19/05/2016 House of Commons

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

House of Commons. Later, an urgent question by Steve double regarding

the rights of parents to take their children on holiday during term

time. That will be followed by a statement from Jeremy Hunt on the

junior doctors contract. The main business is the continuation of the

debate on the Queen's speech. It will concentrate on transport and

infrastructure. Among the measures announced, a modern transport Bill

covering new technology including driverless cars and the UK's

possible first spaceport. And a bill to change the planning process and

tackle the housing deficit. Before that, the leader of the house Chris

Grayling will outline forthcoming business in the chamber and take

questions from MPs. Order, order. Business question, Mr

Chris Bryant. Will the leader of the house givers the business for next

week. You will notice a notice of commonality in business next week.

We will debate the Queen's speech. We will continue on Europe's human

rights, keeping people safe home and abroad. Following, a debate on the

Queen's speech on education, skills and training and finally an economy

and work. Next Friday, the house is not sitting. The provisional

business for the week commencing six to June will start on Monday with

the remaining stages of a bill, one of the two main carry-over bills, to

be confirmed next week. I should also inform the house that the

statement on Syria that we had to move at the last moment will take

place alongside the foreign affairs debate next Tuesday. The business

for Westminster hall for 6th of June will include a debate on the

restriction of the use of fireworks. If only the rules allowed me to take

some interventions. I'm sure the thoughts of the whole house will be

with the families and friends of those on the Egyptair flight 804

which has disappeared over the Mediterranean. People will want to

know what has happened. I hope that the leader will make sure the house

is updated on all events because as I understand it, not least, because

one Briton is on board. I think that was a sort of an apology for not

given as the statement on Syria which was promised. Will it be

separate from the debate? He has nodded, so we can move on. Can we

have statement from the Foreign Secretary explaining he wanted

General Sir Richard Sheriff court-martialed? As the general

reports to Nato and not to him surely he should have been

congratulated for stating that slashing troop numbers was a hell of

a gamble and not threatened. I love a bit of dressing up, just as much

as any other defrocked vicar. Almost as much as you, Mr Speaker. I did

think yesterday it was a case of all fur coat and knickerbockers. The

Queen announced that the government intended to tackle poverty to a room

of Baroness 's and Countess is all dressed in ermine and jewels. The

government announced that they would put the national citizen service

which works six weeks a year on a statutory footing, while the nation

youth service which works all year round has been slashed losing 2000

workers, Kahlo 's is 350 youth centres -- closing 350 youth

centres. Why not put the youth service on a statutory footing as

well? That is what was truly awful about yesterday's Queen 's speech.

It was pretending to be a one nation speech, it was dressed up as such. A

Candy Frost reach if ever there was one. All sugar, whipped up with a

hint of pink to make sure that we believe that passionate

conservativism is still alive. The truth is, the Chancellor puts a

stake through the heart of compassionate conservatives every

time he stands at the dispatch box. Yes, let's reform the prison service

but don't pretend that the horrendous state of our prisons with

the rate of suicides, murders and nonnatural deaths at a high, with

daily violence and drugs freely available as nothing to do with this

government's assault on the prison service budget and the loss of 7000

prison officers since 2010, largely on his watch. Let's improve adoption

but let's not pretend that social services budgets in the poorest

local authorities in the land are not so stretched that children are

being put at risk every day. I'm sorry, Mr Speaker, you can say you

want to tackle social problems in society until you are blue in the

face but when you have paired public services to the bone, when you have

inflicted the toughest cuts on the poorest communities and when you

have systematically undermined the concept of public service, all your

blandishments are nothing but a sugar-coating for a cyanide pill. I

don't know what time you got up yesterday morning so I don't know if

you caught the leader of the house on the today programme. He was

trying to defend the former Mayor of London. He described him as a

historian of making a historian's comment, as if it let them him get

away with anything he wanted. The former mayor does have a habit of

making up historical fact. My favourite one was his assertion that

King Edward the second end joined a range of dissolution with his

catamite Piers Galveston. I don't doubt that he liked a bit of Royal

rumpy pompey but since he was beheaded 12 years before the palace

was built it is pretty unlikely that he did so there. My only explanation

for this so-called fact of the former Mayor of London was that he

was a member of the Piers Galveston Society at Oxford with the Prime

Minister where they got used to porkies. The short answer is, if the

leader of the house was doing his business on the Today programme

between six and 7am, I was in the swimming pool at the time. The

Honourable gentleman is in danger of beheading himself because he has had

five minutes. I think he is in his last sentence. Certainly in his last

paragraph. I believe that the Prime Minister is going to the United

States next week. I'm sure Donald Trump has a ticker tape welcome for

him. When an international statesman like the leader of the house goes on

international business. They always get hail to the Chief but I believe

they have you Cadee sacks ready for him. A very serious point, all our

good wishes go to the families who must be beside themselves with worry

about what happened to the passengers on the Egyptair plane. A

deeply worrying situation. If it turns out to be more than an

accident, we will want to discuss that matter in the house. It is

important to wait to see what the outcome of the investigations and

our hearts go out to everyone involved. On the statement, it will

be a separate statement we put it alongside the foreign affairs debate

because those most likely to be concerned are likely to be there for

the debate as well. Mr Speaker, he's such an old misery. Yesterday was

Britain at its finest. Strong institutions, great tradition,

things that make this great city one of the finest is not the finest in

the world, a monocle should be proud of and a programme for government

that is fulfilling the commitments me made to the elected last year. In

an election that they lost and we won. We set out 21 new bills. It

completes most of the manifesto we won the election on. It helps as

achieve financial targets, to balance the books and complete the

sorting out of the mess we inherited from the members opposite. Inc

includes measures on prisons, is boosts the Digital economies and

helps tackle terrorism. First of all, in the first 12 months, we have

introduced a national living wage. We have seen unemployment at its

lowest level since the 1970s. We have seen a fall of more than

750,000 in the number of workless households. A change that means a

transformational difference to many of our most deprived communities.

The Conservative government sorting out the mess we inherited. He spoke

about interventions and I have sympathy with him. He did better

than his leader did yesterday. I thought, there is a man who spent 41

minutes looking at the shoes of The People on this site rather than

looking at his party leader making such an awful speech yesterday. Mr

Speaker, I'm not sure he actually raised any other questions. I was

grappling with trying to understand what he was going on about in the

middle. We are at the start of a where we will deliver measures that

will make a transformational difference to this country and a

difference to our deprived communities making this country more

secure economically and more secure against the national threats we

face. I think it is worth, in a week when the YMCA named their latest

building, Chris Bryant house after the famous Chris Bryant, not this

one. I think we should pause for a moment to praise... LAUGHTER

We should pause for a moment to praise the shadow leader. Here's a

great champion of equalities in this place and he and I shared the

ambition seeing more women elected to office. I'm delighted to see that

his constituency is doing his bit by electing a woman to represent in

Cardiff. In 2020, we might see a further step in that direction as

well. On the subject of the shadow leader, can I congratulate him for

stepping in to save the local calendar in Rhondda after the defeat

of Leighton Andrews, perhaps he does have his own calendar girl in Leanne

Wood. The controversial age tests -- HS2

budget has been in the media over potential cuts to the scope of the

project and the costs. The announcement for finalised phase two

will not be until at least September, one your plate, is out of

Italy blight on my constituents, can have an update on the progress of

HS2 so that this house can get to know how big the white elephant has

grown? I understand my honourable friend concern. His consistency

faces challenges and benefits from HS2, which all parts of the economy

in a way through infrastructure that will make a difference to jobs and

the prospects of business. I understand the concerns. We have a

debate today on transport but I will also make sure the secretary of

state is aware of the has raised today. Thank you. Can I also think

he would of the housework and is in the business for next week and pass

on our best wishes for those caught up in the dictionary line issue and

hope there is some sort of positive resolution. What a few weeks. We

will have to spend most of our Times discussing this anaemic stuff in the

Queen's speech when all they want to do is knock lumps out of each other

for the EU reference. The debate in the Tory party is hardly reaching

Churchillian standards of discourse, it is apparently all but insults,

personal attacks and tabloid smears according to the member for Wycombe

this morning on the radio. I know my friends are already considering our

amendments for the driverless cars built, most involving blocking this

Tory Government into that vehicle and heading towards the nearest

cliff edge. The Scotland Bill yesterday in the Queen's speech got

22 words. That is doing quite well for what we usually get. It might be

a one nation Queen's speech, but one of these nations are certainly is

not Scotland. We still have not secured a statement from this

governance concerning all of the quite explosive evidence about the

Conservative Party submission to the mission on the conflict between

national and local spending when it comes to the last election campaign.

There are 14 police forces investigating this alleged electoral

Ford Dott fraud but would not read anything from the Government. In the

Telegraph they said why the Tories won, the inside story of the 2015

election, which said buses were critical to moving party troops from

where they live to where the swing voters could be found. The central

party paid for all the buses and trains as well as hotels and

hostels. We know after year and urgent statement from this, about

what they do when it comes to this and lastly, can we perhaps have a

debate on World War II? Then it would allow all the senior vendor 's

-- members to indulge their passion in talking about Hitler because

you're about all of the dodgiest trees and the spurious examples and

perhaps it would take my eyes off the raging civil wars. -- dodgy

histories. Come first thing the honourable gentleman for his

comments about the Egyptian plane. At all of us wait with hope and

trepidation about what has happened. I am really not sure this is the

week for the Scottish National Party to be talking about stories in the

tabloids. I have read the news, there has to be something in the

water in Scotland. As you remember me telling the house a few months

ago, the honourable member for the Western Isles wrote about recess

dates because he wanted to quickly ran in with the news. At that time I

thought he was talking about sheep. Mr Speaker, the Queen's speech was a

powerful package for this country. It is a powerful package that will

deliver change to Scotland and the entirety of the UK, including

important measure of our economy and security. The SNP cannot have it

both ways. It cannot come on the one hand, demand and secure for greater

powers for the party in Edinburgh and a far greater powers for the

nation of Scotland and complain it is not actually getting a huge range

of measures in the Queen's speech. We are looking to how the SNP are

actually going to use the powers. Yesterday we heard a leader of

Westminster was up again saying we want more powers from Scotland,

perhaps they might like to use the powers they got the first place? I

would on the subject of Scottish assembly and Scottish Parliament and

the Scottish administration, I would like to congratulate the First

Minister of Scotland on a real election and I would like to

congratulate Ruth Davidson on depriving the Scottish National

Party of their majority in the Scottish Parliament and we will be

an effective opposition to the SNP and an effective unionist opposition

to the SNP and we want told them to account to use the they've been

given in the interests of Scotland and if they don't do so we will

defeat them. The last point is, he raises about election matters, they

are for the appropriate authorities, not for the Government. Can we have

a debate on the BBC and its relationship with the European

Union, particularly in relation to its coverage of the European Union?

It was revealed in which the magazine this week that the BBC has

received ?2.1 million from the EU between April 2013 and September

2015, this is on top of at least ?141 million in soft loans from the

European investment bank and on the European investment bank's website

it says the European investment bank is the European Union's bank and we

work closely with other EU institutions to implement EU policy.

That is the only basis on which you get one of these loans. Surely these

things should be declared by the BBC whenever they do anything to cover

the EU referendum. Can we have a debate on this and perhaps a little

of the house can tell us if he's agreed to BBC staff to -- should

have to declare this? My honourable friend made his point with his

customary effectiveness. I've no doubt the BBC will be listening

carefully to this comment and if nothing else will ensure they go

even further out of their way to try and make sure they are impartial in

this referendum campaign. Can the leader explained perhaps we can have

a statement the difference between the way in which the 1975 referendum

was held in which ministers disagrees, there was no bitterness,

it was argued on very important grounds and, as I say, without

personal attacks. And the present way in which Government members,

cabinet members and other members of the Government and its supporters

have such bitterness and strife and rancour between them over the

question of whether we Remain Leave. It is uncivilised and totally unlike

in 1975. I found myself this morning sitting and writing a short piece

about social reform alongside my deputy from a different side of the

arguments, and I can assure you we are still best friends, unlike both

people in the Labour Party who appear to be buried to know if their

leader in the back. -- appear to be prepared to knife. Can we have a

debate on the extremely important antimicrobial resistance report that

came out this morning. This report was initiated by the Prime Minister

and Chancellor and is vital. I know my honourable friend from your cows

as a spoken eloquently on this but it is vital and we need to discuss

the terrifying prospect of antimicrobial resistance increasing

over the years as soon as possible. Can I just say my honourable friend

makes a very important point indeed. We this house on political matters,

this is something that affects all of us and it's a matter of great

concern to country and the world as a whole. It is a serious issue and

we will debate on Monday on public services and much the option to

discuss this in this house with the section of state. If not, something

that we should certainly look to return to. In the last month there

have been 11 serious stabbings involving young people in my

borough. There have been 114 incidents of serious youth violence

in Lambeth and 2300, over that, across London. This is a crisis

situation. It is nationwide, it has been occurring for several months

and yet it did not merit a single mention by the Prime Minister in his

remarks in this house yesterday in respect of the forthcoming agenda of

this Government. With the leader of the house arrange for a statement to

be given now on whether the Government will agree to what will I

and many members of his house on both sides have been calling for,

proper independent cross-party commission into this issue, because

right now to many of my constituents it does not look like this

Government cares about what is happening on our streets. Firstly, I

agree with the honourable gentleman about this seriousness. I disagree

with not taking it seriously we have sought to both tighten the law, and

I did some of that myself when I was just a section we are seeking during

gays young people. Yesterday's Queen's speech included are plans to

extend and solidify the National citizens survey. -- to engage young

Biba. The no young people. I want to pay to be to the voluntary sector,

some part -- fantastic project in London sing to engage young people.

This is an issue we will come back to and I will make sure the onset is

aware of the requests made this morning and I can only assure that

we take it seriously indeed. I am the chairman of the all-party

Parliamentary group and earlier this month the peninsular real task force

ended publishing its initial proposals and is available for

public consultation into the 27th of May. Can we have a debate after that

has happened so that Southwest members of Parliament can make sure

that the apartment of transport understands excelling what we want

in the south-west. I am well aware of the challenge that we face with

rail in the South West, had the difficult experience a couple years

ago of the line being washed away and extended period when it was

closed. I know this is something transport planning to take seriously

and I pay tribute to the work he is doing is making sure this is kept

firmly on the desk of ministers. I would remind him that there is offer

the statement this morning an opportunity for him to raise that

issue in the debate on transport and I were advising to do that. Last

Thursday after Parliament had been prone to the Government published

the pure review reports on the deaths of 49 Social Security

claimants who died between 2012 and 2014. This was after ministers had

denied they had any records on people whose deaths had been linked

to the Social Security system. Given the gravity of this matter and that

this is the second time that data has been released on the deaths of

Social Security claimants well Parliament was in recess when will

the leader of the house arrange for a statement to this house on what

action has been taken to address the recommendations in these reports? Of

course, she will have the option to to raise this issue next Thursday

when there is a debate on work and welfare matters in this house, then

sure she will take option to do that. -- take the opportunity. In

yesterday's speech I was pleased to see a higher education Bill

announced in enabling more universities to be built, increased

participation from deprived families and also increase diversity

reporting as well. Can my honourable friend update house as to when the

technical consultation on the Dott this will be announced, particularly

for the university sector and timescales for the debate other than

Wednesday next week? I do not know the dates of the technical

consultation, but what I can tell my honourable friend is that the higher

education Bill will be brought before this house shortly and it

will be one of the early bills to come for debate in this session and

I've no doubt one of my -- Mike honourable friend will want to make

debate in this discussion. Can we have a statement from the old sexy

next week on the plight of the brain family from Dingwall. -- Home

Secretary. They have been threatened with deportation. This young family

came to Scotland five years ago under the fresh talent initiative,

they have contributed massively of the money and efforts to the

community, self-supporting, contributing to community efforts

including the young son Loch Long, seven years old, who has known no

other war between what is first language is Scots Gaelic. Does the

net two member of the house feel no shame that his family -- party's

committee a huge disservice against this young family and the B+

coloured? On the individual case I do not know the circumstances and

and I will draw his commerce to the Home Secretary's comments this

morning. I would say it's important to remember that if people do, for a

temporary period it does not automatically mean that the end of

that period they will have the right to stay. That is an important thing

to remember when we deal with these cases.

I wish to raise the case of a 38-year-old student from Lahoz who

wants to leave her family to complete her Ph.D. At the London

School of theology. Her Visa has been turned down despite the backing

of her bishop in this country. Will the leader make time for a statement

for these processes for genuine academic candidates so these can be

resolved. It seems to be a pattern of Middle Eastern Christians put

into bad circumstances and not evaluated very well. I cannot

comment on the individual case because I don't know the

circumstances. We don't have home of his questions for a little while so

the best thing for me to do is to draw the Home Secretary's attention

to the case and asked the Home Office to deal with him directly on

it. The leader of the house has said that the government's intention is

to make the UK more secure economically and in light of that

could we have a debate in this house on farm gate prices in relation to

the regional differentials between farm gate prices in Northern Ireland

and in Britain. Farmers in Northern Ireland are being placed at a severe

financial disadvantage. Mr Speaker, I don't know enough about the detail

of the case she has raised. Perhaps she would write to me and I will

make sure she gets a proper response. I don't have detailed

knowledge of the farm gate situation in Northern Ireland but I will be

happy to give a proper response to that question. On the front line of

security in this nation armed police officers are put in dangerous

circumstances and have to make a decision in a split second. If they

are forced to make that decision, Babin face months of scrutiny on

whether that decision was right or wrong. Can we have a debate on the

process of analysing those decisions under scrutiny officers are put

under. My honourable friend makes an important point. We are currently

recruiting 1000 new armed officers as an essential part of the strategy

we have two, terrorism in this country. It is really important that

we make sure that if an incident does take place involving an armed

officer, we must check the circumstances, we must not get into

a situation where people do not want to be armed officers because they

are worried about the consequences for themselves. The NHS action plan

on hearing loss, does the leader of the house have an idea when that

might be published. A number of hours will be bidding for an

adjournment debate to debate this. It is good news for the 3 million

hard of hearing or deaf people in the UK. It would be really good to

see the government leading from the front on this. I know the government

is working on this. I don't have a date yet but I'm sure he will want

to fully update the house. I suspect it will be the Department of Health

who will inform Parliament as widely as possible. It may well end up

being debated. I should just, actually, if I might, to the future

chairman of the backbench business committee of the commiseration for

the events of the last couple of weeks. We knows? You may bounce back

quickly. The humanitarian crisis in north-east Syria is becoming worse

with age unable to reach the region. A kilo of sugar is ?1000. Isis,

while on the back foot and Daesh while on the back foot still

controls the only road with access to the region. Would the leader of

the house allow a debate or a statement on this vital matter.

Could I say that I was cheering for Newcastle on Sunday and how

magnificent it was to see them beat Tottenham 5-1 in sure that Arsenal

finished above Tottenham on the last day of the season. Mr Speaker,

you've made yourself in normal enormously popular with one part of

north London and enormously unpopular with another. I suspect

you knew that. We will have a statement on north-east Syria next

Tuesday. If there are areas not satisfactorily covered in the eyes

of the honourable gentleman in that debate, we have the foreign affairs

debate that follows. There will be an opportunity to raise what are

immensely serious issues. They are difficult to address from here but I

remind him that we are the second largest international donor to the

different groups providing humanitarian support to those

affected by the Syrian war. As football seems to be the theme, I'm

sure the leader of the house would congratulate Partick Thistle on

their 140th anniversary. When will the government published its

response to the select committee's report on private members bills.

When will we have a debate on the recommendations of that report? I am

very happy to congratulate Partick Thistle on their anniversary. I'm

sure he will be looking forward to a successful season next season,

probably in the stands many Saturdays. In response to the

procedure committee report on private members bills, we will be

responding in the appropriate time frame which I think is by the 12th

of June. According to Samaritans, 4722 people took their life in

suicides in England in 2015. Whilst this trend is in a 30 year decline,

in recent years it has worryingly been rising again to the highest

levels since 2004. Can we have a debate on the implementation of the

government's suicide prevention strategy for England and how the

government might assist further the prevention of people taking their

lives in suicide? This is, of course, a very serious issue,

particularly among young men where we are seeing a real upwards trend

in recent times. It is a focus for the government and one of the

reasons we are putting more resources into providing a per medal

haul -- proper mental health support. The Health Secretary will

be here on Monday for the public services debate and I encourage him

to bring up the subject in that debate so it remains in the sight of

the Department of Health. Was the honourable gentleman here at the

start of business? I was answering a call of nature, Mr Speaker. They

give me. -- forgive me. I was at Saint James 's Park for the calamity

on Sunday. Forgive him, he's a Tottenham supporter. Can we find

time for debate on garden waste collection. In the borough of

Harrow, the council has decided to charge the resident ?40 for six

months and the collections aren't even being made. I receive

complaints on a daily basis about this. It is time we raised the issue

in the house so we can comment on the calamity of some of the rubbish

collections in this country. I understand how frustrating it is for

him and constituents but in his guise as the deputy chairman of the

backbench business committee he is better placed than anyone to bring

forward such a debate and I'm sure he will do. Kirsty Osborne. People

are concerned about the new body armour that they are being issued.

They can't get up if they fall down. They can't get it in on in the dark.

Why issue kit to soldiers in the first place that puts soldiers in

jeopardy? Can we have a system question on how systems have been

failed. Can we have a procurement changed to stop this happening

again? The honourable lady raises a serious issue. Apart from the Syria

statement, there will be a defence debate on Saturday afternoon. It is

something she may wish to bring to their attention at that point. I

find myself in the curious position of echoing the honourable member for

Shipley. It is entirely coincidental. Can we have a debate

on the BBC White Paper. The statement took place before

publication last week and there is considerable disquiet about the

government's ideological moments and the ability to pack the unitary

board with friends who could have a direct influence on the editorial

policy of the BBC. The proposed unitary board of the BBC is not

responsible for editorial policy. The director-general remains

responsible for editorial policy. The impact and influence of the

board is after broadcast and not before broadcast which is a weight

has been in the past and should continue. Legislation will be

debated in this house and there will be plenty of opportunities to

question the Secretary of State before we get anywhere near

chartering Newell. My local authority Cheshire West, along with

Warrington and Cheshire East councils is currently locked in

talks about a devolution deal for the area. I welcome it in principle

but there seems to be a strange insistence on elected mayors. The

area we are talking about is so broad and large, bordering North

Wales on one side and greater Manchester on the other and I

question the suitability of a mayor for an area so large. Can we have a

debate on the need for elected mayors in areas quite so large? We

are offering additional powers for devolved communities but we need

them to come forward with proposals for structures for local government.

The one thing they have in common is that we have to have confidence they

can deliver what is necessary and I'm sure that's no different in

Cheshire. I have a constituent Elaine who has a hereditary muscle

wasting paraplegic condition. Despite being in her early 20s, she

didn't qualify for PRP. Half of all awards like this are for three years

or less. People with muscle degenerative diseases undergo

continuing assessment which is cruel and a waste of money. Can we have an

impact on PRP and its distribution? Issues like this are immensely

serious and problematic for those affected. I would remind him that in

Scotland of these are devolved matters and perhaps this is the

wrong forum for debate. Urgent question, Steve double. To ask the

secretary of education where the should be a debate on the right of

parents to take their children on holiday during term time. The High

Court judgment represents a significant threat to one of the

government's significant achievements in education, improving

school attendance. For this reason, the government will do everything in

its power to allow headteachers to keep children in school. There is

abundant academic evidence that says that one of the single strongest

determinants of academic success is attendant in school. Even a week off

in school at secondary school can have a significant impact on GCSE

grades. This can have a great damage to life chances. That is why we have

pursued a zero tolerance policy on unauthorised absence. We have

increased fines, issued summons on parents with continued absences.

Crucially, we have clamped down on the practice of taking term time

holidays. These measures have been a striking success. The number of

persistent absentees in this country's schools has dropped by

over 40% from 433,020 ten to 246,020 15. Some 4 million fewer days were

lost due to unauthorised absences today compared to 2012-2013. Overall

absence rates have followed a significant downward trend from 6.5%

in the academic year ending 2000 and in the academic year ending 2015.

These mean that pupils are spending many more hours in school being

taught the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in life. For this

reason we amended the 2006 attendance regulations in 2013.

Previously, special circumstances could permit a holiday in term time

for up to ten days per year. Of course, the need to take time off

school in exceptional circumstances is important but there are no

circumstances in which a 10-day holiday to Disney World should trump

the importance of school. The rules should apply to everyone. Parents

are being come to take their children out of school and go to

Florida it sends a message to everyone that school attendance is

not important. This is a measure that has been welcomed by teachers

and schools, unauthorised absences don't just affect the child that is

absent, they damage everyone's on education as teachers find

themselves having to play catch-up. For the absent children themselves

because learning is cumulative, you cannot understand the division of

fractions if you have not understood their multiplication. You can't

understand why World War I ended if you don't know why it started and

you can't enjoy the second half of the novel if you haven't read the

first. If a vital block of proves -- prerequisite knowledge is lost in

April it won't be understood in May. That is the recently given the

schools the power to set their own term dates in a way that works for

their parents and local communities. Already schools such as Hatton

College in London are doing just this. In areas of the country such

as the south-west were large number of the local population are employed

in the tourist industry is nothing to stop schools from clubbing

together and collectively change or extending the dates of their summer

holidays or doing so as part of the multi-cabinet trust, and that the

Government would encourage them to do so. Just about to conclude? We

are now awaiting me were written judgment from the High Court that

will outline our next steps in due course. The house should be assured

we will seek to take whatever measures are necessary to give

schools and local authorities the power and clarity to ensure that

children attend school when they should. I do thank the Minister for

his answer, however there is another aspect of this policy that sadly, to

date, has been ignored, the economic impact this policy is having an

poorest areas, particularly in Cornwall. In 2014 report published

indicated the tourist industry in Cornwall had lost ?50 million as a

result. I would say to the Minister that there is nothing socially more

well for a family if your parents lose their job or have their hours

cut because of the downturn in the tourist industry and the way it

affects their job. I would also put the Minister that is another case

that only 8% of school absentees is a result of family holidays at when

you look at the attainment of those children, there is no drop-off in

the attainment and family holidays are good for children, they widen

their knowledge of the world and expose them to new experiences and

children his family taken on holiday often perform better as a direct

result. Can I ask the Minister to please look at this again and if he

is going to bring forward measures to tighten these rules or strengthen

them, can you assure the house there will be a full debate in this

chamber on this occasion that it will not be secondary legislation

and this time there will be a fool impact assessment carried out

including the economic impact on the tourist industries is antifamily

test will be applied to this measure and that a full public consultation

will take place that considers the impact on all stakeholders, not just

education, but the wider society and families especially. Thank you. In

answer that two to that specific question, before 20 31st family

holiday is made up between five and 6% of people absences. That figure

has dropped to 2.3% in 2013-14 and 1.2% in 2014-15. I don't believe,

with the greatest of respect, that we should be returning to the

Dickensian world where the needs of industry and commerce take

precedence over the education of children. Mike honourable friend's

constituency is in the beautiful county of Cornwall and has accuses

zestful and thriving tourist industry. -- hugely successful. It

generates about ?2 billion of income for the UK economy. I doubt that the

Cornish tourist industry will be best pleased by my honourable

friend's assertion that tourism in Cornwall is dependent on treating

children for its survival. -- true wanting. Another week, another

crisis for the Department Frederick. Ministers need to get a grip. Their

with school structures means they focus on the wrong issues mean they

failed to deal with the bread-and-butter issues that matter

to parents. All evidence shows that regular attendance is crucial to

ensuring children fulfil their potential, 100% attendance records

should be the ambition of all children in schools but this problem

is of the Government's on making. Changing the diet instead teachers

back in 2013, they should have done a fool impact assessment much

earlier and acted to address concerns. The honourable member

letter Westminster debate on the 50,000 strong position in the

autumn, the Government said then they would look at the concerns

raised, they've known this ruling is coming for a long time, they could

have clarified the drop and they haven't. This ruling is now the

worst of both worlds, it puts parents and head teachers in a

difficult position and is not the best interests of children. By and

large the system to 2012 with head having some discretion was working

welcome parents and headteachers had a clear signal children should be in

school. Headteachers know their parents and school community well

and they are accountable for their children and school should have

appropriate discretion. Will the Minister pledged to work with all

interested parties across this house and outside this house to clarify

the law in the interests of pupils, schools and parents. We pledge to

work with him on that. The reality is that ministers have been asleep

at the wheel, focusing on the wrong issues when we have teacher

shortages and problems in primary assessment and it is time to the

ministers to take their heads out of the sand and deal with these

fundamental issues rather than fixating on school types and the

expense of raising schools to hundreds. Will he do that now? I

listen carefully but I feel that this is not on the same side as we

are when it comes to raising schools to hundreds and improving school

attendance is absolutely key to raising academic standards. What

happened under the last Labour Government that it became accepted

wisdom that parents could take their children out of school for term temp

holidays throughout the ten days a year. Those numbers were causing an

issue for us, we have to address the problem that we inherited from last

Labour Government. Order. Let me say the Minister of State is going about

his duty in the conscientious way we've come to expect. There is a

significant number of young children observing our proceedings this

morning and I doubt rather whether they will be greatly impressed by

the deputies on each side of the house conducting a kind of a verbal

tug of war from which each of them should desist. Partly in

consideration of the children and partly out of respect for the

Minister of State from whom we should hear! I am most grateful. As

I was saying, under the last Labour Government it had become accepted

wisdom that parents could take their children out of school for term temp

holidays for up to ten days a year and we had to address that popular

perception. That's why the regulations were changed in 2013. In

2012 32.7 million people days were lost due to authorised absences,

which is formed 28.6 point 6,000,020 14-15, that some 4 million fewer

people school days lost as a consequence of those changes to the

2013 make relations. That is a huge success that I wish the honourable

gentleman would support that change. Can I ask the minister if he would

agree with me that taking children out of school to come to the mother

of all parliaments and learn about our democracy as one thing but

taking them to land, Florida, in another. And, well, the work --

rigger he's broken two brought to the subject of education and does he

agree that if this country will succeed it needs to take education

seriously. My honourable friend is right. This is about social justice.

When parents with income take their children out of school to go to

Florida, it sends a message to everyone that school attendance is

not important. There is no circumstance in which a trip to

Disney World can be regarded as educational. Can I asked the

minister, I'm very fond of him and I thought he had a bit of a touch of

the dickens about him, but isn't the fact that this is a serious

fundamental problem that we still squeeze the summer holidays into

about a six-week period that British Airways charge the earth to going

round Center Parcs treble their rates. It is a serious problem that

we should tackle for everyone possible benefit. I am on the side

of being tough. I have constituents with great pressure from the Muslim

community, especially Pakistan, to take their children out and they are

the children that have been suffering. I am on the side of being

tough, but let's look at this in a more fundamental way, please. The

honourable gentleman who I have a huge admiration for the former chair

of the educational select committee, is right. We need to look at this

issue are more fundamental win that's we've given schools the

freedom to set their term dates. They should be helping to coordinate

schools so that they set different candidates that help their own

tourist industries. Is the Minister agreeing with me that educational

attainment is directly correlated to attendance and that narrowing the

attainment gap and raising standards must be a priority for any

Government that cares about the future of our children? Honourable

friend is right. There is ample evidence that even taking a few days

off school can have a serious effect on child's education. Particularly

those secondary school years leading up to GCSE but also in primary

education. Where the pattern of attendance is set. Charlie Taylor,

our behaviour expert in the last Parliament, took a view that it's

more important to set the precedent in Primary School so that children

can enter secondary school are already in the habit of attending

school every day. The Government is underlying the importance of giving

head, and I support that in almost all cases with the exception of the

opt out in religion to sex education, which I think are

unacceptable. English and to turn time absences does the Minister

agree that some holidays or the attendance of family funerals are

both can be informative, educational or research at the autonomy and the

discretion to decide whether in those exceptional circumstances

should children be allowed to random absences and shouldn't the law

reflect that? The honourable gentleman accurately reflects the

law as it stands, that editors do have the discretion to grant term

time absence in exceptional circumstances and the examples he

cited court for example, funerals, is an example of the exceptional

circumstance. Term term holiday to take advantage of lower prices would

not be regarded as exceptional. Following on the same theme, the

Government has been very consistent in saying it believes that a school

should have more freedom from the state in making decisions. Does the

Minister believe that this particular case you doesn't believe

that schools should have those freedoms ordered two or is it that

the schools have asked him to relieve them of the particular

freedoms in these case? Whatever the rights and wrongs of the particular

issue, it is clearly inconsistent with the Government's believe in

giving schools greater freedoms? The schools themselves have increased

freedoms if they adopt those academy status. They have freedom of the

curriculum and turned it that these rules apply to individuals, there is

no freedom for an individual not to educate their children. Have to

attend school or attain education otherwise, which is I think the law.

This is about the law applying to parents. We want a society where

education is compulsory for all Tiltman in our country. -- for all

children. The Minister must acknowledge the limbo that schools

now find themselves in, the head teachers know precisely what the

regulations say, but they also know what the High Court ruling is. Can

the Minister clarify for the benefit of the headteachers who might be

listening in on this statement what he thinks it should take precedent,

the High Court judgment or the rulings as they stand? And if it is

the High Court judgment on how quickly is the Government come to

this house to reassert what it wants in terms of the judgment? We are

still waiting to receive the written judgment of the local and as soon as

we receive that we will refer that the honourable gentleman

. Honourable gentleman and the house.

The High Court judgment used in 90% threshold, where Ofsted will

criticise those with an attendance below 95%? A 10% absence rate

equates to one day off a fortnight. I don't think we should be

encouraging that sort of attendance records in our schools. Thank you,

Mr Speaker. We have heard a lot of talk from the minister about

tackling the symptoms, I don't believe enough has been done to

tackle the cause, which are these companies which can get away with

charging astronomical prices during holiday time. When will the

Government do something to tackle this rip-off culture in our society?

This wassen issue can examined some -- which was examines some years

ago. It is not an issue of the holiday companies ripping off

consumers. It is the case that hotels around the world and in this

country charge higher rates during the summer months and peek seasons

than they do out of peek. Of peak. That is a question of market

economics. Mr Platt is a resident of my island and it is the Isle of

Wight council's decision to take him to court which has brought about

this situation. It seems to me that the legislation is quite clear, it

is for the head teacher to decide what constitutes exceptional

circumstances. The head is undoubtedly to the best position to

take account of the full picture in any request for absence. It is hard

to envisage legislation, or even guidance, devised here or in

Whitehall, that could probably take account of all possible exceptional

circumstances. Does the Government intend to take away these decisions

from the person who is ultimately responsible for the performance of

their school? No, my honourable friend explains the situation

accurately. It is a question for the head teacher to determine. And they

should determine whether there are exceptional circumstances to grant

authorised absences. It does rest with the head teacher. The current

situation is obviously lacking in clarity after this judgment. My

concern was there was a lack of clarity beforehand, that perhaps the

minister might turn his attention to. I had a case where a family

whose grandmother was Spanish were denied the opportunity to go to her

funeral in Spain. I wonder if the minister would consider providing

greater clarity to head teachers to ensure that kind of travel is

considered exceptional circumstances? Well, I think the

situation was before the High Court judgment was very clear that the

head teacher has discretion whether or not to grant authorised absence

and can do so only in exceptional circumstances. The NAHT have

produced a two-page guidance which sets out what they believe their

members should decide when determining whether an about sense

should be authorised. The issue of funerals, it makes it clear in this

guidance that fun would be regarded -- that funerals would be regarded

as an exceptional circumstance. People now feel frustrated by term

times and holidays based in an agrar Ryan past. Would my honourable

friend agree that communities based in rural locations often have small

village schools which stand to suffer disproportionately when there

are absences from the sort that he has described? Yes, my honourable

friend makes a very valid point. This is not just about pupil's

education, which it is. It is also about the challenge it presents to

teachers as they seek to deliver catch-up lessons to the pupils who

were absent. In a small school with small class sizes it is doubly

difficult for the teacher. THE SPEAKER: Mark Spencer. What

assistance can the minister give to parents, to give them the education

they might require when making decisions whether to take their

children out of school or not? It seems that a minority of parents are

making the wrong decision. Can he supply any more information on the

impact of removing those children from school at the time they choose

to do that? My honourable friend makes a good point. We need to

emphasise the evidence that even small absences from school will have

a long-term impact on a child's education, as I set out in my

opening comments. A lot of education is that you need to learn one thing

before another. If a teacher is not able to provide a catch-up lesson

for that child they will permanently miss out on a crucial part of

education. Does my honourable friend agree that this Government has taken

positive steps to reduce the cost of family holidays and therefore reduce

the financial incentive to reduce term time absence. Last year

four-and-a-half million under 12 flews tax free.

My honourable friend make the point better than I could have done. Thank

you, Mr Speaker. Whilst I agree with the Government's response and their

determination to raise standards, I do have some sympathy with my

honourable friend, and the situation where we have a number of schools

with a high concentration of people in the tourist industry, where they

are relatively low pay, where there has not been a significant enough

change in the cost of holidays and when there is not momentum around

changes in Terims, there are a number of -- of term time and there

is a number of to get into regional dialogue for economies where there

could be a significant effect. I am happy to have a dialogue with my

honourable friend. We have given discretion to academies to set their

own term dates. I would urge all honourable friends representing

areas with high levels of tourism to work with their schools, with their

local authority, with other local authorities, to find a way in which

they can set term dates which do reflect the needs of their local

communities. Thank you, Mr Speaker. My honourable friend will know that

actually in terms of children being absent from school it is disruptive

to the child who is missing school but also to the class when they try

to catch up. One of the experiments tried at the moment is to extend the

school day by 30 minutes and extending the half term from one

week to two weeks in certain areas now to aa position where parents can

take their children on holiday for a two-week period. What does my

honourable friend think of that idea? It is precisely the kind of

idea we hope and expect will come out of the discretion that we have

granted to academies in this country. There are many schools that

are taking advantage of that particular freedom. Statement, the

Secretary of State for Health. Secretary Jeremy Hunt.

Thank you. For the last three years there have been repeated attempts to

reform the junior doctor's contract to support better patient care seven

days a week, culminating in a dispute which has lasted over 10

months after ten days of discussion under the au pishs of ACAS, the

dispute was resolved yesterday with an historic agreement between the

Government, NHS employers, acting on behalf of the employers of doctors

and the BMA which will modernise the contract making it better for

doctors and patients. The new contract meets all the Government's

red lines for delivering a seven-day NHS and remains within the existing

pay envelope. We will publish an equallied analysis alongside a

renewed contract. It will be put to a ballot of the BMA membership next

month with the support of the leader, the chair of the committee.

Mr Speaker, I would first of all like to express my thanks to the BMA

for the leadership they have shown in returning to talks, negotiating

in good faith and making an agreement possible. I would like to

put on record my thanks to Sir Barber for his excellent stewardship

and to Sir Dalton for his wisdom and insight.

The agreement will facilitate the biggest changes to the junior

doctors' contract since 1999. It will allow the Government to delive

a seven-day NHS, improve patient safety, support productivity

improvements and impoveing the morale of junior doctors with a

modern contract fit for a modern health service. The contract,

inherited by this Government, had a number of features badly in need of

reform, including low levels of basic pay as a proportion of total

income, making doctors rely on unpredict Kabul supplements to boost

their income, automatic annual pay rises even when people take

prolonged periods of leave from the NHS. An unfair banded system which

triggers premium rates to every team member, even if only one person has

worked the extra hours. High premium rates for weekend work which make it

difficult tos are ter staff in line with patient need and risks to

patient safety with doctors sometimes required to work seven

full days or seven full nights in a row, without proper rest periods.

This Government has always been determined that our NHS should offer

the safest, highest quality of care possible, which means a consistent

standard of care for patients admitted across all seven days of

the week. So, the new contract agreed yesterday makes the biggest

set of changes to the junior doctor's contract forren 17 years,

including establishing the principal that any doctor who works less than

an average of one weekend day per month, Saturday or Sunday, should

receive no additional premium pay, compensated by an increase of basic

pay between 10-11%. Reducing the marginal cost of employing

additional doctors at the weekend by a third. Supporting all hospitals to

meet the clinical standard, by establishing a new role for

experienced junior doctors, a senior clinical decision makers, able to

make expert assessments of vulnerable patients who may be

admitted or staying in hospitals over weekends and removing t

disincentive tos are ter sufficient number of doctors at the weekend by

replacing a banding system with a fairer system which values week

yeend work by paying social hours -- unsocial hours worked with more pay

to those who worked the most. The Government recognises that safer

care for patients is more likely to be provided by well-motivated

doctors who have sufficient rest between shifts and work in a

family-friendly system. So, the new contract and ACAS agreement will

improve the well being of our critical junior doctor workforce by

reducing the maximum number of hours a doctor can be asked to work in a

week from 91-72. Reducing the number of nights a doctor can be asked to

work in a row to four. And reducing the number of long days a doctor can

be asked to work to five. Introducing a new post, guardian of

safe working in every trust to guard against doctors being asked to work

excessive hours. Introducing a new catch-up programme for doctors who

take community leave or other time off for caring responsibilities.

Establishing a review to see how best to allow couples to train in

the same areand a offer training placements for those with caring

responsibilities close to their home. Giving pay protection to

doctors who switch specialities and establishing a review to inform a

new requirement on trusts to consider caring and other family

responsibilities when designing rotas. Taken together, these changes

show the Government's commitment to safe care for patients and the value

we attach to the role of junior doctors. Whilst they do not remove

every bug bear or frustration, they will significantly improve

flexibility and work life balance for doctor, leading, we hope, to

improved retention rates, higher morale and better care for patients.

But whatever the progress made with today's landmark changes it will

always be a matter of great regret it was necessary to go through such

disruptive industrial action to get there.

We may welcome the destination, but no-one could have wanted the

journey. Today, I say to all junior doctors, whatever our disagreements

about the contract may have been, the Government has heard and

understood the wider frustrations that you feel about the way you are

valued and treated in the NHS. Our priority will always be the safety

of patients, but we also recognise that to deliver high-quality care we

need a well-motivated and happy junior doctor workforce, putting a

new modern contract in place is not the end of the story. We will

continue to engage constructively with you to try and resolve

outstanding issues, as we proceed on our journey to tackle head on the

journey the NHS faces and make it the highest quality health care

system in where in the world. Today's agreement shows we can make

common cause on that journey w a contract better for patients, for

doctors and better for the NHS and I commend it to the House.

I want to start by putting on record our thanks to Sir Brendan Barber and

the cars for the role they've played in fighting agreements between the

two sides in this dispute. -- finding agreement. I want a good

pitch to the Academy of red medical Royal colleges who proposed these

further talks and encourage the Government and the BMA to pause and

think about patients. I have not been shy in telling the house

secretary what I think about his handling of this dispute. That today

is not the day to repeat those criticisms. I am pleased and

relieved that an agreement has been reached, but I am sad that it took

an all-out strike of junior doctors to get the Government back to the

table. What is now clear, if it wasn't already, is that a negotiated

agreement was possible all along. So I have to ask the house secretary:

Why couldn't this deal had been struck in February? Why did he allow

his pride back then to come before sensible compromise and constructive

talks? When he stands up, he might try to blame the BMA for the

negotiations breaking down, but he failed to say what options he was

prepared to consider in order to ensure that the junior doctors who

work the most unsociable hours are fairly awarded. It was a computer

says no attitude and that is no way to run the NHS. Why did he ignore my

letter to him on the 7th of February on which I asked him to make an

explicit and public commitment to further concessions on the issue of

unsociable hours. I was clear that if he had done that then I was

having courage to BMA to return to talks. Why did he instead insist

upon trying to bulldoze and impose the contract through when virtue

everyone told him not to and the consequences of doing so were

obvious fraud to see, protracted industrial action, destroyed morale

and eight complete Britain in trust. -- for all to see. Can it house

secretary say more about the changes agreed that can undo the

discriminate effects on women of the last contract he published? Does he

now accept the previous contract discriminated against women? Will he

be clear for the record that he note two now understands that this was

never just about pay, can he confirm the concessions have been made not

only in respect of the mechanism for enforcing hours worked and breaks

taken, but also in ensuring that those specialities with the biggest

recruitment problems have decent incentives built into the contract.

Moving on to what happens next, can he tell us what he will do if junior

doctors vote against this offer? Will he still impose a contract? And

which version of the contract will he impose? His preferred version or

this compromise one? Can he say whether the possibility of losing a

case in the High Court about his power to impose a contract had

anything to do with his recently discovered eagerness to return to

talks? We all know it High Court told him he had acted above the law

when he tried to take the axe to my local hospital, so I can understand

why he does not want that embarrassment again, and finally,

can I caution him on his use of language both in this chamber and on

the media. His loose words and implied criticism of junior doctors

is partly the reason why this has ended up being such an almighty

mess. Can I suggest a degree of humility on the part of the

secretary of the state wouldn't go amiss. And can I encourage a period

of radio silence from him to allow junior doctors to consider the new

contract with a clear mind and without his spin echoing in their

ears? Let me remind the house secretary that he still needs to get

a majority of junior doctors to vote for this contract for this dispute

to be finally over. Mr Speaker, I hope with all my heart that the

agreement yesterday may offer a way forward. Junior doctors will want to

consider it, trust needs to be repaired and that will take time. I

hope for the sake of everyone patients and doctors that we might

see an end to this very sorry episode in NHS history. Mr Speaker,

she is wrong today as she has been wrong throughout this dispute. She

spent a lot of time in the last ten months criticising the way the

Government has sought to change this contract. What she did not dwell on

was why it needed to be change in the first place, namely the four

flawed contract put in place in 1999, we have major screamers with

the BMA but once we agree on was Labour's contract was not fit for

purpose. -- many disagreements. Could size and the contract right is

like could sizing the mechanic making the car you just crashed and

it's time she polished the contract changes -- acknowledged the contract

changes have led to the number of the five day care problems were

trying to sort out. She was also wrong to say that an all-out strike

was necessary to resolve this dispute. The reason that the talks

were not in the last ten days, the meaningful talks that we had, is

because the BMA changed its position and agreed great goal sheet is

wrecked to negotiate an weekend pay. She told the house four times before

that change of heart that we should not impose a new contract. What

would have happened if we have followed her advice? Quite simply

today we would not have had the biggest single step towards a

seven-day NHS for a generation. The biggest reforms Don social hours for

17 years, with the extra cost of employing a doctor at the weekend is

going down by one third. We would not have had the reductions in

maximum working hours or many other changes that improve the safety for

patients and quality of life for doctors. She was wrong to say that

the previous contract was discriminatory against women, it

removes discrimination, but does that mean there are a lot of things

that we can do to support women who work as junior doctors? There are,

and that is why the new Deal announced yesterday has an important

and new character clause for women who take time off from maternity

leave him they can get back to the position they would have been in if

they had not had to take time off to have children. And she asked what

happens if the ballot goes the wrong way. What she failed to do was to

say whether she was encouraging junior doctors to vote for that

ballot, and I say to her that on the 28th of October she has told this

house that she supported the principle of seven-day services, but

as Tony Blair once said, you cannot will the end without willing the

means, and in this dispute shows refused to say that she was spot --

supports the withdrawal of emergency care if you report -- supports

contentious changes to reform we can premium pay and now she won't even

say doctors should vote for the new agreement. Leadership is facing up

to difficult decisions, not ducking them. I say to her this Government

is prepared to take difficult decisions and fight battles that

improve quality and safety of care in the NHS. She's not willing to

fight them that is fine, but she shouldn't stand dispatch box and

claim Labour stands up for NHS patients. If she doesn't want to

listen to me perhaps she should listen to former Labour Minister Tom

Harris, who said strategically Labour should be on the side of the

patients and we aren't. If Labour isn't, the Conservatives are! Mr

Speaker, could I add my congratulations on both sides for

turning to constructive negotiations and far reaching an agreement and I

would like to pay particular tribute to Professor Sue Bailey in the

Academy of Medical Royal Colleges for their role in bringing both

sides together. I welcome the particular focus on all the other

aspects that are blighting the lives of junior doctors alongside

negotiations around weekend pay and recognising we need to focus on

those specialties which is hard to recruit two and those of junior

doctors who are working the longest hours of folks of patient safety.

We're not out of the woods yet, we need junior doctors to vote for this

in a referendum. And could I add my voice to the voices of the Leader of

the Opposition spokesman of health to say that I think what is needed

now is a period of calm reflection and to build relationships with

junior doctors going into the future. I wonder if this act of

state could comment on his plans for building a relationship with our

core workforce? Firstly I would like to very much agree with the

honourable lady in her thanks to Professor Dame Sue Bailey and the

leadership the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges has shown in making

the initiative that in the end made this detox possible and the

agreement is possible and I know it's been a difficult and

challenging time for the Royal colleges but I think Professor

Bailey showed real leadership in turn should have and I also very

much agree with her about the need to sort out some of the issues that

have been frustrations for junior doctors, not just in the last few

years, but going back decades in terms of the way their training work

and in terms of the flexibility of the system of six-month rotations

that they work in actually operates and this is an opportunity to look

at those wider issues, think we have started looking at some of them

yesterday and think there is more we can do and I think it is very

important that this is seen not as one side winning and the other side

losing, but as a win-win. But the last ten days it showed is that if

you sit around the table you commit real progress in a better deal for

patients and doctors and that is the spirit we want to go forward. I

absolutely welcome this agreement and I pay tribute to the Royal

Academy of Royal colleges for bringing this about. I do wish there

had been some response to the latter that we sent before the all out

strike. Simic letter. That was the attempt we were trying to make to

create a space that both sites could step into Britain that we got to it

now. I welcome the recognition the quality issues to us and many junior

doctors appear to be dismissed in the impact assessment, the idea of

flexible training champions in each trust, I myself was a flexible

training senior surgeon, the first one in Scotland at the time, and I

think that is really important. The idea was celebrated -- of

accelerated training that one concern I have is the issue of

childcare, if women, junior doctors, will be working longer shifts and

more anti-social shifts, I remember myself when I had to fork out for

childcare, I would like to know, will the NHS respond to that? Is

that in question are as -- crash hours or support? I welcome the

hours Guardian will also be linked to the Director of medical education

and they will be an elected junior doctors for. That was one of their

concerns that they would have no voice in relation to the Guardian. I

also welcome the idea of using modern technology in rota creation.

At the moment rodders are sheets of paper and often no one looks at the

shoulder of one closer to the next and people can end up with very long

periods on call. I do welcome that but one concern that remains is the

issue of rota gaps, we actually don't have enough junior doctors and

we don't have enough junior doctors in the most acute specialties. I

would ask, how is the Secretary of State planning to re-establish a

relationship? How will he recruit people to fill that gap? Because

that was actually the coffee of junior doctors, lack of doctors

simply being spread further. How will we recruit and retain after all

of the painful clash that has been going on for the last year? I

welcome the tone of her comments, which I might say could have been

the tone we might have wanted from the Shadow Health Secretary. Let me

address constructively her comments as she made them constructively to

me that she is right about flexible training, we have to recognise that

we have a junior doctor workforce that is now majority female, that

has a number of family and caring pressures that need to be taken

account of and we need to do this for the NHS as well as because it is

the right thing to do. I think we have to look at

particularly the east Responsibilities of doctors with

young children and one of the things we anoinsed yesterday was an

obligation on trusts to take account of caring responsibilities. If you

have a doctor who wants to work less time during school holiday ands more

and during term time. The needs of patients have to come first. It

could be something which could be taken account of, in the way that

many other industries which operate 24/7 do. She's right to say that

modern technology is key for this. If you are an air steward working

for basmt, you can go on to an electronic system yourself and

choose the hours you wish to work. We have seen a lot of low come work

which is partly driven because they offer the flexibilities that people

need. These are important changes and we intend to take them forward.

May I tell my Right Honourable friend that the actions of him and

his department and the BMA in reaching an agreement will be warmly

welcomed, but will be met with a sigh of relief. Will he accept that

the fact that the BMA were prepared to think again on crucial issues

like overtime at weekends, should not be seen as a sign of weakness,

but of maturity in working the Government to ensure a seven-day NHS

that is for the benefit of patients and patient safety? I agree with

that wise comment, as befits someone who is in fact experienced and

working in the Department of Health. You always get further if you sit

around the table and talk about these issues and it is much better

when you have a Government that is determined to improve the quality

and safety of care for patients, it is also better to recognise that if

the Government is successful that will also be better for the morale

of doctors because the happiest, most motivated doctors are working

in the hospitals which are giving the best care for patients. That is

why it is a win win. It was the refusal for many wreers of the BMA

to discuss the issue that my Right Honourable friend referred to meant

we did reach a deadlock. It was the fact this Government was willing to

proceed with important reforms on our own f we had to, which meant in

the end everyone came together and got a sensible negotiation. Everyone

would have wished we did haven't to go on the journey we did to get

there. Now we have got there it is the time for being constructive on

all sides. Can I thank the minister and the BMA for coming to an

agreement. It is a win win for everyone. Talk dialogue does bring

results. It happened in Northern Ireland and in the conclusion of

this process as well. 45,000 junior doctor BMA members will now be asked

to vote in this and a date has been reached. We've had eight days of

strikes since January. A cancellation of who,000 planned

operations -- 40,000 planned operations what will be done to

catch up with those cancelrationlations? We are in

constant touch with the devolved regions to make sure they know of

the changes we are making and to share any learn from the pro-ess

ises we have been through. We -- processes we have been through. We

are across the country now doing everything we can to catch one the

back log of all the things which have been affected by the industrial

relations dispute. Trust will always priority the areas where clinical

need is the greatest. I know that work is on going across the country.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I very much welcome the agreement that has been

reached. We know that the Secretary of State recognises the important of

having a happy and well-motivated workforce and this contract

addresses many of the causes of unhappiness for junior doctors. It

is particularly good to see addressing the problems of couples

who are both junior doctors. There is more to do, has been

acknowledged, especially on the reasons why junior doctors feel

unsupported and not valued by their employers. My honourable friend

commissioned a report and a review from Sue Bailey, underlining the

problems of junior doctors in training. Can he advise us whether

this review will proceed? The request from the BMA was to find a

way of proceeding with that very important work and we will do it

with the input of Professor Bailey because she has an important

contribution to make. She is right to say that as well as the issue of

more flexible working for people with family commitments, the big

issue for many junior doctors is the way the training process happens. In

particular the way that continuity of training has been undermined by

the new shift system, which we need for reasons of patient safety. That

often means that you can have a different consultant giving advice

on different aspects of care from day-to-day. That is frustrating. We

will look at all those issues with Professor Bailey, with health

education England and with the BMA to see if we can find a better way

forward. Will the Secretary of State be aware

that even my constituents struggling the possible closure of the A in

Huddersfield will otherwise welcome and say thank you to everyone who

has brought this about. Including, I have to say, the leaders of the

opposition parties, our spokeses people who have done so much to help

a positive spirit? Will he just not glout about that or keep that period

of silence because out there, this is part of the phenomenon of the

deep unhappiness about the NHS and problems will arise again because so

many people work in the NHS service, know it has been privatised by the

back door, know that the clinical commissioning system is not working

and that problems will come back again and again unless he confronts

that. Weshlings it would have been a

constructive contribution to this morning's debate if he had not

started to descend into totally false slurs about this Government's

commitment to our NHS. I say to him, if you support the NHS, if you are

passionate about it as this Government is, you put the money in

- ?5.5 billion more than his party was promising at the last election

and you make the difficult reforms necessary to make sure that NHS care

is as good or better than anything which can be provided in the private

sector. That is what this Government is doing. We believe in our NHS and

we are backing it to give it the best care anywhere in the world. I

strongly welcome this important statement and the leadership from

the Secretary of State and congratulate all those involved in

the discussions. On Tuesday, in Eastly, I spoke with a constituent,

a junior doctor and new mum married to a senior nurse at my advice

surgery. She's unable to fast track into GP working and future care

around her four-month-old baby is part of the concerns she has, and

around these negotiations and it weighs heavily on this family,

particularly around on-call working. Can I ask that agile working and

those family first issues are truly taken into account where there are

nurses and doctors trying to bring up families together?

My honourable friend gives one example. I think there are thousands

of examples of people like that who are totally committed to the NHS,

have a bright future and can make a huge contribution to the success of

the NHS in doing a good job looking after patients, but also have home

responsibilities, which are difficult to fulfil when you have

very inflexible Ross tering systems. This is one of -- rostering systems.

We will look at how it brings in that flexibility. If we don't do

that we will see more and more doctors saying they will work to

work as locums or want to work for an agency. That is why we have an

urgent need from the perspective of patients and doctors to address that

issue. I am interested in the Secretary of

State's thoughts about the serious impact on morale that this dispute

has had. I was talking to a junior doctor in Sheffield this-the-other

day who said priority to -- prior to the dispute he did not look at his

contract, he simply got on and did whatever was needed. Does the

Secretary of State realise even if this is settled there's been a

serious impact on goodwill in the health service which could affect

service delivery going forward? I would say to him that if he looks at

the latest NHS staff survey we actually see higher staff

motivation, better communication and more staff recommending their

organisation as a place to work or be treated. I also do accept that

when you make big changes to a contract like the junior doctor's

contract they can be contentious and have an impact on morale. Morale

goes up when doctors are able to give better care for patients and

this is what this will require. The Secretary of State I think has done

a very good job in explaining today. Look, let's look at this, the BMA

caused a problem which should have been resolved a long time ago thasmt

decided they would make a political point. That is fair enough.

Conversely the opposition should have actually been big enough to

say, look, we want to cause political trouble on this. A lot of

this has been caused by political shenanigans. The failure of this is

the junior doctors themselves have lost prestige throughout the UK

because they were used by political pawns as two organisations. Well, I

think it is a great tragedy that the dispute unfolded in the way it did.

I am sure there are people with different agendas who have not

played constructive roles at various points. Given we now have an

agreement I want to look forward and say the lesson of the last ten days

is when you sit down and negotiate about all the outstanding issues

with a Government that is trying to make care better and safer for

patients then you get a result which is good for everyone.

It is not the time to be claiming victory. This negotiated agreement

now has to be put to the members of the British Medical Association.

Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that his own refusal to

negotiate easts a sister baiteded this crisis? Will he heed my

honourable friend, the Shadow Secretary's call for a period of

silence in order to avoid antagonising the junior doctors

still further? Let 's be absolutely clear there was never a refusal to

negotiate on the Government's side. You know, we have now, I think,

developed a lot of trust between the Government and the BMA leadership.

Until that point, they balloted for industrial action without even

sitting down and talking to the Government and they refused to

discuss the issue of weekend pay premium, which is the crucial change

we needed for a seven-day NHS. It is when they changed their position on

those areas that we were able to have constructive talks and that is

why they deserve great credit for coming to the table and negotiating

on things they did not want to previously.

I would like to say thank you to the Secretary of State for bringing hard

to bring about this resolution and always putting users of the NHS at

the heart of everything he does. Will he join me in urging junior

doctors to consider it with an open mind and strip out some of the

politics we have heard. And let's consider what is best for patients,

for the NHS and then what is best for the junior doctors? She speaks

very wisely. All I would say is that I understand in a very contentious

industrial relations dispute that junior doctors will not necessarily

look to me for advice as to which way they should vote, but it wasn't

just me doing this agreement, it was a negotiated agreement and the

leader of the junior doctors committee said it is a good

agreement, he will support people to support it and he thinks it is a

good way forward for doctors and patients T people closest to the

detail, to the negotiations think it is the right step forward for junior

doctors and that is something I want to take account of. Thank you, Mr

Speaker. I don't wish to invite the Secretary of State to provoke by

presumption. If this changes the shape of services it will have

implications for other health professions. Is he prepared to have

further conversation that needs to be had there and with counterparts

across these nationals to professional education and training?

We are of course willing to have those discussions with colleagues in

other parts of the UK. But he is right that to have a seven-day

service doesn't just involve junior doctors, it involves widespread

changes across the service. I would say for nurses, health care

assistants, porters, cleaners, others who work in hospitals, they

already operate on 24/7 shifts. So the changes necessary to contracts

are much less profound than they are to some of the doctors' contracts,

which is why it is important that we change not just the junior doctors'

contract but the consultants' contracts and the fact we have an

agreement bodies well for the consultants' contract, which is the

next step. Can I congratulate my honourable

friend and all honourable friend the member for switch for his hard work

in dealing with the dispute with the BMA. Patients up and down the

country, including mine, were somewhat concerned about the

cancelled operations but I'm delighted that the deployment will

try and make sure this gets caught up with. -- department. One of the

things come out of it was that some senior consultants had to end up on

the front line for the first time in a long time and can I ask what can

be done to make sure this happens on a regular basis so they are getting

experience on the front line as well? Think I will dig myself into a

deep old answer that directly. I would like to echo his thanks to my

honourable friend the member for Ipswich, who has done an outstanding

job at every stage throughout this very difficult period and I can

certainly say we would not have had yesterday's agreement without his

very strong help and support at every stage. I think it's true that

there are A departments that have to plan for the withdrawal of

emergency care and they found that having consultants more visible to

patients had some positive impact and I know studies are going on to

see what lessons can be learned going forward. I too welcome the

opportunity for a negotiated settlement, but let us take a moment

to reflect on one of the fundamental principles of the NHS about

providing high quality patient care, and to that end, Woody section of

state figures opportunity to offer our heartfelt and sincere apology

for the significant and severe distress that has been caused to

patients as a result of this prolonged dispute? With the gift

greatest of respect it was not my decision to take industrial action,

to ballot without him in being prepared to sit around the table and

talk to the Government, and with respect to patient safety we seemed

about improvements in beige and safety under this Government as we

face up to the many problems in care that we inherited, not just miss

staffs and many other places that option should welcome the changes

we've made in one of those it have a seven-day NHS. Like many colleagues

in the house, wrote visit to stick on numerous occasions over the last

six months to express concerns of local junior doctors so,

congratulate him on reaching this and I hope the new doctors in

Wimbledon will wholeheartedly support this deal. Can I say we

spoken about the Guardian and the ability of it and its role to

safeguard and have safe working hours per patients and doctors. Can

have more details about how that should work? I'm happy to do that

and I thank him for his correspondence. The principle is

that junior doctors want to know that there is someone independent

that they can appeal to the think they are being asked to work hours

that are unsafe the spin they cannot work -- after patients how they

wanted because they're physically or mentally too exhausted. That is

something we would all want to make possible but it means they need to

have someone who is the -- is not their line manager, someone

independent and separate. One of the areas we made the most progress in

the last few months, even before the last ten days, is establishing how

these guardians can work in a way that has the of the hospitals the

doctors working there. The section of state is right when he says you

always get further if you get around the table. I ask him why in response

to the cross-party initiative back in February to get everyone around

the table didn't he do that and save us all this trouble rather than

finding both the contract? The cross-party initiative was in for a

new contract, it was to abandon plans for a new contract and just

have pilots in a few limited places and if we had followed that advice

we would not now today had the biggest changes in junior doctor

contracts for 17 years agreed with the BMA, and that was why the call

we wanted was to get the agreement yesterday, safer carefully NHS and

better deals for doctors. That is what we got and we wouldn't have if

we listen to that advice? Can I join in the welcome for the agreement and

the persistent and patients that eventually paid off. In previous

statements I've raised with the sexual state this problem of married

couples, both of whom are doctors, -- secretary of state. If they have

roasters that clash, can he say a word about the progress made in this

important area of making work more family friendly. I'm happy to do

that. Is not easy dissolved because junior doctor at training places

operate on six-month locations and are competitive. You get many more

up applicants than there are posts available, so we have to find a way

of balancing the need to respect family responsibility, something we

would all want to do, with the need to have a fair process for the most

competitive positions. I think we have not got the balance right to

date, so we said cells Dott health education and where we decide people

will go on rotation will have a duty to consider family response but is

when they make decisions about those locations. I welcome the potential

resolution, thank the Government for negotiation at the doctors having

the courage to go on strike, which no one does likely to get a better

deal for the NHS. I would ask the secretary of state to reflect on

this and take further steps to build on his difficult relationship with

NHS staff and stop resenting NHS policy and false dichotomy between

the interests of patients and interests of NHS staff. If he had

listened to what I said, for we said Beasley I don't think that the cost

me exists, the false dichotomy as he says in the end what is right for

patients is also right doctors, the thing that demoralises doctors and

nurses and everyone working in hospitals and different part of the

Ayrshires is when they are not able to give the care they want what they

think is appropriate to the patients in front of them, which is why we

see hospitals that have moved closes towards a seven-day services are

also some of hospitals with the highest levels of morale in the NHS.

He is right, it's not a false dichotomy and we need to do both

together. As the sexual note, my brother and his wife were junior

doctors when they made the decision to move over to New Zealand a long

while ago. That was because of the long-standing cultural problems in

the NHS. They will be pleased indeed about the announcement yesterday

around the couples being able to work together in hospitals

potentially. I have a question for my mother and it relates around what

can you do now in order to encourage them and their friends back into the

NHS? Let me say to your mother that I hope the message of this new

agreement will go brightly way around the world and any doctors who

have moved to New Zealand or Australia are always welcome to come

back, and I think the thing that must unite this Government and the

good doctors who work in the NHS is our commitment to making NHS care

the safest and best in the world, and I think we had a terrible shock