:15:30. > :15:39.function? I am concerned if these reports are

:15:40. > :15:45.circulating, but I hope there will be the assurance tomorrow. I share

:15:46. > :15:48.the honourable gentleman's regard for the programming that they

:15:49. > :15:53.produce. That he will also be aware that we have announced that once we

:15:54. > :16:01.have completed the BBC Charter review process, we will have a

:16:02. > :16:11.review of S4 C, with an aim of how to sustain it. When TS Eliot and

:16:12. > :16:19.Lawrence Olivia formed the society, I was the 12-year-old who put stamps

:16:20. > :16:28.on the publications. Can the Secretary of State say when Channel

:16:29. > :16:32.4 might come up for review? There are a number of issues on the

:16:33. > :16:40.agenda. The charter was the most important priority not least because

:16:41. > :16:45.it runs out before the end of the year, we will also see whether it

:16:46. > :16:51.can be strengthened in its delivery of the public service remit, and I

:16:52. > :16:58.believe we should make public our solutions as soon as possible. --

:16:59. > :17:03.our conclusions. I have heard what he has to say about the BBC's

:17:04. > :17:07.independence, but does he recognise that currently on the board there is

:17:08. > :17:11.just one ethnic minority? It would be a travesty of the same old people

:17:12. > :17:20.and the same old Westminster village occupy the same roles. I have

:17:21. > :17:24.sympathy with his comments. Appointments to the board is

:17:25. > :17:32.something that will be made clear tomorrow. At what I can say to him

:17:33. > :17:36.that the issue of the importance of diversity is something central to

:17:37. > :17:40.the White Paper in terms of those who work for the BBC, those who

:17:41. > :17:51.appear on BBC programmes, and those who watch BBC programmes. Following

:17:52. > :17:55.the lefty Lovie hysteria at the weekend, does he agree that

:17:56. > :18:00.scrapping the discredited BBC trust, asking for more transparency in a

:18:01. > :18:05.publicly funded organisation and wanting the BBC to be distinctive

:18:06. > :18:12.and impartial is hardly the end of public service broadcasting as we

:18:13. > :18:17.know it? I am grateful to him, he will find that our proposals

:18:18. > :18:23.certainly do not represent the end of public service broadcasting, and

:18:24. > :18:29.I hope it will strengthen service broadcasting. There is no doubt

:18:30. > :18:36.about the level of public support for the BBC's independence,

:18:37. > :18:40.impartiality and fairness, so at a time where it is being undermined by

:18:41. > :18:51.competitors and attacked by the Conservative hard right, and the

:18:52. > :18:59.bitter practitioners of the new and kinder politics on the hard left,

:19:00. > :19:07.and of course the crazed from -- conspiracy theorist is, isn't it

:19:08. > :19:13.really important that mainstream politicians stand up for the BBC's

:19:14. > :19:21.right to do its job and defend its staff from the terrible bully and we

:19:22. > :19:26.have seen recently? I do sometimes sympathise with the BBC in terms of

:19:27. > :19:34.maintaining impartiality at a time when they are so many diverse views,

:19:35. > :19:40.and striking a balance between those becomes increasingly hard. But

:19:41. > :19:43.impartiality and objectivity is absolutely at the cornerstone of the

:19:44. > :19:48.BBC's reputation, and I hope that is always the case. Would he agree that

:19:49. > :19:53.the period of charter renewal is time to consider what the BBC can do

:19:54. > :19:59.better than the future, even though it is a much loved institution, and

:20:00. > :20:06.also that there is white concern about the government is of the BBC?

:20:07. > :20:10.I agree, and he has contributed to the excellent select committee

:20:11. > :20:16.report on this matter, and I hope that he will find our proposals on

:20:17. > :20:23.the White Paper take account of that. Are intended to strengthen the

:20:24. > :20:36.BBC and raise areas where perhaps it has not fulfilled its potential to

:20:37. > :20:47.date. The BBC facility in Scotland, at Pacific Ian Glasgow, and I would

:20:48. > :20:53.like to ask specifically about BBC Alba, which is currently 73%

:20:54. > :20:59.repeats, and can only provide 4.4 hours of new output each week. They

:21:00. > :21:04.would like ten hours, and I would hope that the government would take

:21:05. > :21:11.that request on-board. The channel has grown as much of it can do,

:21:12. > :21:18.reaching 700,000 people a week. I would say that I had a very useful

:21:19. > :21:24.meeting with the Chief Executive of BBC Alba, and I agree that they do

:21:25. > :21:29.and excellent job in broadcasting Gaelic. That is something the

:21:30. > :21:32.government remains committed to. She again will need to wait until

:21:33. > :21:40.tomorrow. We recognise the importance of it, but to some extent

:21:41. > :21:48.funding is for the BBC. I welcome the words of reassurance, could he

:21:49. > :21:52.provide assurance about regional broadcasting and the importance it

:21:53. > :22:00.should continue to play in the BBC? I agree with my honourable friend

:22:01. > :22:06.about the importance of BBC local broadcasting. In terms of BBC local

:22:07. > :22:09.radio, it is one of the areas where it is difficult to imagine the

:22:10. > :22:15.commercial sector would ever provide the kind of news broadcasting and

:22:16. > :22:20.community information the BBC provide, and that is one of the

:22:21. > :22:28.strengths, and I would like to see it continue in the future. Is part

:22:29. > :22:33.of the ongoing remove, -- review, could the Secretary of State outline

:22:34. > :22:36.is part of the importance of regional broadcasting that the

:22:37. > :22:52.continuing collaboration between BBC Northern Ireland and Irish

:22:53. > :22:59.broadcaster R T the will continue? -- RTE. The importance of the BBC

:23:00. > :23:05.working in collaboration with other broadcasters is something we very

:23:06. > :23:10.much support. Like most members of this House, I respect the production

:23:11. > :23:13.values of the BBC. But does he agree that it is only proper to ask the

:23:14. > :23:19.BBC to review its government's arrangements and ensure it continues

:23:20. > :23:20.to have an approach in a fast changing digital world?

:23:21. > :23:30.on both points. There is universal agreement that the existing

:23:31. > :23:37.government stop your has not proved sufficiently effective, and there is

:23:38. > :23:41.a need for a new system of governance, and he makes the point

:23:42. > :23:48.we are in a fast changing media landscape. The way in which people

:23:49. > :23:53.consume television is changing. If we look back at the position ten

:23:54. > :24:04.years ago, it has transformed, and the likelihood is that the will

:24:05. > :24:09.continue. And he reassured us he will not listen to the hardline

:24:10. > :24:12.cranks and obsessive detractors of the BBC who are always knocking that

:24:13. > :24:17.important institution which is much loved and valued by mainstream

:24:18. > :24:23.Britain. The BBC actually raises the standard about it and the quality of

:24:24. > :24:27.out that from amongst those competitors, and hobbling the BBC

:24:28. > :24:36.will do nothing but reduce that quality. Well, I have no wish to

:24:37. > :24:42.hobble the BBC. We have listened to all views expressed, but all I can

:24:43. > :24:47.do is invite him to come to the House tomorrow and he will hear what

:24:48. > :24:53.we propose. With wonderful BBC dramas like happy Valley being

:24:54. > :24:58.filmed in my beautiful part of Yorkshire, will the Secretary of

:24:59. > :25:03.State assure me that the White Paper will enhance, support and encourage

:25:04. > :25:15.yet more BBC TV production in the regions? I was fortunate enough to

:25:16. > :25:19.visit the set of Peaky Blinders recently, when it was filming in

:25:20. > :25:26.Liverpool, and it is a very good example of a fine and popular BBC

:25:27. > :25:31.drama, the kind of thing the BBC is excellent at, and hope it will

:25:32. > :25:43.continue to produce in the future. -- I hope it will continue to

:25:44. > :25:54.produce. The -- with the Secretary of State increase the number of

:25:55. > :26:08.funding available for programming made in Wales for Wales? Central to

:26:09. > :26:12.the BBC and the White Paper is programming for regions. We have a

:26:13. > :26:19.little more to say about that tomorrow. I thank him for his words

:26:20. > :26:24.of free assurance, particularly what he said about local radio. In the

:26:25. > :26:29.last Parliament I led an oversubscribed Westminster Hall

:26:30. > :26:33.debate opposing cuts to BBC local radio, and even the BBC trust seemed

:26:34. > :26:38.surprised that the strength of support for them. I look forward to

:26:39. > :26:44.seeing the statement tomorrow. What more can -- statement tomorrow, and

:26:45. > :26:50.what more he can tell us about the importance of local radio. I agree.

:26:51. > :26:54.Local radio performs an enormous function, particularly when there

:26:55. > :26:59.are crises including the flooding in the north and, when it was essential

:27:00. > :27:02.that people were able to obtain information about how to receive

:27:03. > :27:09.help and what the scale of the problem was. I am a great supporter

:27:10. > :27:14.of BBC local radio. In terms of the allocation of budget, that is

:27:15. > :27:18.largely a matter for the BBC, we do not tell them how to divide the

:27:19. > :27:26.funds that they have, but I hope that they continue to give BBC local

:27:27. > :27:33.radio the priority it deserves. Speaking as one of the old lefty

:27:34. > :27:39.luvvies spoken about earlier, we were led to believe that there would

:27:40. > :27:45.be no top slicing of the licence fee. Does that agreement still hold?

:27:46. > :27:50.I can say to him that the agreement we reached with the BBC last July

:27:51. > :27:59.stands, and nothing in the White Paper will change that. Does the

:28:00. > :28:03.Secretary of State agree that with a clearly met to educate, entertain

:28:04. > :28:09.and inform the British public, the BBC plays a pivotal role in British

:28:10. > :28:16.society, but the way we consume education, information and

:28:17. > :28:23.entertainment changes, is there a need to respond to that? The pace of

:28:24. > :28:26.change of technology is very rapid, and the way people consume

:28:27. > :28:32.television today is very different to what it was ten years ago. I have

:28:33. > :28:37.no doubt that when the charter comes to be renewed the next time, it will

:28:38. > :28:44.have changed further, and the BBC needs to take account of that, as

:28:45. > :28:51.does every other broadcaster. The Secretary of State may be aware that

:28:52. > :28:58.Welsh language broadcaster S4c is the only broadcaster across Wales

:28:59. > :29:08.and the UK in Welsh. Its existence is very important. -- S4C. Is future

:29:09. > :29:12.funding considered as part of the charter renewal process, or will

:29:13. > :29:17.they just be stuck in the long grass with little words about it

:29:18. > :29:22.afterwards? I agree with her that S4C makes a very valuable

:29:23. > :29:27.contribution to the broadcasting landscape, and is appreciated across

:29:28. > :29:35.Wales, and I believe it has a considerable audience in Patagonia.

:29:36. > :29:40.We're going to have a further review of S4C once the charter has been

:29:41. > :29:47.renewed, and that will cover all including its governance, its remix

:29:48. > :29:52.and its funding. There is no existential threat to the BBC, and

:29:53. > :29:56.this debate has been carried to rise by hype, as we have just seen today

:29:57. > :30:02.from the left. Would he agree that in return for ?4 billion a year

:30:03. > :30:08.guaranteed, plus BBC worldwide, it is perfectly reasonable for the

:30:09. > :30:23.British public to expect a bit of help tightening, more accountability

:30:24. > :30:29.and even have in this -- evenhandedness? The BBC is

:30:30. > :30:34.privileged to receive ?3.7 billion from licence funding and additional

:30:35. > :30:38.income. Obviously it is important that money is spent wisely and we

:30:39. > :30:45.should seek to improve efficiency wherever possible, and also to seek

:30:46. > :30:53.greater transparency. They are priorities for us which we will

:30:54. > :30:58.address tomorrow. There is some concern that the Secretary of State

:30:59. > :31:03.doesn't seek to exert undue influence in the wrong direction in

:31:04. > :31:07.the future of the BBC, but could I suggest that one area where

:31:08. > :31:12.intervention would be welcome would be if he advises that the people of

:31:13. > :31:15.the Midlands must get a much fairer and more equitable share on the

:31:16. > :31:21.return from licence contributions they

:31:22. > :31:28.I am aware of the strength of feelings in the Midlands, and there

:31:29. > :31:34.was a Westminster Hall debate, again it is up to the BBC in large part

:31:35. > :31:39.however the importance of ensuring that the BBC serves all nations and

:31:40. > :31:48.regions of the United Kingdom is something we feel strongly about. --

:31:49. > :31:55.strongly about. Having debated the future of the BBC a few days ago on

:31:56. > :32:00.the radio with my honourable friend, I yield to no one in my willingness

:32:01. > :32:06.to go the extra mile in support. But can I thank the Secretary of State

:32:07. > :32:10.for meeting with me to listen to some of my concerns. And having been

:32:11. > :32:14.reassured, would he agree with me that it may have been better for the

:32:15. > :32:18.opposition benches to have waited for 24 hours so that they could have

:32:19. > :32:26.been educated and informed in the same way? -- I was very happy to be

:32:27. > :32:32.able to discuss with my honourable friend some of his concerns, and I

:32:33. > :32:37.am hoping that his mind at rest. But I would say to other members that it

:32:38. > :32:40.is sensible to wait until they see what we actually propose, rather

:32:41. > :32:49.than some of the world speculation that has appeared in the newspapers.

:32:50. > :32:53.Virtually everyone agrees that the retention of the high-quality

:32:54. > :32:56.independent public sector broadcaster is essential. With the

:32:57. > :33:03.Minister agree with me that one of the feet thing -- one of the things

:33:04. > :33:07.that ?3.7 million budget is that it comes from the public purse, and

:33:08. > :33:11.that greater transparency should be from the top of the agenda in terms

:33:12. > :33:16.of the BBC and the Minister's announcement tomorrow? I would agree

:33:17. > :33:23.on both of these points. They will be on the agenda tomorrow. Can I

:33:24. > :33:29.just remind him that I was once upon a time a messenger of the BBC's

:33:30. > :33:35.summer --, so I know my way around Broadcasting House. But can I argue

:33:36. > :33:41.that we should actually have some sort of understanding as to how the

:33:42. > :33:44.senior management in the BBC are being paid, because I think that is

:33:45. > :33:53.something which most certainly my local journalist would be interested

:33:54. > :33:56.in learning about? I do agree with my honourable friend, I think

:33:57. > :34:02.transparency's very important particularly when public money is

:34:03. > :34:04.involved. Obviously we in this House and indeed those who work for

:34:05. > :34:10.Government across the whole of the public sector do have the

:34:11. > :34:16.information about the remuneration packages made public over a certain

:34:17. > :34:20.level, the BBC already published bands for -- figures for their

:34:21. > :34:25.senior management, but I sure his wish to see as much transparency as

:34:26. > :34:30.possible. The Secretary of State says he recognises the importance of

:34:31. > :34:34.the BBC reflecting the geographical diversity of the regions of the UK,

:34:35. > :34:39.and indeed the anger that exists in the Midlands about the fact that the

:34:40. > :34:44.BBC has not provided further shares in terms of investment or in terms

:34:45. > :34:47.of its operation and breadth of operation in that region. I

:34:48. > :34:51.understand they cannot say precisely what is in the White Paper, but

:34:52. > :34:55.could he tell the House today what his approach will be to try to

:34:56. > :34:59.influence those things, going forward, and could I also put it to

:35:00. > :35:03.him that when he looks at Channel 4, there is a job of work that could be

:35:04. > :35:07.done there to ensure that they have greater geographical reach and

:35:08. > :35:14.perhaps moving their headquarters to Birmingham might be a good step in

:35:15. > :35:17.that direction? I am grateful to the honourable gentleman, not only am I

:35:18. > :35:21.obviously not able to tell him today what is in the White Paper, but

:35:22. > :35:25.actually as I indicated earlier, some of these questions are ones for

:35:26. > :35:29.the BBC to determine, not for the Government. But I reiterate the

:35:30. > :35:37.importance of serving all the nations and regions. It is something

:35:38. > :35:45.we will be stressing to the BBC, and I also hear what he says about

:35:46. > :35:52.Channel 4. The cuts to local authority funding have created a

:35:53. > :35:57.crisis in regional arts and culture and availability. But in the

:35:58. > :36:00.creation of the BBC, we have a national institution which enables

:36:01. > :36:06.people, irrespective of where they live or what they earn, to have

:36:07. > :36:11.access to the best. Doesn't the Secretary of State understand that

:36:12. > :36:17.by chipping away at the Independence and the finances of the BBC, he is

:36:18. > :36:23.increasing this unequal access, and that is why he has created such a

:36:24. > :36:28.big backlash? I hope the honourable lady will wait until the publication

:36:29. > :36:34.tomorrow, before she makes any comment about the independence of

:36:35. > :36:38.the funding. I agree with her the important role the BBC plays in

:36:39. > :36:42.supporting the creative sector and the arts, it is something which I

:36:43. > :36:46.want to see continue. Does the Secretary of State recognise that

:36:47. > :36:50.the BBC is internationally renowned for its independence and quality

:36:51. > :36:57.programmes, that entertain, inform and challenge, but any attempts by

:36:58. > :37:03.Government to play "Fat controller" by for example interfering with

:37:04. > :37:07.programme scheduling, wrist -- risk inflicting severe damage on the

:37:08. > :37:18.BBC's reputation. I have no ambition to become the fat controller. It's

:37:19. > :37:25.always useful to have a bit of information! I was very pleased that

:37:26. > :37:30.the Secretary of State referred to the important role of regional

:37:31. > :37:34.radio. I wanted to highlight James Hogarth, who broadcast for eight

:37:35. > :37:40.hours straight from radio Humberside when the BBC studio in York was

:37:41. > :37:43.flooded in December, providing that vital public services emergency

:37:44. > :37:46.information. So I hope that in the White Paper tomorrow we will have

:37:47. > :37:54.reference to that important emergency service that the local

:37:55. > :37:58.radio provides. As I indicated to my honourable friend earlier, I agree

:37:59. > :38:04.that BBC Local Radio and forms a valuable service at all times, but

:38:05. > :38:09.it comes into its own at a time of crisis in one particular part of our

:38:10. > :38:12.country or another. Where it is possibly the only source of news and

:38:13. > :38:24.information for the people who are affected. Like my honourable friend

:38:25. > :38:29.from Hull north, my constituents are concerned about local news

:38:30. > :38:31.provision, and regional news provision, can the Secretary of

:38:32. > :38:35.State assure us that the White Paper will not impinge on the independence

:38:36. > :38:42.or the resources of local news provision? Again I will not reveal

:38:43. > :38:46.the contents of the White Paper, but I can assure him I don't think he

:38:47. > :38:53.has any cause for concern? -- cause for concern. It is testament to the

:38:54. > :39:02.quality of the BBC's programming that BBC worldwide brought in 226 --

:39:03. > :39:07.200 ?6.5 million worth of funds to the BBC, an additional ?10 on each

:39:08. > :39:14.and every licence fee payer, so can the Secretary of State conveyed to

:39:15. > :39:24.the House of Commons that he has no intention of selling off any aspect

:39:25. > :39:26.of the BBC's commercial arm? I would invite the honourable gentleman to

:39:27. > :39:33.read what we actually say about this in the White Paper tomorrow, but

:39:34. > :39:36.where I agree is that the BBC does have an extremely valuable asset,

:39:37. > :39:41.and that it should exploit that in order to maximise the return, and

:39:42. > :39:48.reduce the pressure on the licence fee. Order. The clerk will now

:39:49. > :40:00.proceed to read the orders of the day. Consideration of Lord's

:40:01. > :40:03.message. I draw the attention of the House to the fact that financial

:40:04. > :40:15.privileges engaged by Lords amendment 47 he, I must also inform

:40:16. > :40:19.the House that the motion relating to Lords amendment 47 he is

:40:20. > :40:26.certified as relating exclusively to England. If the House divides on the

:40:27. > :40:33.certified motion, a double majority will be required for the motion to

:40:34. > :40:38.be passed. -- amendment 47E. To move to disagree with Lords amendment

:40:39. > :40:46.47E, I called the Minister. Minister Brandon Lewis. I beg to move the

:40:47. > :40:49.motion that this has disagrees with the Lords in the amendment 47E. I

:40:50. > :40:54.would also like to inform the House that I am placing in the House

:40:55. > :41:01.library the analysis on standing order 830. Mr Speaker, yet again we

:41:02. > :41:08.are here making it clear that this Bill defends and delivers our

:41:09. > :41:12.manifesto. I thank the other players for not continuing the opposition to

:41:13. > :41:18.starter homes. But let us be clear, bit -- this is not -- this is the

:41:19. > :41:21.third time we have had to be here and confirm a key manifesto

:41:22. > :41:26.agreement. So I do not attempt to detain this has for too long. I do

:41:27. > :41:30.not have to remind this House of what we said in our manifesto,

:41:31. > :41:34.having outlined it last week and earlier this week. The Lords have

:41:35. > :41:40.scrutinised this Bill more than adequately, and I thank them. But

:41:41. > :41:46.this is no longer scrutiny, and this is an amendment. Enough is enough,

:41:47. > :41:50.it is time to stop. And Mr Speaker, you have certified that this

:41:51. > :41:55.amendment is financially privileged again. So as I set out earlier this

:41:56. > :41:59.week, it is contrary to convention for the House of Lords to send back

:42:00. > :42:03.an amendment in you that clearly invites the same response of

:42:04. > :42:08.financial privilege from this House. Yet on this issue they have chosen

:42:09. > :42:12.to do exactly that. And not that once -- not once, but twice. A

:42:13. > :42:16.number of Lord's rightly voiced their concern yesterday that the

:42:17. > :42:19.Lords were being invited to transgress constitutional

:42:20. > :42:21.proprietors, and I hope this House would agree that this sort of

:42:22. > :42:26.behaviour risks calling into question the role of the second

:42:27. > :42:30.chamber. As the noble lord Lord McCormack eloquently said yesterday,

:42:31. > :42:38.the elected house is a superior house when it comes to political

:42:39. > :42:42.power. The amendment which has two levels are problems with it would

:42:43. > :42:45.impact on our ability to work with local authorities to deliver the

:42:46. > :42:50.best deals for replacement housing. And this could reduce the funding

:42:51. > :42:54.for our manifesto commitment to deliver right to buy discounts for

:42:55. > :42:58.housing association tenants, which is our clear manifesto mandate from

:42:59. > :43:02.the General Election. This therefore no beer -- moves beyond the question

:43:03. > :43:06.of policy into constitutional issues. So I ask this House to send

:43:07. > :43:13.a clear message that it is time for their Lordships' to respect the will

:43:14. > :43:17.of this House. And respect our right to get on with delivering the

:43:18. > :43:23.commitments of our manifesto, which will ensure that we deliver the

:43:24. > :43:35.homes our country needs. The question is that this has disagrees

:43:36. > :43:38.with the Lords in the amendment 47E. As we are all aware, the Government

:43:39. > :43:44.suffered a further defeat in the other place last night. And in -- as

:43:45. > :43:48.in our debate on Monday, I mentioned that there were a string of defeats

:43:49. > :43:53.and concessions, and some of the sharpest edges of this Bill have

:43:54. > :43:57.been knocked off, but it is still a missed opportunity. Since 2010

:43:58. > :44:01.homelessness and rough sleeping has more than doubled, house prices and

:44:02. > :44:06.private rents have risen dramatically, and this Bill does

:44:07. > :44:10.little to tackle that. Lords amendment 47E seeks to put beyond

:44:11. > :44:14.doubt that adequate funding will be available to local authorities to

:44:15. > :44:18.deliver at least one new affordable home for each higher value

:44:19. > :44:21.properties sold, and at least two in London. It gives local housing

:44:22. > :44:25.authorities the opportunity to demonstrate a need for social rented

:44:26. > :44:29.housing for the Secretary of State to consider. The Bill provides a

:44:30. > :44:34.statutory basis to extend the right to buy for housing association

:44:35. > :44:40.tenants, paid for by a sale of council homes to the highest bidder,

:44:41. > :44:45.which could be buy to let landlords or overseas investments. These are

:44:46. > :44:50.homes pay for by our taxes, by our parents' taxes, and the people who

:44:51. > :44:53.have the money could be overseas investors or buy to let landlords.

:44:54. > :44:57.Questions have been raised on this, and the Public Accounts Committee

:44:58. > :45:04.identified the risks of the policy which is so lacking in financial

:45:05. > :45:07.clarity. And in the House of Lords, yesterday evening, it was said it

:45:08. > :45:12.has been argued this is unnecessary since ministers have given a

:45:13. > :45:16.commitment. If that is the case, it should not be controversial. If the

:45:17. > :45:18.Government do not accept this like-for-like displacement, they

:45:19. > :45:23.need to explain why or it will be clear that it is no more than

:45:24. > :45:28.another raid on local authorities' finances, putting greater pressure

:45:29. > :45:36.on already pressed local services. Shelter has calculated that to

:45:37. > :45:39.deliver ?4.5 of receipts, 23,500 vacant council properties per year

:45:40. > :45:43.will need to be sold, nearly a third of all vacant stock each year.

:45:44. > :45:47.Without a commitment on the face of the Bill, there will be a huge loss

:45:48. > :45:50.of genuinely affordable homes, as the Government sounds the death

:45:51. > :45:53.knell for social housing. The Government has said the suspect they

:45:54. > :46:01.are simply honouring their commits to a replacement which this

:46:02. > :46:06.Bill does not effectively do. This Bill and Government policy will make

:46:07. > :46:10.it near impossible for the delivery of new affordable housing. The new

:46:11. > :46:12.starter homes requirement will push social rented housing out of section

:46:13. > :46:40.106 agreements. The amendment is about expanding

:46:41. > :46:44.opportunities for affordable housing, which is something I hope

:46:45. > :46:49.the government would welcome, but they insist on limiting new

:46:50. > :46:55.affordable homes in that one part of the housing crisis. If we're serious

:46:56. > :46:58.about fixing the housing crisis, if the government is serious about

:46:59. > :47:04.getting people onto the housing ladder, it must accept all forms of

:47:05. > :47:11.tenure. The government was defeated many times in the House of Lords.

:47:12. > :47:20.The bill does nothing to address the last six years of failure. There are

:47:21. > :47:25.many things in this Bill I disagree with, but I believe that the

:47:26. > :47:29.amendment 47 EE will improve the bill and put on the face of it the

:47:30. > :47:32.very thing that the Prime Minister just one hour ago confirmed to my

:47:33. > :47:38.honourable friend, the Member for Westminster North, if the

:47:39. > :47:50.government's intention, and I hope the government will reconsider. I do

:47:51. > :47:54.not understand what the government's objections to this at. When the

:47:55. > :47:58.press release went out at the time, it said that after funding,

:47:59. > :48:09.affordable housing on a one to one basis, and proceeds would... I would

:48:10. > :48:16.also fail to understand what the Minister said when he referred to

:48:17. > :48:18.this matter a day or so ago when he said this would significantly reduce

:48:19. > :48:22.the funding available for the ball into the right to buy, preventing

:48:23. > :48:28.the government from fulfilling their manifesto commitment. As I

:48:29. > :48:31.understand it, the building cost is completely independent of tenure, so

:48:32. > :48:38.I fail to understand why the money available would be less than was

:48:39. > :48:43.previously the case. So I hope the government will, at this very last

:48:44. > :48:49.hour, reconsider this and accept what I think is a perfectly sensible

:48:50. > :48:52.amendment put forward by the House of Lords, which is not in

:48:53. > :49:00.contradiction with what the Conservatives put forward in their

:49:01. > :49:06.manifesto. I wish I could say that it was a pleasure to be here once

:49:07. > :49:10.again, to debate the many, many flaws in the housing and planning

:49:11. > :49:15.Bill, but I am grateful to the noble Lords that they have been so robust

:49:16. > :49:21.in their scrutiny and in their response to this Bill. Much has been

:49:22. > :49:25.said by the government about the obstructive nature of the Lords in

:49:26. > :49:30.relation to this Bill. I do not believe they are being remotely

:49:31. > :49:34.obstructive or difficult. They are simply not convinced. They are not

:49:35. > :49:36.convinced that the government has done it's working, they are not

:49:37. > :49:41.convinced that the bill will deliver the government's own manifesto

:49:42. > :49:46.commitments to one for one replacement. This is about a

:49:47. > :49:50.transparent and accountable process for legislating which gives both

:49:51. > :49:54.houses the confidence that there is any basis at all to believe the bill

:49:55. > :49:59.will deliver what the government says it will deliver. Local

:50:00. > :50:05.authorities now the community best. They undertake housing needs

:50:06. > :50:09.assessments, they have statutory housing duties, they are

:50:10. > :50:14.democratically accountable to their local population, and they know the

:50:15. > :50:20.make of homes needed in their area. Nobody on this side is saying that

:50:21. > :50:26.starter homes should not be a part of the mix is, what we're saying is

:50:27. > :50:34.starter homes should be part of a mix to be locally determined by

:50:35. > :50:39.councils who are accountable to the local communities, and there must be

:50:40. > :50:44.one for one replacement before the proceeds are spent on anything else.

:50:45. > :50:51.Once again the government is rejecting sensible tries from the

:50:52. > :50:56.House of Lords. It is ideological committed to a bill that will make

:50:57. > :51:01.the housing crisis worse than it is already, and I urge the government

:51:02. > :51:11.to listen to the House of Lords and accept the amendments they are

:51:12. > :51:17.proposing. The Minister has been complaining about the behaviour of

:51:18. > :51:21.the noble Lords, and I would say that I am grateful for them standing

:51:22. > :51:33.up to people with housing needs in this country. The government's

:51:34. > :51:45.refusal to accept this amendment is causing huge concern. In my

:51:46. > :51:50.constituency there is another 10% in rent, and we need more council

:51:51. > :51:55.homes, not fewer. It is important we get this right, and we genuinely

:51:56. > :52:01.risk seeing a reduction in genuinely affordable homes in the context of

:52:02. > :52:13.this already chronic affordable housing shortage. The money for a

:52:14. > :52:22.replacement is not secure. The offer or 141 or two for one is not the

:52:23. > :52:30.same as like for like, the same affordable rent, in the same area.

:52:31. > :52:34.The assets should not be used... We should not be adopting a top-down

:52:35. > :52:41.policy of selling off assets. The chartered Institute of Housing

:52:42. > :52:45.assessed that funds raised would not fully cover the cost of local

:52:46. > :52:48.authority replacements and the cost of discounts under an extended right

:52:49. > :52:53.to buy. And that funding the right to buy discounts could only be

:52:54. > :52:56.achieved at the cost of not building the replacement local authority

:52:57. > :53:00.units. In other words, under the government proposals, one can only

:53:01. > :53:06.be achieved at the expense of the other. Ministers have not released

:53:07. > :53:09.any figures to demonstrate that additional funding would not be

:53:10. > :53:13.needed from central government. This has been raised time and again in

:53:14. > :53:17.this House and in the other place, and yet we still do not know how the

:53:18. > :53:22.numbers will add up. Rightly, much has been made by the Public Accounts

:53:23. > :53:28.Committee report on this issue, and as the chain of that committee

:53:29. > :53:32.rightly said, we're not talking about a calculation on the back of

:53:33. > :53:36.an envelope, there is no envelope at all. The government seems to be

:53:37. > :53:39.hedging its bets by not releasing an impact assessment, and is taking

:53:40. > :53:44.little or no consideration about how it is funded in practice. But the

:53:45. > :53:47.amendment has rightly called them out. Ministers have estimated they

:53:48. > :53:53.will get ?4.5 billion of receipts from the forced sale of council

:53:54. > :54:00.homes. Shelter has calculated that to deliver 23,500 vacant -- to

:54:01. > :54:05.deliver this, 23,500 homes will need to be made vacant, leaving those

:54:06. > :54:09.with an even more minuscule chance of ever getting the secure council

:54:10. > :54:15.home that they need. If ministers were ever serious about replacing

:54:16. > :54:19.the council stalker to selling off, it is reasonable to ensuring

:54:20. > :54:24.legislation that the funding will be there for local authorities to do

:54:25. > :54:27.so. That begs the question as to why the government is digging in its

:54:28. > :54:31.heels, why are they refusing to accept an amendment which simply

:54:32. > :54:37.seeks to secure a manifesto commitment? I fear it amounts to a

:54:38. > :54:42.tailoring down of the bricks and mortar of the welfare state of

:54:43. > :54:47.social housing. This government is allowing social housing to fund an

:54:48. > :54:52.ill-conceived attack on social housing, pulling out the rug from

:54:53. > :55:00.those who need it most. I hope the government will continue to support

:55:01. > :55:12.this. Most unfortunate that the government has been so obstinate.

:55:13. > :55:17.Because of the strength of feeling of the country as a whole, they gave

:55:18. > :55:21.way, and I'm very pleased about that. As far as social housing is

:55:22. > :55:26.concerned, in all the years I have done this job, carried out surgeries

:55:27. > :55:42.over nearly half a century, no one has come to need as to be Private

:55:43. > :55:48.tenants... But there have been many people who have wanted to be

:55:49. > :55:56.rehoused by Bill housing association or a local authority. If they were

:55:57. > :56:01.in a position to buy, then they would not be seeking social housing,

:56:02. > :56:07.and what the government seems to forget deliberately at the number of

:56:08. > :56:13.people in this country whose only hope of decent housing, if they can

:56:14. > :56:19.be rehoused by the local authority, and therefore all the more do I

:56:20. > :56:25.regret this absolute obstinate attitude taken by the government. I

:56:26. > :56:29.can only assume it comes out of a bias towards private sector, and

:56:30. > :56:35.towards the privately rented sector, as against social housing. In my

:56:36. > :56:38.part, I have listened to some of my honourable friends representing

:56:39. > :56:45.constituencies, and I do not suggest that the problem in my area is

:56:46. > :56:50.anywhere near the London boroughs. But there are enough people in my

:56:51. > :56:55.constituency who have been waiting considerable amount of time to be

:56:56. > :57:03.rehoused, and the reason is obviously that there is an acute

:57:04. > :57:11.shortage, along waiting list, and therefore the only hope is to be

:57:12. > :57:15.rehoused in due course. I would hope that even at this late hour, the

:57:16. > :57:21.ministers would understand the need for this amendment which the Lords

:57:22. > :57:28.carried to be accepted, and it is very regretful that I said at the

:57:29. > :57:33.beginning of my remarks that the government have been so obstinate.

:57:34. > :57:45.The question is, that this House disagrees with the Lords in their

:57:46. > :59:14.amendment 47 E.ON division! Clear the lobby. -- amendment 47 EE.

:59:15. > :59:24.Order. I must remind the House that the motion relates exclusively to

:59:25. > :59:29.England, a double majority is therefore required. The question is

:59:30. > :59:50.that this House disagrees with the Lords in their amendment 47E.

:59:51. > :06:00.Tellers for the ayes. Tellers for the

:06:01. > :11:52.Order, order! Dry to the right, 292, the noes to

:11:53. > :12:02.the left, 197. Of those representing England, the ayes 275, the noes 177.

:12:03. > :12:11.Less than 100. You're slipping!. Ayes to the right,

:12:12. > :12:16.292. The noes to the left, 197. Of those members representing

:12:17. > :12:28.constituencies in England, the ayes to the right, 275, the noes to the

:12:29. > :12:32.left, 177. The ayes have it! Unlock. Minister to move that a committee to

:12:33. > :12:38.be appointed to draw a reason. I beg to move that a committee to be

:12:39. > :12:46.appointed to assign reasons for disagreeing with the amendment,

:12:47. > :12:50.Amendment 47E, that Brandon Lewis be the chair of the committee, that

:12:51. > :12:54.three B the quorum of the committee, that the committee do withdraw

:12:55. > :12:59.immediately. The question is that a committee be

:13:00. > :13:04.appointed to draw up a reason to be assigned to the Lords for a --

:13:05. > :13:09.disagreeing to their Amendment 47E. Andrew Griffiths, Brandon Lewis,

:13:10. > :13:12.Graham Morris, and Julian Smith be members of the committee, that

:13:13. > :13:19.Brandon Lewis be the chair and that three be the quorum, that the

:13:20. > :13:22.committee withdraw immediately. Vote-macro -- As many as are of the

:13:23. > :13:27.opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no".

:13:28. > :13:32.The ayes have it. Programme motion to be moved

:13:33. > :13:36.formally... The question is as the -- as on the

:13:37. > :13:46.order paper. Vote-macro the ayes have it!

:13:47. > :13:48.Armed Forces Bill, consideration of laws amendments.

:13:49. > :13:53.I draw the House's attention to the fact that financial privilege is

:13:54. > :13:59.engaged by Lords amendments one and two, if the House agrees them, Mr

:14:00. > :14:04.Speaker will cause an appropriate entry to be made in the journal. We

:14:05. > :14:08.will take Lords amendment one, which with -- with which we will consider

:14:09. > :14:14.Lords amendment two. Call the Minister to move to agree with Lords

:14:15. > :14:18.amendment one... I beg to move that this House agrees

:14:19. > :14:25.with Lords amendment one, I intend to be brief, madam Deputy Speaker,

:14:26. > :14:30.but I hope that you will allow me to briefly update the House that our

:14:31. > :14:38.team in the Invictus Games so far have a medal total of 89. 55 of

:14:39. > :14:43.which have been won just on the first day of the competition alone,

:14:44. > :14:47.and one of our chief cheerleaders there is my honourable friend, the

:14:48. > :14:54.Minister for veterans and personnel, who has taken through this Bill. I

:14:55. > :14:58.am pleased to welcome the Armed Forces Bill back to the House to

:14:59. > :15:02.consider amendments made in the other place. These two amendment

:15:03. > :15:08.still with a matter raised by the delegate powers and regulatory

:15:09. > :15:16.reform committee. That matter concerns the regulation making

:15:17. > :15:23.powers in new sections 304 and 303, which are inserted into the Armed

:15:24. > :15:28.Forces act. -- 310. These powers allow regulations to be made in

:15:29. > :15:34.relation to appeals against the views of sentence. Clauses ten and

:15:35. > :15:38.11 are part of the statutory frame and -- framework is to Bill creates

:15:39. > :15:43.for offenders who cooperate with prosecutions. That framework follows

:15:44. > :15:49.the provision in the serious organised crime and police act 2005,

:15:50. > :15:53.which applies to civilian criminal justice system. It concludes

:15:54. > :15:58.provisions which allow a person to receive a reduced sentence in return

:15:59. > :16:01.for assisting or offering to assist an investigator or prosecutor. A

:16:02. > :16:07.decision of the court-martial on such reviews may be appealed by the

:16:08. > :16:11.person sentenced or by the director of service prosecutions. The Lords

:16:12. > :16:16.amendments make provision with respect such appeals.

:16:17. > :16:24.The Bill does not set out the detailed rules in the conduct of

:16:25. > :16:28.appeals but instead new sections provide those rules to be set out in

:16:29. > :16:32.regulations made by the Secretary of State. They will be based on

:16:33. > :16:39.existing rules in the court-martial appeals act, 1968. Governing the

:16:40. > :16:43.conduct of appeals from the court-martial, to the appeal court,

:16:44. > :16:48.or to the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the Bill confers powers

:16:49. > :16:50.on the Secretary of State to make regulations. In relation to appeals,

:16:51. > :16:53.against reviews of sentence, which against reviews of sentence, which

:16:54. > :16:59.contain provision corresponding to any provision in parts two and four

:17:00. > :17:09.be appeals act 1968, with or without modifications. This is provided for

:17:10. > :17:14.in new sections 304 D10 and 304 E nine. These revelations are subject

:17:15. > :17:17.to the negative procedure. The delegated powers and regulatory

:17:18. > :17:24.reform committee was content with this, subject to one area of

:17:25. > :17:28.concern. The committee noted in the report that the 68 act included some

:17:29. > :17:31.provisions which may be modified on the Lord Chancellor, by regulations

:17:32. > :17:38.subject to the affirmative procedure. The relevant provisions

:17:39. > :17:47.in the 1968 act are in sections 31 eight, 33, 303A, 406A and 47. They

:17:48. > :17:50.relate to the recovery of costs and expenses arising from appeals

:17:51. > :17:58.proceedings. The committee 's concern is the new regulation in the

:17:59. > :18:02.new sections 340 ten and 304 E nine, subject to the negative procedure

:18:03. > :18:06.could be used to make provision about the recovery of costs and

:18:07. > :18:10.expenses which is made under the 1968 act in relation to appeals

:18:11. > :18:15.covered by the act would have to be made by the affirmative procedure

:18:16. > :18:20.regulations. The government has submitted amendments in the other

:18:21. > :18:26.place to clauses ten and 11, the amendments limit the powers in these

:18:27. > :18:31.sections of the Armed Forces act 2006 under which regulations can be

:18:32. > :18:36.made about appeals. The effect is twofold. First, regulations under

:18:37. > :18:39.those sections may not make provision corresponding to that

:18:40. > :18:43.which the Lord Chancellor may include in regulations in the 1968

:18:44. > :18:48.act. Secondly, regulations under those sections may confer regulation

:18:49. > :18:55.making powers corresponding to those in the act, but only if the exercise

:18:56. > :19:00.of those powers is conferred to the affirmative procedure, like the

:19:01. > :19:06.powers of the Lord Chancellor. These and Mance will address the committee

:19:07. > :19:09.concerns. While I note they have been designated with financial

:19:10. > :19:15.privilege we do not expect any significant expenditure to arise

:19:16. > :19:18.from the regulation making powers. I hope Honourable members are able to

:19:19. > :19:22.support these amendments, which were accepted by all sides of this House

:19:23. > :19:28.in the other place and I commend them to the House. The question is

:19:29. > :19:33.this House agrees with the Lords on their amendments one. Toby Perkins.

:19:34. > :19:39.Thank you very much, mad deputies bigger. I thank the Honourable lady

:19:40. > :19:45.for updating the House on impressive performances from the invaders games

:19:46. > :19:55.team. -- Madame deputies bigger. -- from the games team. -- Madden

:19:56. > :20:00.Deputy Speaker. It is reassuring when we can reach consensus on both

:20:01. > :20:04.sides of this House and with the other place. Particularly when

:20:05. > :20:08.dealing with such an important matter as the welfare of Armed

:20:09. > :20:12.Forces personnel. The safety and security of the nation is reliant on

:20:13. > :20:16.the commitment, courage and patriotism of Armed Forces

:20:17. > :20:20.personnel. We owe them a debt of gratitude. It is only right we

:20:21. > :20:25.continue to up date the law to make sure we take steps to protect the

:20:26. > :20:29.security and well-being of Armed Forces personnel as we look to them

:20:30. > :20:38.to protect our own. We are pleased to support amendments one and two.

:20:39. > :20:42.While technical in nature they have the powers in the sections around

:20:43. > :20:47.recognising assistance with court marshals in sentencing. The

:20:48. > :20:50.honourable lady has gone to a little more detail. We welcome the

:20:51. > :20:58.commitment in the report stage of the Bill. The relation of sexual

:20:59. > :21:01.assault has been spoken of in a clear format. The potential benefits

:21:02. > :21:07.of removal of discretion to investigate sexual assault and two

:21:08. > :21:09.review compensation levels paid to injured service personnel,

:21:10. > :21:14.particularly the most seriously injured and those suffering from

:21:15. > :21:16.mental illness. While we originally called for these measures to be

:21:17. > :21:20.included in the Armed Forces, we are pleased that the Government has made

:21:21. > :21:23.these concessions outside the statutory framework. I commend my

:21:24. > :21:28.colleagues in the other place, especially the noble Lords Tony

:21:29. > :21:33.Cliff for pushing for these concessions. -- -- Tunnicliffe. We

:21:34. > :21:39.are pleased to support these amendments. I thank the Minister

:21:40. > :21:43.again for her statement and for her conclusion of this Bill and for her

:21:44. > :21:51.leadership which she has given as well. We appreciate the commitment

:21:52. > :21:56.and the dedication. I would like to make one point, a very quick one. I

:21:57. > :22:00.do not want to delay the House any longer. It is gratifying to see the

:22:01. > :22:03.centrality of the role of the commanding officer is still

:22:04. > :22:07.recognise. They are being offered assistance and legal clarifications

:22:08. > :22:11.and it is to be welcomed by everybody in this House. But we must

:22:12. > :22:15.not lose sight that four soldiers, sailors and airmen, the relationship

:22:16. > :22:20.between them and commanding officers must be sacrosanct and not eroded by

:22:21. > :22:26.a ship towards independent oversight. The Minister has included

:22:27. > :22:29.that and I appreciate that. We must trust that these men and women in

:22:30. > :22:33.command of a unit in peacetime and operations. That lies at the heart

:22:34. > :22:39.of the bond between service personnel and command. In that

:22:40. > :22:46.regiment and in their heirs stations and on board ships. I thank the

:22:47. > :22:52.Minister for her commitment. Kristin Oswald. Thank you. I joined the

:22:53. > :22:58.Minister in congratulating those who have participated in the games. We

:22:59. > :23:00.have strong focus on supporting the work of service personnel making up

:23:01. > :23:04.Armed Forces. It has been constructive to see positive

:23:05. > :23:08.progress in committee and in this chamber. It is important to use

:23:09. > :23:11.available opportunities to examine and assess the structures and

:23:12. > :23:16.outcomes for members of the armed services. We are pleased to see the

:23:17. > :23:20.Government conceding in the other place and agreeing to review to

:23:21. > :23:23.consider removing the position of the commanding officer to

:23:24. > :23:27.investigate allegations of sexual assault. The accusers and accused

:23:28. > :23:34.benefit from added transparency in such challenging situations. We are

:23:35. > :23:36.supportive of amendment number one. There was significant committee

:23:37. > :23:39.discussion about the most appropriate way of modernising the

:23:40. > :23:46.mechanics behind the matters dealt with here. The review of sentence

:23:47. > :23:50.following offers of assistance. And a person who has been sentenced by

:23:51. > :23:51.court-martial may have their sentence reviewed to take into

:23:52. > :23:57.account assistance given, or offered. The reviewing court may

:23:58. > :24:04.reduce the sentence in return for the off of assistance given. The

:24:05. > :24:06.subsection allows person who is reviewed to appeal against

:24:07. > :24:08.court-martial and gives them the opportunity for the director to

:24:09. > :24:13.appeal against the decision. It is appropriate that then is,

:24:14. > :24:16.transparency and good practice are central to service discipline

:24:17. > :24:21.proposals and this would appear to be a positive move in this regard.

:24:22. > :24:27.In addition, we are supportive of the inclusion of amendment two,

:24:28. > :24:31.allowing for a sentence to be reviewed, to take account of a

:24:32. > :24:34.failure of a person sentenced to give assistance which they had

:24:35. > :24:37.offered to an investigator or prosecutor where they had received a

:24:38. > :24:43.discounted sentence in respect of that. This reflects the importance

:24:44. > :24:49.of additional clarity for service personnel and we have welcomed that.

:24:50. > :24:53.We do have a Judy of care to service personnel under the Armed Forces

:24:54. > :24:59.covenant. -- response ability of care. It is important it is dealt

:25:00. > :25:09.with in terms of continual transparency. -- response ability.

:25:10. > :25:13.-- response ability. This will be published before the summer recess.

:25:14. > :25:18.That is a topic I have returned to several times in committee and in

:25:19. > :25:22.this chamber and it is vital these statistics are published regularly

:25:23. > :25:26.in a consistent format and the report includes all appropriate

:25:27. > :25:31.metrics so there is the chance to properly scrutinise information and

:25:32. > :25:36.assess progress. If we do not have the opportunity to regularly examine

:25:37. > :25:39.fully and consistently these statistics, many of the fine words

:25:40. > :25:45.spoken in this place are simply words. I would encourage the

:25:46. > :25:49.publication and it would suggest we appear to be making a positive step

:25:50. > :25:56.in the right direction in terms of greater transparency in service

:25:57. > :26:00.justice. The question is this House agrees with the House of Lords in

:26:01. > :26:10.amendment one. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary,

:26:11. > :26:14."no". The eyes have it. Amendment two, formerly. The question is this

:26:15. > :26:21.House agrees with the Lords in and two. As many as are of the opinion,

:26:22. > :26:28.say "aye". To the contrary, "no". The Ayes have it. We come to motion

:26:29. > :26:32.number three on the sittings of the House. Minister to move? The

:26:33. > :26:39.question is as on the order paper. As many as are of the opinion, say

:26:40. > :26:49."aye". To the contrary, "no". Ayes have it. The Ayes have it. And we

:26:50. > :26:54.now come to the motion recommended by the backbench business committee.

:26:55. > :27:01.The operating pensions fought UK pensioners living overseas. Mr Ian

:27:02. > :27:08.Black foot. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The operating pensions for

:27:09. > :27:13.UK pensioners living overseas as appears on the order paper in my

:27:14. > :27:15.name and those in many of my colleagues, I'm grateful to the

:27:16. > :27:23.backbench business committee in granting this debate. I laid down an

:27:24. > :27:27.early day motion, 1235, praying that the operating regulations that

:27:28. > :27:33.denied 550,000 pensioners, they are denied their full pension

:27:34. > :27:37.entitlement that it be annulled. It had the support of 97 members from

:27:38. > :27:40.eight parties. Including the Government party and independent

:27:41. > :27:46.members. This matter has cross-party support. I hope that today the

:27:47. > :27:50.Government will reflect on the injustice many face and the strength

:27:51. > :27:55.of cross-party support that there is on this issue. The policy of not

:27:56. > :27:59.awarding increases has been followed by successive governments and

:28:00. > :28:05.continues with the introduction of the new state pension introduced

:28:06. > :28:10.this April. You're right to the full UK pension is determined by the

:28:11. > :28:13.country you live in. There are 640,000 UK pensioners living in

:28:14. > :28:20.overseas countries, where the UK meets its full obligation. But

:28:21. > :28:25.sadly, 550,000 living in countries where annual operating does not take

:28:26. > :28:33.place and pensioners suffer from a frozen pension. -- annual updating.

:28:34. > :28:37.I think for those who do not necessarily know the details at the

:28:38. > :28:43.end, would he agree that nobody intended this injustice to start? It

:28:44. > :28:47.started in the 1950s because they had not put in the operating. And

:28:48. > :28:55.nobody bothered to say that this is crazy. -- updating. This is an

:28:56. > :28:58.anomaly which has taken place. There is no logic for pensioners living in

:28:59. > :29:04.the US that they can benefit but those in Canada cannot. There is a

:29:05. > :29:07.question of justice. That is why I'm asking for members to unite in this

:29:08. > :29:11.matter across this House. It should concern us all and I hope today

:29:12. > :29:16.Minister and the governed will respond in the correct manner. --

:29:17. > :29:21.government. The pension legislation provided for the additional state

:29:22. > :29:23.pension to be updated at least in line with earnings and also provided

:29:24. > :29:28.for the state pension updating overseas to continue. Pensioners

:29:29. > :29:31.would have been entitled to updating is if they retired in the UK but

:29:32. > :29:33.they are no longer entitled to increased payment simple because

:29:34. > :29:40.they live in certain overseas countries. They will only be updated

:29:41. > :29:44.on a European Union country or one in which the UK has a reciprocal

:29:45. > :29:48.agreement. There are 16 such non-European Union countries,

:29:49. > :29:53.including the USA, Israel, Turkey and the republics of the former

:29:54. > :29:55.Yugoslavia. The agreement with Canada, New Zealand and the former

:29:56. > :30:01.agreement with Australia do not provide for updating. Between them

:30:02. > :30:06.these countries account for around 80% of overseas residents who do not

:30:07. > :30:12.get their full pension entitlement. What we are talking about is

:30:13. > :30:18.individuals who have paid national insurance in anticipation of

:30:19. > :30:23.receiving a full UK state pension. We often talk about a postcode

:30:24. > :30:27.lottery. In this case it is a national lottery whether our 530,000

:30:28. > :30:32.pensioners paying the price. -- where there are. You are entitled to

:30:33. > :30:38.this not least upon your national insurance contributions but on what

:30:39. > :30:43.country you live in? How can that be fair? If you live in the US Virgin

:30:44. > :30:46.Islands your rights are protected. If you live in the British Virgin

:30:47. > :30:52.Islands they are not. This debate is about fairness. It should not be

:30:53. > :30:57.about where you live. After all, pensions are a contract, not a

:30:58. > :31:02.benefit. It is only fair and just that a British pensioner choosing to

:31:03. > :31:06.enjoy their retirement overseas should receive the same amount as a

:31:07. > :31:19.If you pay in, the pension should remain in the United Kingdom. You

:31:20. > :31:25.If you pay in, the pension should pay out, regardless of your address.

:31:26. > :31:31.I thank the honourable gentleman for that very succinct point. This

:31:32. > :31:37.should be about... It is often referred to as British values of

:31:38. > :31:41.fairness. If you paid into that pension, you should get your

:31:42. > :31:45.entitlement. There is no excuse for us not doing that. Why should we be

:31:46. > :31:51.in the position that we seem to be in, that we have different classes

:31:52. > :31:55.of pensioners? It's morally unjust and unfair for the government to

:31:56. > :32:01.strip pensioners of their rights. Overseas pensioners are entitled to

:32:02. > :32:06.fairness. The state pension is all right, not a privilege. Look forward

:32:07. > :32:11.to the minister responding later but I hope we do not hear what we have

:32:12. > :32:14.heard before, which is it is all about cost. It's about doing the

:32:15. > :32:21.right thing and recognising all pensioners deserve to be treated

:32:22. > :32:26.fairly. We should today focus on the 550,000 pensioners losing out but

:32:27. > :32:31.there is a topical dimension to this debate as well. What other

:32:32. > :32:35.implications for the 400,000 UK pensioners living in EU countries if

:32:36. > :32:46.there is to be a bricks sit vote in a few weeks' time? In the Other

:32:47. > :32:51.Place, of course there is uncertainty about how about you the

:32:52. > :32:56.UK could impact on pension benefits living in other parts of Europe.

:32:57. > :33:03.What are we to make of this? There is no clarity in that answer from

:33:04. > :33:07.the government at all. Are the 550,000 pensioners likely to be

:33:08. > :33:13.joined by others if there is a vote? The government could say today that

:33:14. > :33:17.those living in the UK countries, irrespective of that vote, or have

:33:18. > :33:21.their pensions protected. Or the minister do that today, will he is

:33:22. > :33:25.sure pensioners living in EU countries that pension would not be

:33:26. > :33:34.affected? That's a very simple request. Remove this uncertainty for

:33:35. > :33:40.UK pensioners living in Europe. If we consider that the government

:33:41. > :33:43.wants to list the limit from 15 years to their entire lifetime, why

:33:44. > :33:47.would the government not want to confirm voting rights on UK

:33:48. > :33:54.pensioners but denied them full pension rights? What drives this

:33:55. > :34:00.decision-making process? Is it about cost savings or will it be about

:34:01. > :34:03.accepting obligations to meet our commitments to paying pensions

:34:04. > :34:08.regardless of the country of residence? I appreciate that the

:34:09. > :34:12.Minister will have been told by the Treasury or the nothing. The

:34:13. > :34:23.Minister is a loyal government servant and I understand the

:34:24. > :34:31.position he is in. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, during a debate in

:34:32. > :34:34.2003-4, when acting as the Chief Secretary to the Treasury said, if

:34:35. > :34:41.the system worked in the way most people think, it would not matter

:34:42. > :34:46.where a person left. Madam Deputy Speaker, it would not matter where a

:34:47. > :34:50.person lived. I have to say, on this occasion, I have said this before

:34:51. > :34:55.but I agree with the Chancellor. It should not matter where you live. My

:34:56. > :35:01.appeal to the Minister is reflect on those words from the Chancellor.

:35:02. > :35:05.Those words were spoken while in opposition that each and every one

:35:06. > :35:10.of us should be judged by our deeds and government. It is not good

:35:11. > :35:15.enough to say the right thing in opposition and then claim it is all

:35:16. > :35:22.about cost in government. Let us today do the right thing, let us

:35:23. > :35:25.unite in this House, standing up for our pensioners, regardless of

:35:26. > :35:29.domicile. I am looking forward to hearing voices from all sides of the

:35:30. > :35:34.Chamber, looking forward to hearing the honourable member speaking from

:35:35. > :35:40.the Labour front bench and the honourable lady did set a meeting on

:35:41. > :35:44.the 2nd of February of this year, that this situation is unfair,

:35:45. > :35:49.illogical and does not make sense, and I agree with the sentiments. I

:35:50. > :35:53.hope that if the House divides of this motion, the Labour benches and

:35:54. > :35:55.all those across the Chamber stand shoulder to shoulder with all the

:35:56. > :36:03.pensioners seeking their full pension rights. He mentioned the

:36:04. > :36:07.all-party group on frozen pensions. I thought he might be interested to

:36:08. > :36:12.know he has just been elected as the vice-chair of the all-party group,

:36:13. > :36:17.as has our honourable friend sitting next to us, elected as the co-chair

:36:18. > :36:21.of that all-party group. It was crowded. This you share my concern

:36:22. > :36:26.that these injustices run like a thread throughout the UK Government

:36:27. > :36:32.policy and it's time to resolve these issues? I thank my honourable

:36:33. > :36:40.gentleman for that. I didn't even know I was up about! I am grateful

:36:41. > :36:44.for that news. But he's right. We are talking about frozen pensions

:36:45. > :36:49.but there are injustices faced by women born in the 1950s and many

:36:50. > :36:53.have engaged in that debate. I have suggested to the Minister, given the

:36:54. > :36:57.importance of these issues, that we should be taking this out of the

:36:58. > :37:00.Chamber in some regards, that we should have a pensions commission

:37:01. > :37:06.that should look at these matters so we can make sure we get this right.

:37:07. > :37:15.We all have obligations to look after our pensioners. I also

:37:16. > :37:19.acknowledge that there is a cost of the government of unfreezing

:37:20. > :37:22.pensions. However, increased immigration as a result would offer

:37:23. > :37:29.the government savings to pay for it. In 2010, an Oxford economic

:37:30. > :37:34.study published using government subsistence showed a pensioner who

:37:35. > :37:41.leaves the UK saves the UK's ?7,700 a year in NHS usage and other

:37:42. > :37:49.age-related benefits. Lost incomes would amount to ?3900. That saving.

:37:50. > :37:57.That would save the government ?4300. There are many people living

:37:58. > :37:59.in the UK today that have come from the Caribbean or Indian

:38:00. > :38:03.subcontinent, worked here or their working life, want to go back to

:38:04. > :38:08.their country of origin but can't do so because they risk being penalised

:38:09. > :38:12.by a frozen pension. We must hope those people that want to do those

:38:13. > :38:17.as well as the existing UK pensioners the live overseas. It is

:38:18. > :38:20.therefore not just about the gross cost of increased pension spending.

:38:21. > :38:25.There is a reduced commitment to those pensioners who seek the UK to

:38:26. > :38:37.be with loved ones abroad or return to their country of origin.

:38:38. > :38:40.Those two are subject to frozen pensions have waited long enough to

:38:41. > :38:43.see this matter debated in the House. We must not let them down. We

:38:44. > :38:46.need to speak up for those pensioners who want to move abroad

:38:47. > :38:49.and perhaps those who want to come here or wish to Rob turned to their

:38:50. > :38:51.country of origin. There are a host of reasons why a pensioner may

:38:52. > :38:56.choose to move abroad in later life. It's wrong to punish them for making

:38:57. > :39:00.this choice. Pensioners who have paid the required national insurance

:39:01. > :39:04.contributions during their working lives in expectation of a decent

:39:05. > :39:10.pension and return will find themselves living on incomes have

:39:11. > :39:14.fallen in real terms year-on-year. Payments of National Insurance

:39:15. > :39:20.contributions is mandatory. All recipients have made these

:39:21. > :39:26.contributions. It's unfair to differentiate payment levels.

:39:27. > :39:29.Pensioners will now face ending their days in poverty because they

:39:30. > :39:35.choose to live in the wrong country. In most cases without any knowledge

:39:36. > :39:40.of the implications of their choice. Others are being forced back to the

:39:41. > :39:46.UK, away from the family they laugh, just to secure an income they can

:39:47. > :39:50.survive. Reform would bring the UK in line with international norms as

:39:51. > :39:56.most other developed countries pay their state pension equivalents in

:39:57. > :40:00.this way. We are, sad to say, the only country in the OECD that does

:40:01. > :40:10.not pay pensions irrespective of domicile. That should shame us all.

:40:11. > :40:14.Why are we the only country that does not accept our wrist moral

:40:15. > :40:20.responsibility to our pensioners? This must change. We know the

:40:21. > :40:27.statistics, 550,000 people affected, behind those numbers there are

:40:28. > :40:36.550,000 human stories. Let me take three examples of the human cost of

:40:37. > :40:43.the freezing of state pensions. A person moved from India to Glasgow

:40:44. > :40:48.in 1960 and worked in the UK for 30 years in shipbuilding, manufacturing

:40:49. > :40:54.and the ship industry. He returned to India in 1997 and reached the

:40:55. > :40:59.state pension age in 2008 and was paid a decent pass 30 a week. Having

:41:00. > :41:04.made all the required National Insurance contributions, if you're

:41:05. > :41:08.storing the UK today, he would not get ?87, he would get the full UK

:41:09. > :41:13.state pension. The decline in his income has left him concerned about

:41:14. > :41:19.losing his home. He now feels he may have to move back to the UK. Why are

:41:20. > :41:29.we putting such a gentleman in such a position? I will happily give way.

:41:30. > :41:38.It's a very good example he gave. Is it not also a paradox? If he returns

:41:39. > :41:46.to the UK, he gets his pension upgraded to the full amount, so it's

:41:47. > :41:52.a cost of the UK Government as well as disrupting a person's life. My

:41:53. > :41:57.noble friend is correct. It's not just about someone who comes back to

:41:58. > :42:01.the UK to live. If that individual or any other came back to the UK for

:42:02. > :42:07.a holiday, they collect a full UK state pension will stop but the

:42:08. > :42:11.whole thing is just daft. We need to normalise it and accept our full

:42:12. > :42:19.responsibilities. Let me give you the example of Rita Young, 78, who

:42:20. > :42:23.lives in Peterborough. She retired in 2002 aged 67 having enjoyed a

:42:24. > :42:30.long career as an market researcher. Her son worked in Australia. Since

:42:31. > :42:34.being widowed, Rita has wanted to join her son and grandchildren in

:42:35. > :42:42.Australia but has felt unable to do so because of the prospect of a

:42:43. > :42:47.frozen pension. As she gets older, Rita finds daily life increasingly

:42:48. > :42:53.difficult, especially as she doesn't have a family that she can rely on.

:42:54. > :42:58.She is deeply saddened and is not able to be with her family during

:42:59. > :43:03.the later stages of her life. She said, I have worked contributed to

:43:04. > :43:06.my state pension all my life. It doesn't seem fair that the

:43:07. > :43:14.government can just stop upgrading it because I want to be with my

:43:15. > :43:20.family. That's the human cost. And then, lastly, former college

:43:21. > :43:26.lecturer, and, 91, lived and worked in the UK or her life, paying

:43:27. > :43:30.National Insurance contributions throughout. 2002, aged 77, she

:43:31. > :43:37.retired and decided to move to Canada to be with her daughter and

:43:38. > :43:42.grandchildren. 14 years on, and, who has served as an intelligence

:43:43. > :43:49.officer and the Second World War, has struggled to live on a frozen

:43:50. > :43:53.pension of ?75 50 a week. Does he agree with me that the fact that

:43:54. > :43:59.majority of the Commonwealth nations who are part of this process, it's a

:44:00. > :44:02.slap in the face for those who have served not only this country but the

:44:03. > :44:14.Commonwealth, not just in the Second World War but previous and conflicts

:44:15. > :44:22.at about? Unfreezing death pension would be a worthwhile exercise. When

:44:23. > :44:26.you talk about Canada, if a Canadian pensioner moved here, the Canadian

:44:27. > :44:31.pension would get the full pension here. We need to make sure that our

:44:32. > :44:35.pensioners living in Canada have the same. And feels she would be forced

:44:36. > :44:38.to move back to the UK because I pension would no longer cover the

:44:39. > :44:43.day-to-day expenditures and is increasingly reliant on her daughter

:44:44. > :44:48.to get by. She said, it's the injustice that gets to me. I value

:44:49. > :44:54.my independence but I can't go on living like this and I don't want to

:44:55. > :44:59.inflict this on my family. As well as ever-increasing property, I feel

:45:00. > :45:06.a sense of stress and shame. It is affecting my health. Madam Deputy

:45:07. > :45:11.Speaker, for these people and all those who are not getting what is

:45:12. > :45:15.rightfully theirs, let this House today sent a clear and unequivocal

:45:16. > :45:20.message to the government that we want all our pensioners, regardless

:45:21. > :45:26.of domicile, to be in receipt of what is rightfully theirs, a full

:45:27. > :45:31.state pension. Today we can take the first steps in fixing this injustice

:45:32. > :45:37.and deliver fairness for all our pensioners. The question is as on

:45:38. > :45:47.the order paper. Minister. I will start by congratulating the

:45:48. > :45:50.honourable gentleman on securing this important debate on this

:45:51. > :45:57.important subject and those who have supported him on this order paper.

:45:58. > :46:02.For clarity, just I would like to point out a flaw in the motion,

:46:03. > :46:08.which it seems to indicate that this government has introduced this

:46:09. > :46:12.measure. And it speaks of no more up ratings and it regrets the governed

:46:13. > :46:18.has taken this action. I would point out this is a policy which has been

:46:19. > :46:20.consistent for 70 years and it is not something this government has

:46:21. > :46:27.done. I will give way to the honourable member. I'm grateful to

:46:28. > :46:33.him for giving way. I made it clear I recognised it is something which

:46:34. > :46:36.has happened since the 1940s. I acknowledge that. It has happened

:46:37. > :46:44.under all governments but we do have the opportunity to respond to this

:46:45. > :46:48.in the correct manner. I think it is the record for the Minister and the

:46:49. > :46:54.House that each year, statutes were brought in which continues at this.

:46:55. > :46:58.I think none of us can say that we are blameless for what has gone on.

:46:59. > :47:02.I think a small minority of us have been voting against what government

:47:03. > :47:06.proposes to Parliament. This is our fault for not recruiting more

:47:07. > :47:09.people. The best people to recruit would be the Chancellor and the

:47:10. > :47:14.Prime Minister and the ministers who have to face up for the Government

:47:15. > :47:16.and pass the responsibility onto those who do carry responsibility

:47:17. > :47:24.who are the most senior ministers in government. I am grateful to both

:47:25. > :47:27.gentlemen for having clarified that. I was simply pointing out an

:47:28. > :47:32.inconsistency in the order paper and for the sake of order wanted to make

:47:33. > :47:36.sure while there have been yearly decisions taken by the Government,

:47:37. > :47:40.this is consistent with policy which has been undertaken by successive

:47:41. > :47:48.governments on both sides of the House. The UK state pension is

:47:49. > :47:52.exportable worldwide, regardless of the country of residence, or

:47:53. > :47:55.nationality. Successive governments have taken the view that all those

:47:56. > :48:00.who have worked in the UK and built an entitlement to a state pension

:48:01. > :48:04.should be able to receive it. We have no plans to change this

:48:05. > :48:12.arrangement. However, the state pension is only increased, or given

:48:13. > :48:15.a uprating if they are resident in the European economic area or a

:48:16. > :48:22.country with which the UK has a reciprocal agreement allowing for a

:48:23. > :48:25.uprating. The policy has been consistent for some 70 years,

:48:26. > :48:31.including the Government of Clement Attlee, Wilson, Tony Blair, Matt

:48:32. > :48:38.Mullan, Thatcher and major. -- Major. The rate currently paid in

:48:39. > :48:42.the UK would currently cost in excess of half a billion per year.

:48:43. > :48:47.This amount would increase significantly over time. If arrears

:48:48. > :48:56.were included, the cost would be into Williams of pounds. --

:48:57. > :49:00.billions. Some have suggested partial uprating. While this might

:49:01. > :49:06.cost tens of millions short-term, the annual cost would converge into

:49:07. > :49:11.that of full-time uprating in the long term. It might help if the

:49:12. > :49:19.Minister today or perhaps another day, maybe the next session, could

:49:20. > :49:20.explain first when was the last time the Government voluntarily

:49:21. > :49:28.negotiated a reciprocal agreement with another nation or territory?

:49:29. > :49:31.Secondly, since the last negotiation, which was on a

:49:32. > :49:35.voluntary reciprocal agreement, how many other countries have been

:49:36. > :49:39.brought into the uprating for other reasons, like access to the European

:49:40. > :49:47.Union? I can certainly partly address his question. No new

:49:48. > :49:53.commitments for upratings have been made since the 1980s. All the other

:49:54. > :49:57.information he seeks, I'm happy to write to him more substantially on

:49:58. > :50:02.that. We have to recognise that resources are limited. The

:50:03. > :50:08.government has to make judgments and take difficult decisions about how

:50:09. > :50:12.best to use these limited resources. The majority of pensioners abroad

:50:13. > :50:16.live in countries such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand and South

:50:17. > :50:22.Africa. The rules in these countries are varied. Some have largely means

:50:23. > :50:25.tested pensions systems whereby a significant proportion of any

:50:26. > :50:28.increase in the amount of the UK state pension would go to the

:50:29. > :50:33.treasuries of those countries rather than the pensioner. I should add

:50:34. > :50:39.that many people who voluntarily move abroad do that before they have

:50:40. > :50:42.reached pension age. Many of them may well have been able to build up

:50:43. > :50:49.some pension provision in the countries that they have emigrated

:50:50. > :50:52.to. We should also remember the decision to move abroad is a

:50:53. > :50:56.voluntary one. It remains a personal choice. Dependent on the

:50:57. > :51:02.circumstances of the individual, which will differ from one person to

:51:03. > :51:08.another. The occasions for the state pension is just one factor in this

:51:09. > :51:12.decision. There has been no evidence of a proven behavioural link between

:51:13. > :51:19.the uprating policy and pensioner migration. I'm grateful to the

:51:20. > :51:25.Minister. He is being generous with his time. Can he not accept that in

:51:26. > :51:29.every other OECD country, they allow the pensioners living abroad to

:51:30. > :51:31.collect a pension? Why are we against this? We're not talking

:51:32. > :51:34.about people getting something to which they are not entitled. We're

:51:35. > :51:39.talking about them getting something they're entitled to because they

:51:40. > :51:43.have made national insurance can be shown. That is what we are denying

:51:44. > :51:47.them. I think it is important we do not just a look at this in one

:51:48. > :51:49.narrow perspective, as the honourable gentleman as saying. They

:51:50. > :51:57.have paid national insurance and are entitled. There are other aspects.

:51:58. > :52:02.The element of individual choice. When people are thinking about going

:52:03. > :52:06.abroad it is not purely this issue that determines whether they are

:52:07. > :52:10.going to live here, or abroad. Over the years, the UK has entered into a

:52:11. > :52:17.number of reciprocal agreements with other countries. But most provide

:52:18. > :52:22.for payments of upratings. That is not the primary purpose of the

:52:23. > :52:25.agreements. They are intended to provide a measure of coordination

:52:26. > :52:29.between Social Security schemes, to protect the Social Security workers

:52:30. > :52:35.moving between the countries in their working lives. They prevent

:52:36. > :52:38.employees, employers and the self-employed from needing to pay

:52:39. > :52:42.social security contributions to both the home state and the state of

:52:43. > :52:47.employment at the same time in order to get access to social Security

:52:48. > :52:50.benefits. And of course Social Security agreement varied to some

:52:51. > :52:55.extent from country to country. Depending on the nature and scope of

:52:56. > :53:02.the country's Social Security scheme. It should also be noted the

:53:03. > :53:06.UK is not alone in applying restrictions on payment of state

:53:07. > :53:09.pensions abroad. In some respects, the UK arrangements are less

:53:10. > :53:15.restrictive than those which apply in some other countries. Madam

:53:16. > :53:20.Deputy Speaker, the crux of the issue is individual choice. Those

:53:21. > :53:24.who have contributed to the UK state pension scheme are free to draw

:53:25. > :53:31.their entitlement from wherever they choose to live. The rules governing

:53:32. > :53:33.the uprating pensions are straightforward and widely

:53:34. > :53:41.publicised. If a person chooses to live in a country, country a, that

:53:42. > :53:47.pension will be up rated. If they live in country B, it will not be.

:53:48. > :53:50.In the final analysis, it is for the individual to weigh up the benefits

:53:51. > :53:58.of living in country B, where his position will not be operated

:53:59. > :54:03.against those afforded thy Aid, or indeed by remaining in the UK. I am

:54:04. > :54:08.mindful that there are are a number of people in this chamber who wish

:54:09. > :54:11.to speak. It is a backbench business debate and I mindful to give

:54:12. > :54:15.backbenchers the freedom to speak more than the front benches. I

:54:16. > :54:19.congratulate the honourable member again and those who have supported

:54:20. > :54:22.him on securing this debate. I'm pleased to have been able to set out

:54:23. > :54:31.the Government position, which remains unchanged. Angela Rayner.

:54:32. > :54:37.Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to congratulate the

:54:38. > :54:39.honourable member for Ross Guy and labour and my honourable friend, the

:54:40. > :54:45.member for Vauxhall, for securing this debate and thank all members

:54:46. > :54:50.that are taking part in this debate and have already made significant

:54:51. > :54:56.contributions. I know my party leader has spoken eloquently on this

:54:57. > :55:00.issue in the last time previously serving on the all-party

:55:01. > :55:04.Parliamentary group. Frozen pensions seem even more of a problem today in

:55:05. > :55:10.the context of the rich and wealthy hiding their money in overseas tax

:55:11. > :55:13.savings. Many of my constituents have grandparents and parents who

:55:14. > :55:20.have answered our government's call to come after the war to rebuild our

:55:21. > :55:23.country. Many of these pensioners have been a long-standing public

:55:24. > :55:29.servants and have even fought for our country, paying national

:55:30. > :55:34.insurance for all if not many of their working lives and playing by

:55:35. > :55:40.the rules. But since 1981 it has been the position that were a person

:55:41. > :55:45.is not ordinarily resident in the UK there is no entitlement to an annual

:55:46. > :55:49.increase in retirement pensions. The current government has reaffirmed

:55:50. > :55:53.this in the debate on January the 26 and the Minister stated, as

:55:54. > :55:57.honourable members will be aware the state pension is payable worldwide

:55:58. > :56:01.but uprating for people not ordinarily resident in the UK is

:56:02. > :56:06.generally restricted to people living in the European economic

:56:07. > :56:09.area, Switzerland, Gibraltar, or countries with which there is a

:56:10. > :56:15.reciprocal agreement providing for the uprating. Madam Deputy is

:56:16. > :56:19.bigger, cost has been cited as a determining factor in continuing to

:56:20. > :56:23.freeze pensions, which the House of Commons library puts in the region

:56:24. > :56:31.of half a billion per year. But the proposal of partial uprating has an

:56:32. > :56:37.estimated cost of just 37 million. Small in government spending terms.

:56:38. > :56:42.This option offers an affordable and expedient policy alternative. I am

:56:43. > :56:47.my party are keen to review the research by the ICP and the NCP,

:56:48. > :56:52.which suggests a partial way forward which is cost neutral to the

:56:53. > :56:58.Exchequer. We want to be bold in our response. And also credible. I am

:56:59. > :57:02.aware that the Right Honourable member for West Dorset has made a

:57:03. > :57:07.commitment to looking at this reversal on behalf of the

:57:08. > :57:12.Government. Madam Deputy Speaker, as some runs Italy new to this brief, I

:57:13. > :57:15.think it is worth taking a fresh look about the logic of the current

:57:16. > :57:21.arrangements, which is just not there. -- relatively new.

:57:22. > :57:26.Arrangements with some countries and not others. Where one pensioner in

:57:27. > :57:31.the USA gets an up rated pension and a pensioner in neighbouring Canada

:57:32. > :57:37.has there's frozen. The government should review the impact of this

:57:38. > :57:39.policy, and Labour is calling for a full equality is an impact

:57:40. > :57:44.assessment on freezing the overseas state tension, as well as a country

:57:45. > :57:50.by country analysis of the number of people affected. I recently met with

:57:51. > :57:55.the international Consortium of British pensioners and the National

:57:56. > :58:00.pensioners Convention. We discussed the impact of the freezing overseas

:58:01. > :58:04.state tensions. Many members of this debate have passionately spoken

:58:05. > :58:09.about the individual impact, like Rita Young, being kept away from her

:58:10. > :58:13.family, mentioned by the honourable member in his opening remarks. It is

:58:14. > :58:17.clear that while the Government has told us half the story, ministers

:58:18. > :58:22.must be forthcoming about the impact of the policy. We know for example

:58:23. > :58:29.that the majority of those affected live either in Canada or Australia.

:58:30. > :58:35.Two countries where the pension system is means tested. The previous

:58:36. > :58:39.pensions minister said as a result, uprating of the pensions are British

:58:40. > :58:43.citizens living here would effectively need a transfer to the

:58:44. > :58:50.Canadian and Australian Exchequer. The pensioners themselves would not

:58:51. > :58:52.necessarily be any better. However, I would welcome further detail from

:58:53. > :58:56.the Government about the number of British pensioners living in

:58:57. > :59:01.countries where the pension systems are not means tested. I would be

:59:02. > :59:05.grateful of the Minister can give the House that information today,

:59:06. > :59:08.all if he would write to me. Can he tell us how many British pensioners

:59:09. > :59:14.live in countries where the pensions system is not means tested and by

:59:15. > :59:18.how much they are losing out? Also, I share the request made early in

:59:19. > :59:22.the debate about the countries in which they live, have approached the

:59:23. > :59:25.UK Goodman for a reciprocal agreement similar to that which we

:59:26. > :59:31.have in the United States. -- UK government. If so, on what grounds

:59:32. > :59:36.were the agreements refused? Can the Minister give an estimate of the

:59:37. > :59:38.cost to the Exchequer of uprating of British pensioners living in

:59:39. > :59:47.countries where the pension system is not means tested? I am keen to

:59:48. > :59:50.listen, learn and work with stakeholders such as the all-party

:59:51. > :59:54.Parliamentary group to find a solution which is credible,

:59:55. > :00:00.affordable and fair. Members from across the House would have

:00:01. > :00:04.received, like myself, e-mails and correspondence from many overseas

:00:05. > :00:08.pensioners who will be watching the debates today. I hope they take from

:00:09. > :00:13.the debate that members from across this House value their contribution

:00:14. > :00:18.which they have made to our great country and will continue to work

:00:19. > :00:26.across parties to seek a fair way forward. Thank you, Madam Deputy

:00:27. > :00:33.Speaker. Can I congratulate the honourable member on his good

:00:34. > :00:39.fortune in securing this debate? And his election to the office of the

:00:40. > :00:43.Waspy committee. Maybe in that capacity he can write to my

:00:44. > :00:45.constituents, to inspect a big into that committee and explain why he

:00:46. > :00:53.and I are here today rather than upstairs.

:00:54. > :00:59.As the chairman of the all-party group for frozen pensions, more

:01:00. > :01:05.numbers may be surprised my name is not on the motion. As my honourable

:01:06. > :01:10.friend, the minister, has recognised and the honourable friend, it's

:01:11. > :01:14.technically flawed. But that said, that should not be allowed to

:01:15. > :01:20.diminish in any way from the frost of the motion, which is very simple

:01:21. > :01:26.and because it's very simple I don't want to detain the House for long.

:01:27. > :01:29.This is an injustice that has been perpetrated post-war and continued

:01:30. > :01:37.ever since under successive governments, as has been said. As my

:01:38. > :01:43.honourable friend... Is he seeking to intervene? No comment not. The

:01:44. > :01:52.point has been made but let's make it again. It's an absurdity that a

:01:53. > :01:58.pensioner living in Canada on one side of Niagara Falls has a frozen

:01:59. > :02:03.pension and a pensioner living in the United States, 500 yards across

:02:04. > :02:07.the river on the other side, does not have a frozen pension. There is

:02:08. > :02:16.no equity, sensible logic in that whatsoever. The point has been made

:02:17. > :02:18.incorrectly I think that a lot of these people have paid National

:02:19. > :02:22.Insurance contributions and therefore they should get their

:02:23. > :02:27.pensions but we all need to recognise that national insurance is

:02:28. > :02:33.not funded pension scheme, unlike a private pension scheme, which is

:02:34. > :02:38.fully funded. National insurance contributes to a number of benefits.

:02:39. > :02:43.But the point has not been made that throughout their working lives, very

:02:44. > :02:51.many of the now elderly people we are talking about, who are being

:02:52. > :02:54.shoddily treated, have not only paid National Insurance contributions but

:02:55. > :03:01.their taxes to the United Kingdom and served the United Kingdom, in

:03:02. > :03:05.some cases in the Armed Forces. If in retirement, having paid their

:03:06. > :03:11.dues or their working lives, they wish then to join friends, family,

:03:12. > :03:16.in another country, why should they not be able to do so and take their

:03:17. > :03:23.pensions with them? The point has also been made that there is another

:03:24. > :03:30.restriction movement which is that a significant number of Commonwealth

:03:31. > :03:37.immigrants came to the United Kingdom in the 1950s and 60s,

:03:38. > :03:41.established, worked here, regard themselves as British and have paid

:03:42. > :03:46.their dues or their working lives, but now, in old age, would like

:03:47. > :03:50.return to the example of the Caribbean and feel they are being

:03:51. > :03:56.prevented from doing so because they are afraid that their pensions will

:03:57. > :04:03.be frozen and they won't be able to afford to live in the country of

:04:04. > :04:10.their birth. I believe that that is morally wrong. There is another

:04:11. > :04:21.downside to all of this, which is that we are in danger of generating

:04:22. > :04:26.a car dream of pensioners, like the 90-year-old in Canada who may have

:04:27. > :04:30.to abandon his partner who has dementia and come back to the United

:04:31. > :04:35.Kingdom because he can't afford to live, who will be coming back, and

:04:36. > :04:38.if they come back, there will be a cost to our health services and

:04:39. > :04:44.social services and that needs to be taken into account the Department

:04:45. > :04:50.for Work and Pensions the Treasury. The issue relating to those expats

:04:51. > :04:57.living in France and Spain but throughout the European Union has

:04:58. > :05:06.been touched upon and skated over. Potentially, this is a very real

:05:07. > :05:12.issue indeed. If the United Kingdom votes to leave the European Union,

:05:13. > :05:19.there is no guarantee at all that those pensioners will continue to

:05:20. > :05:25.have their pensions operated. And following the cessation with the

:05:26. > :05:32.fuel payment, on the spurious grounds that a few places are part

:05:33. > :05:39.of metropolitan France and therefore it is appropriate to take that

:05:40. > :05:44.benefit from them, a lot of those pensioners are not, as is popularly

:05:45. > :05:48.described, rich retirees living on yachts in the Mediterranean,

:05:49. > :05:53.drinking gin, they are struggling. They will come home because they

:05:54. > :06:00.won't have anywhere else to go. And I suspect that that struggle will

:06:01. > :06:07.turn into a torrent if we leave the European Union. It's no good, the

:06:08. > :06:12.Brexit people saying, we will negotiate unilateral agreements.

:06:13. > :06:18.With 27 countries, mainly France and Spain, but there is Italy and Greece

:06:19. > :06:26.and others dotted throughout the 26 other member states of the European

:06:27. > :06:30.Union. It is a very real issue that the DWP and Treasury will have to

:06:31. > :06:35.face. The all-party group recognises the difficulties in resolving a

:06:36. > :06:41.problem that has been allowed to build up over many years. And with

:06:42. > :06:48.great respect to my honourable friend, it is facile to say

:06:49. > :06:51.successive governments have done this. Successive doubt governments

:06:52. > :06:57.have but they have been wrong and it's time we put this injustice

:06:58. > :07:03.right. There has to be a way of addressing the issue. John Malcolm

:07:04. > :07:08.and Jim Tilley and others, the International Consortium of British

:07:09. > :07:14.pensioners, have put forward, having met the Cabinet Office, why believe

:07:15. > :07:20.to be a sensible solution. This is not a DWP issue. I understand

:07:21. > :07:27.entirely that the Treasury is very afraid that if an inch is given, I

:07:28. > :07:31.will be taken in the courts by those will then seek recompense back for

:07:32. > :07:38.the last 40 years. And that of course could add up to a very

:07:39. > :07:46.considerable amount of money. But we have to move forwards. We can't stay

:07:47. > :07:50.where we are. So, what John Malcolm and his colleagues have suggested,

:07:51. > :07:57.and what we have suggested with him to the Chancellor, is that there

:07:58. > :08:04.should be an operating based upon today's pensions, receipt of today's

:08:05. > :08:09.pensions. If somebody had better pension frozen 20 years ago, and

:08:10. > :08:17.many have, they would be operated at that figure, not today's figure.

:08:18. > :08:21.That would be a pittance, a beautiful son of money. But it would

:08:22. > :08:25.be a step in the right direction and gradually over time, that would

:08:26. > :08:32.actually resolve the problem and we would accept the principle, which is

:08:33. > :08:39.the right principle. Those pensions should be operated in line with

:08:40. > :08:47.inflation year on year. The Chancellor, following a receipt of

:08:48. > :08:50.John Malcolm's paper, has looked at it and construed that more

:08:51. > :08:59.information is needed. That I accept. The pensioners are not

:09:00. > :09:05.experts in all of these matters. So my understanding is that the

:09:06. > :09:12.Chancellor has been in touch with John Malcolm, has referred back to

:09:13. > :09:18.him, he is now assembling further information that is required in

:09:19. > :09:24.order for the Office for Budget Responsibility to consider this. But

:09:25. > :09:26.the Department for Work and Pensions, the Treasury, the Cabinet

:09:27. > :09:32.Office and the Prime Minister or have to recognise this. If we don't

:09:33. > :09:40.address this, there will certainly be a moral cost because we are wrong

:09:41. > :09:43.and there will also be a financial cost. An two fronts because

:09:44. > :09:47.pensioners who can't afford to live overseas will come home and

:09:48. > :09:54.pensioners who want to go overseas to retire won't go. At the end of

:09:55. > :10:01.the day, that will be a cost on the social services budget. When my

:10:02. > :10:09.honourable friend comes to respond, I would like him simply to say that

:10:10. > :10:13.he recognises the problem, but he understands... I suspect this is

:10:14. > :10:19.slightly above his pay grade, it certainly above mine! There has to

:10:20. > :10:23.be a way forward, there has to be a solution. I want this government,

:10:24. > :10:28.this Conservative government, to have the pride and courage to give

:10:29. > :10:35.to people who are in retirement oversees the dignity that they

:10:36. > :10:39.deserve. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to pay tribute to

:10:40. > :10:43.everyone who has brought this debate to the floor of the Chamber and I

:10:44. > :10:50.want to declare an interest in this debate. I am in receipt of a UK

:10:51. > :10:53.state pension and I have received uprating of this pension since I

:10:54. > :10:57.first received it and further declare that it is possible that

:10:58. > :11:13.sometime in the very distant future I may decide live abroad. England!

:11:14. > :11:18.Madam Deputy Speaker, as you well know, I have written that down the

:11:19. > :11:22.Hansard, and I want to repeat, and I will repeat many things that have

:11:23. > :11:29.been said in this debate because they are important. A pension is not

:11:30. > :11:33.benefit, it is not a privilege, it is not a hand-out. Pensions are

:11:34. > :11:38.owned by individuals who contributed the state. To those who have worked

:11:39. > :11:43.hard all their lives to provide for themselves and their family and

:11:44. > :11:48.support our economy. UK state pensions are operated according to

:11:49. > :11:52.the laws and regulations existing in this country and that right must be

:11:53. > :12:00.extended to all but a British pensioners abroad. Over 500,000 of

:12:01. > :12:05.them do not benefit at the moment. Currently, as has been said, no

:12:06. > :12:09.reciprocal agreement exists with the Commonwealth countries of Canada,

:12:10. > :12:14.New Zealand and Australia. UK pensioners living in these countries

:12:15. > :12:17.account for 80% of those who have their pensions frozen. These are

:12:18. > :12:22.Commonwealth states with which we have a close relationship but not

:12:23. > :12:29.close enough to form reciprocal agreements to support pensioners and

:12:30. > :12:32.some of the countries we do have reciprocal agreements with, the

:12:33. > :12:39.former republics of Yugoslavia, the USA, Turkey, and a personal

:12:40. > :12:45.favourite of this government, the tax havens and Bermuda, it

:12:46. > :12:53.exemplifies this government's priorities that it protects tax

:12:54. > :13:00.havens for the global elite but fails to correct the injustice of

:13:01. > :13:06.its own pensioners. This government claims that the price for universal

:13:07. > :13:11.uprating is too high. In fact, Oxford University's figures estimate

:13:12. > :13:16.that ?4300 is saved each year with every pensioner the moves abroad due

:13:17. > :13:20.to decreased pressure on public services. I'm sure if they really

:13:21. > :13:25.looked, this government could find the money to provide these

:13:26. > :13:30.pensioners just as found the money for bombing Syria and just as they

:13:31. > :13:34.will find ?167 billion to replace Trident. This government is more

:13:35. > :13:39.concerned with bombing abroad than supporting our pensioners abroad.

:13:40. > :13:44.This government has said they would like to focus on providing the

:13:45. > :13:50.pensioners based in the UK. I will reiterate what I said earlier,

:13:51. > :13:53.pensions are a right and an uprating the pensioners abroad should not be

:13:54. > :14:00.a trade-off with pension rates for people here. The government has said

:14:01. > :14:04.that uprating is based on levels of earnings, growth and price inflation

:14:05. > :14:09.in the UK and that there is no relevance to pensioners abroad. No

:14:10. > :14:12.reciprocal agreements have been made with the three main foreign

:14:13. > :14:19.countries in which British pensioners live. To try to overcome

:14:20. > :14:22.this deficit. The government has said that opposition to universal

:14:23. > :14:28.uprating has been government policy for 70 years across all governments.

:14:29. > :14:34.As someone who supports the end of a 300 year political union, I am not

:14:35. > :14:40.for one the blind traditionalism! This government like several before

:14:41. > :14:44.it has refused to even consider universal uprating, refused to

:14:45. > :14:52.negotiate a reciprocal agreement with certain states and have even

:14:53. > :14:56.refused to consider a review, resulting in an asymmetrical system

:14:57. > :15:02.where pensioners in the EU and USA benefit that those in Australia and

:15:03. > :15:06.Canada don't. This government is taking an out of sight, out of mind

:15:07. > :15:12.approach which is leading our pensioners living overseas in some

:15:13. > :15:17.countries were soggy cheer in real terms through an incoherent system

:15:18. > :15:22.which sets us apart from any other member of the OECD. Partial uprating

:15:23. > :15:26.is a pragmatic and practical solution and I would urge the

:15:27. > :15:30.government to take this route. It's about time the rights of those who

:15:31. > :15:36.helped build this country are secured in their pension rights to

:15:37. > :15:41.uprating rather than focusing on decreasing public spending and

:15:42. > :15:47.rolling back the state. When we were, we pay National Insurance and

:15:48. > :15:52.taxes. Our pensions are accrued on that basis. These pensions are a

:15:53. > :15:54.right and know one should ever be refused what is theirs by right,

:15:55. > :16:07.whether they live here or elsewhere. Thank you for calling me to speak in

:16:08. > :16:10.this debate. I operate on the principle I have a contract with my

:16:11. > :16:16.government and my government has a contract with me. I work hard, pay

:16:17. > :16:22.national insurance, pay my tax, and in return I get a pension. That is a

:16:23. > :16:26.very simple expectation. It does shame in this government and

:16:27. > :16:30.successive ones that they have failed to meet their obligation in

:16:31. > :16:39.the cases of those people choosing to move overseas. As I said earlier,

:16:40. > :16:43.where you choose to live should have no bearing, no bearing on your

:16:44. > :16:49.pension entitlement. It is shameful that governments continue to argue

:16:50. > :16:55.differently. Then of course we heard from the front bench. It was a

:16:56. > :17:02.reasonable point. That uprating these pensions would cost 500

:17:03. > :17:08.million per year. But this is money which is owed to people. This is

:17:09. > :17:15.money which they have a realistic expectation of receiving. It is not

:17:16. > :17:19.as if we have a group of angry silver haired men and women

:17:20. > :17:25.demanding cash for having made no contribution. They deserve this cash

:17:26. > :17:30.because they have made a contribution. Is my right honourable

:17:31. > :17:36.friend seeking to intervene? He has lurched forward. Excellent. It is

:17:37. > :17:42.nice when somebody agrees with me. Particularly from my own side. What

:17:43. > :17:47.I would like to say, now the Minister has resumed his seat, I

:17:48. > :17:54.would like to say that the Minister in his speech made great play on the

:17:55. > :18:00.issue of choice. That pensioners have a choice of where they live. I

:18:01. > :18:05.am delighted we have choices in this country. That is the wonderful thing

:18:06. > :18:10.about living in an open and free society where we can choose where we

:18:11. > :18:17.live and who we associate with. But choice cuts both ways. Doesn't it?

:18:18. > :18:24.It also applies to government. And the Government absolutely has the

:18:25. > :18:28.choice to honour its promises to retired people who have made an

:18:29. > :18:36.enormous contribution to this country. And right now, the

:18:37. > :18:43.Government is choosing not to honour those commitments. I would conclude

:18:44. > :18:47.this very short speech, Madam Deputy Speaker, by saying the governors

:18:48. > :18:56.should exercise its right to choice by actually choosing to do the right

:18:57. > :19:02.thing. -- government. Kate Hoey. Can I congratulate the honourable member

:19:03. > :19:07.for Ross Skye. And the other members who have spoken. And to pay tribute

:19:08. > :19:14.to the honourable member and his friends. I think it is really

:19:15. > :19:18.sending out a very positive signal that so many members of his party

:19:19. > :19:22.are actually here today for this important debate. This is something

:19:23. > :19:26.some of us in the chamber have been speaking about and it has been

:19:27. > :19:30.supported over many years and it has been said governments of all

:19:31. > :19:35.political persuasions, when in opposition have made the right

:19:36. > :19:39.noises, said positive things, and in government have completely reneges

:19:40. > :19:45.because they always tend to when the Treasury gets involved. I will come

:19:46. > :19:50.my honourable friend on the front bench. What she has said reflect the

:19:51. > :19:54.views of the leader of our party who has made a commitment on this over

:19:55. > :19:58.many years. I hope this will be something we will continue to treat

:19:59. > :20:06.very seriously and to be a supporter Rob. I would like to pay tribute

:20:07. > :20:09.also to John Malcolm. He has continued for many years to push

:20:10. > :20:13.this from the international consortium of British pensioners,

:20:14. > :20:18.the global Coalition of all the different campaign groups. He has

:20:19. > :20:22.kept going. All of his supporters have kept going when they must've

:20:23. > :20:26.felt time and again setback after setback and that they were not

:20:27. > :20:30.getting anywhere. I hope today they feel, following on from the speeches

:20:31. > :20:35.of people on all sides, they are beginning to see movement. And also

:20:36. > :20:38.to welcome the support of the National pensioners Convention. I

:20:39. > :20:43.think all those who have pensioner groups in our constituencies, this

:20:44. > :20:50.is regularly raised certainly in my area. Pensioners here, no matter how

:20:51. > :20:59.do the gold in their circumstances, they do believe it is unfair and

:21:00. > :21:04.would welcome it in resolve. -- no matter what their circumstances. I

:21:05. > :21:07.represent many people in the Afro-Caribbean community who came

:21:08. > :21:12.and worked in many years ago and many of them getting onward like to

:21:13. > :21:15.go back. And the situation in the Caribbean where some islands are

:21:16. > :21:20.covered and some are not, it is ludicrous the Government cannot get

:21:21. > :21:23.even in a small part of the Caribbean, forgetting the big

:21:24. > :21:28.countries, cannot work out reciprocal agreements for those

:21:29. > :21:32.countries. They want to retire in their old age and go back but they

:21:33. > :21:40.do not feel they can go back, knowing that their pension will not

:21:41. > :21:44.increase and that they may well be subject to their families and roses

:21:45. > :21:48.out there helping them when they have been working here and wanting

:21:49. > :21:55.to go back and wanting to retire with dignity. The Minister did not

:21:56. > :22:02.really, honestly, really say anything other than what he read out

:22:03. > :22:08.in his brief, which said everything the last time the minister spoke. I

:22:09. > :22:11.do not understand why we cannot get a reciprocal agreement with

:22:12. > :22:18.Australia, Canada and New Zealand. In his winding up, can he tell us

:22:19. > :22:23.why he cannot get that? We tried? When was it last discussed? What

:22:24. > :22:30.were the obstacles? These are three of our closest countries. They are

:22:31. > :22:34.part of the Commonwealth. Many of them died for us in the first and

:22:35. > :22:38.Second World War. Why can we not get a reciprocal agreement with those

:22:39. > :22:45.three countries? Why can we not get it with the Caribbean? That is only

:22:46. > :22:49.one way of doing it. Obviously the best way would be to have the

:22:50. > :22:56.fairness of saying that this is their money. This is pensioner's

:22:57. > :23:01.money. It is not government money. It is Jude to them and it should

:23:02. > :23:05.have happened. Some government at some stage will have two except

:23:06. > :23:14.enough is enough and we had to make that bold step. -- we have to say

:23:15. > :23:19.enough is enough. There is a case for change. I think there is a lot

:23:20. > :23:29.in this case which could be taken up. And if we could get a start to

:23:30. > :23:34.add least dealing with the partial construction of the link, getting

:23:35. > :23:38.rid of that, that would be a start. This is a question of justice,

:23:39. > :23:44.fairness and it is not really about cost. We know the cost of many of

:23:45. > :23:49.these people who would like to go and move abroad, go back home, or

:23:50. > :23:53.move because they have got family and they would like to retire and be

:23:54. > :23:59.with their family, the savings we will make over the years can be made

:24:00. > :24:06.up. There will be savings, no doubt about it, they will be savings. It

:24:07. > :24:09.will cost us much more if many of these people come back here at the

:24:10. > :24:14.time when they are going to need more help support and all the extra

:24:15. > :24:26.social services. And that is castles. I think the cost issue --

:24:27. > :24:30.is cost. At least we should start to redress it with the suggestion in

:24:31. > :24:35.this document. 30 million is not a huge amount of money. I do not want

:24:36. > :24:38.to get involved in the European Union but I think we are giving

:24:39. > :24:43.something like 50 million per day to the European Union. 30 million in

:24:44. > :24:50.the scale of things is actually very very small. I would appeal to this

:24:51. > :24:55.minister and certainly to my front bench to keep up the pressure on

:24:56. > :24:59.this. Because I do believe that there is now, I have never seen so

:25:00. > :25:03.many members involved in any of these kinds of debates and questions

:25:04. > :25:08.we have had in the last 27 years I have been in this House, there are

:25:09. > :25:12.two or three committee members on this site who have done a lot of

:25:13. > :25:16.work on this and I think the first time a lot of new members will have

:25:17. > :25:23.understood. People moving today do not realise, because the website is

:25:24. > :25:26.not very clear. There is not any clarity. Many people who moved a

:25:27. > :25:33.long time ago had no idea they were not going to get their pension up

:25:34. > :25:37.rated. Thank you to all of the members who have taken part in this

:25:38. > :25:41.debate. I hope all of those watching all over the world who have felt so

:25:42. > :25:46.let down over the years will feel at last, thanks to the efforts of the

:25:47. > :25:52.members who have spoken today and in having this debate, there is a

:25:53. > :25:58.little chink somewhere that this may begin to change. Sir Peter

:25:59. > :26:01.Bottomley. Thank you. I agree with everything that has been said so

:26:02. > :26:06.far. Apart from what has been said from the front bench. But that is

:26:07. > :26:13.not to be taken personally. We know his role is to say what government

:26:14. > :26:20.has decided not to change. The issue is the Government has got to change.

:26:21. > :26:23.I would say any member of Parliament who goes to live in one of the

:26:24. > :26:30.countries on the frozen list should not get a pension at all? If we do,

:26:31. > :26:35.it should not be upgraded in line with inflation? Why is it that the

:26:36. > :26:39.people who do the calculations for government can take their second

:26:40. > :26:42.state pension, their work pension, abroad to any island in the

:26:43. > :26:49.Caribbean and know it will be uplifted with inflation? Why is

:26:50. > :27:01.this? If they move to the Isle of Skye, the Isle of Wight, the island

:27:02. > :27:04.Ely, and possibly the United Arab Emirates, and I pay tribute to my

:27:05. > :27:09.honourable friend, the honourable lady and others who in advance of

:27:10. > :27:12.the welcome efforts of the SNP have followed the efforts of John Malcolm

:27:13. > :27:16.and his predecessors, because he was not the first and I hope he will not

:27:17. > :27:23.be the last to fight this battle. Why is it such an arbitrary

:27:24. > :27:28.collection of countries? I believe it will come when this government

:27:29. > :27:37.justifiably finds one of the combo of heads of government meetings is

:27:38. > :27:42.dominated by the major countries where over half a million frozen

:27:43. > :27:47.pensions live and when they say... I would not say head of state, but

:27:48. > :27:51.head of government, why is it that a minister can sit on the front bench

:27:52. > :27:57.and say, do not worry, too much. These are not precise words. They

:27:58. > :28:02.can get money from Social Security in the country they live in. That

:28:03. > :28:07.may be true in Australia. Does it apply to the person who served in

:28:08. > :28:10.the civil service in Southern Rhodesia and stayed on in Zimbabwe

:28:11. > :28:18.and has no option and where you can now find alien dollar notes from the

:28:19. > :28:25.previous inflation? -- billion dollar notes. It is not right. I

:28:26. > :28:30.think we should start saying, very simply, that the politics will mean

:28:31. > :28:36.this change will come in time. The question is when and how. I suspect

:28:37. > :28:39.that some stage in the future, I hope I'm still in the House when it

:28:40. > :28:44.happens. I do not intend to go on forever but quite some time. I hope

:28:45. > :28:50.the uprating will apply retrospectively. I understand that

:28:51. > :28:56.the first is step, possibly the only step will get to the partial

:28:57. > :29:04.unfreezing. We need to get the Chancellor understand that as and

:29:05. > :29:07.when the proper fans that the 1.2 million British pensioners overseas

:29:08. > :29:11.will be able to vote and whether they vote in individual

:29:12. > :29:14.constituencies or if they have an overseas constituency in the way I

:29:15. > :29:19.think France does it, that will start bringing in a political power

:29:20. > :29:24.which is probably missing at the moment. The problem at present is

:29:25. > :29:30.those already overseas tend not to be registered and do not vote. It is

:29:31. > :29:40.a scandal how very few in the last 50 News are registered and do vote.

:29:41. > :29:44.It is -- 15 years. And it is strange that people who do not vote abroad

:29:45. > :29:49.do not think it matters to them. We have got 1.2 million now. 10% of

:29:50. > :29:53.British pensioners. And perhaps twice as many in future. And the

:29:54. > :29:57.time for government to resolve this is now. Because otherwise every

:29:58. > :30:03.extra 1000 British pensioners abroad will probably mean 50,000 in a

:30:04. > :30:08.frozen country and they will start saying the cost is going up. --

:30:09. > :30:12.100,000 British. The government could turn around and say we do not

:30:13. > :30:16.think overseas pensioners should get a uprating and they should look

:30:17. > :30:19.again at the agreements they have got with the European Union and

:30:20. > :30:24.other countries in the world so that nobody out of 1.2 million gets an

:30:25. > :30:31.increase. That would have some logic to it. Maybe the Minister would like

:30:32. > :30:36.to say now or right to be later on if the governors will propose to

:30:37. > :30:39.look at a reciprocal agreement and if they will drop it. I doubt he can

:30:40. > :30:43.say yes because I did the kid has happened. I think since 1981 the

:30:44. > :30:48.governors has said we do not have to do much about it because people are

:30:49. > :30:52.not making a fuss about it. The job of the House of Commons is to make a

:30:53. > :31:00.fuss about it. Let me put it this way, I do not want my government,

:31:01. > :31:03.the Government, any alternative government, to go on giving to a

:31:04. > :31:07.minister in the Department for Work and Pensions the sort of points

:31:08. > :31:15.which the Minister has been given today and which he has given to us.

:31:16. > :31:21.The arguments don't take this any further forward, they don't provide

:31:22. > :31:27.a resolution, they just say we will be stick the marts because we got

:31:28. > :31:31.away with it and nobody noticed. Over 500,000 people in countries

:31:32. > :31:39.that are mostly associated with this country in war and peace, in

:31:40. > :31:42.prosperity and difficulty, are being denied the increases which everybody

:31:43. > :31:48.is takes for granted. Not just everybody else in this country but

:31:49. > :31:51.around the world. I pay tribute to the honourable member for bringing

:31:52. > :31:54.this forward and I thank the backbench business committee. I hope

:31:55. > :31:59.the Minister will forgive me for the way I put some of my points. I hope

:32:00. > :32:05.you will report back that this House and this country does not believe in

:32:06. > :32:08.unfairness. We were elected to help government doing things that are

:32:09. > :32:12.right, not just because the popular pressure will go to make him do it

:32:13. > :32:15.with he's right or wrong. The time to do is now and I hope that message

:32:16. > :32:23.will go clearly through to government. I also want to thank my

:32:24. > :32:30.honourable friend the putting forward this debate. I have to say

:32:31. > :32:34.it's fair to say that given my youthfulness prior to the last year,

:32:35. > :32:39.I didn't have a great understanding of pensions, but the more I look

:32:40. > :32:46.into this, the more bizarre the world pension seems to get. I want

:32:47. > :32:51.to thank the member for mentioning the fact we were not at the meeting

:32:52. > :32:56.because we are in the Chamber debate. He made an interesting

:32:57. > :33:00.point, which is one of the reasons I find this debate is bizarre. He said

:33:01. > :33:06.the government claims it has received legal advice that people

:33:07. > :33:12.will be able to claim the back payments, but legal advice received

:33:13. > :33:17.contradicts this. The minister himself said that on the back of

:33:18. > :33:21.this, many pensioners who are overseas that have their pensions

:33:22. > :33:26.frozen is at effectively compensated through means tested benefits in

:33:27. > :33:29.their country of residence, implying that I'm freezing them would make

:33:30. > :33:34.savings for foreign governments at the expense of the UK taxpayer. But

:33:35. > :33:39.again, would you look at the facts, the recent review of the countries

:33:40. > :33:43.with the largest number of frozen pensions shows this is not the case.

:33:44. > :33:50.The vast majority would benefit greatly from an uprating in full. It

:33:51. > :33:54.brings me to something that is the person my honourable friend

:33:55. > :33:59.mentioned, the former college lecturer, who is now 91. She worked

:34:00. > :34:04.in the UK or her life and moved to Canada to be with her daughter and

:34:05. > :34:10.grandchildren. 14 years on, she has served as an intelligence officer in

:34:11. > :34:16.the Royal Navy during the Second World War and she is struggling to

:34:17. > :34:22.live of a frozen pension of ?75.50 when she was entitled to. She now

:34:23. > :34:28.feels she will be forced to move back to Britain to survive. It was

:34:29. > :34:32.telling, the quotes are used. She said, it's the small things and the

:34:33. > :34:35.injustice that is getting to me. I value my independence but I can't go

:34:36. > :34:39.on living on the breadline and I don't want to inflict this on my

:34:40. > :34:44.family. That's telling because she is not asking for millions here, she

:34:45. > :34:49.is not asking to raid the banks, she's asking for an extra 20 or 30

:34:50. > :34:56.quid she is entitled to do after she has paid all the working life into

:34:57. > :35:00.the system. She goes on to say, as well as ever increasing poverty, I

:35:01. > :35:06.feel a sense of stress and shame, which is affecting my health. I was

:35:07. > :35:10.looking through all the different briefings on this and on previous

:35:11. > :35:14.debates we have been having for years, and as the minister pointed

:35:15. > :35:23.out, this debate has been happening since post-World War II, but one of

:35:24. > :35:26.the quotes from the government, it said, unfortunately, we can't

:35:27. > :35:30.unfreeze pensions because it is incompatible with the government's

:35:31. > :35:35.policy of containing the long-term costs of the Social Security system

:35:36. > :35:44.to ensure it remains affordable. I know this is an incredible cynical

:35:45. > :35:49.point to make but this is where the real lunacy about this argument of

:35:50. > :35:52.cost comes in. Instead of giving people that 20 or 30 extra quid that

:35:53. > :35:59.everybody else in the UK gets they are entitled to, they have paid into

:36:00. > :36:03.the system more their life, instead we are saying, we will not give you

:36:04. > :36:09.that money but you can go live abroad, you can make yourself ill

:36:10. > :36:15.through poverty, worrying, stress, and only then, when you are repulsed

:36:16. > :36:19.to return to Britain, don't worry, we will foot the bill of the NHS.

:36:20. > :36:23.This argument of cost doesn't stand up because the cost will actually

:36:24. > :36:30.increase when these pensioners who have been made ill come back in

:36:31. > :36:43.order to survive. This is supported... It's a powerful

:36:44. > :36:47.argument. Canadians here can get the full state pension from their

:36:48. > :36:53.country but were dished pensioners can't get in Canada, therefore it is

:36:54. > :36:56.not about protecting Social Security here because the reciprocal

:36:57. > :37:07.arrangement could easily put in place. That's a further nonsense

:37:08. > :37:10.argument. I couldn't agree more with what the honourable member said and

:37:11. > :37:15.the relationship with Canada is something I will touch on. The

:37:16. > :37:22.argument I was making there is supported by the Oxford economic

:37:23. > :37:25.study in 2010, which using published government statistics showed that

:37:26. > :37:32.pensioner who permanently leaves the UK, actually saves ?4300 a year

:37:33. > :37:36.through NHS usage and other public security benefits and social

:37:37. > :37:41.security benefits. So we are actually placing an increasing

:37:42. > :37:47.workload and cost onto the NHS and other public bodies, the very ones

:37:48. > :37:53.that were simultaneously using as an argument to continue with frozen

:37:54. > :37:57.pensions. It makes no sense. The third reason given by the government

:37:58. > :38:01.is there could be some kind of backlash, legal and political.

:38:02. > :38:12.That's not the case because this has been debated for years. A lady said

:38:13. > :38:17.because she was in South Africa and there was not that reciprocal deal,

:38:18. > :38:22.her pension was frozen, but had she moved to an EU country or country

:38:23. > :38:26.where there was a deal, she would have had an operator pension. The

:38:27. > :38:31.judge ruled that she should lose the case, there was no form of

:38:32. > :38:36.discrimination, but even the judge noted just how ludicrous the system

:38:37. > :38:40.was and how there was so much confusion about it. The judge ruled

:38:41. > :38:49.it was a political decision rather than a judicial one and that just

:38:50. > :38:55.shows how crazy these plans. I can't remember where the honourable member

:38:56. > :39:02.is from... He used these words earlier on. Any person moving within

:39:03. > :39:10.the EU gets an increase. There are 16 countries the UK has reciprocal

:39:11. > :39:15.agreements with but the agreements with Canada, New Zealand and

:39:16. > :39:20.Australia do not allow for operating. It's worth knowing that

:39:21. > :39:25.these three countries make up 80% of overseas residents who don't receive

:39:26. > :39:29.up ratings. I agree with everything the member said about choice in how

:39:30. > :39:33.that has to work both ways with the government but when the minister was

:39:34. > :39:37.saying has opened remarks that this is a choice that pensioners make

:39:38. > :39:43.whether they choose to go to country a country be with or without a deal.

:39:44. > :39:48.That does not seem to add up. Surely, the freedom would be about

:39:49. > :39:52.being able to choose freely where you want to go, knowing you have

:39:53. > :39:54.paid on all your life then you will get back? It's not for the

:39:55. > :39:58.government about a hindrance on where people can choose to spend

:39:59. > :40:12.their pension that they are built up over their lifetime. I put the idea

:40:13. > :40:15.forward, perhaps it New Zealand, and Canada and the others applied to

:40:16. > :40:21.join the EU they would get the operating and we would also the

:40:22. > :40:27.problem? An interesting point but we will see how things go in the

:40:28. > :40:31.summer! Everything that has been mentioned here in this debate

:40:32. > :40:37.punches on a deeper, more fundamental problem within pensions

:40:38. > :40:41.as a whole with this government and consecutive governments, which is

:40:42. > :40:46.inconsistency. On the one hand, we tell people to pay National

:40:47. > :40:50.Insurance for pensions to live a happy retirement but only in certain

:40:51. > :40:55.places, we tell people we give them greater freedom and they should be

:40:56. > :40:59.trusted with their pensions, but we won't give them the freedom to move

:41:00. > :41:04.anywhere with their pension. We can make deals to operate their pensions

:41:05. > :41:09.with some countries but not others and we will give them the vote in

:41:10. > :41:14.other countries but not prepared to pay out for your pension. It doesn't

:41:15. > :41:17.seem to make sense. Everything seems to be very convoluted and

:41:18. > :41:21.conflicting. I know the member spoke about what the Chancellor said about

:41:22. > :41:25.being supportive of the change when he was in opposition, something that

:41:26. > :41:31.has been touched on throughout the debate. The House of Commons library

:41:32. > :41:34.shows the Shadow pensions minister then explained that the

:41:35. > :41:38.Conservatives had a considerable sympathy with those affected will

:41:39. > :41:43.stop the Prime Minister has stated in a letter that the government is

:41:44. > :41:46.not feel they can change anything in times of austerity because how can

:41:47. > :41:51.we unfreeze these pensions when the people in the UK are being asked to

:41:52. > :41:57.make sacrifices? But in the wake of things that have happened recently,

:41:58. > :42:02.whether that be the Panama papers, the shambolic deal with Google, it's

:42:03. > :42:09.clear this government is asking the wrong people to make sacrifices. And

:42:10. > :42:11.it's also worth remembering -- reminding the minister the other

:42:12. > :42:21.sympathy in the world simply won't pay bills. I should have said, with

:42:22. > :42:24.the Leader of the House, and I take the leave of the House because

:42:25. > :42:34.several members asked the Minister to speak again. I would like to make

:42:35. > :42:37.some very brief comments. This is a backbench business committee

:42:38. > :42:40.debating is not normal for frontbenchers to have a second go

:42:41. > :42:48.and I don't want to set precedents but I want to make one or two

:42:49. > :42:51.concluding comments. The issue of bilateral agreements has been

:42:52. > :42:54.mentioned and I want to say the bilateral agreements are normally

:42:55. > :42:59.negotiated on the basis of compatibility of systems and that

:43:00. > :43:06.reciprocal city is achieved between the two nations and thus respective

:43:07. > :43:13.costs are broadly balanced. In the case of Canada, with over 150,000 UK

:43:14. > :43:18.state pension recipients, any new bilateral would not receive

:43:19. > :43:21.reciprocal city so would be disadvantages to the UK taxpayer.

:43:22. > :43:27.May I pay tribute to my honourable friend? For the work he has done

:43:28. > :43:33.over a number of years on this particular issue? It's important but

:43:34. > :43:43.that on the record. Can I also pay tribute... On that point, can I also

:43:44. > :43:49.pay tribute to my honourable friend and indeed to the honourable lady

:43:50. > :43:58.from Vauxhall? My honourable friend... I will not give way. Point

:43:59. > :44:04.of order. If a reciprocal agreement was made, there wouldn't be no

:44:05. > :44:08.reciprocal agreements anywhere. I cannot answer that point as it is

:44:09. > :44:11.not point of order, is a point of debate, and the Minister is being

:44:12. > :44:17.briefed because he has the leave of the House to speak again. Minister.

:44:18. > :44:21.It is leader of the House that I do not wish to abuse so I simply wish

:44:22. > :44:29.to conclude by referring to what my honourable friend referred to, the

:44:30. > :44:34.issue that has been raised by the International Consortium of British

:44:35. > :44:40.pensioners. He is right to mention that the consortium has come up with

:44:41. > :44:43.proposals but it was felt that the proposals were not sufficiently

:44:44. > :44:48.developed but I know they are working on more and we look forward

:44:49. > :44:52.to having sight of them. May I conclude by congratulating the

:44:53. > :44:59.honourable member again for securing this debate? Thank you. Thank you,

:45:00. > :45:03.Madam Deputy Speaker, and let me thank all the honourable members who

:45:04. > :45:07.have spoken this afternoon. There has been a unity across the Chamber,

:45:08. > :45:11.that this is something that shames us all, when we want to see the

:45:12. > :45:15.government taking action. It's about fairness as many members have said.

:45:16. > :45:28.Let me thank the frontbenchers that have spoken.

:45:29. > :45:34.This is a matter of considerable importance and I also would like to

:45:35. > :45:40.congratulate the honourable member for North Thanet because he has led

:45:41. > :45:51.this along with support from many others. We will not let this matter

:45:52. > :45:55.go. It has been touched on about the partial operating. I purposely did

:45:56. > :45:58.not do that in my earlier remarks but the government could make a

:45:59. > :46:04.start by acknowledging it. I would say to the Minister, please go away

:46:05. > :46:09.and talk to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who spoke in 2003 about

:46:10. > :46:12.the injustices taking place. Let's see the government accepting the

:46:13. > :46:16.moral responsibility we have pensioners everywhere. I would take

:46:17. > :46:20.the logic of what the member said, if we decide to go and live in the

:46:21. > :46:22.British Virgin Islands, we would get our pension. If it's right for us,

:46:23. > :46:30.it's right for everyone else. The question is as on the order

:46:31. > :46:42.paper. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary,

:46:43. > :46:49."no". The Ayes have it. Order. Before I announce... Point of order,

:46:50. > :46:55.Mr Charles Walker. Can I seek you urgent advice? I and others are very

:46:56. > :47:00.concerned about the light of licensed cab drivers in London, many

:47:01. > :47:05.of whom are my constituents and yours. How can I bring my concern is

:47:06. > :47:13.best to the attention of the new Mayor of London? I can honestly

:47:14. > :47:17.answer the honourable gentleman in saying that is sadly not a point of

:47:18. > :47:26.order for the chair. But I wish it was. Because I share his concerns. I

:47:27. > :47:29.no longer speak in this place on behalf of my constituents. It does

:47:30. > :47:35.not mean I do not work on their behalf. He and I share a very great

:47:36. > :47:41.concern about the point he has made. And I hope that he will find a way,

:47:42. > :47:47.as other colleagues will find a way, of asking questions, or applying for

:47:48. > :47:53.a debate in this place which will also come to the attention of the

:47:54. > :47:57.new Mayor of London. Whom we all hope will take the necessary action

:47:58. > :48:04.on this extremely important matter. Order. I have to announce to the

:48:05. > :48:08.House that I must correct the number announced in the division earlier

:48:09. > :48:13.today on the motion to disagree to the House of Lords message on the

:48:14. > :48:17.Housing and planning Bill. The number of members voting no and

:48:18. > :48:28.representing English constituencies was erroneously reported as 177.

:48:29. > :48:38.Instead of 166. The correct figures are as follows... The Ayes, 292. The

:48:39. > :48:48.Noes, 297. Of those representing constituencies in England, the Ayes,

:48:49. > :48:51.275. The Noes, 166. Although there was an error in the numbers, the

:48:52. > :48:58.House will have noted that this makes no difference in the results

:48:59. > :49:03.of the division. Under the order of the House earlier today, I shall not

:49:04. > :49:08.adjourn the House until any message from the House of Lords has been

:49:09. > :49:13.received. I now suspend this sitting to await a message from the Lords.

:49:14. > :49:20.When the House is ready to resume, the bells will be sounded and a

:49:21. > :49:26.warning notice will be put on the enunciated in the usual way. Order.