26/04/2017

:00:08. > :00:19.Point of order. Mr David Winick. Because question one was closed,

:00:20. > :00:24.there wasn't an opportunity for a response on that particular point

:00:25. > :00:28.about the West Midlands. Would it be possible to put on record that if

:00:29. > :00:36.there had been an opportunity, on the Labour benches, we would,

:00:37. > :00:38.certainly myself, would have stated that public services have been

:00:39. > :00:44.result of the Tory cuts. I thought result of the Tory cuts. I thought

:00:45. > :00:47.it was useful that that should be said because there was not an

:00:48. > :00:52.opportunity to respond to what the Prime Minister said. He has made his

:00:53. > :00:58.point with force, and it will be recorded in the official report, and

:00:59. > :01:04.if the honourable gentleman wishes, it may be then more widely

:01:05. > :01:09.disseminated to others. I am saving the honourable gentleman up. Point

:01:10. > :01:19.of order. You and I are familiar with the tension that afflicts this

:01:20. > :01:25.place before an election. I believe what we have seen this morning is a

:01:26. > :01:29.sudden outbreak of parliamentary Tourette's, and the rumour is that

:01:30. > :01:35.something known as a Crosby check has been implanted within the brain

:01:36. > :01:40.of those on the other side that compels them to stay strong and

:01:41. > :01:48.stable -- says strong unsaleable library 18 seconds and say Coalition

:01:49. > :01:53.chaos every 30 seconds. Is the affliction permanent one that be

:01:54. > :01:57.cured? I am grateful to the honourable gentleman, but I am not

:01:58. > :02:03.sure this is a matter for the chair. Without fear of contradiction, I can

:02:04. > :02:13.say that in my time in this place, I have never been preprogrammed or

:02:14. > :02:18.otherwise by anyone. Point avoid, -- point of order, Mr Chris Brown. I

:02:19. > :02:27.want to raise a serious point. You want to raise a serious point. You

:02:28. > :02:30.referred to the order paper can memorise and two people killed in

:02:31. > :02:36.the First World War. That is the right thing to do. This short

:02:37. > :02:41.parliament has seen two members of our own community killed. Jo Cox,

:02:42. > :02:44.our colleague, and Keith Palmer, who was defending us. I am sure the

:02:45. > :02:50.whole House would want to add the thanks to all the police officers

:02:51. > :02:53.who work on the estate, add them to the thanks earlier. Jo Cox is

:02:54. > :02:59.getting a shield in the chamber by the next time the parliament

:03:00. > :03:04.gathers. It would seem to me and to a lot of members on all sides,

:03:05. > :03:08.wholly appropriate that Keith Palmer should also have a shield in the

:03:09. > :03:14.chamber. He was not a member of Parliament, but he was one of us,

:03:15. > :03:17.and he was our shield defender. If there are many voices out there that

:03:18. > :03:21.said this chamber should just be for members, those should be rejected.

:03:22. > :03:27.There must be a permanent reminder of what he did for us. I thank him

:03:28. > :03:32.for his point of order. I had no advance notice of this, and about

:03:33. > :03:37.which I make no complaint whatsoever. It is right that these

:03:38. > :03:43.matters should be considered by a number of people, and it would be

:03:44. > :03:46.wrong and disrespectful of me to other individuals who should be

:03:47. > :03:52.consulted simply to say yes, it is going to happen. I entirely open to

:03:53. > :03:59.the proposition that the honourable gentleman has just put? I most

:04:00. > :04:05.certainly am. Not all precedents in every matter have to be observed.

:04:06. > :04:14.There is scope for innovation, otherwise nothing would ever change.

:04:15. > :04:26.And Keith Palmer will always have a very special and perhaps unique hold

:04:27. > :04:33.on the affections and respect of members of this House, so I think

:04:34. > :04:37.that that discussion can continue and perhaps I can most appropriately

:04:38. > :04:40.say, having heard the honourable gentleman's view, and expressed a

:04:41. > :04:42.response not unsympathetic that I would be interested to hear the

:04:43. > :04:50.views of my parliamentary colleagues. I am absolutely up for

:04:51. > :04:53.doing just that. Point of order, Sir Desmond Swain. I agree with the

:04:54. > :05:00.honourable gentleman in that respect. I am mystified with the

:05:01. > :05:04.point of order by the point -- honourable member of Walsall, who

:05:05. > :05:08.said there was no opportunity to comment on the back of the closed

:05:09. > :05:13.question. There was an opportunity, but he did not take it. Surely you

:05:14. > :05:18.can stand, and depending on whether he catches your eye, you can call

:05:19. > :05:24.him on the back of a closed question. It is just that the

:05:25. > :05:28.question must relate to the substantive question on the order

:05:29. > :05:34.paper. I do not want to have a great long debate about this. I do not

:05:35. > :05:39.know whether he is standing -- he was standing, I didn't seek to have

:05:40. > :05:50.further questions. I judged the best way to maximise the discussion. I

:05:51. > :05:52.had given thought to that matter in advance, and I decided I would move

:05:53. > :05:59.from the closed question to the engagement question I had made the

:06:00. > :06:02.mental calculations about numbers and I think it was the right

:06:03. > :06:09.judgment, so there was not an opportunity on that question. More

:06:10. > :06:13.widely, I would simply say colleagues might have noticed that

:06:14. > :06:19.on this occasion, conscious of the very large numbers of people wanting

:06:20. > :06:25.to contribute, I ran proceedings on somewhat longer than normal. There

:06:26. > :06:31.is no debate offering the opportunity for valedictory

:06:32. > :06:34.speeches. -- at the end of the parliament as there was at the end

:06:35. > :06:42.of the last. I make no complaint about that, I am simply saying it is

:06:43. > :06:45.no such opportunity. And I thought the mood for today was that as many

:06:46. > :06:52.members as could reasonably be called should be called, perhaps

:06:53. > :06:56.particularly with regard, not exclusively, but particularly with

:06:57. > :07:05.regard to those who had announced their intention to leave the House.

:07:06. > :07:12.So we have run on a bit. To which I reply, so what? In order so there

:07:13. > :07:14.should be no misunderstanding, because the honourable gentleman

:07:15. > :07:22.gave the impression that I was not standing. I was desperately trying

:07:23. > :07:26.to catch your eye, and if I may say so, we have all the differences in

:07:27. > :07:30.the world, but I have always looked upon him as a person of integrity,

:07:31. > :07:38.and I would be grateful if you could clarify the position. I was not

:07:39. > :07:45.looking at the honourable gentleman, I confess, but I accept entirely

:07:46. > :07:51.that he was standing and I withdraw. Very greatest. We have it on the

:07:52. > :07:55.record that the honourable gentleman, the Member for Walsall

:07:56. > :08:04.North, was standing! He was seeking to catch my eye! I called 35

:08:05. > :08:07.members. One further point of order. We then should proceed. The

:08:08. > :08:14.honourable gentleman has had a good crack today, but another goal. I

:08:15. > :08:18.merely wanted to correct my honourable friend the Member for

:08:19. > :08:25.Newport, who referred I think to me, when he said Lincoln, I am

:08:26. > :08:29.Litchfield. And to my honourable friend, there has been considerable

:08:30. > :08:36.speculation about what might be on my head. Can I say that a chip is

:08:37. > :08:43.not one of them! It is reassuring to have additional information! Head

:08:44. > :08:47.inspection may be available to members, but not to those observing

:08:48. > :08:51.our proceedings elsewhere, and I do not want them to feel excluded.

:08:52. > :08:57.Point of order. I am sure I speak for my colleagues who are standing

:08:58. > :09:09.down. Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to express our

:09:10. > :09:13.appreciation for our Prime Minister to stay as long as she had. I have

:09:14. > :09:17.always been a staunch supporter of maintaining conventions, but on this

:09:18. > :09:20.occasion I have to say that I think stretching the convention was rather

:09:21. > :09:24.a good idea, and thank you very much. I thank the honourable

:09:25. > :09:31.gentleman. We have known each other a long time, and I wish him all the

:09:32. > :09:34.best for the future. If there are no further points of order, the

:09:35. > :09:43.appetite has been satisfied for today, we come now to the ten minute

:09:44. > :09:50.rule motion, Mr Alan Brown. Thank you. Mr Speaker, I beg to move to

:09:51. > :09:53.bring in a bill to make provision to safeguard them for release of cash

:09:54. > :09:56.attentions in the construction industry and for connected purposes.

:09:57. > :10:01.When I secured this ten minute rule Bill, I genuinely hoped it would be

:10:02. > :10:08.the start of new legislation. Unfortunately the honourable member

:10:09. > :10:12.was apparently so scared to what I was proposing to call a general

:10:13. > :10:18.election instead! Joking apart, this topic is very important. Cash

:10:19. > :10:24.attentions as a deduction of proportion of the agreed value of a

:10:25. > :10:27.contract effectively cash bond. This cash is withheld by the main

:10:28. > :10:31.contractor to cover snagging defects and agreed -- in an agreed

:10:32. > :10:35.maintenance period of one or two years. Usually the subcontractor

:10:36. > :10:45.remedies these defects at the alone cost as per contractual conditions,

:10:46. > :10:50.thereby... Retentions are not released in a timely manner at the

:10:51. > :10:56.end of the contract, for a reasons, and something not at all. The most

:10:57. > :10:59.common reason for non-releases going into liquidation. One example of

:11:00. > :11:05.this is a world based company losing ?240,000 over five years due to

:11:06. > :11:09.insolvencies. Another example is a Scottish plumbing firm, which lost

:11:10. > :11:18.?150,000 of retentions over five years. A huge amount for an SME.

:11:19. > :11:21.Scottish plumbers have already been hit by the 1995 pensions act,

:11:22. > :11:26.section 75, multi-employer pension debt issue. So some of these owners

:11:27. > :11:31.of companies are already at risk of personal insolvency. So this issue

:11:32. > :11:35.is just another distraction that is not required. Regarding the

:11:36. > :11:40.tensions, and SME steelwork and contractor has an annual turnover --

:11:41. > :11:46.turnover of ?30 million and has the supplied attentions of 150,000. That

:11:47. > :11:49.is 0.5% turnover. When you consider how small the profit margin is that

:11:50. > :11:54.the lower end of the construction industry, that 0.5% is a

:11:55. > :11:57.considerable amount. I have worked in the construction industry so I

:11:58. > :12:04.understand the origins of the detention system. To be fair, I also

:12:05. > :12:07.know how hard it can sometimes be together subcontractor back on site

:12:08. > :12:11.to do snagging works, which is often because they have moved onto another

:12:12. > :12:16.job, some resources are not immediately available. That said, it

:12:17. > :12:19.is seldom subcontractors do not fulfil their obligations, therefore

:12:20. > :12:22.when they fulfilled their obligations, they expect to get the

:12:23. > :12:28.money released when it is due to them. If they comply, why should

:12:29. > :12:32.they not receive the money in a timely manner? I would ask this

:12:33. > :12:37.House, white, in the 21st century, are we dealing with unprotected cash

:12:38. > :12:43.attentions? The loss of cash retentions comes with a human loss.

:12:44. > :12:50.According to a survey of SMEs, 25% of them say that a debt of 25,000

:12:51. > :13:01.places are not to jeopardise their business prospects. They are often

:13:02. > :13:08.much higher than ?20,000. This gives fewer opportunities to recruit

:13:09. > :13:19.apprentices and opportunities to invest in training. Individual

:13:20. > :13:25.bankruptcy is also a risk. Due to personal guarantees by directors.

:13:26. > :13:28.There is a productivity problem in the UK, and yet here we have smaller

:13:29. > :13:30.companies struggling with cash flow, stress in having to put extra

:13:31. > :13:34.man-hours into chasing up these cash retentions, so surely resolving this

:13:35. > :13:38.issue can only improve productivity, not just in man-hours saved in not

:13:39. > :13:42.having to chase up the tensions, but in terms of the money released that

:13:43. > :13:48.can be freed up for investment in new equipment, or job creation,

:13:49. > :13:52.productivity. To be fair, this issue productivity. To be fair, this

:13:53. > :13:53.in terms of late payments has been in terms of late payments has been

:13:54. > :13:57.they have took action on that, but they have took action on that,

:13:58. > :13:59.release of retentions is the missing release of retentions is the missing

:14:00. > :14:01.link in this payment chain that action has to be taken on. We can

:14:02. > :14:06.further illustrate the seriousness further illustrate the seriousness

:14:07. > :14:10.of this. In 2015 small firms across the UK lost almost ?50 million worth

:14:11. > :14:17.of retentions because of insolvencies on the supply chain.

:14:18. > :14:19.That money could be reinvested and also a client somewhere along the

:14:20. > :14:22.line has to pay for this lost revenue. ?3 billion worth of

:14:23. > :14:28.retention monies are held at one down. This can affect productivity,

:14:29. > :14:28.cash flow and profit. Also, the uncertainty of retention release

:14:29. > :14:41.companies. -- banks not allowing means borrowing against sums due

:14:42. > :14:51.borrowing. A report prepared for government 53 years old recommended

:14:52. > :14:55.this being dealt with. And a government report recommended cash

:14:56. > :15:01.retentions should be detected in a cost again. Operating a tenancy

:15:02. > :15:04.deposit scheme would protect individuals in the private sector,

:15:05. > :15:10.but there has been no will by governments to do something with

:15:11. > :15:25.these construction deposits. In 2002, 2008, a committee... In 20

:15:26. > :15:31.During the enterprise committee, of which I was a member, the Minister

:15:32. > :15:38.said, it is fair to say there is absolute cross party agreement on

:15:39. > :15:41.the need to reform cash retentions. I am very open about it, I think

:15:42. > :15:42.they are outdated and do not think they are there. They are

:15:43. > :15:49.particularly unfair to small businesses. The Minister then said,

:15:50. > :15:54.the honourable gentleman can be sure that this Minister gives her word

:15:55. > :15:57.that this matter is not going to be kicked into the long grass. In fact,

:15:58. > :16:03.it is very short grass that has only just grown, because the review will

:16:04. > :16:06.be completed by March, then recommendations will be out to

:16:07. > :16:09.public consultation. If legislation is required as a result, I will be

:16:10. > :16:16.happy to be the Minister to take it through. Here we are in April 2017,

:16:17. > :16:19.the process being kicked back this year, now we have a general election

:16:20. > :16:26.causing further delay. We're not just in the long grass, we're then

:16:27. > :16:31.longer as growing out of a sea of mud. The consultation will be

:16:32. > :16:34.consulted on again once completed. So any new government will not move

:16:35. > :16:38.on this until after the summer recess. I would plead that there is

:16:39. > :16:47.consideration of suitable secondary legislation to be enacted early.

:16:48. > :16:55.I have been contacted by companies in my constituency affected by the

:16:56. > :16:58.non-release of these retentions. One company wanted to remain anonymous

:16:59. > :17:02.and would not name the company they were having difficulty with because

:17:03. > :17:06.the difficulty is they still have to tender for more work from that

:17:07. > :17:09.company with holding the money, so they did not want to upset them, and

:17:10. > :17:20.that is how the market share operates. I care a tribute to the

:17:21. > :17:24.Scottish and Northern Ireland's plumbers' Federation, the National

:17:25. > :17:28.Confederation Of Building Contractors, and others. They have

:17:29. > :17:31.raised these matters with myself. The companies and organisations are

:17:32. > :17:35.fed up with blockages from Government. The Scottish Government

:17:36. > :17:38.has been operating a project bank account system to ensure

:17:39. > :17:43.subcontractors get paid in time and the Government pays the main

:17:44. > :17:47.contractor. This can be adapted to include retentions. The tenancy

:17:48. > :17:50.deposit scheme is the model which should be adopted for cash

:17:51. > :17:55.retentions. This could already have been in place at the Government

:17:56. > :17:59.accepted the Enterprise Bill but this year alone we have seen

:18:00. > :18:04.examples of thousands of pounds worth of retentions lost, when a

:18:05. > :18:08.company in Northern Ireland went into liquidation in January. With an

:18:09. > :18:15.article in The Times in February this year, the main contractors

:18:16. > :18:20.treat retentions as their own money. It can take up to five years to get

:18:21. > :18:26.a bill settled. Retention monies are ring-fenced in several accounts in

:18:27. > :18:30.countries such as the US, Australia, New Zealand and certain EU member

:18:31. > :18:34.states. As already outlined, we know what the problem is. It has existed

:18:35. > :18:40.for well over 50 years. We know there is a solution for works, and

:18:41. > :18:42.it works in other countries. The Government has acknowledged

:18:43. > :18:46.cross-party support for ending cash retentions. I have outlined today

:18:47. > :18:50.this is a UK wide issue that requires UK Government action. I do

:18:51. > :18:53.urge the Government to support the Bill and if I'm lucky enough to be

:18:54. > :19:03.re-elected, I continue to pursue this issue. The question is that he

:19:04. > :19:06.have to leave to bring in his bill. As many as are of that opinion, say

:19:07. > :19:14."aye". To the contrary, "no". I think the ayes have it. Who will

:19:15. > :19:22.prepare and bring in the bill? Hannah Medel, Gavin Newlands, Stuart

:19:23. > :19:31.Blair Donaldson, Bill S Duffin, Patricia Gibson, Doctor Philippa

:19:32. > :19:41.Whitford, Mark Duncan, a beast Simpson and myself, Mr Speaker. --

:19:42. > :20:02.Davies Simpson and myself. Mr Alan Brown.

:20:03. > :20:13.Construction Industry (Protection of Cash Retentions) Bill Bill. Second

:20:14. > :20:23.reading, what day? 12th of May. Order. Business of the House. 24th,

:20:24. > :20:30.25th, 26 and 20 7th of April. The question of the business house as on

:20:31. > :20:34.the order paper. As many as are of that opinion, say "aye". To the

:20:35. > :20:42.contrary, "no". . The ayes have it. Ways and means motion. Beg to move.

:20:43. > :20:46.The question is the Digital Economy Bill. The question is as on the

:20:47. > :20:55.order paper. As many as are of that opinion, say "aye". To the contrary,

:20:56. > :21:02."no". . I think the ayes have it. The clerk will read the orders of

:21:03. > :21:08.the day. Digital Economy Bill, consideration of Lords amendments. I

:21:09. > :21:15.must draw attention to the fact that financial privilege is engaged by

:21:16. > :21:20.Lords' amendments 248-254. If the House agrees them, I will cause an

:21:21. > :21:25.appropriate entry to be made in the journal. The motion to be taken is

:21:26. > :21:30.to disagree with the Lords in their amendment one, with which we will

:21:31. > :21:37.consider Government amendments a - see in you and the others as on the

:21:38. > :21:45.selection paper. To move to disagree with Lords amendment one, I call the

:21:46. > :21:49.minister. Minister Hancock. I am delighted that today we have the

:21:50. > :21:53.final opportunity to scrutinise the Digital Economy Bill and I hope get

:21:54. > :21:57.it onto the statute book before the dissolution of Parliament. The bill

:21:58. > :22:01.has been widely supported during its passage. It tackles head on some

:22:02. > :22:06.serious issues which many in this House feel strongly about. It will

:22:07. > :22:09.help extend digital conductivity, protect children from online

:22:10. > :22:13.pornography, and better deliver Government services. The other House

:22:14. > :22:18.has made some amendments so I will go through these in turn. Lords

:22:19. > :22:22.amendment one challenges the Government to be more ambitious on

:22:23. > :22:26.universal digital connectivity. It forms part of our plan to deliver

:22:27. > :22:31.better connectivity, helping to ensure everyone gets decent

:22:32. > :22:34.broadband and no one is left behind. However, we have some serious

:22:35. > :22:39.concerns about amendment once and whether it is deliverable. As

:22:40. > :22:42.drafted, it is counter-productive to the implementation of a USO because

:22:43. > :22:48.of the risk of legal challenge and the delay this will cause. We are

:22:49. > :22:53.legislating for this USO under the EU telecoms legislative framework in

:22:54. > :22:56.which a USO is intended to ensure a baseline of services where a

:22:57. > :23:00.substantial majority have taken up the service but the market has not

:23:01. > :23:06.delivered and where users are at risk of social exclusion. According

:23:07. > :23:09.to Ofcom's latest data, in 2016, take-up of ultrafast broadband with

:23:10. > :23:16.download speed of 300 megabits per second and higher was less than

:23:17. > :23:21.0.01%, so we are nowhere near able to demonstrate that the majority of

:23:22. > :23:27.the public have this access. We therefore cannot accept amendment

:23:28. > :23:32.one and we are not in a position, also of a substantial majority

:23:33. > :23:37.having taken up superfast broadband. However I support the ambition of

:23:38. > :23:44.faster and better broadband and so we propose an amendment in you which

:23:45. > :23:50.says that any broadband USO should... And the Government should

:23:51. > :23:54.direct Ofcom to review the minimum speed once superfast take-up is 75%.

:23:55. > :24:00.This gives the assurance that any USO speed will reconsidered once a

:24:01. > :24:04.substantial majority of subscribers are on superfast. Lords amendment

:24:05. > :24:12.two seeks to tackle a number of issues related to mobile phones and

:24:13. > :24:16.frustration about service. I understand that, representing a

:24:17. > :24:24.ruble constituency, and this bill is designed to address them in the new

:24:25. > :24:33.electronic code, switching and powers. But Lords amendment two is

:24:34. > :24:37.not the answer. It is an understandable reaction to faults in

:24:38. > :24:40.the market, but first the requirement to allow customers to

:24:41. > :24:47.Rome is unclear and there have been doubts about whether it would --

:24:48. > :24:52.they would be able to do it legally. Whilst superficially attractive

:24:53. > :24:55.roaming it's the wrong solution, why would operators improve their

:24:56. > :25:05.coverage when a competitor can reap the war rewards -- the rewards?

:25:06. > :25:08.Taking roaming off the table in 2014 locked in ?5 billion of investment

:25:09. > :25:13.to improve mobile infrastructure in the UK and 4G coverage from all

:25:14. > :25:18.operators has grown from 29% to 22% in the last year. Second, on

:25:19. > :25:23.switching the bill already has greater provision on switching, and

:25:24. > :25:26.this provision concerns operators all telecoms services including

:25:27. > :25:33.fixed line broadband, pay-TV, not just mobile phones, and Ofcom is

:25:34. > :25:37.better placed to ensure companies improve the level of their service.

:25:38. > :25:39.On Bill capping it, this is something the Government intended to

:25:40. > :25:42.look at in the consumer rights look at in the consumer rights

:25:43. > :25:49.paper, and something that is already offered by some providers, so while

:25:50. > :25:57.we can't accept the Lords amendment two, we can see the benefits of

:25:58. > :26:02.customers being able to limit use. Providers must ensure that those

:26:03. > :26:07.with existing contracts will also have the opportunity to place a

:26:08. > :26:10.limit on their bill. This will not affect any obligations regarding

:26:11. > :26:15.contacting the emergency services, be that through voice call or text

:26:16. > :26:18.message. Moving on to Lords amendment 40 and the proposed code

:26:19. > :26:23.of practice for social media platform providers in online abuse,

:26:24. > :26:28.want to start by saying we agree with the spirit of the amendment

:26:29. > :26:32.that was agreed in the Other Place. We take harm caused by online abuse

:26:33. > :26:35.and bullying very seriously. We offer an alternative close that we

:26:36. > :26:41.think will achieve the intended outcome and will form part of our

:26:42. > :26:48.work to improve internet safety next Parliament. Our amendment seeks to

:26:49. > :26:53.provide a code of practice to protect users of online services and

:26:54. > :26:59.set out the behaviour social media companies should follow. It will

:27:00. > :27:03.give guidance for how providers respond to harmful behaviour such as

:27:04. > :27:07.bullying. There is good work being done by some providers to prevent

:27:08. > :27:11.the use of platforms for illegal purposes and potential criminal

:27:12. > :27:15.conduct, were reported to the police, will continue to be liable

:27:16. > :27:20.to investigation. We already expect social media providers to work

:27:21. > :27:23.closely with law enforcement in relation to potential unlawful

:27:24. > :27:29.activity taking place on these sights. But other uses of social

:27:30. > :27:31.media might be cruel or upsetting or insulting but nevertheless legal.

:27:32. > :27:36.There is more that can be done to tackle online abuse like bullying

:27:37. > :27:39.and other serious issues which people face, which face our children

:27:40. > :27:43.and young people. The code will set out guidance about what social media

:27:44. > :27:51.providers should do in relation to convert that is lawful but not

:27:52. > :27:55.molest distressing or upsetting. Our intention -- lawful but distressing

:27:56. > :27:58.or upsetting. Social media companies have recently put in place some

:27:59. > :28:02.improvements to make their platforms safer but we all agree they still

:28:03. > :28:07.have some way to go and this amendment will be helpful in

:28:08. > :28:12.achieving that. Turning to Lords amendment 230 seven, 238 and 230

:28:13. > :28:16.nine. These amendments would establish a BBC licence fee

:28:17. > :28:22.commission to make a recommendation on the level of the licence fee

:28:23. > :28:25.required to fund the BBC. For a full public consultation on the

:28:26. > :28:30.appropriate level of BBC funding. But we do not believe it is right

:28:31. > :28:33.for an unelected body effectively to set tax rates. It is a long

:28:34. > :28:36.established principle that the Government does not consult on the

:28:37. > :28:42.level of taxation, and therefore the amendments are not only impractical

:28:43. > :28:50.but also unnecessary. Lords amendment 242. It extends the public

:28:51. > :28:57.service broadcast regime to OnDemand menus and platforms. I know we

:28:58. > :29:01.recently consulted on this and concluded that we saw no compelling

:29:02. > :29:05.evidence to change the regime but I understand the impulse behind the

:29:06. > :29:11.amendment, to ensure that PSB channels are readily available as

:29:12. > :29:17.technologies are changing. But there is podcasting and Internet-based

:29:18. > :29:22.viewing and they are completely different. The amendment extends the

:29:23. > :29:26.prominence regime to content originating from the non-PSB

:29:27. > :29:34.portfolio channels of the commercial PSBs. It also seeks to remove

:29:35. > :29:41.Ofcom's discretion in applying prominence rules and defines the

:29:42. > :29:45.current definition of an EPG to include smart TV interfaces, which

:29:46. > :29:48.we are told would ultimately put up the cost of a television. So we

:29:49. > :29:51.cannot accept the amendment but we do understand the strength of

:29:52. > :29:59.feeling in both houses on this issue so we have tabled in view of Lords

:30:00. > :30:03.amendment 242 to place a new requirement on the needs of finding

:30:04. > :30:08.and accessing PSB content across all TV platforms. If Ofcom's makes clear

:30:09. > :30:12.there was a problem in this area that can only be fixed by

:30:13. > :30:17.legislation, then assuming that this Government returns in June, I can

:30:18. > :30:22.commit we will bring forward that legislation as soon as reasonably

:30:23. > :30:26.possible. Another area that has raised serious concern is secondary

:30:27. > :30:28.ticketing. Here I want to pay tribute to colleagues across this

:30:29. > :30:36.has for their work but in particular my honourable friend the member for

:30:37. > :30:40.Selby, who is in his place in a bright blue suit. Since this issue

:30:41. > :30:44.was debated in the House, we have published our response to the review

:30:45. > :30:50.accepting the recommendations in full, introduced Lords amendment 247

:30:51. > :30:57.to give the Government the power to introduce a criminal offence,

:30:58. > :31:01.provided funding to national trading standards for enforcement,

:31:02. > :31:05.facilitated the sector's operation in cyber security networks, and

:31:06. > :31:07.launched an enforcement investigation into suspected

:31:08. > :31:12.breaches of consumer protection law in the online secondary ticketing

:31:13. > :31:17.market. But that is not enough, and noble Lords also added amendment 246

:31:18. > :31:19.to the bill, requiring ticket resellers to provide buyers with the

:31:20. > :31:24.ticket reference or buying number in any specific condition attached to

:31:25. > :31:28.the reseller of the ticket. We agree in principle. We have got some

:31:29. > :31:32.concerns over its practicality and the provision relating to reductions

:31:33. > :31:36.on tickets that also duplicates provisions in the Consumer Rights

:31:37. > :31:41.Act, so we tabled our amendment to Lords amendment 246, which requires

:31:42. > :31:45.that any unique ticket number must be identified, which we intend to

:31:46. > :31:49.have the same effect, and we will also continue to work with the

:31:50. > :31:50.industry to reduce the risk of fraud or unwarranted cancellation of

:31:51. > :32:02.tickets. I would also like to say a few words

:32:03. > :32:08.about amendments we are proposing to accept an age verification for

:32:09. > :32:11.online pornography, part three of the bill. Age verification of people

:32:12. > :32:15.accessing pornography is a hugely important part of the bill, and has

:32:16. > :32:18.been welcomed across the House. While the intention of the bill is

:32:19. > :32:24.about protecting children, the scope of material for adults that the

:32:25. > :32:27.regulator can act against has prompted much debate in the other

:32:28. > :32:29.place, where we heard concerns that the current prohibited material

:32:30. > :32:44.definition may be going too far in the type of material regulator is

:32:45. > :32:51.able to block. Our goal is to ensure that children are prevented from

:32:52. > :32:53.accessing online pornography. Our amendment therefore redefines the

:32:54. > :32:58.scope of the material, taking an approach based on the definition of

:32:59. > :33:02.extreme pornographic image in the criminal Justice and immigration act

:33:03. > :33:06.2008. I would like to confirm that this does not change the definition

:33:07. > :33:13.of what is and what is not lawful for adults to view, and indeed in

:33:14. > :33:17.the Lords amendment 45 we made absolutely clear that content behind

:33:18. > :33:21.age verification controls can still be subject to criminal sanctions

:33:22. > :33:27.provided by existing legislation. What is illegal off-line is illegal

:33:28. > :33:32.online. And where material is criminal in nature, and not hosted

:33:33. > :33:37.in the UK, the National Crime Agency is see op command works with

:33:38. > :33:50.international partners to address this material at you dudes diction.

:33:51. > :33:55.-- the Ceop division. Ceop considers illegal or inappropriate content

:33:56. > :33:58.with children. I recognise that for many the Digital economy Bill

:33:59. > :34:03.represents unfinished business in re forming the law in this area.

:34:04. > :34:07.Internet safety strategy is already underway and will look into the

:34:08. > :34:11.questions of safety on the Internet, and we will agree with Lords

:34:12. > :34:15.amendment 41, which requires the Secretary of State to produce a

:34:16. > :34:20.report on the impact and effectiveness of the new regulatory

:34:21. > :34:26.framework for online pornography. It precludes -- includes a requirement

:34:27. > :34:34.to consult on the definitions in this bill. The ability for the

:34:35. > :34:41.regulator to block noncompliant sites of a significant step.

:34:42. > :34:47.Noncompliant sites should be blocked we're recommended by the regulator

:34:48. > :34:50.to do so. But nothing is 100% effective. I am delighted we have

:34:51. > :34:52.made this much progress in this bill to protect children from harmful

:34:53. > :34:59.content online, and I pay tribute to the work of many members, including

:35:00. > :35:04.my old friend, the Member for Devizes, Hampshire, the former

:35:05. > :35:08.Secretary of State, the select committee and others. And I look

:35:09. > :35:13.forward to putting this Bill into action. Turning to the other

:35:14. > :35:19.amendments made by the other place, Lords amendment 46 fulfils our

:35:20. > :35:24.manifesto commitment just in time to enhance the public lending Right by

:35:25. > :35:27.extending it so that authors of e-book standard audio books have the

:35:28. > :35:31.right to receive payment from the government for remote landing of

:35:32. > :35:40.these books from public libraries. -- lending. Amendment 240 concerns

:35:41. > :35:46.children's TV programming. We have extended tax relief for animation to

:35:47. > :35:49.children's TV, and this amendment, proposed by an strongly supported by

:35:50. > :35:54.Baroness Benjamin in the other place, and powers of common to

:35:55. > :35:59.support children's TV further if necessary. Lords amendment 241

:36:00. > :36:05.concerns accessibility of on demand programmes. We debated this in this

:36:06. > :36:09.House report stage last November and I paid tribute on action on hearing

:36:10. > :36:14.loss as well as honourable members who impressed this matter. Ofcom

:36:15. > :36:18.will now have the power to ensure subtitles are other appropriate

:36:19. > :36:27.provision is put in place. Lords amendment 243 concerns listed

:36:28. > :36:29.events. In the UK the listed events regime provides coverage of sports

:36:30. > :36:34.events with national significance, and this amendment will make sure

:36:35. > :36:39.this is future proof does TV changes with new technologies. Amendment 244

:36:40. > :36:45.creates a new power for the Secretary of State to protect a

:36:46. > :36:48.policy statement relating to telecommunications for the

:36:49. > :36:50.management of radio spectrum and postal services for Ofcom as the

:36:51. > :36:54.regulator. .Com will have regard to this when carrying out their

:36:55. > :37:02.statutory duties. The reason for this is that during the passage of

:37:03. > :37:08.this bill, there has been the ability to change provider,

:37:09. > :37:11.connectivity, and lots of other things, is things like the universal

:37:12. > :37:18.service obligation. This will allow the government to define a clear

:37:19. > :37:20.policy on these matters to ensure a greater coherence in an increasingly

:37:21. > :37:26.complex and interlinked environment. I want to thank off, for all the

:37:27. > :37:38.work they have done supporting the package of this Bill is an excellent

:37:39. > :37:43.ensure the bill was amended in the ensure the bill was amended in the

:37:44. > :37:55.Lords to tackle concerns in the EU neutrality ... Lords amendment 249

:37:56. > :38:01.response to an operational requirement of the police, who

:38:02. > :38:06.require support in tackling gangs especially in large urban areas, who

:38:07. > :38:10.supplied drugs in suburban areas, market and coastal towns, especially

:38:11. > :38:14.class a drugs, to support their market expansion, gangs recruit and

:38:15. > :38:17.exploit children and vulnerable adults through intimidation,

:38:18. > :38:23.violent, debt, bondage and grooming. They are used to carry drugs with

:38:24. > :38:29.money. I want to pay tribute again to my old friend from North West

:38:30. > :38:34.Hampshire for his long campaign on this, and the work in the Home

:38:35. > :38:36.Office by my honourable friend the Minister for safeguarding, and with

:38:37. > :38:43.this amendment to the police will be able to disrupt the mobile phones

:38:44. > :38:48.that the drugs gangs rely on. Lords amendments 249-25 at the start of

:38:49. > :38:55.reforms to the Data Protection Act. The new legal framework coming into

:38:56. > :38:59.force in May 2018, paving the way to ensure that funding mechanism can be

:39:00. > :39:05.put in place and time and provide certainty for data controllers.

:39:06. > :39:10.Lords amendments 253-255, a concern the Crown guarantee for BT pensions.

:39:11. > :39:17.They are necessary following the announcement on the 10th of March of

:39:18. > :39:20.a deal between BT and accurately that will legally separate BT and

:39:21. > :39:22.open beach. We welcome the split, and these amendments ensure the

:39:23. > :39:30.split does not affect peoples pensions. I will give way. We do not

:39:31. > :39:36.have BT open reach in Northern Ireland at all, to roll out with

:39:37. > :39:43.broadband, as that is carried out by BT itself. Is there any provision

:39:44. > :39:51.for Northern Ireland? The provision in the bill as to ensure that those

:39:52. > :39:56.protections will be able to detain that protection when they

:39:57. > :40:01.transferred to the separate organisation, OpenReach. Those who

:40:02. > :40:06.are not leaving BT Group, there will be no change to the pension

:40:07. > :40:10.arrangements, so they are not negatively affected either, but the

:40:11. > :40:17.provision is not necessary. It is necessary to allow the split to take

:40:18. > :40:22.place without detriment or added benefit to any current BT employee,

:40:23. > :40:30.so the Crown guarantee continues to operate as is today. Further

:40:31. > :40:37.technical amendments have been made regarding whistle-blowing. And to

:40:38. > :40:43.define the electronic communication cord, one of the core measures of

:40:44. > :40:50.this Bill which will be a crucial enabler. I wanted to say that there

:40:51. > :40:55.have been improvements to this Bill, thanks to the work of many people

:40:56. > :41:01.across this House, but in particular... Yes, of course. Before

:41:02. > :41:05.he closes, I hope he will recognise, he spoke about the missed

:41:06. > :41:11.opportunities in terms of this Bill, does he recognise that he leads this

:41:12. > :41:22.Parliament with data-sharing and the rights of citizens over their own

:41:23. > :41:28.data in a worse state of chaos and total unknown mess across

:41:29. > :41:36.departments that it was when he took up the role, I think just over a

:41:37. > :41:40.week ago -- a year ago. The honourable lady is normally so

:41:41. > :41:42.reasonable and constructive that the electioneering must have got into

:41:43. > :41:45.her. Because I am afraid I do not recognise that. We have made

:41:46. > :41:52.considerable progress on data-sharing in this Bill, but the

:41:53. > :41:54.rules around data are going to evolve, not least because there are

:41:55. > :42:01.European rules that come into force before we leave the European Union.

:42:02. > :42:13.Yes, there is more work to do, but she has had -- she should not be so

:42:14. > :42:17.churlish about this Bill. Would he then answer the question, do

:42:18. > :42:25.citizens own and control their own data? Yes or no? Of course, citizens

:42:26. > :42:29.elect the government, and in many cases the government is responsible

:42:30. > :42:36.for data, and having democratic legitimacy behind the control of

:42:37. > :42:40.data is critical to a functioning democracy. No doubt in the future

:42:41. > :42:45.this will be an issue that we can return to. There are not any Lords

:42:46. > :42:54.amendments that I have described in this area. And I think the Bill

:42:55. > :42:57.makes significant progress. I wanted to end by paying tribute to the

:42:58. > :43:02.honourable lady opposite, who has worked hard on the bill, made some

:43:03. > :43:13.suggestions we have taken on board, and been a pleasure to work with, to

:43:14. > :43:15.negotiate with, and has been a very effective... She tells me when I'm

:43:16. > :43:24.complementary about her that I'm damaging her career no end! And so I

:43:25. > :43:31.hope she takes these compliments in the way that they are intended. And

:43:32. > :43:34.with that, I beg to move. The question is that this House

:43:35. > :43:39.disagrees with the Lords under Amendment one. Louise Haig. Thank

:43:40. > :43:43.you. The Minister knows he makes me deeply uncomfortable when we agree

:43:44. > :43:50.on anything, including compliments from across the dispatch box! But it

:43:51. > :43:54.is a great privilege to respond for the opposition today and be part of

:43:55. > :44:03.the closing stages of this Bill, which is in better shape thanks to

:44:04. > :44:05.deliberations across the House, and exemplary cross-party working when

:44:06. > :44:13.it was first introduced last year. We're Stokely at -- still clear from

:44:14. > :44:16.the opposition benches that this does not go far enough in some

:44:17. > :44:21.crucial areas and that is a missed opportunity to update

:44:22. > :44:26.infrastructure, on skills strategy, finance, responsibilities in the

:44:27. > :44:30.digital age, and drives individuals should have in this era, when data

:44:31. > :44:33.is increasingly a currency that matters above all. But there have

:44:34. > :44:42.been some useful changes and I am grateful to the Minister for his

:44:43. > :44:47.considered opinion regarding the government bid... Amendment one has

:44:48. > :44:50.sought to increase broadband to superfast levels to ensure that

:44:51. > :44:54.every household in the country can benefit from speeds of at least 30

:44:55. > :45:02.megabits a second. The benefits of this do not need espousing again. We

:45:03. > :45:05.have debated them at length. The House is united on the need for much

:45:06. > :45:09.improved speeds and reliability of broadband across the country. I know

:45:10. > :45:16.the Minister's own constituency has fallen down the rankings in terms of

:45:17. > :45:21.superfast availability during his tenure. Said he will be keen to

:45:22. > :45:25.tackle this. 59% of Britain has access to superfast speeds, and a

:45:26. > :45:31.shopping 40% in rural hamlets do not even have access to basic broadband.

:45:32. > :45:34.In my city of Sheffield, superfast access is no means universal, we

:45:35. > :45:39.have the biggest availability of any major city in the UK. I appreciate

:45:40. > :45:42.the arguments around the universal service directive, but it is

:45:43. > :45:46.disappointing that more of an effort was not made at an earlier stage of

:45:47. > :45:52.the bill today is the argument on this, given Ofcom has made the case

:45:53. > :45:55.clearly that it is better value for money for the taxpayer to intervene

:45:56. > :45:59.in the market now and future proof the 30 megabits per and. The

:46:00. > :46:02.European Commission has provided non-binding guidance in its latest

:46:03. > :46:08.review of universal service in 2011, so it is not entirely clear that a

:46:09. > :46:13.superfast designation is beyond the scope of their directive. The legal

:46:14. > :46:25.perspective is only one of the tools the government has as it -- at its

:46:26. > :46:28.proposal. Ofcom reviews the USO accordingly, tying the USO to the

:46:29. > :46:34.rest of the market in ensuring that the last ten, five or 1% do not fall

:46:35. > :46:38.too far behind the rest of the UK. We would have liked to see the

:46:39. > :46:40.government back 30 megabits in its entirety and I do not accept that

:46:41. > :46:46.millions of consumers and businesses should be (.

:46:47. > :46:53.This was an opportunity to prepare the UK for the digital future and

:46:54. > :46:57.although this is a step forward, it is a baby step. I'll amendment to,

:46:58. > :47:01.it is fantastic the Government has put the accepted the case we put

:47:02. > :47:06.forward on Bill capping, allowing consumers to put a monthly cap on

:47:07. > :47:12.their bill. There are some providers providing bill caps already. Tesco

:47:13. > :47:17.Mobile and 3, mobile are leading the way. There are in addition some

:47:18. > :47:22.smaller companies such as plus net which has a smart cap automatically

:47:23. > :47:27.set at ?10, and another one which has a ?5 cap. That predicted

:47:28. > :47:31.possible and commercially viable for companies to introduce such a

:47:32. > :47:35.measure, however there is currently not the sector wide standard we

:47:36. > :47:37.would like to see. So this amendment will provide basic protections

:47:38. > :47:40.across the whole sector for all consumers and we are delighted that

:47:41. > :47:44.the Government, who opposed this when the bill was passing through

:47:45. > :47:48.the Commons, has seen sense and been persuaded by the strength of our

:47:49. > :47:52.Ottomans. On pornography and age verification is, all sides of the

:47:53. > :47:55.House have worked together in partnership and often in unison and

:47:56. > :47:59.part three of this bill. The original intention remains intact,

:48:00. > :48:02.to protect children from the harmful effects of pornography, and I am

:48:03. > :48:06.delighted the House has worked together to ensure we will have one

:48:07. > :48:11.of the most effective regimes in the world for protecting children. The

:48:12. > :48:15.digital age brings responsibilities and this is recognition of that

:48:16. > :48:19.fact. The bill has grown beyond the narrow bounds of age verification

:48:20. > :48:22.during its passage. The blocking measures for age are fixation which

:48:23. > :48:29.we supported at all supporters into the contentious areas of what is

:48:30. > :48:32.categorised as extreme pornography or prohibited material. This could

:48:33. > :48:35.have been welcome opportunity to fully debate what should and should

:48:36. > :48:39.not be accessible on the internet but due to the late editions of

:48:40. > :48:44.amendments, it curtailed debate, and it is vital that these issues are

:48:45. > :48:48.properly debated, as we tread a very thin line between protection and

:48:49. > :48:51.censorship, so we are pleased the Government has accepted our

:48:52. > :48:53.reasonable amendment that requires the Secretary of State to produce a

:48:54. > :48:57.report on the impact and effectiveness of this regular to

:48:58. > :49:02.refrain work, and crucially also requires Government to consult on

:49:03. > :49:07.the definitions in this bill of extreme pornography. I will give

:49:08. > :49:12.way. Would she agree with me, though, that in setting out these

:49:13. > :49:16.definitions of prohibited material and extreme pornography, and I will

:49:17. > :49:20.speak about this later, we will have -- we have left ourselves in a

:49:21. > :49:25.quandary, when material that she and I would probably agree is completely

:49:26. > :49:30.unacceptable can in theory be viewed behind age filters. I had from the

:49:31. > :49:34.minister that he is prepared to continue this unfinished business.

:49:35. > :49:38.Will she and her party commit to try to work out these definitions in the

:49:39. > :49:42.next Parliament to ensure we can come to a better place? That is

:49:43. > :49:47.exactly why be pushed these amendments in the Lords and we are

:49:48. > :49:54.so pleased to see the Government accepted. We do need a clear

:49:55. > :49:57.consultation. It is my understanding though in new legislation that has

:49:58. > :50:04.passed, that nothing considered will be able to be viewed height age

:50:05. > :50:08.filters, whether it is prohibited or extreme or otherwise. It will be

:50:09. > :50:15.required to be behind age verification filters. She is right,

:50:16. > :50:19.but she will know that the original definition referred to five

:50:20. > :50:23.statutes. We now have a definition that is much tighter. Specifically

:50:24. > :50:27.because items that were in the broader definition were now deemed

:50:28. > :50:31.to be not obscene, and I agree with that, but the problem is that

:50:32. > :50:35.material that 85% of people have viewed it the should not be

:50:36. > :50:38.accessible on the internet for anyone, could potentially be

:50:39. > :50:42.accessible behind those filters for anyone to see, and that is the

:50:43. > :50:46.problem that I think we need to collectively solve. She's absolutely

:50:47. > :50:50.right and it is true to say that material is currently available

:50:51. > :50:55.without any age filters. So we have made substantial progress in this

:50:56. > :50:58.area and it is very welcome that we have. But this consultation will be

:50:59. > :51:01.absolutely crucial in the next Parliament and we look forward to

:51:02. > :51:06.participating in that debate and making sure we get the best possible

:51:07. > :51:08.regime for online pornography. Their balls are several Government

:51:09. > :51:12.amendments brought forward in the Lords on age verification -- there

:51:13. > :51:19.are also several Government amendments. The effectiveness of

:51:20. > :51:23.measures will be determined by the technology used. If we are not

:51:24. > :51:32.careful, we could either end up with age verification that can be too

:51:33. > :51:36.easily by past -- far too easily bypassed, or intrusive and therefore

:51:37. > :51:41.push viewers on two sides that do not use age verification, or illegal

:51:42. > :51:46.sides that straight into much more damaging runs. Proportionality is at

:51:47. > :51:49.the heart of these proposals and I would like to push the minister to

:51:50. > :51:53.say something more on this when he speaks again. The BBFC have

:51:54. > :51:56.intimated that the likely preference is age verified mobile teller funny,

:51:57. > :52:02.but there are significant privacy issues with this approach and we

:52:03. > :52:06.should proceed with caution before creating any process in storing data

:52:07. > :52:10.that could be leaked, hacked or commercialised, and would otherwise

:52:11. > :52:14.be completely private and legitimate. Concerns have been

:52:15. > :52:21.raised about the BBFC and the appropriateness to be the tax-free

:52:22. > :52:24.regulator, and I'm therefore grateful that the minister has

:52:25. > :52:29.listened to these concerns and guidance will now be issued by the

:52:30. > :52:32.Secretary of State and then issued to the regulator. I want to put

:52:33. > :52:35.those concerned on the record here again and ensure that the report

:52:36. > :52:38.that the Secretary of State produces on the effectiveness of the

:52:39. > :52:41.regulation also covers the regulated itself. I will be grateful for

:52:42. > :52:46.clarification from the minister on this point also. On the social media

:52:47. > :52:50.code of conduct, we are delighted that the Government has taken a

:52:51. > :52:54.decisive step in the right direction. This amendment requires

:52:55. > :52:58.the Secretary of State to issue a code of practice for online social

:52:59. > :53:02.media platforms in relation to bullying, directing insolence or

:53:03. > :53:10.other behaviour likely to intimidate or upset. It is important to tackle

:53:11. > :53:12.bullying online. While social media has brought transformative and

:53:13. > :53:16.significant change for the good, it has also significantly to an

:53:17. > :53:21.exponential increase in bullying. It is estimated that seven in ten young

:53:22. > :53:26.people have experienced cyberbullying, with many I frequent

:53:27. > :53:30.basis. It can lead to anxiety, depression and even suicide. This is

:53:31. > :53:33.the first time social media providers will be legislated for on

:53:34. > :53:40.this issue and will now be required to her processes in in place to

:53:41. > :53:44.respond. Some providers have taken sets to address these issues but the

:53:45. > :53:48.pace of change has to keep up with the scale of the problem. It is

:53:49. > :53:55.absolutely right that the Government has taken decisive legislative acts

:53:56. > :53:57.action and it would be great if the minister could confirming his

:53:58. > :54:02.remarks that there will be full public consultation in the drafting

:54:03. > :54:07.of this code of conduct. We're happy to support the Government's

:54:08. > :54:10.amendment that require Ofcom to review on a regular basis at

:54:11. > :54:13.electronic programme guides in relations to the public service

:54:14. > :54:15.broadcasting and the indications of change in technology that is taking

:54:16. > :54:18.place on public service broadcasting. We are pleased that

:54:19. > :54:24.the minister has confirmed that any necessary powers will be transparent

:54:25. > :54:31.to Ofcom should they be required to intervene on this. -- powers will be

:54:32. > :54:35.transferred. My right honourable friend has helped to make

:54:36. > :54:38.significant progress on tackling abuses in the secondary ticket

:54:39. > :54:41.market. Music fans across the country will be thanking all those

:54:42. > :54:45.involved in this campaign but we recognise there is still more to be

:54:46. > :54:50.done and that the review must be implement it in full in the next

:54:51. > :54:53.Parliament. On each lending and on demand accessibility, we are pleased

:54:54. > :55:01.that the minister has accepted the Lords' amendments. Finally, I would

:55:02. > :55:03.say that whilst the bill has made significant improvements, and it has

:55:04. > :55:08.been a privilege to enter negotiations with the Government,

:55:09. > :55:12.and it also, as the minister says, has been a privilege to negotiate

:55:13. > :55:17.with him, I would just finished by saying this. This legislation is not

:55:18. > :55:20.a bill for the digital economy. The technology sector waited eagerly for

:55:21. > :55:24.the Government's strategy for this crucial area of our economy for well

:55:25. > :55:28.over a year and to say that it was disappointed with a lack of ambition

:55:29. > :55:31.and the strategic direction in both this bill and the Government's

:55:32. > :55:36.eventual strategy would be a gross understatement. Our burgeoning

:55:37. > :55:39.digital economy is the largest in the world and growing at a rate we

:55:40. > :55:42.could hardly have expected even a decade ago but after seven years of

:55:43. > :55:48.a Conservative Government, 12 million people still lack basic

:55:49. > :55:53.digital skills. And businesses do not have access to superfast

:55:54. > :55:56.broadband. Britain doesn't even feature on the fibre broadband

:55:57. > :56:01.league table and 4G mobile coverage lacks firmly behind our major

:56:02. > :56:06.competitors. Too often, workers will find themselves underpaid and

:56:07. > :56:10.exploited by bosses they never even meet and who don't fulfil their

:56:11. > :56:15.basic duties as an employer. People across the countries of the

:56:16. > :56:21.exclusion because I digital technologies behind. Now would have

:56:22. > :56:26.been the time to lay the foundations for a truly world leading economy

:56:27. > :56:31.with digital inclusion at its heart. These foundations must be built and

:56:32. > :56:34.responsibilities. Responsibilities from employers to the workforce,

:56:35. > :56:40.responsibilities of the Digital giants to their users, and the

:56:41. > :56:43.responsibility of Government to create the situation in which

:56:44. > :56:49.digital can transform our economy. There was a alarming lack of

:56:50. > :56:53.ambition for the country, a worrying indication of the Government's

:56:54. > :56:57.priorities in terms of technology as we Brexit. I can assure the House

:56:58. > :57:01.that come June the 9th, when I am preparing to take the minister's

:57:02. > :57:05.place, it is the Labour Party that will have the vision of the

:57:06. > :57:09.infrastructure, skills and finance that will be championing this

:57:10. > :57:15.sector, which is central to the UK's ability to thrive in Brexit. We

:57:16. > :57:22.welcome the improvements that have been made in this bill but I hope

:57:23. > :57:27.that however the next Parliament looks, our digital economy is given

:57:28. > :57:33.far greater prominence and priority. I welcome this bill and the

:57:34. > :57:39.amendments that the Government is supporting from the Lords. This bill

:57:40. > :57:43.does take place, the debate exposed against the background of the UK

:57:44. > :57:47.creative economy, the leading creative and technology economy in

:57:48. > :57:50.Europe. London is by far and away the leading technology city in

:57:51. > :57:55.Europe and one of the major centres of the world. The creative and

:57:56. > :57:59.digital economy has been a major factor in our growth and is a

:58:00. > :58:04.success story in this country. The bill brings in necessary and welcome

:58:05. > :58:08.measures for reform but elderly position of considerable strength

:58:09. > :58:13.where the UK tech economy is the envy of Europe and many others in

:58:14. > :58:16.the world. I particularly thank the Government for the intervention on

:58:17. > :58:22.the question of the resale of ticketing online, the abuse in the

:58:23. > :58:26.secondary market. This follows on the campaign by the honourable lady

:58:27. > :58:31.and my honourable friend in championing this cause. They brought

:58:32. > :58:35.it to the attention of the select committee and we held at first

:58:36. > :58:39.hearing on this question in November just before the report stage debate

:58:40. > :58:43.here in the Commons, with cross-party support we tabled

:58:44. > :58:48.amendment seeking legislative reform to combat the use of robots and the

:58:49. > :58:52.failure of people to correctly identify tickets when sold on

:58:53. > :58:55.secondary markets. The member for West Suffolk said the Government

:58:56. > :59:00.would consider the presentations made and consider amendments to the

:59:01. > :59:04.bill in the Lords. That has taken place so I congratulate him and his

:59:05. > :59:08.Department and the Secretary of State for the interest they have

:59:09. > :59:13.shown in this subject, for the round tables Bates posted and the support

:59:14. > :59:17.given to amend the Bill. It is important that people buying tickets

:59:18. > :59:21.online know what they are buying. I welcome the decision for the

:59:22. > :59:24.investigation to be opened to ensure that the existing consumer

:59:25. > :59:27.protection is being enforced. I welcome what the minister has said,

:59:28. > :59:31.that there should be a unique reference them on a ticket that can

:59:32. > :59:37.be seen when someone purchases it. That does make it easier to identify

:59:38. > :59:41.who the reseller of the ticket is. But others stressed that there is

:59:42. > :59:44.also the question of consumers buying tickets where the seat

:59:45. > :59:48.number, the row number, isn't clear when they buy it. A reference number

:59:49. > :59:52.may not tell them when the theatre they are buying a ticket for and

:59:53. > :59:55.people end up paying inflated prices for a cheap ticket that they could

:59:56. > :59:59.have bought themselves online, and are not aware of that. Many of the

:00:00. > :00:03.venues that have given evidence to the Senate committee has given

:00:04. > :00:08.evidence about that too. That should be referred to the commission to

:00:09. > :00:10.ensure that the existing consumer protection is enforced and action is

:00:11. > :00:15.taken against those who breach it but the Bill should -- the amendment

:00:16. > :00:24.to the bill to make sure that is taken into account is welcome, too.

:00:25. > :00:30.There has been widespread abuse in the market here and it is good to

:00:31. > :00:35.see these reforms will combat that. I would like to touch on the code of

:00:36. > :00:41.practice for online social media platforms. This is out of the debate

:00:42. > :00:45.about Internet safety and in particularly, cyber-bullying. There

:00:46. > :00:48.are many areas of practice of social media companies which are giving

:00:49. > :00:54.cause for concern. One of the reports was linked to the sale of

:00:55. > :00:58.tickets online as well. In particular were social media

:00:59. > :01:02.platforms are promoting and supporting ticketing site selling

:01:03. > :01:06.tickets that had been fraudulently acquired or fraudulently sold. It

:01:07. > :01:10.shouldn't be the case that should be done. It is important to have a

:01:11. > :01:14.debate around the broader debate about social issues like fake news

:01:15. > :01:18.as well. To consider the social obligations social media companies

:01:19. > :01:22.and platforms had to protect users from harmful or misleading content,

:01:23. > :01:26.to make sure there is some fair redress for people when they are the

:01:27. > :01:30.victims of that and for the companies to recognise they do have

:01:31. > :01:34.an obligation. It would be interesting to consider, after the

:01:35. > :01:46.election, when looking at some of these important issues, whether we

:01:47. > :01:49.would consider the role for some broad obligation that can be placed

:01:50. > :01:51.in statute on these companies linked to a failure to act. Whereby

:01:52. > :01:54.somebody has referred to the company, evidence of harmful

:01:55. > :01:59.contents, illicit content on the site and the company has failed to

:02:00. > :02:04.act against it, there is some measure of redress against them as

:02:05. > :02:10.well. This is the first step in looking into the broader obligations

:02:11. > :02:17.from social media companies. It feels only fitting you are in the

:02:18. > :02:26.chair, as I have my last opportunity before we break up and you are

:02:27. > :02:32.therefore my maiden speech. It is lovely to see. Can I welcome the

:02:33. > :02:36.changes to this Bill? I believe we have worked very well, as the

:02:37. > :02:45.minister and the member for Sheffield Healy outlined. He is at

:02:46. > :02:51.least wearing red Sox, so that would be some view you have an influence

:02:52. > :02:55.on him. You are shaking your head but I think the honourable lady is

:02:56. > :03:00.correct. It is correct we should have been able to go on a journey

:03:01. > :03:06.with this bill. When we sat in the Bill committee, there was concern it

:03:07. > :03:10.did need significant improvement. Even though we have managed to put a

:03:11. > :03:15.lot more onto the face of the bill, something we have urged all along, I

:03:16. > :03:21.still think there are some deeply worrying areas that will need to be

:03:22. > :03:27.revisited, in particular around data-sharing. It won't surprise

:03:28. > :03:31.members that know me, I want to exclusively focus my comments on

:03:32. > :03:40.connectivity, given the member for Sheffield Healy has covered every

:03:41. > :03:45.other aspect so wonderfully well. Connectivity is a fundamental issue

:03:46. > :03:50.in rural communities. It is the lifeblood of our communities. It is

:03:51. > :03:55.no longer the ropes, they still complain about them, it is the

:03:56. > :04:02.superhighways of the Internet people are desperately concerned about. We

:04:03. > :04:06.welcome the government's move with a universal service obligation. We

:04:07. > :04:10.would have liked to have seen, as we have heard, more ambition. The 30

:04:11. > :04:19.meg option which was one of the options put forward by Ofcom

:04:20. > :04:24.highlights this was feasible, it was possible. I don't accept the

:04:25. > :04:28.government's argument that it was not possible because of the

:04:29. > :04:32.mechanism itself. If that truly is the case, then perhaps we are

:04:33. > :04:39.choosing the wrong mechanism. If not, choosing the wrong mechanism,

:04:40. > :04:45.but we need to put into place other measures that will ensure that rural

:04:46. > :04:54.communities are not left behind. It is true that in areas in my

:04:55. > :05:02.constituency such as oxen, ten meg would be a huge step forward as they

:05:03. > :05:07.have 12 kilobits. So it will be welcome. But it will be overtaken in

:05:08. > :05:12.Scotland by the Scottish Government's commitment to 30 meg.

:05:13. > :05:15.The Minister has talked this town saying we are showing more ambition

:05:16. > :05:21.in Scotland because this could go further, because it is open. But the

:05:22. > :05:25.end product lets us down. In Scotland, the Scottish Government

:05:26. > :05:30.has committed 230 meg to 1% of the population over the course the

:05:31. > :05:35.current Scottish parliament. When we look at what will happen in terms of

:05:36. > :05:43.the government's offer here, this trigger mechanism of 75%

:05:44. > :05:50.subscription rates. 2016, only 31% were getting 30 meg and the year

:05:51. > :05:54.before, in 2015, it was only 27%. If you are a constituent in England,

:05:55. > :06:03.Wales and Northern Ireland, how long are you going to have to wait before

:06:04. > :06:08.you catch up and get to 75%. What this highlights, it could have been

:06:09. > :06:13.an ambitious measure to close the digital divide, or simply a safety

:06:14. > :06:20.net, it is quite clearly the latter. I think it is fine, so long as it is

:06:21. > :06:24.clearly articulated as such. Because, actually other things can

:06:25. > :06:29.be done. As the Minister knows, I have been a huge advocate of

:06:30. > :06:35.vouchers. I was disappointed about your alternative was not put in. I

:06:36. > :06:40.welcome the government's move at the end of last year when they did bring

:06:41. > :06:47.forward a consultation on vouchers. The consultation, as I understand,

:06:48. > :06:51.is ready to report. I accept that as a valid excuse on this occasion,

:06:52. > :06:57.that we cannot continue that discussion for a number of weeks.

:06:58. > :07:02.But I want to urge the government to live up to its ambition. The

:07:03. > :07:10.Minister says fibre means fibre and fibre is the future. The Chancellor

:07:11. > :07:18.talks about millions for fibre and five GE. What they need to make sure

:07:19. > :07:24.is that it is universally available. Based on the government's strategy,

:07:25. > :07:28.all of it will flow to urban areas without specific policies that

:07:29. > :07:32.ensure it goes into the role rural economy also. The government in its

:07:33. > :07:40.rush to get back up at the fibre league tables will show the same

:07:41. > :07:45.inevitable pragmatism as it has on. I the government to use the

:07:46. > :07:50.opportunity of an election, to put in the manifesto, a commitment to

:07:51. > :07:56.vouchers, a commitment to empowering rural areas because in the Scottish

:07:57. > :07:59.Borders, I have set up a Scottish Borders digital Forum and that

:08:00. > :08:04.brings together all the community councillors. We have been looking at

:08:05. > :08:08.solutions, looking at the options and considering how we not only

:08:09. > :08:16.catch up, but put in place structures that ensure we do not

:08:17. > :08:20.fall behind in future. And it will push fibre slightly further and we

:08:21. > :08:27.will see copper and some wireless. If we get the right support,

:08:28. > :08:32.communities in my constituency who want to do community fibre schemes

:08:33. > :08:37.could leap ahead and that is where the voucher schemes could prove so

:08:38. > :08:42.valuable. So perhaps the Minister, if he is not saving it for some

:08:43. > :08:49.future date, could confirm whether vouchers are something he will

:08:50. > :08:53.support and perhaps fit into this model so constituents in the Borders

:08:54. > :08:58.can actually leap forward in terms of their speeds. Because if we don't

:08:59. > :09:06.show more ambition in this area, actually put more money into it,

:09:07. > :09:10.what you will see is this government's policy winding,

:09:11. > :09:15.cementing in the digital divide, telling constituents in rural areas,

:09:16. > :09:22.you can only get 10 megabits. Asked in the cities, people are getting

:09:23. > :09:27.gigabits. I am sure many honourable members here, not least those in

:09:28. > :09:31.rural constituencies, we would consider that a failure in

:09:32. > :09:35.government policy. Take the opportunity, show the ambition and

:09:36. > :09:40.make sure we realise the full potential of fibre and connectivity

:09:41. > :09:44.into the future. Madam Deputy Speaker, I will close just by

:09:45. > :09:48.thanking again, the way the team have worked here. I would like to

:09:49. > :09:53.have been consulted a bit more, I would have liked to have seen a bit

:09:54. > :09:57.foresight and ambition in the whole scheme, but this Bill represents

:09:58. > :10:06.progress, even as said, they are baby steps. For this final

:10:07. > :10:10.opportunity to speak on this Bill, I am particularly pleased, given all

:10:11. > :10:14.our hard work and the fact the government has made time so we can

:10:15. > :10:23.complete this as a priority during this final week. I will confine my

:10:24. > :10:27.remarks to two provisions, Lords amendments 246 and 247 which address

:10:28. > :10:33.problems in the secondary ticketing market. That I and many music fans

:10:34. > :10:37.have been personally affected. These are proposals we have refined

:10:38. > :10:41.through various stages of the bill committee and discussed at length in

:10:42. > :10:47.the culture, media and sport select committee. I want to thank my

:10:48. > :10:51.honourable friend for helping us here detailed evidence on this

:10:52. > :10:55.important issue and my colleagues on the committee for their tenacious

:10:56. > :10:59.advocacy for both producers and fans of sport, theatre and music, as well

:11:00. > :11:07.as they're constructed work to allow the committee to make some unanimous

:11:08. > :11:15.recommendations at committee stage. Also, would he agree with me, it is

:11:16. > :11:20.regret that the company did not appear in front of the committee to

:11:21. > :11:25.give evidence and people can draw their own conclusions that they did

:11:26. > :11:30.not appear? I agree, it is despicable they have dodged and been

:11:31. > :11:42.slippery around attending the select committee. There have been so many

:11:43. > :11:49.victims of Via Go Go and they should have come and explain themselves. So

:11:50. > :11:55.I agree with my honourable friend. At this juncture, I don't know if

:11:56. > :12:03.you will go on to mention another campaign, and they don't want to

:12:04. > :12:12.steal your thunder if you are... His thunder? Yes, his thunder, I want to

:12:13. > :12:20.mention the number that was mentioned in an e-mail I know you

:12:21. > :12:26.have had, he has had... You would think I would have got the hang of

:12:27. > :12:31.it by now, I have been doing it for 12 years. I will try to get the

:12:32. > :12:37.protocol right. I know she has been in touch and the numbers are

:12:38. > :12:44.shocking. They have already refunded ?51,000 to the victims of Via Go Go

:12:45. > :12:49.and I was astonished that there is still 418 members waiting to join

:12:50. > :12:54.the group. I can assure the honourable lady my thunder is very

:12:55. > :13:02.much intact still and hasn't been stolen. I totally agree, the

:13:03. > :13:07.campaign that Clare Turnham has ran has been exemplary. But she

:13:08. > :13:11.shouldn't have had to run her campaign. The customer services team

:13:12. > :13:16.at Viagogo should have dealt with the complaints that were flooding

:13:17. > :13:22.in. I suspect it is not the last we will have heard of Viagogo in this

:13:23. > :13:29.place. While we have not been able to conclude the enquiry due to the

:13:30. > :13:32.impending dissolution, I hope our successor committee, however it is

:13:33. > :13:37.comprised will adopt the evidence we have heard and continue that work. I

:13:38. > :13:41.would like, it just thank the honourable lady from Sunderland

:13:42. > :13:45.West, who has campaigned for years to get wider attention for the

:13:46. > :13:49.problems with secondary ticketing. Based on the number of people across

:13:50. > :13:53.the country who have shared their stories of being ripped off or

:13:54. > :13:56.missing out on a favourite show because of the practices of

:13:57. > :14:01.parasitical touts, I would imagine there are now a large number of

:14:02. > :14:05.colleagues across this House who have also heard from affected

:14:06. > :14:13.constituents, how these practices are poisoning our cultural wealth,

:14:14. > :14:15.both for fans and creators. Amendment 247 will prohibit breaches

:14:16. > :14:20.of ticket sales limits helping combat touts using bot software to

:14:21. > :14:25.gobble up tickets before genuine fans can get them. I tabled a

:14:26. > :14:28.version of this amendment at committee stage and the select

:14:29. > :14:33.committee tank fully added their names. I'm grateful to ministers, in

:14:34. > :14:38.particular, my honourable friend for West Suffolk, a huge Paul Simon

:14:39. > :14:44.Funk, who I know has had experience is trying to gain Paul Simon

:14:45. > :14:50.tickets, as well as members from the other plays for their cooperation in

:14:51. > :14:53.flushing out the legal details for a workable law. And to the Secretary

:14:54. > :14:59.of State for her work in engaging very closely with the industry. It

:15:00. > :15:04.is particularly important this amendment provides for an unlimited

:15:05. > :15:09.fine when someone is found guilty of this offence. Fans and ticket agents

:15:10. > :15:13.have been engaged in a technological arms race against increasingly

:15:14. > :15:17.sophisticated touts, Madam Deputy Speaker. They can make tens of

:15:18. > :15:25.thousands of profit in one go from one pair of tickets. To prevent fans

:15:26. > :15:29.being fleeced and protect the rights of artists to decide how they want

:15:30. > :15:32.to sell their tickets, we need to make touting a genuinely bad

:15:33. > :15:36.proposition for those seeking to make a quick windfall. Smaller fine

:15:37. > :15:42.simply would not have done this, so I am pleased this law has teeth.

:15:43. > :15:49.Amendment 246 to augment the consumer rights act 2015 provisions

:15:50. > :15:53.that require transparency, declaration of certain transparency

:15:54. > :15:58.to the buyer during ticket resale. We have heard time and time again

:15:59. > :16:02.from people that have bought tickets from touts only to find that they

:16:03. > :16:08.were misled about the validity of the tickets or have been denied

:16:09. > :16:12.entry. Artists and venues who have anti-touting policies but who cannot

:16:13. > :16:17.enforce the policies because touts and resale websites either flout the

:16:18. > :16:22.consumer rights act or are not required under the consumer rights

:16:23. > :16:25.act to declare enough information for them to identify and cancel

:16:26. > :16:29.these tickets. Some of the stories are

:16:30. > :16:36.heart-breaking, Madam Deputy Speaker and one of the worst offenders has

:16:37. > :16:39.be Viagogo, which in addition to often completely ignoring consumer

:16:40. > :16:44.right acts requirements to declare information like the face value of

:16:45. > :16:47.the ticket, as often failed to display to consumetering full price

:16:48. > :16:51.they would be paying for the resale tickets. Fans who thought they could

:16:52. > :16:56.be paying a couple of hundred pounds would end up instead finding that

:16:57. > :16:59.their credit cards have been charged amounts into the thousands. For

:17:00. > :17:03.some, the dire financial straits this put them in has led them into

:17:04. > :17:12.panic attacks and even consideration of suicide. The victims of Viagogo

:17:13. > :17:17.Group we have heard about, has identified 108,000 pounds of refunds

:17:18. > :17:21.owed of which less than half has been refunded.

:17:22. > :17:25.The group has hundreds upon hundreds more ripped off fans waiting to

:17:26. > :17:28.join. Even when a refund is given, people are still left without

:17:29. > :17:32.tickets for events they were excited about. So that's disappointed

:17:33. > :17:37.children and their family day ruined.

:17:38. > :17:41.As was the case for one woman who hoped to surprise her husband with

:17:42. > :17:47.concert tickets when he came home from serving in Afghanistan. The

:17:48. > :17:51.Select Committee invited, as we have heard, Viagogo to respond to our

:17:52. > :17:55.questions, but, as you saw, they left an empty chair. I hope our

:17:56. > :18:01.successor committee does not let this pass. Lord's amendment 246 and

:18:02. > :18:05.the Government amendment to it are important because adding a unique

:18:06. > :18:09.ticket reference number to any ticket resale will both allow

:18:10. > :18:13.consumers to check with the venue in advance of the purchase whether that

:18:14. > :18:17.ticket would be valid and will also allow artists and venues to enforce

:18:18. > :18:21.their terms and conditions and cancel touted tickets.

:18:22. > :18:25.There is no point in making a rule if you can't enforce it and it's

:18:26. > :18:30.high time for touts to learn that they can't simply continue on with

:18:31. > :18:34.impunity. Therefore I would ask that ministers going forward work with

:18:35. > :18:40.the industry to establish in regulations what constitutes a

:18:41. > :18:44.unique ticket number. A number that will be identifiable to venues. If

:18:45. > :18:49.this happens, this is genuine progress and I'm grateful to the

:18:50. > :18:53.Government for getting behind it. However, it was originally included

:18:54. > :18:57.in lore's amendment 246 to also add a requirement to the CRA to list any

:18:58. > :19:01.terms and conditions associated with resale of a ticket and the

:19:02. > :19:07.Government amendment has deleted this provision, contending that it's

:19:08. > :19:11.already covered under section 93-B. What I've learnt seems to indicate

:19:12. > :19:16.that this is significantly less clear. An unequivocal statement from

:19:17. > :19:20.the minister here today that this is the case would be a welcome step. I

:19:21. > :19:23.would also be grate if you feel we could look further into this in the

:19:24. > :19:28.future. Going back to the point about a law being only as good as

:19:29. > :19:33.its enforcement, one problem we have is that there have not yet been any

:19:34. > :19:38.prosecutions under the consumer rights act 2015 for violations to do

:19:39. > :19:45.with secondary ticketing. Instead, the CMA is undertaking a review. The

:19:46. > :19:49.review's welcome and should I be re-elected, I will be most

:19:50. > :19:57.interested in the conclusions of that review.

:19:58. > :20:00.But there have clearly been many a myriad violations to do with ticket

:20:01. > :20:06.resaling. Without having been able to test the laws fudge shucking in

:20:07. > :20:09.court, we don't know if it's effective and fit for purpose --

:20:10. > :20:13.laws functioning in court. Not to mention, it's not serving as the

:20:14. > :20:19.robust protection for consumers this it was intended to be. An example.

:20:20. > :20:24.Metallica, a group I'm sure you are very familiar with as a very popular

:20:25. > :20:28.UK tour coming up this autumn. There are strict conditions attached to

:20:29. > :20:32.the tickets, including that the lead booker must enter with others in

:20:33. > :20:37.their party which is limited to a McMum of four, they must present

:20:38. > :20:40.photo ID matching the name on the purchase -- maximum of four. All the

:20:41. > :20:46.conditions have been clearly listed by the primary sellers which are

:20:47. > :20:52.Ticketmaster and the Ticket Factory. The fan fair alliance who does great

:20:53. > :20:57.work in this area has found multiple listings on Ticketmaster's secondary

:20:58. > :21:03.sites, Get Me In and Seat Wave, as well as Stub Hub and Viagogo which

:21:04. > :21:07.do not note the conditions. It's a disaster waiting to happen for fans

:21:08. > :21:11.if the venues follow through on enforcing the conditions. So whether

:21:12. > :21:16.the problem is one of enforcement of the CRA or one of the CRA being

:21:17. > :21:20.unclear, it certainly needs sorting out. We are not currently seeing the

:21:21. > :21:23.conditions being consistently declared.

:21:24. > :21:27.I personally cannot see how it would be harmful to make the consumer

:21:28. > :21:31.rights act absolutely clear on this at this juncture and I would

:21:32. > :21:35.appreciate the minister's clarification. While we have thus

:21:36. > :21:38.achieved great progress in this area, there do remain problems

:21:39. > :21:42.within secondary ticketing to consider in the future. There seems

:21:43. > :21:47.to be a number of dodgy practices yet to be investigated. This week I

:21:48. > :21:52.heard from someone who'd recently resold spare tickets on Stub Hub. He

:21:53. > :21:56.told me he priced the tickets below other sellers, closer to their face

:21:57. > :22:01.value, and instead of a fan buying them, the buyer tells me it was Stub

:22:02. > :22:07.Hub themselves that actually bought the ticket, presumably to resell for

:22:08. > :22:13.an even greater profit. Another issue, Madam Deputy Speaker is the

:22:14. > :22:16.potential use of Google ad words, ticket sellers including Viagogo

:22:17. > :22:21.spend top dollar to advertise themselves highly in Google search

:22:22. > :22:24.results, often masquerading as official ticket sellers when they

:22:25. > :22:28.have not been authorised by the venues or the event organisers at

:22:29. > :22:33.all and are selling tickets that are invalid if resold. I understand from

:22:34. > :22:36.Google that if they wish to be vigilant about deceptive

:22:37. > :22:40.advertising, but that to act on these issues, they need evidence.

:22:41. > :22:43.They need examples reporting to them, either from consumers

:22:44. > :22:47.themselves who've been turned away from events after buying a ticket

:22:48. > :22:51.from a company using a sponsored link on Google or from the

:22:52. > :22:55.Advertising Standards Authority. These are not yet been forthcoming

:22:56. > :23:01.thus far. To conclude, Madam Deputy Speaker,

:23:02. > :23:06.and I see the joy on the whip's face as I say I'm about to conclude - I

:23:07. > :23:13.would like... There is more if you would like me to continue.

:23:14. > :23:22.Metallica's lyrics. I won't be quoting that. To conclude, Madam

:23:23. > :23:25.Deputy Speaker I would like to thank ministers, the Secretary of State

:23:26. > :23:31.and colleagues across this House for helping to make some real progress

:23:32. > :23:37.in this Bill and I look forward to seeing these measures enacted.

:23:38. > :23:45.Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and it's a pleasure to follow the

:23:46. > :23:48.honourable gentleman for Selby and Ainsty who I've gotten to know very

:23:49. > :23:52.well over our time campaigning on this in this and the last Parliament

:23:53. > :24:01.on this issue so it's a real delight to see that we have got to this

:24:02. > :24:05.stage as I rise to speak in respect to clauses in respect to sale of

:24:06. > :24:10.tickets. It's with great delight that I welcome the news that these

:24:11. > :24:14.will be accepted and make it on to the substitute yew book. It goes

:24:15. > :24:21.without saying that we'd not be where we are if it was not for the

:24:22. > :24:24.cross party campaigning. None of this would have happened without the

:24:25. > :24:29.campaigning of myself and others over the years. This is where it

:24:30. > :24:34.gets into a very long list so I hope the House will indulge me, including

:24:35. > :24:37.the steadfast received by my own frontbench, over recent years on

:24:38. > :24:42.this issue and the excellent speech we had from the Shadow minister

:24:43. > :24:45.today. I do sincerely hope she's returned to continue in this vein

:24:46. > :24:49.too and the support from the other side of the House, most notably in

:24:50. > :24:56.the last Parliament by the former member for Hove and Port Slade who I

:24:57. > :25:04.know is a friend of the honourable member for Selby and Ainsty who,

:25:05. > :25:08.along with myself, we founded the All Party Group on ticket abuse and

:25:09. > :25:16.chaired that. In recent years, by the member for Selby and Ainsty and

:25:17. > :25:20.Folkestone and Hythe, have worked together with other colleagues. I

:25:21. > :25:27.can't remember his constituency but he's sitting over there with the red

:25:28. > :25:32.tie. I sound like David Dimbleby now. But we've worked tirelessly on

:25:33. > :25:36.this issue through the Culture, Media and Sports Select Committee

:25:37. > :25:44.with their investigation into the secondary ticketing market. I think

:25:45. > :25:48.the other honourable - sorry I've just given you another job on

:25:49. > :25:51.another Select Committee - I sincerely hope this issue will be

:25:52. > :25:54.picked up again in the next Parliament so all of the hard work

:25:55. > :25:59.that's been done so far on this inquiry is not lost and I'm sure it

:26:00. > :26:02.will be. I want to acknowledge the minister, the Minister for West

:26:03. > :26:07.Suffolk for his customary Goodhue four and willingness to listen, that

:26:08. > :26:13.ensured that, along with the Shadow frontbench and members in the Lord's

:26:14. > :26:16.and member who is've brought the amendments at a satisfactory

:26:17. > :26:19.conclusion for us all was reached and of course the Secretary of State

:26:20. > :26:24.for Culture, Media and Sport who I'm pleased to see is in the chamber

:26:25. > :26:29.today with us. She'll recall that she met with myself and the former

:26:30. > :26:33.member for Hove and port Slade, I think that was over three years ago,

:26:34. > :26:37.to discuss the fraud aspect of all of this when she was a Home Office

:26:38. > :26:41.Minister, proving that ministers have long memories. So those

:26:42. > :26:46.meetings are worth it. I give way to the minister. I wanted to respond to

:26:47. > :26:53.a point that she and my right honourable friend raised. We are

:26:54. > :26:57.clear that section 93 of the consumer rights act requires

:26:58. > :27:03.secondary sellers to provide information on the restrictions on

:27:04. > :27:08.resale. It was very clear on the face of that Bill. Excellent. I was

:27:09. > :27:12.going to come on to that, so I'll have to make sure not to press him

:27:13. > :27:17.on that issue again because he's answered the question that I was

:27:18. > :27:22.going to follow on from the honourable member for Selby and

:27:23. > :27:25.Ainsty. I'm pleased he's put that on-the-record. I commend the

:27:26. > :27:31.sterling work by colleagues on all sides of the House of Lords. Firstly

:27:32. > :27:34.to Lord Pendry, Labour peer who way back in 1997 was shadow Sports

:27:35. > :27:39.Minister, was the first to coin the phrase, put fans first. So I can't

:27:40. > :27:45.claim credit for that one, I didn't invent it. He campaigned on this

:27:46. > :27:49.issue way back then. Sadly for him and for us today, he was not made a

:27:50. > :27:54.minister in the Government that followed so he wasn't able to ensure

:27:55. > :28:02.this happened 20 years ago, showing that this day has indeed been a very

:28:03. > :28:05.long time coming. More recently Lord Stevenson and Baroness Hayter, Lord

:28:06. > :28:11.Clement Jones from the Liberal Democrats and the amazing talent of

:28:12. > :28:17.the late Baroness Flint who laid the first amendments in the Lord's. The

:28:18. > :28:20.House knows she sadly passed away a few short months ago. She was a joy

:28:21. > :28:23.to work with and without this campaign I wouldn't have gotten the

:28:24. > :28:28.chance to know her and I wish I could have had that privilege for

:28:29. > :28:34.longer. I want to give a special mention to Conservative peer and

:28:35. > :28:39.former Sports Minister Lord minutian whose tenacity at the end of 2015

:28:40. > :28:44.ensure wed got the measures that we did in the statute book in the

:28:45. > :28:48.consumer rights act. We wouldn't have progressed to where we are now

:28:49. > :28:51.without him, as we'd still be at base camp waiting for the weather to

:28:52. > :28:57.shift. He's been the most amazing allie. All fans across the country

:28:58. > :29:01.who're not ripped off in the future should know his name and thank him.

:29:02. > :29:05.Thank yous over to back to the business at hand. The two new

:29:06. > :29:10.clauses will take us one step closer to making sure fans are put first in

:29:11. > :29:14.the second market, something that has been sorely lacking for years.

:29:15. > :29:18.At this point I was going to be pressing the minister on the point

:29:19. > :29:22.he's clarified so I'll thank him again for doing that. The acceptance

:29:23. > :29:28.of the clauses will be a fitting way to end this current Parliament and

:29:29. > :29:32.I'm confident any Reds it you issue -- Reds it you issues will be picked

:29:33. > :29:37.up after the general election. None of us can know what will happen come

:29:38. > :29:41.polling day but if the good people of Washington and Sunderland elect

:29:42. > :29:44.me and other honourable members across the House, I'll personally

:29:45. > :29:49.get right back to business and pick up where we leave Office today on

:29:50. > :29:56.this issue because there's plenty more to continue campaigning on. We

:29:57. > :30:03.are far from our cross party vision on a market to ensure that fans are

:30:04. > :30:07.not ripped off. The consumer markets authority are investigating, the

:30:08. > :30:14.chair of the Select Committee mentioned, to supporting the victims

:30:15. > :30:19.of Viagogo, who've been I unfairly ripped off disgracefully by one of

:30:20. > :30:21.the worst players in this market who disgracefully did not attend the

:30:22. > :30:26.Select Committee when they were called to do and that is definitely

:30:27. > :30:33.something that we should revisit and see if there's ways to force

:30:34. > :30:36.companies who have the head office overseas to be able to come and give

:30:37. > :30:41.evidence. It seems wrong that they are able to evade that by saying

:30:42. > :30:49.they are not based in the UK. Well all their customers are.

:30:50. > :30:53.And also ensuring the recommendations are implemented

:30:54. > :30:57.fully and effectively. The list could go on, but those are just a

:30:58. > :31:02.few of the many issues that must be picked up in the next Parliament.

:31:03. > :31:06.Finally, I want to thank the Minister, the Secretary of State and

:31:07. > :31:09.particularly my front bench colleagues and all other honourable

:31:10. > :31:14.members across the House and colleagues in the other place, who

:31:15. > :31:18.have committed so much time to this campaign. For the early part of the

:31:19. > :31:23.last eight years I felt like a loan Warrier on this issue, but it has

:31:24. > :31:28.been welcomed to see momentum build and see colleagues from both houses

:31:29. > :31:32.built around this campaign. This campaign cannot be slowed when the

:31:33. > :31:36.newly elected House and returns in June. Fans deserve for us to be

:31:37. > :31:41.campaigning for them at every opportunity. Let's all commit today

:31:42. > :31:46.to continue to fight for them until this market is properly cleaned up.

:31:47. > :31:53.Then, our work will be done. Nigel Huddleston. It is a pleasure to

:31:54. > :31:57.speak today because I like my friend from the opposite side of the

:31:58. > :32:01.chamber, and I said that with sincerity, you were in the chair

:32:02. > :32:04.when I gave my maiden speech as well, so my final speech of this

:32:05. > :32:09.parliament will also be with you in the chair. I support this bill

:32:10. > :32:13.wholeheartedly because it is a very consumer friendly bill from

:32:14. > :32:17.beginning to end. It will be of extreme benefit to my constituents,

:32:18. > :32:26.it will improve their businesses and they will have more fulfilling

:32:27. > :32:28.careers. I would like to highlight the points made around the universal

:32:29. > :32:31.service obligation around switching of mobile phones, which has been an

:32:32. > :32:36.ongoing debate for quite a while and it is good to see resolution on that

:32:37. > :32:40.matter. And all the initiatives from Digital government. And I appreciate

:32:41. > :32:46.the amendments that have been suggested, and agreed that those

:32:47. > :32:50.that have been accepted there to improve the bill. I would like to

:32:51. > :32:57.say, echoing the comments of many of the chamber here, in the development

:32:58. > :33:02.of this bill and on Bill committee, it has been very nice for me as a

:33:03. > :33:08.relatively new MP to see Parliament working at its best. When we work

:33:09. > :33:11.across parties, we have meetings, discussions, we disagree

:33:12. > :33:16.respectfully, but become too reasonable conclusions because we

:33:17. > :33:20.have the same end in tent in mind. We see the theatre of Prime

:33:21. > :33:23.Minister's Questions and others, but Parliament does a lot of work when

:33:24. > :33:29.we work cross-party and I would like to echo the words of many here by

:33:30. > :33:33.praising the work done by many colleagues over many years, before I

:33:34. > :33:38.came into the House of, and is, to make significant progress on an

:33:39. > :33:44.important bill. The honourable member for Sheffield Healy, I will

:33:45. > :33:50.disagree with respectively. I would not want to run down the Digital

:33:51. > :33:56.economy. This bill will enable us to be even more successful. We need to

:33:57. > :34:00.make sure we have this bill so we can continue with that success. We

:34:01. > :34:03.shouldn't take our digital leadership for granted so measures

:34:04. > :34:07.in this bill will be of huge advantage. The Minister mentioned

:34:08. > :34:11.about further worked been required in several areas. I agree with him,

:34:12. > :34:17.particularly with Bill capping and the topics around the changes,

:34:18. > :34:21.significant changes required in secondary ticketing. The devil will

:34:22. > :34:24.be in the detail in terms of secondary ticketing changes. I

:34:25. > :34:29.understand the Russian offer having a booking number or unique reference

:34:30. > :34:33.number but we do have to be careful but doesn't have the unintended

:34:34. > :34:37.consequence of potentially opening up to more fraud. We have to be

:34:38. > :34:42.careful about the details of that bill. Or the element of the bill.

:34:43. > :34:48.Finally, I would like to make my final comments around this area of

:34:49. > :34:53.Internet and social platforms. This is something I know a fair bit

:34:54. > :34:57.about, many of you know I worked for Google before coming into

:34:58. > :35:01.Parliament. It is a great company, as are all the Internet players.

:35:02. > :35:07.They do a lot of good, but they need to take their responsibilities more

:35:08. > :35:11.seriously than they have of late. I welcome the changes and significant

:35:12. > :35:15.progress has been made in terms of child exploitation images and the

:35:16. > :35:20.age verification. It was alarming to learn about 1.4 million people under

:35:21. > :35:27.the age of 18 accessed pornography just last year in the UK. But the

:35:28. > :35:32.scale of inappropriate content online now is huge. YouTube has 400

:35:33. > :35:39.hours of video uploaded every single minute of every single day. A lot of

:35:40. > :35:43.that content is perfectly acceptable, fun, entertaining,

:35:44. > :35:47.newsworthy and so on. But some of it is inappropriate. And the scale of

:35:48. > :35:53.the inappropriate is shocking. And this comes from somebody who worked

:35:54. > :35:57.in the sector. Every day, Google removes 200,000 videos that have

:35:58. > :36:01.been flagged as inappropriate. 92 million videos have been removed by

:36:02. > :36:09.Google as deemed inappropriate from Google as deemed inappropriate from

:36:10. > :36:10.you tube last year. Clearly, the other social media platforms as

:36:11. > :36:27.well, particularly Facebook... If that means they have to spend

:36:28. > :36:33.millions, tens of millions or billions working on making sure that

:36:34. > :36:37.we, our children and families are protected and can operate online in

:36:38. > :36:41.safety, then so be it. I would prefer them to the days of their own

:36:42. > :36:47.volition. I would prefer them to do this themselves and invest

:36:48. > :36:52.considerably in both technology and human resources bodies to make

:36:53. > :36:55.judgments and assessments as to the appropriate of content online. If

:36:56. > :37:00.they do not take this action themselves, I hope I can work with

:37:01. > :37:03.colleagues in a cross-party manner when we hopefully come back after

:37:04. > :37:08.this parliament and make sure that if they don't act themselves, then

:37:09. > :37:18.we will take action for them. Thank you. Tom Elliott. I hate to almost

:37:19. > :37:23.be someone who repeats things, but I think you were in the chair when I

:37:24. > :37:34.made my maiden speech two years at no. I hope it is not a bad omen. I

:37:35. > :37:39.am at a disadvantage to some members who are on the committee and have a

:37:40. > :37:44.better insight to the bill. I will restrict my contribution to the

:37:45. > :37:51.Lords amendment number one. I am in support and agreement with the

:37:52. > :37:58.member for Berwickshire and Selkirk. We come from rural areas even though

:37:59. > :38:02.he is from Scotland and I am from Northern Ireland. I note the

:38:03. > :38:06.minister said at one stage the bill was unfinished business. I think

:38:07. > :38:10.what you will find, as time goes forward, it will continue to be

:38:11. > :38:18.unfinished because technology is moving so fast and so quick, we will

:38:19. > :38:22.see more demands no matter what area and it is the one concern I have

:38:23. > :38:29.around the bill because it may not be future proofed. I accept there is

:38:30. > :38:33.the movement for reducing the proposal from 30 megabytes per

:38:34. > :38:42.second down to ten for broadband to be a practical move. I understand

:38:43. > :38:46.that argument. One of the reasons we rejected Lords amendment number one

:38:47. > :38:50.in the form put forward by the other place was precisely because it was

:38:51. > :38:54.not future proofed and it had specific figures on the face of the

:38:55. > :39:02.bill. The powers in the bill require of comp to review speed so as

:39:03. > :39:13.technology advances, so can the demands of the service obligation.

:39:14. > :39:19.Thank you for that clarification. If we can get 10 megabytes per second

:39:20. > :39:27.in South Tyrone, that is great because you have a huge job of work.

:39:28. > :39:30.In fact, currently there are less than 40% of businesses and

:39:31. > :39:37.households that have access to 10 megabits per second in Fermanagh and

:39:38. > :39:41.South Tyrone, my constituency. If we can get up to that great, I say

:39:42. > :39:45.bring it on and the sooner the better, because I want to see

:39:46. > :39:51.businesses flourishing. And in an area that is very rural, many of the

:39:52. > :39:54.online agricultural forums, many of the application forms for

:39:55. > :39:59.agriculture now have to be done online. It is a requirement. We just

:40:00. > :40:05.don't have the access to the high-speed broadband to do that.

:40:06. > :40:10.Happy to give way. Will he accept from me there are rural areas in

:40:11. > :40:14.England as well and whilst the government are to be congratulated,

:40:15. > :40:18.does he agree with me we must do more to ensure the areas that are

:40:19. > :40:24.geographically isolated do not remain digitally isolated? I

:40:25. > :40:29.absolutely agree with the member and he has my full support in trying to

:40:30. > :40:35.resolve that matter. I suppose I will give one example, my young son

:40:36. > :40:40.had a new PS for the Christmas 16 months ago. And I had promised him I

:40:41. > :40:44.would download a game for Christmas and I gave him the voucher on

:40:45. > :40:49.Christmas morning, hopefully he would have it downloaded by

:40:50. > :40:54.lunchtime. He didn't have it downloaded for New Year's Day. Ten

:40:55. > :41:00.days it took to download the game, which was some kind of simulator. It

:41:01. > :41:04.is areas like that that is frustrating to young people. Also

:41:05. > :41:09.those young people need to do their classwork and their student work and

:41:10. > :41:14.they rely on line, there is so much reliance on line. I wanted to put on

:41:15. > :41:18.record my appreciation for bringing the bill forward and progressing it

:41:19. > :41:22.at this stage because it is important. But I also accept the

:41:23. > :41:29.Minister's suggestion that the Lords amendment wasn't future proofed, but

:41:30. > :41:33.can I say to the Minister and the Department in future, we must look

:41:34. > :41:40.at this on a regular basis because changes will be needed and will be

:41:41. > :41:45.required. Thank you very much. I wanted to make three sets of

:41:46. > :41:49.comments, I won't retain the House too long. The first is to set out

:41:50. > :41:54.for the benefit of the front bench, the specific concern I still feel

:41:55. > :41:58.and they did address this around these definitional points, the

:41:59. > :42:02.second is to talk about how far we have and the third is to join into

:42:03. > :42:07.some of the statements about how cross-party working can deliver in

:42:08. > :42:15.this place. Just to focus and I know both ministers did receive a letter

:42:16. > :42:18.from me on this, but the part three amendments, I understand the

:42:19. > :42:20.processes as to where we got to on this. When we had briefings, we were

:42:21. > :42:29.concerned these definitional questions were not thrashed out. I

:42:30. > :42:33.do want to commend the ministers, unlike some of the Commons from the

:42:34. > :42:36.opposition front bench, I do think this bill was greatly improved by

:42:37. > :42:40.the current ministerial team and there was a willingness to engage,

:42:41. > :42:45.listen and improve the bill and I felt we were in a much better place

:42:46. > :42:52.at the end of the committee stage than we were when we started. But we

:42:53. > :42:56.had this could concern over the definition of prohibited material.

:42:57. > :43:01.Prohibited material is clear definition, it is appropriate, it is

:43:02. > :43:07.workable, it is guided by five different statutes. Only one of

:43:08. > :43:12.which is the obscene publications act from 1959. It is from that act

:43:13. > :43:19.that came the concern about, and I will not trouble Hansard in terms of

:43:20. > :43:23.checking up, but checking whether certain acts were performed, once

:43:24. > :43:27.considered to be illegal, are now not considered to be illegal and

:43:28. > :43:32.therefore should not be captured by this definition of prohibited. I

:43:33. > :43:37.think it was the concern over those specific items that led to what I

:43:38. > :43:42.think is effectively rather narrowed down the focus too much to the

:43:43. > :43:46.definition of extreme pornography, which essentially leaves a lot of

:43:47. > :43:51.material in the middle that is not currently captured by existing

:43:52. > :43:56.statute, but is considered to be damaging, at worst, or

:43:57. > :44:00.life-threatening in some cases, all the way down the damaging. For

:44:01. > :44:05.example, my reading of the current definitions means the definition of

:44:06. > :44:11.extreme pornography makes two things, all but the most extreme

:44:12. > :44:15.forms of sexual violence. By that I am referencing choking pornography,

:44:16. > :44:24.with the extreme, multiple sexual abuse, sexual activity on one woman

:44:25. > :44:28.or man and also, non-photographic child sexual images, including

:44:29. > :44:33.animation. That is a thing that concerns us because we have worked

:44:34. > :44:38.so hard to outlaw this whole area without any conversations about what

:44:39. > :44:44.is permissible. It is an area we would all support removing entirely

:44:45. > :44:48.from the Internet. It was a great privilege to work with her on the

:44:49. > :44:53.committee. I wonder if she would share my concern we don't have

:44:54. > :44:56.enough information, clear, research-based evidence about the

:44:57. > :45:01.long-term impact on viewing all different sorts of pornography and

:45:02. > :45:06.of appearing in it. The honourable lady, who I think has worked

:45:07. > :45:10.assiduously in this area, and I thank her for many levels of

:45:11. > :45:14.conversation and improvements of the building did together. But she is

:45:15. > :45:19.right, in some ways we are conducting an unknown experiment

:45:20. > :45:23.with child-rearing, with the way young people absorb information

:45:24. > :45:26.about the world. It is not for me to pontificate about what might or

:45:27. > :45:32.might not be harmful. If you look at the research which has been done,

:45:33. > :45:39.they have shown some of these items that are now permitted behind an age

:45:40. > :45:47.verification screen. And between 74 and 81% of people to whom those

:45:48. > :45:51.images are shown, are in favour of preventing any access to those

:45:52. > :46:00.images. It is a representation of men and women and the proportion of

:46:01. > :46:04.women is the Highers. We are using prohibited material in the off-line

:46:05. > :46:11.world and we are now using a narrower definition of extreme poor

:46:12. > :46:16.pornography in the off-line world. 82% of people think the regime

:46:17. > :46:22.should be as tough or tougher for online material given its ease of

:46:23. > :46:25.access to generation we are trying to protect.

:46:26. > :46:31.I want to intervene to put on record to the honourable member for devises

:46:32. > :46:36.who's approved this Bill with no end to her work on it, along with

:46:37. > :46:39.others. But just to reiterate the point, what is illegal offline is

:46:40. > :46:45.illegal online. What we have been doing in this Bill is bringing in

:46:46. > :46:50.age verification for online and the enforcement of the need for that age

:46:51. > :46:54.verification which of course can only take place online because it's

:46:55. > :46:58.about stopping people being able the view it online. So the point that

:46:59. > :47:02.she's just made I think is taken care of. As for the definitions, we

:47:03. > :47:08.did have to use an existing definition but, as I said in my

:47:09. > :47:15.speech, we regard this as unfinished business and the report that we've

:47:16. > :47:19.accepted as an amendment which has to report after the consultation,

:47:20. > :47:22.the Secretary of State has to report after consultation between 12 and 18

:47:23. > :47:26.months after the passage of this Bill will be the opportunity to take

:47:27. > :47:32.all of this research into account and get to a good settlement that

:47:33. > :47:38.has strong support behind it, rather than doing it in a rush just before

:47:39. > :47:41.the disillusion of Parliament. I do appreciate the minister's comments

:47:42. > :47:45.on that and he neatly anticipates what I was coming on to say which is

:47:46. > :47:50.that I have no intention of causing trouble, if you like, at 24 stage of

:47:51. > :47:54.the Bill because we know from the despatch box about his firm

:47:55. > :47:57.commitment to make sure the definitional questions are

:47:58. > :48:02.established in a way all parties can agree to support. Yes, of course. I

:48:03. > :48:10.thank the honourable lady for giving way a second time. One further

:48:11. > :48:13.concern I wish to place on record that was remaining unresolved, which

:48:14. > :48:17.is that regardless of the appearance about the Acts it's what is

:48:18. > :48:20.happening about the welfare and safety of those who might have been

:48:21. > :48:24.violently pushed into pornography which we may not be able to tell

:48:25. > :48:29.from the viewing of it. I'm very concerneded about the effect that

:48:30. > :48:34.has. My right honourable friend raises an important point again.

:48:35. > :48:37.Having material like this easily available, in some cases marketed

:48:38. > :48:42.for commercial purposes, many would believe, and evidence is starting to

:48:43. > :48:47.emerge, is extremely damaging for people who're viewing it,

:48:48. > :48:51.particularly under-age people and those coerced into performing in

:48:52. > :48:54.those acts, but I think the honourable lady hopefully shares my

:48:55. > :48:57.relief and satisfaction that the Government front pen. Does accept

:48:58. > :49:02.that and is prepared to continue to look at these things and to look at

:49:03. > :49:08.this definition of what actually to whom is this material harmful. That

:49:09. > :49:11.brings me on to my second point which is how far we've come. I

:49:12. > :49:16.wanted to pay tribute to so many colleagues in this place, some of

:49:17. > :49:20.whom are not in place, some of whom are standing down, like the

:49:21. > :49:23.honourable lady for Slough who, with me led the cross party inquiry into

:49:24. > :49:28.the original question as to what we should do in this space and, in the

:49:29. > :49:31.face of much provarietication and push back, not from within this

:49:32. > :49:37.place, primarily from industry, managed to deliver a result that was

:49:38. > :49:41.both effective and proportional. I do just want to thank all colleagues

:49:42. > :49:45.and ministers and Shadow ministers for continuing to work with that

:49:46. > :49:48.commitment. What I have found and I wanted to just reference the

:49:49. > :49:52.conversations that my right honourable friend the member for

:49:53. > :49:59.Hastings has been having around banning extremist material or making

:50:00. > :50:05.it more difficult to disseminate, in this space, none of us are

:50:06. > :50:09.technoexperts but I think we understand what our constituents

:50:10. > :50:12.want. Always here you get people saying, don't trouble your heads

:50:13. > :50:17.about the Internet you innocent people, you know nothing about this,

:50:18. > :50:20.how can you possibly stand up and talk about stopping extremist

:50:21. > :50:23.material, you don't really understand the Internet, it's a

:50:24. > :50:29.special place and should be different. I've never understood why

:50:30. > :50:35.we should allow the Internet to be a special form of content deassembly

:50:36. > :50:38.nation when we willingly accept self-regulation and Government

:50:39. > :50:41.regulation of other forms of media. What has been so good about the

:50:42. > :50:46.journey we have been on since 2012, is that we have seen an increase in

:50:47. > :50:50.this corporate social responsibility. We have seen

:50:51. > :50:55.Internet service providers led by Talktalk and Sky and joined rapidly

:50:56. > :50:59.by the others, really go out there and put in family-friendly filters

:51:00. > :51:05.and invest in education about online safety. I was delighted to see some

:51:06. > :51:11.of the proposals for PSHE changes that would include this conversation

:51:12. > :51:17.about how to be a safe place. I wanted to report back from a visit I

:51:18. > :51:21.conducted to the Internet watch foundation in Cambridge who've

:51:22. > :51:24.benefitted substantially from increased funding from industries as

:51:25. > :51:28.a result of the work we all did which hassenabled them to go into

:51:29. > :51:31.places like the dark web to places where they know people are

:51:32. > :51:35.exchanging child abuse imagery and block it and take it down. They are

:51:36. > :51:38.extremely grateful for the work that the Government has continued to do

:51:39. > :51:43.and the support that they have received right across the House. I

:51:44. > :51:47.also share the concerns that my right honourable friend raised. I

:51:48. > :51:52.still think there are companies out there who hide behind A the legal

:51:53. > :51:56.jurisdiction in the United States and therefore their adherence if you

:51:57. > :52:04.like, to a different set of freedom of speech standards and B, the

:52:05. > :52:10.slightly shoulder shrugging of saying, well, if you put it in law,

:52:11. > :52:13.we'll abide. I'm afraid the time is running out for companies like

:52:14. > :52:18.Facebook to say we are sorry a photograph of a man hanging his

:52:19. > :52:25.18-month-old baby, a video was on the Internet, if they can be so

:52:26. > :52:29.clever as to make an advert for a specific colour of shoes, follow me

:52:30. > :52:35.around the Internet because I've browsed it once, almost in

:52:36. > :52:37.perpetuity, I think they have the technology, pictorial and IP

:52:38. > :52:42.addressing technology - they'll probably say she doesn't know her

:52:43. > :52:46.words again - I'm not a technoperson, I'm a politician, but

:52:47. > :52:50.there is stuff out there for clever people who can make this happen if

:52:51. > :52:55.they wanted to and they should not looking for collective individuals

:52:56. > :52:58.or Governments to do so. In conclusion I would like to say once

:52:59. > :53:04.again, put on record, my thanks to all in this place who have

:53:05. > :53:08.campaigned with me together I think we have really made a difference. My

:53:09. > :53:12.thanks to the front pen. Who've taken this seriously and worked very

:53:13. > :53:18.hard to deliver real progress in the area and I guess I'll say I'm happy

:53:19. > :53:22.to sign up again should I be lucky enough to be re-elected in a few

:53:23. > :53:25.weeks' time to continue this journey particularly around this

:53:26. > :53:31.definitional clarity that I think would enhance the space even

:53:32. > :53:36.further. Thank you. -- this place even further. The question is that

:53:37. > :53:39.the Lords disagree with the amendment. As many of that opinion

:53:40. > :53:45.say aye. Of the contrary no. The ayes have it, the ayes have it. With

:53:46. > :53:49.the leave of the House we'll take Government amendments A-to-C in lieu

:53:50. > :53:57.of Lord's amendment 1 together. Minister to move formally. To move

:53:58. > :54:04.formally. A-to-C in lieu of Lord's amendment to be made. Those in

:54:05. > :54:11.favour say aye, those in favour say no. The ayes have it. The move

:54:12. > :54:19.formally? To move formally. Move for this amendment. As many are of that

:54:20. > :54:30.opinion say aye. Those not in favour say no. Theaways have it. The

:54:31. > :54:35.question is that amendment A in lieu of Lord's amendment B. With the

:54:36. > :54:39.leave of the House we'll take Lord's amendments 3-39 together. Minister

:54:40. > :54:44.to move formally to agree. To move formally. The question is that this

:54:45. > :54:48.House agreed with the Lords and amendments 3-39, as many of that

:54:49. > :54:53.opinion say aye, of the contrary no. The ayes have it, the ayes have it.

:54:54. > :54:57.The motion to disagree with the Lords in their amendment 40. To move

:54:58. > :55:01.formally. The question is this House disagrees with the Lords in their

:55:02. > :55:05.amendment in 40. As many of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary no.

:55:06. > :55:09.The ayes have it. Gosh, quite a long way to go! With

:55:10. > :55:14.the leave of the House we'll take a moment. A and B in lieu of Lord's

:55:15. > :55:20.amendment 40 together. Minister to move formally to agree. The move

:55:21. > :55:23.formally. A and B in lieu of Lord's amendment 40 be made. In opinion say

:55:24. > :55:28.aye. To the contrary no. The ayes have it.

:55:29. > :55:34.With the leave of the House we'll take Lord ice amendments 41-236

:55:35. > :55:39.together. Minister to move formally. Thank goodness for that, to move

:55:40. > :55:44.formally. The question is this House agrees with the amendments. As many

:55:45. > :55:48.are of that opinion say aye. To the contrary no. The ayes have it. With

:55:49. > :55:55.the leave of the House we'll take the motions to disagree with the

:55:56. > :55:59.Lords amendments 237-239 together. Minister to move formally to

:56:00. > :56:04.disagree. To move formally. The question is this House disagrees

:56:05. > :56:08.with the Lords and their amendments 237 to 239, as many of that opinion

:56:09. > :56:14.say aye, of the contrary no. The ayes have it. With the leave of the

:56:15. > :56:19.house we'll take 240 and 241 together. Minister to move formally

:56:20. > :56:24.to agree. To move formally. The question is this House agreed with

:56:25. > :56:33.the amendments 240 and 241, as many of that opinion say aye, to the

:56:34. > :56:38.contrary no. The ayes have it. Move to amendment 242. To move formally.

:56:39. > :56:42.As many of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary no. The ayes have it.

:56:43. > :56:46.Minister to move formally that amendment A in lieu of Lord's

:56:47. > :56:51.amendment 242 be made. Move formally. The question is the

:56:52. > :56:55.amendment A in lieu of Lord's amendment 242 be made. Of as many of

:56:56. > :56:59.that opinion say aye. Of the contrary no. The ayes have it. With

:57:00. > :57:06.the leave of the House we'll take amendments 243 to 245 together.

:57:07. > :57:12.Minister to move formally to agree. To move formally. 243 to 245. As

:57:13. > :57:17.many are of that opinion say aye, to the contrary no. The ayes have it.

:57:18. > :57:20.246 and Government amendment A, minister to move Government

:57:21. > :57:26.amendment A to Lord's amendment 246 formally. To move formally.

:57:27. > :57:30.Government amendment A to Lord's amendment 246 be made. As many of

:57:31. > :57:35.that opinion say aye, to the contrary no. The ayes have it.

:57:36. > :57:41.Amendment 246 as amended be agreed to. To move formally. The question

:57:42. > :57:44.is that amendment 246 as amended be agreed to. As many of that opinion

:57:45. > :57:50.say aye, to the contrary no. The ayes have it. With the leave of the

:57:51. > :57:54.House we'll take the remaining Lord's amendments together, the move

:57:55. > :58:00.formally to agree. To move formally. The question is that this House

:58:01. > :58:04.agreed with the Lords and their amendments 247 to 289, as many are

:58:05. > :58:11.of that opinion say aye. To the contrary no. The ayes have it. And

:58:12. > :58:14.now this is my favourite piece of Parliamentary procedure so, as it's

:58:15. > :58:19.my last session in the chair, I'm delighted to ask the minister to

:58:20. > :58:24.move the reasons committee. I beg to move. Another committee be appointed

:58:25. > :58:35.to draw up reasons to be assigned to the Lords for disagrees to

:58:36. > :58:40.amendments 237, 238 and 239. That the members be members. Matt Hancock

:58:41. > :58:44.be the chair of the committee. Three be the core of the committee and

:58:45. > :58:49.that the committee do withdraw immediately. So the question is that

:58:50. > :58:53.a committee be appointed to draw up reasons to be assigned to Lord's for

:58:54. > :58:59.disagreeing to their amendments to the digital economy Bill. That Mims

:59:00. > :59:03.Davies Lou week Hague mat Han concall limit Kerr Scott Mann Geoff

:59:04. > :59:07.Smith be members of the committee, that Matt Hancock be the chair, that

:59:08. > :59:11.three be the core of the committee and that the committee withdraw

:59:12. > :59:13.immediately. As many are of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary no.

:59:14. > :59:33.The ayes have it. The ayes have it. I must draw the House's attention to

:59:34. > :59:37.the fact that financial privileges engaged by Lord's amendments 11 and

:59:38. > :59:40.33, if the House agrees them, I'll cause an appropriate entry to be

:59:41. > :59:43.made in the journal. We begin with the Government motion to agree with

:59:44. > :59:47.the Lord's amendment one with which it will be convenient to consider

:59:48. > :59:51.the other Lord's amendments as on the selection paper. I call the

:59:52. > :59:56.minister to move the motion to agree with the Lords in their amendment

:59:57. > :59:59.one. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker and if I've just heard what Madam

:00:00. > :00:04.Deputy Speaker's read through I've got 147 amendments so I hope your

:00:05. > :00:08.changed your chair by the time it comes. I don't think we'll take

:00:09. > :00:13.those individually, Madam Deputy Speaker! When we sent this Bill to

:00:14. > :00:16.the Lord's some months ago there was considerable cross party consensus

:00:17. > :00:21.for the aims and measures. We made amendments in this House including

:00:22. > :00:25.the significant addition after the clause on gross human rights abuses

:00:26. > :00:29.and violations which I believe significantly improves this

:00:30. > :00:32.legislation. I'm pleased to say the same consensus continued in the

:00:33. > :00:34.House of Lords and the group before us today consix cysts - only of

:00:35. > :00:44.Government amendments. It is crucial we get the many

:00:45. > :00:49.valuable powers on this bill into the statute book, the seizure and

:00:50. > :00:53.forfeiture powers and to prevent tax evasion. I welcome the support of

:00:54. > :01:00.colleagues across the House to ensure we can achieve this. Although

:01:01. > :01:04.there are 147 amendments, I want to reassure members these are minor or

:01:05. > :01:07.technical changes that aim to enhance the operation of the bills

:01:08. > :01:12.existing measures. I will highlight some of the most significant

:01:13. > :01:16.measures. The issue that received the most substantial scrutiny in the

:01:17. > :01:20.House of Lords was that of the company ownership transparency in

:01:21. > :01:26.British Overseas Territories with financial centres and Crown

:01:27. > :01:28.dependencies. I know this topic also is of great interest to right

:01:29. > :01:34.honourable and honourable members in this House. As part of our effort to

:01:35. > :01:39.increase corporate transparency, the government continues to work closely

:01:40. > :01:43.with our overseas territories to combat corruption and make sure they

:01:44. > :01:47.implement the commitments they made on law enforcement and access to

:01:48. > :01:52.ownership data by the deadline of June this year. I met with the Chief

:01:53. > :01:56.Minister of Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man this week to discuss

:01:57. > :02:01.their progress and I pressed again, our ambition for transparent

:02:02. > :02:04.registers. And yesterday, I co-chaired a meeting with the peers

:02:05. > :02:09.and London representatives of overseas territories so they could

:02:10. > :02:22.update us on their efforts so far. Once these commitments have been

:02:23. > :02:24.implemented, they will put the UK and our overseas territories and

:02:25. > :02:26.Crown dependencies ahead of most jurisdictions in terms of

:02:27. > :02:28.transparency including G20 partners and major corporate centres

:02:29. > :02:31.including some states in the United States. As I have said, we should be

:02:32. > :02:36.proud of this fact on the progress we have made so far since the

:02:37. > :02:40.anti-corruption Summit last year. These arrangements will prevent

:02:41. > :02:44.criminals from hiding from anonymous companies and bringing significant

:02:45. > :02:48.benefits in terms of the capacity and information the UK law

:02:49. > :02:52.enforcement authorities will have at their disposal to tackle criminal

:02:53. > :02:57.activity and investigate bribery, corruption, money-laundering and tax

:02:58. > :03:05.evasion. But it is right we review the effectiveness of this

:03:06. > :03:07.implementation to assess whether they are delivering the outcomes we

:03:08. > :03:10.are after. That is why we amended the bill in the House of Lords to

:03:11. > :03:13.require a statutory review of the progress made by these territories

:03:14. > :03:17.against their existing commitments. That report will be laid in

:03:18. > :03:22.parliament so the House can revisit this issue as appropriate and in due

:03:23. > :03:28.course. I know some peers and members would have liked us to go

:03:29. > :03:31.further, but we are making considerable progress working

:03:32. > :03:35.consensually with these territories and respect their constitutional

:03:36. > :03:39.settlements as well. The government maintains it would not be

:03:40. > :03:43.appropriate to force legislation on jurisdictions that are

:03:44. > :03:47.self-governing. With progression growing nearer, I welcome the fact

:03:48. > :03:52.this amendment was supported by peers of all parties and I trust you

:03:53. > :03:56.will agree this is a sensible way to go forward. Madam Deputy Speaker,

:03:57. > :04:04.turning to provisions already in the bill, we have made amendments to the

:04:05. > :04:09.proposed unexplained wealth orders. Members previously raised concerns

:04:10. > :04:13.that ?100,000 threshold for the imposition of unexplained wealth

:04:14. > :04:16.orders could disadvantage law enforcement agencies in certain

:04:17. > :04:18.parts of the country, particularly where property value may be lower

:04:19. > :04:35.and the proceeds of crime or shared out. The Northern Ireland

:04:36. > :04:38.executive also raised those concerns. In light of amendment of

:04:39. > :04:40.this, amendments two and 15 would lower the threshold down to 50,000,

:04:41. > :04:42.as requested by the SNP. The threshold remains an important

:04:43. > :04:46.safeguard that would be considered by the court. Following concerns

:04:47. > :04:50.raised in the Lords, and the right honourable member for barking when

:04:51. > :04:52.she gave evidence to the bill committee, further amendments were

:04:53. > :04:57.made in the Lords to make sure unexplained wealth orders can be

:04:58. > :05:00.applied to property held in trust or other complex ownership

:05:01. > :05:05.arrangements, including through a foreign company. These amendments

:05:06. > :05:09.will help to ensure these orders will have the largest impact one law

:05:10. > :05:14.enforcement agencies can use them. And lastly, and amendments 11 and 33

:05:15. > :05:19.provides for a compensation scheme in relation to the interim freezing

:05:20. > :05:22.orders that can accompany an order. That would be a freezing order to

:05:23. > :05:27.make sure somebody doesn't scarper when you go to court to try and put

:05:28. > :05:32.in place an order and so that is why we need a compensation scheme in

:05:33. > :05:36.place, should the court decide that order is not appropriate. This is an

:05:37. > :05:45.important safeguard to circumscribe abuse of power such as this. Members

:05:46. > :05:49.will recall we recalled the seizure and forfeiture powers to cover

:05:50. > :05:55.gaming vouchers and casino chips, and other concerned that had been

:05:56. > :06:01.raised. Following a representation, at that point, amendments 47 to 49

:06:02. > :06:04.and 91 to 93 would allow law enforcement agencies to seize

:06:05. > :06:09.betting slips where they suspect the funds used to place the bet the

:06:10. > :06:13.proceeds of crime. These provisions would be subject to the same

:06:14. > :06:16.safeguards as cash seizure and will be working with bookmakers and their

:06:17. > :06:20.trade association to make sure these measures are used effectively. I

:06:21. > :06:25.trust members are welcome this further expansion of these powers.

:06:26. > :06:37.On the related issue, amendments 69 to 71 would

:06:38. > :06:40.allow for expenses to be deducted from any property recorded under the

:06:41. > :06:42.seizures and forfeiture powers, helping to ensure they function

:06:43. > :06:47.properly in practice. Following discussion with banks and other

:06:48. > :06:49.bodies, an Amendment 36 extends the periods to which properties can

:06:50. > :06:52.share information with each other to tackle money-laundering. At present

:06:53. > :06:57.information sharing can take place the 28 days only. We are extending

:06:58. > :07:00.that to 84 days. It takes into account more complex cases where

:07:01. > :07:05.numerous banks may have relevant information. It is a sign of this

:07:06. > :07:08.government's commitment to work in partnership with the private sector

:07:09. > :07:11.to tackle money-laundering and we are sure the information sharing

:07:12. > :07:15.provision will underpin the important work of the joint

:07:16. > :07:19.money-laundering intelligence task force. As I said, there are a number

:07:20. > :07:21.of other amendments in this group that provides for minor or technical

:07:22. > :07:38.changes for the existing provisions. I do not expect any of these would

:07:39. > :07:40.provoke concern amongst members, but I will be happy to address specific

:07:41. > :07:43.queries during my closing remarks. I hope the House agrees the amendments

:07:44. > :07:45.will improve the bill, which has been the subject of significant

:07:46. > :07:47.cross-party support throughout the passage of it. The bill will ensure

:07:48. > :07:49.the law enforcement agencies have the tools they need to tackle

:07:50. > :07:54.money-laundering and terrorist financing and work with the private

:07:55. > :07:57.sector on these crucial priorities. We must remember this bill is only

:07:58. > :08:01.one element of the government's wider approach for tackling

:08:02. > :08:06.corruption and other serious and organised crime. I have already

:08:07. > :08:10.referred to the bribery act which is another plank in this assault on

:08:11. > :08:16.corruption and it goes to the heart of this being part of a wider

:08:17. > :08:19.package and a continual process of tackling corruption. I was pleased

:08:20. > :08:23.there was a golf of the evidence of the limited review of partnerships

:08:24. > :08:27.on the 27th of March which allows people to make their concerns known

:08:28. > :08:32.about the abuse of the Scottish Limited partnerships that we all see

:08:33. > :08:39.and has been evidenced by the Herald newspaper throughout this process.

:08:40. > :08:45.It was champion, I have to thank the honourable member for raising the

:08:46. > :08:49.issue and I hope once that review is completed and we see the results

:08:50. > :08:56.that we will be in agreement about whatever next steps may come next.

:08:57. > :09:00.Officials are analysing the responses and is expected to submit

:09:01. > :09:05.its advice shortly after the election. The Ministry of Justice

:09:06. > :09:09.has conducted an initial call for evidence is calling for changes to

:09:10. > :09:12.the law on corporate criminality liability for wider forms of

:09:13. > :09:19.economic crime. They are considering the response at present. We are

:09:20. > :09:26.extending the supervisory sector including a new office for an

:09:27. > :09:29.anti-money-laundering supervision in the Financial Conduct Authority to

:09:30. > :09:37.help ensure that the non-statutory supervisors complying with their

:09:38. > :09:42.obligations in money-laundering. The information, the first of its type

:09:43. > :09:47.in the G20 has been up and running since June 20 16. We have also

:09:48. > :09:56.recently published proposals for a further public beneficial ownership

:09:57. > :10:00.register for overseas entities. We are continuing to reform the

:10:01. > :10:05.suspicious activity report regime, including investment in systems and

:10:06. > :10:09.processes to come from in these legislators reforms. And following

:10:10. > :10:12.the anti-corruption Summit last year, we have worked closely with

:10:13. > :10:21.society, business leaders and practitioners to launch strategy.

:10:22. > :10:24.I'm pleased we have reached this stage in stretch constructive

:10:25. > :10:28.fashion and I invite the House to agree they amendments before so this

:10:29. > :10:33.legislation can be enacted without further delay. I beg to move. The

:10:34. > :10:39.question is this House agrees with the Lords and the amendment one. I

:10:40. > :10:45.rise on behalf of Her Majesty's loyal opposition for the final time

:10:46. > :10:51.this Parliament. To address a criminal finances bill and these

:10:52. > :10:55.government amendments. The minister talked about cross-party

:10:56. > :10:59.co-operation, he talked about Labour's bribery act and these build

:11:00. > :11:05.on those and the Proceeds of Crime Act. We welcome these amendments

:11:06. > :11:10.because we want is a bill that works and prevents financial crime. So

:11:11. > :11:15.these amendments, all grouped in one block, there are a lot of them, I

:11:16. > :11:21.want to take Amendment 34 separately at the end. But on the whole, we

:11:22. > :11:27.will remember the heady days of 2016 when this bill was announced and

:11:28. > :11:30.some of the headlines about human rights abuses who buy London homes

:11:31. > :11:35.could have their assets seized and the rhetoric about clearing up dirty

:11:36. > :11:39.money. So we welcome this bill. These amendments, we are happy to

:11:40. > :11:43.support them because they are mostly technical in nature and they will

:11:44. > :11:48.ensure some measures in the bill will work more effectively. They

:11:49. > :11:52.provide a tidying up function. We support the measures aimed at

:11:53. > :11:55.ensuring unexplained wealth orders, cannot be circumvented through

:11:56. > :12:00.trusts or other complex financial arrangements. We welcome the thought

:12:01. > :12:04.that has gone into devolved governments as well, the specific

:12:05. > :12:13.arrangements for Scotland Abdelboden island and I would like to put on

:12:14. > :12:16.record, that is our hope of the return of an inclusive devolved

:12:17. > :12:23.government in Northern Ireland will be achieved as soon as possible. Do

:12:24. > :12:27.I turn to Amendment 34 now? OK, I want to address Amendment 30 four.

:12:28. > :12:31.Throughout the various readings of the bill in the House, we have

:12:32. > :12:36.consistently come back to the elephant in the room, the issue of

:12:37. > :12:41.beneficial ownership and transparency in the UK's overseas

:12:42. > :12:46.territories and Crown dependencies. I don't want to rerun the arguments

:12:47. > :12:52.that have gone before, but I believe, because there isn't time!

:12:53. > :12:56.We all have to go back to our constituencies. I believe that mine

:12:57. > :13:01.and the Labour Party's position on this is clear. The Labour Party

:13:02. > :13:05.believes the government has a moral duty to ensure our overseas

:13:06. > :13:08.territories and Crown dependencies adopt publicly accessible registers

:13:09. > :13:13.of ownership in order to prevent these territories from being the

:13:14. > :13:21.global epicentre of illicit practices which is damage developing

:13:22. > :13:27.countries, the world economy, and they do our reputation harm as well.

:13:28. > :13:30.There were headlines about how there aren't visible dead bodies piling up

:13:31. > :13:35.on the streets of London, but there have been malpractice is going on.

:13:36. > :13:39.While this is going to be an argument that can run and run, I do

:13:40. > :13:43.take heart from the government having realised that a step in the

:13:44. > :13:53.right direction on the long and winding road to ensuring that the

:13:54. > :13:56.new arrangements for information sharing between these territories

:13:57. > :14:02.and the UK enforcement agencies are to be subject to an open and

:14:03. > :14:06.transparent review. Territories such as the British virgin islands and

:14:07. > :14:11.the Cayman Islands have been astute. They are very clever at using what

:14:12. > :14:18.are essentially tokenistic, box ticking consultations to argue that

:14:19. > :14:22.compliance, competitiveness and security concerns hamper their

:14:23. > :14:26.having centralised and close registers of beneficial ownership.

:14:27. > :14:31.They do this because they know they can get away with it and to have a

:14:32. > :14:35.centralised as opposed to a decentralised platform, brings them

:14:36. > :14:41.one step closer to having laid the foundation for a public register in

:14:42. > :14:47.the future. That is the holy Grail, the whatever, the end of the rainbow

:14:48. > :14:50.we are looking for. So therefore the government's concession on this is

:14:51. > :14:55.appreciated. But it must be clear for the record, the original

:14:56. > :14:59.amendment tabled by the Labour Party would have been a far more

:15:00. > :15:04.assessing the substance of the assessing the substance of the

:15:05. > :15:08.overseas territories claims they are unable to have public registers of

:15:09. > :15:14.beneficial ownership due to compliance and competitive excuses

:15:15. > :15:19.that are wheeled out. We recognise this is a missed opportunity for

:15:20. > :15:22.Britain. The systems of British Overseas Territories and Crown

:15:23. > :15:25.dependencies are allowed tax avoidance. Some people say it is on

:15:26. > :15:30.industrial scale, we cannot pretend it is not going on. And the

:15:31. > :15:36.government's unwillingness to support our position on registers of

:15:37. > :15:40.beneficial ownership is quite unforgivable. Sadly, it shows the

:15:41. > :15:44.party opposite, they could do better, they are not as serious as

:15:45. > :15:56.they could be. Not serious enough about money-laundering.

:15:57. > :16:02.Money laundering and corruption have been identified as high priority

:16:03. > :16:05.threats in the National Crime Agency's national control strategy.

:16:06. > :16:10.The minister referred to the summit last year under David Cameron how

:16:11. > :16:15.long ago it all seems. Times are changing before our eyes. The UK

:16:16. > :16:19.Strategic and Defence Security Review, its national risk assessment

:16:20. > :16:22.of money laundering and terrorist financing and its overseas

:16:23. > :16:26.development aid strategy. I must say, I welcome the fact that the

:16:27. > :16:31.0.7% commitment remains in the manifesto of the party opposite. We

:16:32. > :16:35.all know that international terror networks require large scale and

:16:36. > :16:41.continuous funding to conduct their operations. A finance sector

:16:42. > :16:45.embroiled in money-laundering and tax avoidance is a threat to us all.

:16:46. > :16:50.Granted this Bill is a step in the right direction, but it is

:16:51. > :16:53.regrettable that the failure to legislate for public registers of

:16:54. > :17:04.beneficial ownership is not in there. I'm not surprised the party

:17:05. > :17:08.opposite are untering personaled at having missed this opportunity given

:17:09. > :17:14.their threat to turn post-Brexit Britain into a low-wage tax haven.

:17:15. > :17:20.You know, potentially with workers' rights casually tossed to the side.

:17:21. > :17:24.Anyway, after the... We are, we now find ourselves in this period of

:17:25. > :17:30.wash-up. The criminal finances bill. Let's hope it doesn't get washed up

:17:31. > :17:37.on a lost beach of lost dreams being announced with such fan fair in the

:17:38. > :17:41.beginning. We find ourselves in the precipitous haze. Whatever happened

:17:42. > :17:44.to the fixed term Members of Parliament act, it wasn't worth the

:17:45. > :17:49.paper it was written on. This election we are having for no other

:17:50. > :17:52.ran than for political expediency, Madam Deputy Speaker, I very much

:17:53. > :18:03.hope that on the other side of that we'll be in Government. But whatever

:18:04. > :18:11.happens - you will find otherwise actually. I digress. We'll be

:18:12. > :18:18.watching what happens next. So I want to make it absolutely clear

:18:19. > :18:20.that if the forthcoming review demonstrates that these

:18:21. > :18:25.decentralised platforms as have been favoured by the overseas territories

:18:26. > :18:27.are impeding the operational efficacy of our enforcement

:18:28. > :18:31.agencies, we on this side of the House will demand that the

:18:32. > :18:39.Government reacts immediately to ensure that all platforms be

:18:40. > :18:43.centralised and made public. The review is not the end of the path

:18:44. > :18:46.towards transparency for these territories but merely the start.

:18:47. > :18:51.The Labour Party will continue to fight to ensure that these

:18:52. > :19:01.territories eventually embrace full openness and transparency. Thank

:19:02. > :19:04.you. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker and, unlike some other members, you

:19:05. > :19:08.weren't in the chair when I made my maiden speech but I seem to have

:19:09. > :19:13.made a number of speeches in front of you too, give or take an empty

:19:14. > :19:18.chamber perhaps if we are lucky enough to be re-elected we won't be

:19:19. > :19:22.drawing the short straw in the next Parliamentary term. Madam Deputy

:19:23. > :19:25.Speaker, as the minister said, it's been a process of this Bill that has

:19:26. > :19:29.been widely consensual and cooperative and we have managed to

:19:30. > :19:32.work together across all party boundaries and Bill committee,

:19:33. > :19:35.various meetings, discussions with the minister and debates on the

:19:36. > :19:40.floor in the House. We have got to a position where we think this Bill is

:19:41. > :19:48.a very, very decent start to the long-term goal of trying to tackle

:19:49. > :19:51.and eradicate financial criminality. Everybody agrees with those aims. We

:19:52. > :19:54.have got the Bill to a decent position, albeit I think there could

:19:55. > :20:01.be improvements and I know that the minister would be minded to agree

:20:02. > :20:05.with the principles but we'll hopefully work on that as time goes

:20:06. > :20:10.on. Touching on some of the amendments, I was delighted to hear

:20:11. > :20:17.the minister say that the threshold will be just from 100,000 down to

:20:18. > :20:21.50,000 pursuant to the submissions that we made in Bill committee. Very

:20:22. > :20:26.gracious of the minister to give us that credit at the despatch box and

:20:27. > :20:32.it's taken very graciously. There are very good reasons why it

:20:33. > :20:36.should be ?50,000 and the minister acknowledged the reasons in his

:20:37. > :20:41.speech. The last thing we want is something within the terms and

:20:42. > :20:45.conditions, the facets, the facilities with an unexplained

:20:46. > :20:50.wealth orders that could be used by the criminals to get one step ahead

:20:51. > :20:52.and subvert that process. This goes a long way to stopping the

:20:53. > :20:58.criminals. I thank the Minister for That and I'm sure it will find its

:20:59. > :21:01.way into the final form of the Bill. Secondly, the inclusion of betting

:21:02. > :21:04.slips as a form of cash I think within the Bill is very welcome. It

:21:05. > :21:10.was a manifesto pledge by the SNP which we are very proud to have been

:21:11. > :21:14.delivered in this Bill. My right honourable friend from Kirkcaldy and

:21:15. > :21:21.cow Ben Deith has made significant political waves in relation to the

:21:22. > :21:27.issue of Scottish Ltd partnerships and special recognition must go to

:21:28. > :21:33.Richard Smith from the Herald and his colleague who've done great

:21:34. > :21:39.investigative journalism on this subject -- Cowdenbeath. I'd be

:21:40. > :21:46.delighted. I'd not intended to participate in this but I would like

:21:47. > :21:50.to acknowledge the cooperative way in which the minister responded. The

:21:51. > :21:53.minister never gave indications throughout this process that he

:21:54. > :21:57.doesn't agree with the thrust of what we were saying. It's heartening

:21:58. > :22:01.to hear that he's corroborated our position to the consultation. My

:22:02. > :22:06.only request to the minister and I'll take him at face value, is that

:22:07. > :22:09.beyond a period of consultation, if his department could show the same

:22:10. > :22:13.energy in tackling this issue so we can finally get rid of the scourge

:22:14. > :22:17.of what sing an awful vehicle that brings this place and our economy

:22:18. > :22:24.into disrepute. That is a Scottish Ltd parter inship. Madam Deputy

:22:25. > :22:27.Speaker, beneficial ownership and registers and compelling

:22:28. > :22:34.jurisdictions to publish registers of beneficial ownership has been a

:22:35. > :22:39.real hot topic during this debate. I would have preferred a situation

:22:40. > :22:44.where we could justify persuading or compelling overseas territories to

:22:45. > :22:50.publish registers of beneficiaries. We in the SNP, my view would always

:22:51. > :22:54.stop short of allowing this place to tell another jurisdiction what it

:22:55. > :22:57.can and cannot do. That's consistent with what we believe in our

:22:58. > :23:04.constitutional issue. For that reason and that reason only, I am

:23:05. > :23:08.pleased, although not overwhelmed, by the new provisions within the

:23:09. > :23:12.Bill. There is a commitment here for discussions to take place and an

:23:13. > :23:14.assessment to take place in relation to the information-sharing between

:23:15. > :23:18.the territories and the UK Government. We've had very, very

:23:19. > :23:21.good constructive discussions with all territories and with the

:23:22. > :23:24.Government and they all assure us that on a 24-hour turn around, the

:23:25. > :23:29.information can be gotten from the territories to aid the tackling of

:23:30. > :23:34.financial criminality in the UK. That is a very good and reassuring

:23:35. > :23:38.assurance but it needs to be documented and approved in the

:23:39. > :23:43.House. Of course I'll give way. I'm very grateful to my right honourable

:23:44. > :23:48.friend nor giving way and can I congratulate him and the honourable

:23:49. > :23:53.member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath for putting teeth into this Bill.

:23:54. > :23:55.Does he agree with the compromise amendment on sharing beneficial

:23:56. > :24:00.ownership is really not a compromise at all because it's a restatement of

:24:01. > :24:04.existing Government policy with no mention of transparency or the

:24:05. > :24:07.developing countries. Does he agree with me this has been a lost

:24:08. > :24:12.opportunity in the light of the Panama Papers to grasp the issue of

:24:13. > :24:15.corruption and work a bit harder to ensure real transparency in the

:24:16. > :24:23.overseas territories sowe can stop the sucking away of money from

:24:24. > :24:25.developing countries. Yes, I do agree with my right honourable

:24:26. > :24:30.friend. The jurisdiction issue comes into play on this point for me.

:24:31. > :24:33.Whilst I agree with the thrust of the substantive arguments that it

:24:34. > :24:37.would be sincible to compel the overseas territories to publish the

:24:38. > :24:43.registers, unless I can satisfy myself that this place has rights to

:24:44. > :24:47.do so, I would find it hard to support that suggestion.

:24:48. > :24:54.Substantivity I completely and utterly agree with that thrust. My

:24:55. > :24:57.view is, we'll never fully rid the financial sector of criminality

:24:58. > :25:00.until we can have a full register of beneficiaries of ownership. That

:25:01. > :25:05.must be what we strive to achieve. Madam Deputy Speaker, I was

:25:06. > :25:08.perturbed, despite the cooperation, of the frontbench saying the

:25:09. > :25:12.position is clear on this matter. I don't agree with that and I don't

:25:13. > :25:15.think it's been clear, particularly in the point at which it was brought

:25:16. > :25:20.back at the last stage, there was an amendment put before the House that

:25:21. > :25:22.would have compelled the Crown Dependencies to publish the

:25:23. > :25:25.registers but not against the overseas territories. I would have

:25:26. > :25:28.said it should have been the other way around, hence we could not

:25:29. > :25:34.support that amendment but would have been willing to support an

:25:35. > :25:38.amendment in relation to the overseas. There may have been a

:25:39. > :25:40.missed opportunity in that. Madam Deputy Speaker, throughout the

:25:41. > :25:45.passage of the Bill we sought to cooperate and more importantly to

:25:46. > :25:47.widen the debate beyond the technicalities and the

:25:48. > :25:50.manifestations of financial criminality contained in the Bill.

:25:51. > :25:55.We think that the banking culture in the UK is a significant facilitator

:25:56. > :26:00.of financial criminality and we believing that it's not until we

:26:01. > :26:04.tackle the root cause of my view of criminality which is the banking

:26:05. > :26:08.culture in the UK is that we'll never fully have the tools to

:26:09. > :26:10.eradicate financial irregularity. That's not a particularly

:26:11. > :26:14.controversial point. I can understand why the minister was keen

:26:15. > :26:19.not to have a banking culture review within the Bill which we would have

:26:20. > :26:23.provided, but I would urge the Conservative frontbench and whoever

:26:24. > :26:27.is the Government after the next election to really pursue this point

:26:28. > :26:33.and really pursue the point that the banking culture that has developed

:26:34. > :26:36.over the last generation is the real facilitator of financial criminality

:26:37. > :26:41.and it must be brought to task and reviewed in that manner. We have

:26:42. > :26:45.sought to wind the debate in relation to whistleblowing. They

:26:46. > :26:49.need genuine material and proper protection. It's not easy working in

:26:50. > :26:52.a large financial services organisation seeing things and then

:26:53. > :27:01.going reporting to your boss that things are not as they ought to. --

:27:02. > :27:05.ought to be. People in that position should have the maximum protection

:27:06. > :27:17.from this place to bring that information forward so regulateths

:27:18. > :27:21.and Government can act accordingly -- regulators. The conversation

:27:22. > :27:26.should continue beyond this Bill to discuss further how to tie things up

:27:27. > :27:29.and deal with the underlying causes of financial criminality, not just

:27:30. > :27:33.the manifestations and vehicles to tackle it. I'm not going to take the

:27:34. > :27:38.House's time up any further, other than to say that I'm delighted that

:27:39. > :27:41.I'll be fighting the general election in Dumfries and Galloway

:27:42. > :27:45.for the Scottish National Party, we'll be giving it everything we've

:27:46. > :27:55.got and hopefully sending this Prime Minister home wards to think again.

:27:56. > :28:00.THE SPEAKER: The question is that the Lords agree the amendment. The

:28:01. > :28:07.ayes have it. We'll take the remaining together. Minister to move

:28:08. > :28:10.formally to agree. The question is the House agrees with amendments

:28:11. > :28:17.2-147. As many of that opinion say aye. Of the contrary no. The ayes

:28:18. > :28:21.have it. Education and research bill

:28:22. > :28:26.consideration of Lord ace's amendments. I mist draw the House's

:28:27. > :28:32.attention to the fact that financial privileges engaged by Lord's

:28:33. > :28:37.amendments 23, 138 and 139, if agreed by the House I'll cause an

:28:38. > :28:41.appropriate entry to be made in the journal. I remind the House certain

:28:42. > :28:43.other motions relating to the amendments will be certified as

:28:44. > :28:48.relating exclusively to England and Wales as set out on the selection

:28:49. > :28:51.paper. If the House divides on any certified motion a double majority

:28:52. > :28:55.will be required for the motion to be passed. I would alert members

:28:56. > :29:03.there is an additional paper published today containing three

:29:04. > :29:07.additional motions to disagree to Lord's amendments 183, 184 and 185.

:29:08. > :29:13.I'm sure the minister will explain this to the House. The motion to be

:29:14. > :29:17.taken is to disagree with the Lords in their amendment 1 with which it

:29:18. > :29:22.will be convenient to consider other motions and amendments as on the

:29:23. > :29:26.selection paper. I call on the minister to approve to disagree with

:29:27. > :29:32.the amendments. Thank you. I beg to move this House disagrees with

:29:33. > :29:35.Lord's amendment 1. Madam Deputy Speaker, the higher education and

:29:36. > :29:41.research Bill sets out the most significant legislative reforms of

:29:42. > :29:44.the sector for 25 years. The world of higher education's changed

:29:45. > :29:50.fundamentally since the higher and further Education Act of 1992

:29:51. > :29:56.leaving a regulatory system that's come enpolitics, fragmented and

:29:57. > :30:04.out-of-date -- complex, fragmented and out-of-date. Just yesterday, the

:30:05. > :30:07.two main sector groups, universities UK and the other reit rated its

:30:08. > :30:12.support for this important piece of legislation. Given its scale and

:30:13. > :30:15.importance, this Bill has understandably received robust and

:30:16. > :30:18.constructive debate as it has progressed through this House and

:30:19. > :30:23.the other place. I would like to put on record my thanks to all members

:30:24. > :30:27.and noble Lords who've engaged with its during this process. Throughout

:30:28. > :30:33.we have listened, reflexed and responded. This group includes no

:30:34. > :30:35.fewer than 240 amendments agreed in the other place which strengthen and

:30:36. > :30:47.improve the drafting in the Bill. These range from institutions of

:30:48. > :30:51.autonomy and provision through this student transfer and accelerated

:30:52. > :30:55.degrees. The other players also agreed amendments to strengthen the

:30:56. > :30:58.research provisions in the bill, including putting the hell day in

:30:59. > :31:03.principle into legislation for the first time. I'm pleased to show that

:31:04. > :31:07.once again we are willing to engage and respond and I hope Honourable

:31:08. > :31:12.members will be with me if I speak at some length, but I realise there

:31:13. > :31:17.are many important points. I hope they realise there are many

:31:18. > :31:22.important points I want to set out clearly. Turning to Lords amendment

:31:23. > :31:25.number one. We listened carefully to the debate in the other place about

:31:26. > :31:30.the role and functions of universities. At its heart was the

:31:31. > :31:35.importance of protecting institutional autonomy, which we

:31:36. > :31:39.support. We responded to this with a significant package of amendments,

:31:40. > :31:43.designed to provide robust and meaningful protection of

:31:44. > :31:54.institutional autonomy across the bill, which received support from

:31:55. > :31:57.all parties. On the definition of a university, as I have said

:31:58. > :31:59.previously came in a limited sense, University can be described as a

:32:00. > :32:03.degree level provider with awarding powers. We can say in University is

:32:04. > :32:09.expected to be an institution that brings together a body of scholars

:32:10. > :32:13.to form a cohesive and self-critical academic community, that provides

:32:14. > :32:20.excellent learning opportunities for people. We expect teaching at such

:32:21. > :32:23.an institution to be informed by a combination of research, scholarship

:32:24. > :32:28.and professional practice. To distinguish it from the school's

:32:29. > :32:33.role, we can say a university is a place where students are developing

:32:34. > :32:36.higher analytical capacities, Jill Rosseti about the world and higher

:32:37. > :32:42.levels of abstract capacity in their analysis. Further, the strength of

:32:43. > :32:47.the university sector is based on its diversity and we should continue

:32:48. > :32:53.to recognise a one size fits all approach is not in the interests of

:32:54. > :32:57.students or of wider society. In particular, small and specialist

:32:58. > :33:02.providers that support the creative arts, theology and agriculture have

:33:03. > :33:05.allowed more students with highly specialised career aims, the

:33:06. > :33:10.opportunity to study at university. As we have said in our white paper

:33:11. > :33:13.and throughout the passage of this bill, the diversity of the sector

:33:14. > :33:18.and opportunities for students have grown as a result of the important

:33:19. > :33:23.changes introduced by the previous Labour government in 2004, including

:33:24. > :33:27.the lifting of the requirement for universities to have students in

:33:28. > :33:32.five subject areas and award research degrees. No one would want,

:33:33. > :33:39.and we would not expect, to go back to the specific changes the party

:33:40. > :33:45.opposite made. To protect the use of university title, we have tabled a

:33:46. > :33:50.Maignan 's won a 21 D, which means before allowing its use, they will

:33:51. > :33:55.have referred to factors in guidance given by the Secretary of State and

:33:56. > :33:57.before giving guidance, the Secretary of State must consult

:33:58. > :34:03.relevant persons and bodies. This consultation will be full and broad.

:34:04. > :34:07.It will reference processes and practices overseas, for example in

:34:08. > :34:11.Australia and provide an opportunity to look at a broad range of factors

:34:12. > :34:18.to consider before granting university title. This may include

:34:19. > :34:23.factors such as track record in excellent teaching, sustained

:34:24. > :34:26.scholarship, cohesive academic communities, interdisciplinary

:34:27. > :34:30.approaches, supportive learning infrastructures, dissemination of

:34:31. > :34:34.knowledge, public facing role of universities, academic freedom and

:34:35. > :34:38.freedom of speech and wider support for students and Pastoral care. In

:34:39. > :34:43.the other place we tabled an amendment based on a proposal from

:34:44. > :34:48.Baroness Wolf, requiring them to take expert advice from a relevant

:34:49. > :34:53.body on quality and standards before granting, varying or revoking degree

:34:54. > :35:04.awarding powers. I can confirm the role of the relevant body would be

:35:05. > :35:09.similar to QAA and the system will build on the valuable work the QAA

:35:10. > :35:14.has been doing over the years. Our amendment 701A, in place of

:35:15. > :35:18.amendment 71 strengthens this amendment. This amendment also makes

:35:19. > :35:23.clear that if there is not a designated quality body to perform

:35:24. > :35:27.the the committee they must established to perform it must

:35:28. > :35:36.feature a majority of members who were not members of the OFS. In a

:35:37. > :35:41.boating there's members, the OFS must inform the interest listed in

:35:42. > :35:44.the clause. This will ensure the advice is impartial and in form.

:35:45. > :35:49.This amendment makes a clear the advice must include a view on

:35:50. > :35:52.whether the provider under consideration can maintain quality

:35:53. > :35:56.and standards and it requires the OFS to notify the Secretary of State

:35:57. > :36:03.as soon as possible after it grants that to a provider who has not

:36:04. > :36:11.previously delivered a degree course under a validated arrangement. I

:36:12. > :36:15.would expect the secretary of state advice to the OFS would be reviewed

:36:16. > :36:19.if there is a change in circumstances, such as a merger or a

:36:20. > :36:24.change in ownership. The OFS has powers under the bill to remove

:36:25. > :36:28.things from the provider where there are concerns to the quality standard

:36:29. > :36:33.following such a change. We would expect the OFS to seek advice from

:36:34. > :36:37.the relevant body on any such quality concern before taking the

:36:38. > :36:40.step of revocation. In the other place, we introduced amendments

:36:41. > :36:44.which provide additional safeguards around the revocation of degree

:36:45. > :36:49.awarding powers recognising these are last resort powers. Amendments

:36:50. > :36:57.passed relating to appeals against such decisions. Our amendment 78 a

:36:58. > :37:02.278 page achieved the same names as Lords amendments 78 and 106 but

:37:03. > :37:07.would align the wording more closely with terminology used elsewhere in

:37:08. > :37:10.legislation. The amendments allow an appeal on unlimited grounds and

:37:11. > :37:18.permits the first-tier Tribunal to retake any decision of the OFS to

:37:19. > :37:22.revoke the university title. Over the course of this passage we have

:37:23. > :37:27.seen complete consensus across both houses about the importance of

:37:28. > :37:32.teaching in higher education. We have always been a world leader in

:37:33. > :37:37.our approach to higher education, but we shouldn't be complacent. The

:37:38. > :37:42.framework of us is the opportunity to safeguard best teaching and raise

:37:43. > :37:45.standards across the sector. But for it to properly, it needs to have

:37:46. > :37:51.reputational and financial incentives behind it, that is why we

:37:52. > :37:56.are proposing to remove the two voted in, Lords amendments 12 and

:37:57. > :38:00.23, which would have rendered it unworkable. Almost 300 providers

:38:01. > :38:04.took part in the first round of assessments and we have received

:38:05. > :38:08.vocal support. The sector has voted with its feet and demonstrated real

:38:09. > :38:15.confidence in the framework. It would not be appropriate to stop

:38:16. > :38:26.fundamentally alter it now. I am grateful. I hear what he is saying

:38:27. > :38:31.about it, but would he accept that although there might be widespread

:38:32. > :38:35.consent across the sector on this exercise, the sector is not happy

:38:36. > :38:39.about the traffic light system and does want very much to see the

:38:40. > :38:47.review the right honourable gentleman is putting in place.

:38:48. > :38:50.Minister. I thank the honourable member for coming to that point

:38:51. > :38:55.because it enables me to discuss the amendment the government is bringing

:38:56. > :39:00.forward to address those concerns. I am pleased to present to the House a

:39:01. > :39:03.series of amendments which demonstrate our continued commitment

:39:04. > :39:10.to developing the teaching excellent framework carefully. We have

:39:11. > :39:14.consulted widely on the Tef and we want to draw on the best expertise

:39:15. > :39:19.as we develop this scheme. That is why I am pleased to move amendment

:39:20. > :39:24.23 seat which requires the Secretary of State to commission an

:39:25. > :39:29.independent review of the Tef within one year of the Tef clause being

:39:30. > :39:33.commence. Crucially, the amendment requires the Secretary of State to

:39:34. > :39:35.lay this report before Parliament and showing Parliamentary

:39:36. > :39:39.accountability for the framework. The report must cover many of the

:39:40. > :39:43.aspects that have concerned members of this House and the other plays,

:39:44. > :39:50.including whether the metrics used RFID the use in the Tef, whether the

:39:51. > :39:56.names of the ratings alluded to art for appropriate use in the Tef and

:39:57. > :40:00.the appropriate of the Tef for the providers to carry out teaching,

:40:01. > :40:04.research and the functions and the assessment of whether the scheme is

:40:05. > :40:07.in the public interest. I am happy to confirm the Secretary of State

:40:08. > :40:12.will take account of the review and if he or she considers it

:40:13. > :40:15.appropriate, will provide guidance to the OFS Cordingley, including any

:40:16. > :40:21.changes to the scheme the review suggests might be needed, whether

:40:22. > :40:26.this is in relation to the metrics or any other items that the review

:40:27. > :40:32.will look. We have also had concerns about the impact of the link between

:40:33. > :40:37.the Tef and fees. We recognise the important role of Parliament in

:40:38. > :40:44.setting the that is why I am pleased to move amendments 12 A, 12 B, 12 F

:40:45. > :40:47.and 12 G, which amends the Parliamentary procedure required to

:40:48. > :40:53.alter the limited amounts to ensure any regulations that would raise

:40:54. > :40:56.fees would be subject, as a minimum, to the affirmative procedure. This

:40:57. > :41:02.provides a greater level of Parliamentary oversight on fees than

:41:03. > :41:08.the measures originally put in place under the previous Labour government

:41:09. > :41:15.in 2004. I have also brought forward a further motion to disagree with

:41:16. > :41:19.Lords amendments numbers 183 to 185, which are no longer required as a

:41:20. > :41:24.consequence of this amendment. This is a technical change as a result of

:41:25. > :41:28.the wider set of amendments regarding the amounts. Furthermore,

:41:29. > :41:33.these amendments demonstrate our commitment to a considered roll-out

:41:34. > :41:39.of the fish are rented fees. Amendments 12 C and 12 D will delay

:41:40. > :41:42.the link between differentiated Tef ratings and tuition fee caps, so

:41:43. > :41:47.this will not come in for over three years, with the first year of

:41:48. > :41:55.differentiated fees as a result of Tef ratings be no earlier than the

:41:56. > :42:03.academic year beginning autumn 2020. If I have understood, the connection

:42:04. > :42:11.between the Tef and the level has been postponed rather than decouple

:42:12. > :42:15.because you want if he can provide reassurance to the University of

:42:16. > :42:21.West London, and the students are worried about that and amendment 156

:42:22. > :42:26.from the Lords, they liked that one about the international students.

:42:27. > :42:31.They think that they will go completely bankrupt if these things

:42:32. > :42:37.are not kept as they are in the Lords amendments. Can he reassure

:42:38. > :42:42.them at all? What I can reassure the honourable member is we are

:42:43. > :42:46.committed to ensuring universities are able to increase their fees in

:42:47. > :42:51.line with inflation providing they can demonstrate they are delivering

:42:52. > :42:56.high quality outcomes throughout the Tef. We will be introducing this

:42:57. > :42:59.scheme gradually and not differentiating, according to uplift

:43:00. > :43:06.which institutions are able to get before academic year 2020, starting

:43:07. > :43:09.August 20 20. Up until that point there will be no differentiation of

:43:10. > :43:16.the uplift based on performance in the Tef. This means the

:43:17. > :43:23.differentiated fees will not be introduced until after the

:43:24. > :43:30.independent review has reported to the Secretary of State and to

:43:31. > :43:32.Parliament. Until this point, all English providers participating in

:43:33. > :43:38.Tef will receive the full inflationary uplift. It will be up

:43:39. > :43:41.to devolved administrations, as before, to determine whether they

:43:42. > :43:47.are content for their institutions to participate in the Tef and what

:43:48. > :43:52.impact participation may have on their fees. I can confirm the

:43:53. > :43:58.ratings awarded under the Tef this year will not be used to determine

:43:59. > :44:02.differentiated fees and unless the provider actively chooses not to

:44:03. > :44:07.re-enter Tef after the independent review. In practice, this means this

:44:08. > :44:11.year's ratings will only count towards differentiated fees if,

:44:12. > :44:15.after the review, a provider does not ask for a fresh assessment

:44:16. > :44:19.before their next one is due. An opportunity that will be open to all

:44:20. > :44:23.participants. Before moving to other amendments, I would like to

:44:24. > :44:29.reiterate our commitment that Tef will evolve to assess the quality of

:44:30. > :44:32.teaching at subject level as well as institutional level. We recognise

:44:33. > :44:39.subject level assessments are challenging and I have announced an

:44:40. > :44:44.extension to the role out of subject level Tef. This follows the best

:44:45. > :44:49.practice demonstrated and the first subject level assessments will not

:44:50. > :44:53.take place until spring 2020. Turning to students at electoral

:44:54. > :44:57.registration. In both this House and the other place, we have heard

:44:58. > :45:00.compelling argument about the importance of students at electoral

:45:01. > :45:10.registration and I commend the member for Sheffield Central for his

:45:11. > :45:15.passionate work on this issue. In place of the amendment passed on

:45:16. > :45:21.this issue in the other place, I am pleased, working very closely with

:45:22. > :45:26.my collie, the Minister for Constitution, to be moving

:45:27. > :45:28.amendments 15 A and 15 B, that will improve the electoral registration

:45:29. > :45:34.of students. The amendments do this by permitting the office for

:45:35. > :45:38.students to impose a condition of registration upon higher education

:45:39. > :45:42.providers, requiring their governing bodies to take steps specified that

:45:43. > :45:44.the office for students to facilitate cooperation with the

:45:45. > :45:53.electoral registration officers in England.

:45:54. > :45:58.Equally importantly, maintaining unaltered the statutory roles and

:45:59. > :46:02.responsibility of EROs for ensuring the accuracy of the electoral

:46:03. > :46:07.register. These amendments will compliment the existing powers of

:46:08. > :46:11.the EROs. In implementing this condition, the office for students

:46:12. > :46:14.will be obliged to have regard to ministerial guidance issued under

:46:15. > :46:18.the general duties clause of the Bill which will lay out what the

:46:19. > :46:21.Government expects in relation to the electoral registration condition

:46:22. > :46:26.alongside expectations about other functions of the OFS. There are many

:46:27. > :46:29.excellent examples across the sector of methods to encourage students to

:46:30. > :46:34.join the electoral register, including models put in place by the

:46:35. > :46:37.University of Sheffield in the member opposite's constituency which

:46:38. > :46:41.provides an example of good practice.

:46:42. > :46:46.Through our amendments, the OFS will have a specific power to impose an

:46:47. > :46:51.electoral registration condition to deal with providers that are not

:46:52. > :46:53.doing enough to cooperate with electoral administrators where

:46:54. > :46:57.imposed a condition takes effect as a requirement it will oblige action

:46:58. > :47:01.to be taken. The clear aim is for the office for

:47:02. > :47:05.students to look across the sector and where needed ensure necessary

:47:06. > :47:09.action is taken. The condition can then require particular steps to be

:47:10. > :47:15.taken so that higher education providers work with the ROs to

:47:16. > :47:26.facilitate registration. Noncompliance is enforceable,

:47:27. > :47:29.including through OFS sanctions. Also the Cabinet Office have been

:47:30. > :47:33.extremely helpful from the very start in supporting the initiative

:47:34. > :47:42.that we took with the University of Sheffield. Would he recognise that

:47:43. > :47:46.the critical game-changer is by having seamless integration of

:47:47. > :47:49.electoral registration and student enrolment where not only at

:47:50. > :47:53.Sheffield but where other universities have taken that up,

:47:54. > :47:59.it's seen levels of registration which simple promotion of or

:48:00. > :48:02.direction towards the voter registration portal hasn't

:48:03. > :48:08.succeeded. And, would he, in monitoring how effective the

:48:09. > :48:15.proposals of the Government are, look at effective outputs and if

:48:16. > :48:18.university outputs through methods of cooperation with electoral

:48:19. > :48:23.registration offices do not deliver the sort of 70% mark that an

:48:24. > :48:29.integrated system has, would he then be expecting that they would be

:48:30. > :48:35.pushed in that direction by the office for students? I thank the

:48:36. > :48:41.honourable member for his continued thoughtful engagement with this

:48:42. > :48:47.question. We look forward to continuing to work with him. We

:48:48. > :48:50.don't expect there to be a one-size-fits-all approach. We need

:48:51. > :48:53.an approach that recognises the particular circumstances at

:48:54. > :48:58.different I thinkth institutions. We look forward to continuing to engage

:48:59. > :49:02.closely with him in coming weeks and months subject to the results on

:49:03. > :49:06.June 8th and look forward to that process. It's vital for this country

:49:07. > :49:09.that we have a healthy democracy that works for everyone. This

:49:10. > :49:12.Government shares the aim of increasing the number of students

:49:13. > :49:16.and young people registered to vote. It's vital the views of students and

:49:17. > :49:21.young people are taken into account in the democratic process and this

:49:22. > :49:28.amendment will help deliver that. Lastly, by no means least, let me

:49:29. > :49:31.turn to amendments 156 A to C which relate to international students. I

:49:32. > :49:34.want to reiterate that the Government values and welcomes

:49:35. > :49:41.international students who've come to study in the UK. We recognise

:49:42. > :49:44.they enhance our educational institutions financially and

:49:45. > :49:47.culturely, they enrich students and they become important ambassadors

:49:48. > :49:51.for the UK in later life. It's for this reason that we have no plan to

:49:52. > :49:54.limit the number of genuine international students who can come

:49:55. > :49:58.to study here and I need to be very clear that that commitment applies

:49:59. > :50:02.to all institutions. We have no intention of limiting any

:50:03. > :50:04.institution's ability to recruit genuine international students and

:50:05. > :50:10.no plans to cap the number of student who is can come to the UK to

:50:11. > :50:16.study nor to limit an institution's ability to recruit genuine

:50:17. > :50:23.international students based on any other basis. Happy to give way.

:50:24. > :50:26.Could he explain the logic of including in a statistic which the

:50:27. > :50:33.Government wishes to limit a statistic which the Government has

:50:34. > :50:37.no desire to limit? I can reassure my right honourable friend that this

:50:38. > :50:42.Government welcomes international students. They can deliver a huge

:50:43. > :50:48.amount of value to our institutions, to our economy and to the learning

:50:49. > :50:53.environment here. But it is also important to recognise that there is

:50:54. > :50:57.an independent office for national statistics that classifies students

:50:58. > :51:02.as migration. It's a body which has an independent status. And that is

:51:03. > :51:05.the definition which it applies and accordingly it's appropriate it's

:51:06. > :51:11.treated in the way that it is at present in our immigration system.

:51:12. > :51:16.Thank you very much. I would like to thank the Minister for These

:51:17. > :51:19.amendn'ts because they reflect very well what the Education Select

:51:20. > :51:23.Committee said in its report recently on the subject of

:51:24. > :51:26.university sector and implications of leaving the European Union. I,

:51:27. > :51:30.like the minister, believe that it's so important to make sure that our

:51:31. > :51:35.sector, this very important sector, is attractive abroad. Indeed. No-one

:51:36. > :51:40.would disagree with that and it's good news that the UK continues to

:51:41. > :51:44.be a highly attractive place for international students to come and

:51:45. > :51:51.study. We are seeing numbers of international students running at

:51:52. > :51:55.record highs with over 170,000 non-EU entrants to UK higher

:51:56. > :52:02.education students institutions for the sixth year running. The latest

:52:03. > :52:05.Home Office visa data shows since 2011 university sponsored visa

:52:06. > :52:10.applications have risen by around 10%. I'm going to take one more

:52:11. > :52:14.intervention on this subject and take it from... Oh, two more. I'm

:52:15. > :52:18.grateful to the Minister for Giving way but he's been being selective

:52:19. > :52:21.with the statistics because the UK is losing market share across the

:52:22. > :52:26.world when it comes to international students. The statistics agency

:52:27. > :52:32.shows the UK has seen a reduction of over 50% in students comeling to the

:52:33. > :52:35.UK from India -- coming. More than half international students in the

:52:36. > :52:39.UK say they don't feel welcome. Does he recognise the scale of that

:52:40. > :52:48.problem? I think the honourable member might be being selective as

:52:49. > :52:53.well. I can point to the 8% Increase in those from China. Since 2011,

:52:54. > :52:57.numbers of applications are up by 10%. Let's not get distracted

:52:58. > :53:01.further. I'll take this intervention then move on.

:53:02. > :53:04.My right honourable friend has been a great advocate for this issue for

:53:05. > :53:07.a long period of time so I personally say thank you to him for

:53:08. > :53:13.delivering the amendments as seen on the order paper today. But given the

:53:14. > :53:17.fact that under this new amendment we'll be seeing institutions having

:53:18. > :53:20.to give out their numbers of international students in a new

:53:21. > :53:24.duty, what would happen to institutions that for any reason

:53:25. > :53:27.don't give over that information to the higher education Statistics

:53:28. > :53:34.Authority in terms of their enforcement power? Well, I thank the

:53:35. > :53:39.honourable member for his intervention. We would expect all

:53:40. > :53:43.higher education providers on the office for students registers to be

:53:44. > :53:47.compliant with the duties and conditions that are imposed on them

:53:48. > :53:52.and if they are not, the office for students has a range of regulatory

:53:53. > :54:00.tools at its disposal to deal with those kinds of eventualities. For

:54:01. > :54:04.the last time on this. I understand his discomfort on this issue. But he

:54:05. > :54:12.talked about numbers. He will recognise, won't he, that in the

:54:13. > :54:15.latest year for which numbers are available, 2014-15, new enrolments

:54:16. > :54:20.of international students fell by 3%, so he cannot say numbers are

:54:21. > :54:25.going up. Well, you can certainly say that

:54:26. > :54:29.since 2011, visa applications have risen by around 10%. There might be

:54:30. > :54:34.a year on year fluctuation has there's been in many periods in the

:54:35. > :54:41.history of international students coming to study. We have seen

:54:42. > :54:46.fluctuations, but since 2010, we have seen applications up by around

:54:47. > :54:50.10%. The amendment tabled in the other place, Lord's amendment 156,

:54:51. > :54:54.could do real damage. For example, it prevents international students

:54:55. > :54:57.being treated as long-term migrants. The internationally recognised

:54:58. > :55:01.definition of a long-term migrant is anyone moving countries for a period

:55:02. > :55:06.of more than a year. If we were not able to apply the key features of

:55:07. > :55:10.the work immigration regime such as the need to specify the terms on

:55:11. > :55:14.twig migrant can come and a requirement to return home upon

:55:15. > :55:21.expiry of the visa to international students, this could undermine the

:55:22. > :55:24.whole student migration system. The amendment prohibits any change to

:55:25. > :55:28.the future student migration regime that could be interpreted as more

:55:29. > :55:35.restrictive than that enforced when this Bill is passed. Any future

:55:36. > :55:40.changes, even mime nor technical changes, will require fresh

:55:41. > :55:45.legislation. I don't believe it would be sensible or helpful,

:55:46. > :55:48.particularly given how crowded the forthcoming programme is likely to

:55:49. > :55:54.be. That said, I recognise the strength of feeling. That's why I'm

:55:55. > :55:57.pleased to move 156 A oaf C, the Bill already create force the first

:55:58. > :56:01.time a requirement for information to be published on higher education

:56:02. > :56:07.providers with a statutory duty to consider what will be helpful to

:56:08. > :56:11.students on higher education courses here to prospective students and

:56:12. > :56:14.higher education providers. The amendments extend the important new

:56:15. > :56:19.duty to cover what information would be useful to current or prospective

:56:20. > :56:25.international students in higher education and the proud vieders that

:56:26. > :56:28.recruit them -- providers. They would specifically require

:56:29. > :56:32.consideration of publication of international student numbers. All

:56:33. > :56:35.this is designed to make sure there is as much information as possible

:56:36. > :56:38.available about the UK's offer to international students. We have a

:56:39. > :56:41.good story to tell and the Government's keen to ensure that it

:56:42. > :56:49.is told. Madam Deputy Speaker, this Bill is

:56:50. > :56:53.long overdue, it will streamline the higher education's architecture, it

:56:54. > :56:55.will strengthen our world class capabilities and enhance the

:56:56. > :56:59.competitiveness and productivity of our economy. I thank all members for

:57:00. > :57:03.their constructive engagement through this Bill's passage and beg

:57:04. > :57:09.to move. Speak peek the question is that this

:57:10. > :57:16.House disagrees with the Lords in their amendment one. Mr Gordon

:57:17. > :57:21.Marsden. It's a great pleasure and privilege to be able to speak on

:57:22. > :57:30.these amendments this afternoon and I want to begin by thanking all the

:57:31. > :57:35.work that has been done by the various teams of drafters and

:57:36. > :57:38.clerks. I know that he and I have had some very intense discussions in

:57:39. > :57:48.the last three to four days and I know that those must have put great

:57:49. > :57:51.pressure on the clerks concerned to produce the required amendments,

:57:52. > :57:54.substantial required amendments which are now before us today. I

:57:55. > :57:57.want to give special thanks to the public Bill office. Most people

:57:58. > :58:05.who've been in opposition, whether on this side or the other, now it's

:58:06. > :58:07.very much in terms of resources, a David and Goliath project, and we

:58:08. > :58:12.are grateful to the professional work of the public bill office for

:58:13. > :58:17.assisting us. I want to place on record, because we are talking about

:58:18. > :58:23.Lords amendments, my gratitude and the gratitude I think of many in

:58:24. > :58:27.this House to the reboughs and strong -- robust and strong exercise

:58:28. > :58:31.of its historic privilege by the House of Lords which is to revise,

:58:32. > :58:35.to remind and to warn. I think they've done all three things with

:58:36. > :58:39.the raft of amendments that they have put and it's that raft of

:58:40. > :58:43.amendments combined with the intense pressure that has been applied

:58:44. > :58:46.across the sector, across various groups and the work that we have

:58:47. > :58:50.been putting in, with the cooperation of the minister in

:58:51. > :58:55.recent days that have brought us to where we are today. Those groups are

:58:56. > :59:00.numerous. Sometimes, and I'm sorry that the minister in his measured

:59:01. > :59:05.presentation, didn't find time to talk about the contribution of the

:59:06. > :59:09.people who work in universities, that they are just as important as

:59:10. > :59:15.the contribution of students and teachers. After all, without them,

:59:16. > :59:18.we wouldn't have universities, we wouldn't have higher educational

:59:19. > :59:24.institutions. I want to place on record my thanks also to the various

:59:25. > :59:30.sector groups who've assisted us in this process to NUS who I think have

:59:31. > :59:33.delivered some very thoughtful and trenchant critiques which have

:59:34. > :59:38.helped us get where we are today, as have indeed the unions involved, at

:59:39. > :59:45.the UCU and unitnison and the Council for British universities.

:59:46. > :59:51.And the whole range of universities across the sector, modern and

:59:52. > :00:02.traditional and I must not forget the submissions from the EFE sector

:00:03. > :00:05.and the EOC because 12% of higher education is provided by further

:00:06. > :00:10.education as well. It's been about the dialogue with University vice

:00:11. > :00:16.chancellors and junior lecturers. We are in a much better place because

:00:17. > :00:21.of the specialist critique we have had and because of the amendments

:00:22. > :00:30.that the Minister has accepted on the bill in the Lords and can I,

:00:31. > :00:37.since she is in the chamber, paid tribute to the honourable Lady, the

:00:38. > :00:43.member for Glasgow... And her team for making the point that they make

:00:44. > :00:51.about the importance of the devolved administrations. Let us turn to the

:00:52. > :00:54.actual amendments that the government wishes to, I was going to

:00:55. > :01:03.say Tampa with, that would be churlish, wishes to remove. The

:01:04. > :01:06.concession on university title is welcome but necessary. It's been a

:01:07. > :01:11.long time coming. There have been strong concerns across the sector

:01:12. > :01:15.from all areas, people who work in the sector, people concerned about

:01:16. > :01:20.the nature of their employment, about the quality of their teaching

:01:21. > :01:26.and the students who are having, at the end of the day, to increasingly

:01:27. > :01:30.pay more and more about this. I don't think that we should forget

:01:31. > :01:36.the context in which this bill is being wound up here today. The

:01:37. > :01:40.context is that of a world-class university sector which is now

:01:41. > :01:45.facing all of the challenges of Brexit. Challenges which were not in

:01:46. > :01:53.any shape or form included in this bill. Therefore, we have to have a

:01:54. > :01:57.world renowned brand of University protected in as many ways as

:01:58. > :02:03.possible. So we are content that the government have now committed to

:02:04. > :02:07.hold this fall and wide-ranging consultation on University title and

:02:08. > :02:10.as the Minister has said, once that consultation has finished, as a

:02:11. > :02:16.result of discussions that we have had with him, the secretary of state

:02:17. > :02:21.will have two issue guidance on the criteria to be applied when awarding

:02:22. > :02:30.University title which the OFS much Pieters must have regard to. My

:02:31. > :02:37.honourable friend is making a strong case and I agree with him that it's

:02:38. > :02:42.great the government have recognised the real challenge to university

:02:43. > :02:46.reputation that could come to the extension of University title

:02:47. > :02:50.without safeguards. Would he agree with me that the government

:02:51. > :02:55.proposals are a watering down of the Lords amendment one and it would be

:02:56. > :03:00.very necessary in due course to look very carefully at the guidance and

:03:01. > :03:08.ensure that it does adequately protect our University title. My

:03:09. > :03:12.honourable friend the esteemed chair of the all-party committee,

:03:13. > :03:18.all-party group on University is absolutely right. She makes

:03:19. > :03:21.precisely the point that so many people want to make to the

:03:22. > :03:25.government. Edmund Burke said that the price of liberty was eternal

:03:26. > :03:31.vigilance and the price of extracting these concessions from

:03:32. > :03:36.the government today will be, if not eternal scrutiny, very severe

:03:37. > :03:41.scrutiny if day by any chance go back into office after June the 8th.

:03:42. > :03:48.Whatever the situation is, not just within this house but outside it,

:03:49. > :03:52.there has to be that scrutiny. That means that this process is not a

:03:53. > :03:58.tick box process but is one where there must be a big conversation.

:03:59. > :04:05.One that my honourable friends, the member for Durham, the member for

:04:06. > :04:09.Sheffield Central, Ilford South, Ilford North, who has just spoken

:04:10. > :04:15.and all sorts of people have made this point, I pay tribute to

:04:16. > :04:20.Baroness Brown in pursuing this and, hopefully, the penny has finally

:04:21. > :04:26.dropped to the government as many have said strong safeguards need to

:04:27. > :04:29.be put into place to make sure that anybody with degree awarding powers

:04:30. > :04:36.has met the criteria to do so and will not put the student at risk or

:04:37. > :04:42.damage the hard earned reputation of the entire sector in the UK. That is

:04:43. > :04:47.why the government commits to that full and wide-ranging consultation

:04:48. > :04:53.and I'm pleased that the Minister has confirmed that it will look at

:04:54. > :04:59.international examples of granting University title in places such as

:05:00. > :05:05.Australia. It is crucial that it looks at that range of teaching,

:05:06. > :05:09.sustained scholarship, a cohesive academic community, learning

:05:10. > :05:13.infrastructure and often forgotten Pastoral care. Actually supporting

:05:14. > :05:19.students to learn, not simply being part of a vague online community.

:05:20. > :05:24.And knowledge exchange because as research fortnight said last year,

:05:25. > :05:29.the title of University needs to be seen as a privilege and not an

:05:30. > :05:32.automatic entitlement. That is why this consultation and subsequent

:05:33. > :05:36.guidance is so important with the market being open to new entrants

:05:37. > :05:46.and that is why we will continue to press ministers on it. Moving on to

:05:47. > :05:52.the issues around the awarding of degree awarding powers. Right from

:05:53. > :05:56.the beginning of this bill, we have said, and it's been nobly elaborated

:05:57. > :06:02.and strengthened by the amendment that was put in the other place by

:06:03. > :06:05.the Baroness Wolf who was a fantastic advocate for the H E

:06:06. > :06:09.sector and the FA sector and knows of what she talks and that is why

:06:10. > :06:15.the government has had to move on this area. This bill is

:06:16. > :06:20.significantly at its heart about trust, or the lack of it. We've said

:06:21. > :06:24.right from the beginning that the government needs to make very clear

:06:25. > :06:33.and allay some of the concerns that we and a number of other members of

:06:34. > :06:36.the sector have had about the principle amendment that giving

:06:37. > :06:39.providers the option from day one of building up the process of degree

:06:40. > :06:46.awarding powers is potentially very dangerous and is potentially taking

:06:47. > :06:49.a gamble on probationary degrees from probationary providers. I don't

:06:50. > :06:55.want to reopen the debate that we had in committee on this but I do

:06:56. > :06:59.want to say very strongly that we are not against private providers,

:07:00. > :07:06.we are not against new providers, as such, but the premise must be to

:07:07. > :07:09.strengthen the public centre that these new providers can demonstrate

:07:10. > :07:14.providing high-quality education and that includes robust governance that

:07:15. > :07:19.maintains academic quality and the student interest and has a

:07:20. > :07:23.demonstrable track record of delivering higher education before

:07:24. > :07:27.being given granting degrees powers. We know from looking at the issues

:07:28. > :07:32.that have arisen in the United States by private providers at some

:07:33. > :07:35.of the criticisms that Baroness Wolf has levelled at a similar process in

:07:36. > :07:42.Australia and the issues that involved the Apollo group 's numbers

:07:43. > :07:53.of years ago, to see why the safeguards are entirely necessary.

:07:54. > :07:59.So, we are very pleased that we are going to get some significant degree

:08:00. > :08:07.of scrutiny put in place and that when granting or revoking degree

:08:08. > :08:10.awarding powers the OFS must be advised by the independent

:08:11. > :08:14.designated quality body which the government has conceded on the

:08:15. > :08:18.providers ability to provide and maintain a cheap provision of an

:08:19. > :08:25.appropriate quality and standards. There has to be a crucial traffic

:08:26. > :08:29.light, if Thiede use that expression, saying caution and a

:08:30. > :08:36.guarantee of the process and the OFS must be advised in that way. It is

:08:37. > :08:41.important, after all, the OFS will be whether you take the term

:08:42. > :08:47.mutually or not, in the first few years of its existence, a creature

:08:48. > :08:54.of government. It is a creature of government that is on probation and

:08:55. > :08:58.on trial. I was pleased to hear the Minister praise Khieu AA for what

:08:59. > :09:02.they have done but as he says things change with time. That is why we had

:09:03. > :09:08.to press the government so hard to come forward with a new mechanism if

:09:09. > :09:16.Q a were no longer to be the appropriate body. That is fired the

:09:17. > :09:20.concession of an automatic review by the quality body if there is a

:09:21. > :09:24.change of ownership or merger at a university because we know and

:09:25. > :09:30.people in the sector know and the people employed there no, and those

:09:31. > :09:33.who are being taught an inferior conditions because of some of what

:09:34. > :09:39.has happened in the past, we know what can happen in that area. So we

:09:40. > :09:44.need those steps alongside a consultation guidance on University

:09:45. > :09:49.title to protect our brand of higher providers. It's not just about the

:09:50. > :09:55.letter. It is about the spirit of this. That is reiterated by that

:09:56. > :09:58.automatic review and that will prevent University title of degree

:09:59. > :10:03.awarding powers being purchased without protections of quality

:10:04. > :10:09.assurance. We remain concerned that should no independent designated

:10:10. > :10:16.quality body exist, the EOF S must set up a specific committee. That is

:10:17. > :10:22.one of the things we were determined to ensure the government take that

:10:23. > :10:26.position. Therefore, there are assertions of a committee with a

:10:27. > :10:31.majority of members with no previous involvement with the OFS is crucial

:10:32. > :10:36.for this body to remain independent of government and with the office of

:10:37. > :10:43.students for the reasons I have described. I want to move on to the

:10:44. > :10:47.issue of the teaching excellence framework and Lords amendment 23 and

:10:48. > :10:54.the amendments the government are moving in the loop of those

:10:55. > :11:04.amendments. Now, the minister said, the principle of teaching excellence

:11:05. > :11:08.was accepted across the house. And, actually, who would be against

:11:09. > :11:16.teaching excellence? Who would be against dystopia teaching? The devil

:11:17. > :11:19.is always in the detail. In this case, it's in a detail which in

:11:20. > :11:26.another area, the research assessment exercise, took nearly six

:11:27. > :11:32.years to take through its process. So, we are wise to think and to

:11:33. > :11:41.pause and particularly on the potential to differentiate Effie

:11:42. > :11:46.levels which has been a concern across the sector. We have expected

:11:47. > :11:51.serious fears, not least in the context of the ridiculously titled

:11:52. > :11:58.gold, silver, and bronze, which was no doubt dreamt up in an office of

:11:59. > :12:02.post-Olympic euphoria back in the autumn. Those are the use use that

:12:03. > :12:06.people are concerned about. People are concerned that any link is bound

:12:07. > :12:16.to affect student decision-making and adversely and input to -- in

:12:17. > :12:26.particular those from disadvantaged backgrounds. The Minister has quoted

:12:27. > :12:31.somewhat selectively the groups he wishes to quote but I can assure a

:12:32. > :12:45.number of universities and university groups who remain, some

:12:46. > :12:53.of them, of a most relevant nature, that is why it is crucial this is

:12:54. > :12:58.put to a full independent review. That is why it is quite right that

:12:59. > :13:03.that has been accepted and aided by the work that the Lords put in. It

:13:04. > :13:09.gives a different direction of travel to the rubber-stamping

:13:10. > :13:14.technocracy that the government previously had in mind for us. The

:13:15. > :13:17.government's agenda on higher education has consistently hit

:13:18. > :13:21.student halves, particularly from disadvantaged backgrounds and this

:13:22. > :13:28.is in the context of what we said at the beginning about doing everything

:13:29. > :13:33.in our power to resist the temp being used as a Trojan Horse for the

:13:34. > :13:37.escalation of fees. We know from the Sutton trust, from the various

:13:38. > :13:41.surveys that the mountain of debt which is being imposed on students

:13:42. > :13:44.as a result of the way this government and its predecessor have

:13:45. > :13:52.gone forward in this is daunting. What an impediment to its hopes and

:13:53. > :13:56.dreams. Now that we see inflation leaping, post-Brexit, to the level

:13:57. > :14:01.that is going to bring in the future, we are right to be concerned

:14:02. > :14:06.that there should be a proper process in terms of how we take this

:14:07. > :14:10.forward. So with the unions involved, many in the sector feel

:14:11. > :14:15.very strongly about any sort of link that affects any student

:14:16. > :14:21.decision-making adversely, particularly in the sector of low

:14:22. > :14:27.income families. You see you also have very strong concerns that this

:14:28. > :14:37.would create a multitiered system, increased pressures on teachers and

:14:38. > :14:41.it has been said that if the government wanted to improve

:14:42. > :14:46.teaching quality in needs to think about whether staff are supported

:14:47. > :14:53.enough to deliver. It's vitally important that the government are

:14:54. > :14:56.finally, on the back of concerns of the people who really know what is

:14:57. > :15:01.going on in the sector that the government have finally put in place

:15:02. > :15:10.a legislative commitment to a full independent review before the

:15:11. > :15:14.differentiation fees. I was grateful to the Minister for setting out the

:15:15. > :15:19.chronology of that process. It is not simply about the Expedia but

:15:20. > :15:24.about the process. We will still campaign for the link between the

:15:25. > :15:30.TEF and the fees to be removed altogether. But we know that we have

:15:31. > :15:36.to try the best we can with this bill. I believe that the full

:15:37. > :15:43.independent review would give us much more capacity to challenge the

:15:44. > :15:48.points that might be brought forward because it makes it clear that

:15:49. > :15:52.review would cover specific areas, including whether the process by

:15:53. > :15:56.which ratings are determined appropriate for use in the scheme,

:15:57. > :16:00.the names, the impact of the scheme on the ability of providers and

:16:01. > :16:04.their assessment of whether it is in the public interest and a good

:16:05. > :16:09.strong independent reviewer will take these things out. And then the

:16:10. > :16:20.government, whichever government it is, will be on that account.

:16:21. > :16:32.Would he agree with me... The review is welcome, but it would have been

:16:33. > :16:37.good to hear from the Minister that he would want to act on the outcome,

:16:38. > :16:44.not ignore that. I cannot be responsible. I cannot be responsible

:16:45. > :16:53.for the minister's mood music, only for what he committed to do in the

:16:54. > :17:04.context of this book. And it is very important. It is not just the Lords,

:17:05. > :17:10.a whole raft of people concerned about this, and the combined efforts

:17:11. > :17:15.outside, the wisdom of the Lords who could constrain the Minister by the

:17:16. > :17:23.original amendments who have insisted on these things, who have

:17:24. > :17:28.got us the concessions today. I want to reiterate what I see it in my

:17:29. > :17:32.speech. I said I was happy to confirm that the Secretary of State

:17:33. > :17:38.is going to take account of the review, and provide guidance

:17:39. > :17:43.accordingly including any changes that the review suggests Army did,

:17:44. > :17:53.in relation to the metrics, any other items. I am grateful to the

:17:54. > :17:59.honourable gentleman, for clarifying that point. It is an important

:18:00. > :18:05.point, as is the fact that all regulations under this bill, will

:18:06. > :18:09.now be subject to the affirmative procedure. This puts daylight on

:18:10. > :18:17.some of the issues we have been talking about, in terms of rocketing

:18:18. > :18:24.fees. Entirely possible, I believe, that the Secretary of State will

:18:25. > :18:29.have two, whoever that is, listen to an independent statutory review.

:18:30. > :18:37.That could see this is not working, it won't ever, certainly not for the

:18:38. > :18:40.time being, and it is in our interests to make sure that

:18:41. > :18:47.statutory review is as potent as we wish it to be. I also want to talk

:18:48. > :18:58.about the electoral registration amendment, welcome the government's

:18:59. > :19:02.amendments. That strengthens to some extent the current position. We

:19:03. > :19:07.would have preferred the full commitment to ensuring block

:19:08. > :19:15.registration, but nevertheless we wholeheartedly welcome anything that

:19:16. > :19:21.can facilitate greater student interest and awareness in political

:19:22. > :19:27.affairs. I pay tribute to the fantastic work that my honourable

:19:28. > :19:35.friend has done, and the good work as pilots at the University of

:19:36. > :19:47.Sheffield and Bath. I also like to thank the members of the committee,

:19:48. > :19:52.Acton, Ealing, West Bromwich, because they have concerns that have

:19:53. > :20:00.been felt strongly. It is important to note we are not just relying on

:20:01. > :20:09.nudges, on the honourable gentleman made reference in this respect, we

:20:10. > :20:16.have specific powers to impose electoral registration for providers

:20:17. > :20:21.not doing enough. In terms of the amendment, I want to turn finally to

:20:22. > :20:32.the amendments on international students. I welcome the doggedness

:20:33. > :20:41.with which the Lord has pursued this matter, with the coalition, and I

:20:42. > :20:49.would have hoped that the strength of that coalition may have moved the

:20:50. > :20:56.government. But unfortunately, it is not a question of values, and

:20:57. > :21:03.welcomes that the honourable gentleman talked about. I am sure,

:21:04. > :21:11.as he was the dedicated Remainer, I am sure he signs up to.

:21:12. > :21:15.Unfortunately, he has a Prime Minister who has at worst been

:21:16. > :21:22.obstructive on this issue. The question is from his honourable

:21:23. > :21:31.friend, from Bedford, and the cheer of the select committee, have

:21:32. > :21:36.pointed out where we are. Brexit has been throwing up problems for the

:21:37. > :21:38.higher education sector. The government 's stance is threatening

:21:39. > :21:50.the sector and the reputation worldwide. The issues about stealing

:21:51. > :21:59.in Erasmus, funding beyond 2020, the university sector has got enough to

:22:00. > :22:08.content with. -- staying in Erasmus. Having a Prime Minister who to

:22:09. > :22:15.wrinkle her nose, and cabinet ministers who do the same win the

:22:16. > :22:19.different path is suggested. My honourable friend, making compelling

:22:20. > :22:25.points. In terms of Northern Ireland, to universities, Queens

:22:26. > :22:31.University and Ulster, both of them rely upon Erasmus and the social

:22:32. > :22:41.funds to develop cross-border educational research programmes.

:22:42. > :22:46.Therefore, the impact of Brexit in the context of this debate,

:22:47. > :22:55.particularly important. Would he agree? Absolutely. My honourable

:22:56. > :23:01.friend meeting another point, to where the the government has still

:23:02. > :23:04.got a long way to go in understanding and realising what the

:23:05. > :23:09.international sector is all about. But despite it is so disappointing.

:23:10. > :23:15.I was going to say the Minister is not going to go farther, but the

:23:16. > :23:22.truth, the Minister cannot. Because colleagues have been sat on by No.

:23:23. > :23:28.Ten and the Home Office. Split down the middle on this issue. It is a

:23:29. > :23:37.shambles. The retiring Liberal Democrat spokesperson commented on

:23:38. > :23:43.this today. It is one that we in government would have no part in. We

:23:44. > :23:47.continue to push for the removal of students from the migration

:23:48. > :23:57.statistics, and while I welcome, genuinely, the designated body which

:23:58. > :24:02.has been talked about, the truth is exactly as the honourable gentleman

:24:03. > :24:14.said. It leaves the Minister without visible means of support. In terms

:24:15. > :24:17.of delivering objectives. Madam Deputy Speaker, the problems and

:24:18. > :24:22.weaknesses of this bill have been substantial, not least the

:24:23. > :24:28.government be only doing anything to make a pre Brexit bill, conceived

:24:29. > :24:33.when it was assumed Brexit would fall, that and this could have gone

:24:34. > :24:39.to pre-legislative scrutiny, it could have been paused. The Council

:24:40. > :24:49.for defence of British universities would have argued. And indeed, this

:24:50. > :24:53.house. Not least the chair of the committee. They didn't. It has been

:24:54. > :25:00.left to the arguments that we have put in this place, and by we I mean

:25:01. > :25:03.not just my party, the pole position, I mean the other

:25:04. > :25:14.opposition parties and House of Lords. Constant effort to cross

:25:15. > :25:24.benchers, Lib Dem peers, small but important group of conservative

:25:25. > :25:29.peers, who have wrinkled noses, fighting for Russia's lead against

:25:30. > :25:34.the dictation, risking blunting the dynamism of the sector. It could be

:25:35. > :25:44.delivered that an old university, Oxford, Cambridge, or a new one,

:25:45. > :25:49.many we were celebrating last night. Indeed, the bill sector, I am going

:25:50. > :25:54.to pay tribute for extending awarding powers to the sector. Not

:25:55. > :26:02.least because my college at white pill is going to be one of those to

:26:03. > :26:06.benefit. The Americans have a saying. When you get lemons, make

:26:07. > :26:12.lemonade. That is what all those have tried to do. Make this flawed

:26:13. > :26:22.bill better for purpose, not hinder the dynamism. I think without having

:26:23. > :26:33.that decent thrash, this would be a poor bill. Thank you Madam Deputy

:26:34. > :26:38.Speaker. My remarks are going to be short in this debate. I think all

:26:39. > :26:43.the honourable member 's have got something else to be doing. Over the

:26:44. > :26:51.last six years I have been a champion of universities. Well done.

:26:52. > :26:58.I have debated against many different members. For the last two

:26:59. > :27:04.years it has been a privilege, to be vice chair, with my honourable

:27:05. > :27:09.friend from Sheffield Central. I wish them success, and hopefully I

:27:10. > :27:15.can join him, continuing to represent students in Parliament. I

:27:16. > :27:24.have got 23,000 students in my constituency. Spread across two

:27:25. > :27:28.universities. Both of them have a lot component of international

:27:29. > :27:33.students. It is absolutely vital, we have debates for years, relating to

:27:34. > :27:40.how much they contribute to the local economy and national economy.

:27:41. > :27:45.I am pleased that this bill is being presented. It is something that we

:27:46. > :27:58.have called for, across the higher education sector. And I am pleased

:27:59. > :28:05.to see this bill passing, hopefully, to royal assent. I would like to pay

:28:06. > :28:13.tribute to my honourable friend for his work, in pushing this. This bill

:28:14. > :28:23.really testament to all of his work. I want to move on to the amendments,

:28:24. > :28:28.156, the House of Lords, and the government amendments to this

:28:29. > :28:33.particular amendment. As has already been said, it is incredibly welcome.

:28:34. > :28:38.The Minister and Department for Education have listened to the

:28:39. > :28:42.campaign group of MPs, getting that duty of reporting on the number of

:28:43. > :28:48.international students from the designated body. This makes a

:28:49. > :28:57.massive difference, significant change in tone by the government.

:28:58. > :29:03.Thank you again for listening to us. And just a shout out to members who

:29:04. > :29:12.have contributed to this campaign, honourable friend is for Portsmouth

:29:13. > :29:17.South, Bedford, and Loughborough, great champions for the student

:29:18. > :29:19.community. And also international students, paying tribute to

:29:20. > :29:24.colleagues on the other say to have been championing this case. I am

:29:25. > :29:28.obviously delighted that the Department for Education has made

:29:29. > :29:34.this amendment, but depending on the outcome on June eight I can

:29:35. > :29:38.guarantee to not only the government but my constituents, I'm going to be

:29:39. > :29:45.continuing the case when it comes to immigration consultation,

:29:46. > :29:48.collaboration, and that is in order to make sure that international

:29:49. > :29:54.students are going to be taken out of the overall immigration figures.

:29:55. > :29:57.It is peculiar that they have still been included. Nonetheless,

:29:58. > :30:03.hopefully if I am still going to be around after June eight I will be

:30:04. > :30:08.making representations with colleagues and we want to make sure

:30:09. > :30:12.that this is in the interests of my constituents, students,

:30:13. > :30:16.international students and the United Kingdom reputation overseas.

:30:17. > :30:17.I wish everybody a huge amount of Lock, in the forthcoming general

:30:18. > :30:30.election. Last July when this bill first came

:30:31. > :30:36.to the floor of the house I spoke about the use you of pushing ahead

:30:37. > :30:40.with it following the Brexit vote. I questioned whether the time was

:30:41. > :30:46.right for this particular bill and I think there is still some issues, as

:30:47. > :30:50.have been raised this afternoon by the member for Blackpool South,

:30:51. > :30:55.regarding Brexit and this bill. I'll come onto them in a little while but

:30:56. > :31:00.I'd like to pay tribute to both the member for Blackpool South's

:31:01. > :31:07.tenacity and collaboration across the house with all aspects of the

:31:08. > :31:10.bill and pager beaut also to the Minister for universities and

:31:11. > :31:24.science for his huge amount of work that has been done on this bill. --

:31:25. > :31:28.and pay tribute. The decision for Scottish higher education to remain

:31:29. > :31:32.in the hands of the Scottish Government was very important to us.

:31:33. > :31:43.There shouldn't be any system that could be detrimental to Scotland

:31:44. > :31:52.which is currently worth over ?6 billion. In Northern Ireland,

:31:53. > :31:56.education and higher education is devolved and has not got the

:31:57. > :32:00.political authority at the moment due to the lack of political

:32:01. > :32:04.institutions are banned running and in that regard it is particularly

:32:05. > :32:10.damaging for others with Brexit moving. All of our universities rely

:32:11. > :32:13.on EU migrants in both teaching and student populations and would she

:32:14. > :32:18.agree with me that there needs to be a resolution to both its use to

:32:19. > :32:24.ensure that further and higher education continues to be the pump

:32:25. > :32:28.that fuels the local economy? I thank my honourable friend for that

:32:29. > :32:35.intervention. On these benches we have been consistent for calls for

:32:36. > :32:38.EU workers and students in University and in our local

:32:39. > :32:46.communities to be given the assurances they need. This is not

:32:47. > :32:50.about getting assurances that they are allowed to stay this is getting

:32:51. > :32:57.assurances that they are welcome to stay and we appreciate the

:32:58. > :33:03.contribution they make. Looking this week at any assessment system should

:33:04. > :33:13.not be used, we agree with section four of Amendment 23, any assessment

:33:14. > :33:18.system should not be used to create a single composite ranking of higher

:33:19. > :33:23.education providers as this could skew prospective students opinions

:33:24. > :33:27.about whether or not to attend a particular institution. Scottish

:33:28. > :33:34.higher education already has its own quality assurance process in place

:33:35. > :33:38.which includes inputs not just from students but also from teaching

:33:39. > :33:44.professionals across the sector. This enhancement led it teaching

:33:45. > :33:50.review is highly regarded and we would not want a UK wide system to

:33:51. > :33:55.threaten Scotland's's current system. The UK Government does not

:33:56. > :33:59.have any jurisdiction over the Scottish HD sector and therefore the

:34:00. > :34:05.Secretary of State alone should not be creating an assessment system

:34:06. > :34:08.Scottish education. We are looking for assurances that the Scottish

:34:09. > :34:15.Government must play a full part in the development of any system that

:34:16. > :34:24.could apply to higher education in Scotland without full concentration.

:34:25. > :34:29.-- consultation. Moving on to Amendment 150 six. It's positive to

:34:30. > :34:31.hear today from the government, reiterating the commitment that

:34:32. > :34:40.there are no limits to international student numbers but the government's

:34:41. > :34:42.alternative amendment placing a duty on higher education institutes to

:34:43. > :34:50.publish information relating to international students does not go

:34:51. > :34:54.far enough to allow this sector to thrive. Current immigration policy

:34:55. > :34:59.poses a significant risk to Scottish universities and we are losing out

:35:00. > :35:06.to key competitors in attracting international students. Grateful to

:35:07. > :35:13.my honourable friend for giving way. I'd like to pager beaut to her hard

:35:14. > :35:17.work on the bill. Picking up about Scottish universities, Herriot Watt

:35:18. > :35:21.University in my constituency with an outstanding international

:35:22. > :35:25.reputation in science and technology recently announced cuts and

:35:26. > :35:34.redundancies specifically citing the Brexit effect, this government's

:35:35. > :35:41.immigration policies. Without this amendment she agree that

:35:42. > :35:44.universities will continue to suffer adversely both through Brexit and

:35:45. > :35:52.the government immigration policy. The lack of protection of University

:35:53. > :35:57.staff from strict immigration controls. My right honourable friend

:35:58. > :36:05.speaks of a passionately about Herriot Watt University but the

:36:06. > :36:08.picture she has painted could be applied to any number of

:36:09. > :36:15.universities, they are all feeling this very strongly at the moment. In

:36:16. > :36:21.some ways, it's not established professors, it's our students, our

:36:22. > :36:26.researchers, that are extremely mobile and can move and when they

:36:27. > :36:31.move, we could potentially be losing our position in terms of world

:36:32. > :36:39.rankings of universities. Higher education statistics agency dater

:36:40. > :36:51.says Scotland has seen 2% increase in EU international admissions in

:36:52. > :36:56.2014-15 compared to 2013-14. Higher numbers of entrants from some

:36:57. > :37:01.countries including India, Pakistan, and Nigeria. While we welcome the

:37:02. > :37:06.slight increases these remain... It remains a significant fall in the

:37:07. > :37:19.number of entrants from these countries since 2010. The number has

:37:20. > :37:26.reduced 59% since 2011, causing devastation across the sector. In

:37:27. > :37:30.comparison, during the period 2012-13 and 2013-14, the number of

:37:31. > :37:34.international students in higher education in Canada increased by

:37:35. > :37:45.11%, they are able to capitalise on this market where we are failing. I

:37:46. > :37:50.recently visited Canada with a delegation from the SNP. The she

:37:51. > :37:54.agreed that Canada's emigration policies have encouraged people to

:37:55. > :37:58.come to Canada and contribute to the economy and could be a great model

:37:59. > :38:04.for this country rather than the narrow path we are going down.

:38:05. > :38:12.Absolutely. We see the UK becoming an increasingly hostile environment

:38:13. > :38:15.for international students. They are going to other countries with a more

:38:16. > :38:21.attractive route to post the deep work options. International students

:38:22. > :38:25.make an important contribution to our economy and the UK Government

:38:26. > :38:30.have focused on migration policy on control rather than effective

:38:31. > :38:34.policies that allow for flexibility and support in terms of migration.

:38:35. > :38:39.The loss of the post study work Visa is a blow to many students but also

:38:40. > :38:48.to our local economy which is missing out on these skilled people.

:38:49. > :38:57.I apologise for coming in on her speech. The worth to the economy is

:38:58. > :39:04.something like 7 billion. In Scotland it is estimated to be worth

:39:05. > :39:09.about 1 billion annually. It's significant and something we need to

:39:10. > :39:13.be looking at. It's not just about the benefits to our economy but to

:39:14. > :39:18.our community, the diversity they bring and all the other benefits

:39:19. > :39:21.that we can look at. We call on the UK Government to take international

:39:22. > :39:27.students out of the net migration target and we look forward to seeing

:39:28. > :39:38.this in the next Queen's speech. As the UK leaves the U and our E U

:39:39. > :39:45.students, I assume, will be then categorised as as international

:39:46. > :39:50.students. If we do not get the immigration policy right, long-term

:39:51. > :39:56.damage will be done to our vital H E sector and the wider economy. As has

:39:57. > :40:05.already been said by my honourable friend, we need these guarantees for

:40:06. > :40:09.EU nationals both working in H E and prospective students to come to our

:40:10. > :40:13.universities. In Scotland our problem has always been emigration,

:40:14. > :40:18.not immigration. So it's time for the government to face the facts and

:40:19. > :40:24.take international students out of the net migration target. We need

:40:25. > :40:27.the skilled people. I hope very much that the government can take a

:40:28. > :40:33.serious look at Scotland's needs when considering future immigration

:40:34. > :40:36.policies. It's great to see the Immigration Minister here and I hope

:40:37. > :40:40.he will listen to some of these points made across the chamber this

:40:41. > :40:46.afternoon. I'd like to briefly mention schedule nine amendments to

:40:47. > :40:56.29-40 which I understand are not being presented today. I hope the

:40:57. > :40:59.minister if he is returned all of the Department for Education will

:41:00. > :41:06.clarify the Ahrar I committee role and how it would impact priorities.

:41:07. > :41:09.We seek assurances that this executive committee will not be to

:41:10. > :41:13.the detriment of Scottish institutions by means of removing

:41:14. > :41:17.funding streams or having large amounts of research priorities and

:41:18. > :41:24.therefore funding is staying within England. At the committee and report

:41:25. > :41:29.stage, the SNP put forward a number of amendments, in particular having

:41:30. > :41:34.devolved nation representation on the board of UK Ahye in order to

:41:35. > :41:38.take consideration of these research priorities across the whole of the

:41:39. > :41:47.UK. We will be looking for clarification of the composition of

:41:48. > :41:51.the border and assurances on the impartiality of the board when we

:41:52. > :41:59.return. The UK is at a crossroads. I hope the part that we choose to take

:42:00. > :42:04.both today and in the weeks and months to come protect this vital

:42:05. > :42:11.sector of the Scottish and the UK economy. It's important to all our

:42:12. > :42:19.futures that we get this right. Madame Deputy Speaker it is a

:42:20. > :42:22.pleasure to follow the honourable mother for Glasgow North West. She

:42:23. > :42:26.made a number of points I have a great deal of sympathy with

:42:27. > :42:31.particularly about the long-term implications of getting immigration

:42:32. > :42:37.policies right for the future of our students. May I take this

:42:38. > :42:42.opportunity to praise the minister. In the best of circumstances this

:42:43. > :42:46.would be a bill that required deft handling, and Coppermine is to not

:42:47. > :42:50.only resolve the issues in this house but also the issues in the A

:42:51. > :42:55.bars. When you add on top of that that it has been done in a very

:42:56. > :43:01.truncated form, the fact that it has reached this place is down to his

:43:02. > :43:04.considerable dexterity in managing different interests. It's a great

:43:05. > :43:12.pleasure to see the Immigration Minister. I can be nicer to him

:43:13. > :43:19.today. I would say that he is a true man of Yorkshire and those

:43:20. > :43:24.principles of securing our borders are at the core of everything he has

:43:25. > :43:29.done about immigration. Those have come together in the amendments

:43:30. > :43:36.proposed by Her Majesty's government in lieu of the Lord's amendments. I

:43:37. > :43:41.rise to support the government amendments. I do so because although

:43:42. > :43:46.personally I believe the long-term goal should be to exclude student

:43:47. > :43:50.numbers from immigration statistics, as the honourable lady from Glasgow

:43:51. > :43:55.was saying just previously, before that we need to get precision. The

:43:56. > :43:59.truth is, a lot of immigration statistics represent an sample sets

:44:00. > :44:04.and although there may be information available in specific

:44:05. > :44:11.circumstances, to the Home Office, out there in the great blue yonder,

:44:12. > :44:14.and trust me it is a great blue yonder, there will be our lot of

:44:15. > :44:19.misunderstanding about what immigration really is and people

:44:20. > :44:23.have a very sensitive understanding about different types of

:44:24. > :44:28.immigration. We shouldn't treat it as one clump. The population

:44:29. > :44:32.understand it can be good for this country particularly when it comes

:44:33. > :44:35.to the transfer of skills and people who are going to contribute

:44:36. > :44:42.long-term to the economic vitality of our company. In that instance I

:44:43. > :44:47.think the proposal of the government is worthy of support because it puts

:44:48. > :44:50.in place a structure where we can get precision that is understood not