04/07/2017

:00:00. > :00:00.real potential for rare diseases and every other that she mentions.

:00:07. > :00:13.Low-mac order, we must now move on. Urgent question, Angela Rayner.

:00:14. > :00:17.Thank you, Mr Speaker. To ask the Secretary of State if she will make

:00:18. > :00:23.a statement on the Government plans for funding on education. Thank you,

:00:24. > :00:29.Mr Speaker. This Government is determined to ensure that all

:00:30. > :00:32.pupils, regardless of where they live, receive a world-class

:00:33. > :00:35.education. Over the past seven years we have made significant progress

:00:36. > :00:38.was that there are now 1.8 million more children in schools that are

:00:39. > :00:45.pretty good understanding than they're worth in 2010. And today we

:00:46. > :00:50.saw and percentage point rise in Key stage two results as pupils and

:00:51. > :00:53.teachers rise to meet the challenge of these new, more demanding

:00:54. > :00:57.curriculum and assessments. Looking beyond skills, the Government has

:00:58. > :01:03.prioritised funding for all phases of education and we announced we

:01:04. > :01:07.would be investing an additional ?1 billion a year early indication

:01:08. > :01:10.entitlements, including funding for the new 30 hours entitlement and

:01:11. > :01:17.funding to increase the per child rate that providers receive. We

:01:18. > :01:22.protected the national base rate per pupil from 16 to 19-year-olds in

:01:23. > :01:25.sixth form, sixth form colleges and further education colleges in

:01:26. > :01:30.England, and in the spring Budget, the Chancellor announced new

:01:31. > :01:35.investment in technical education for 16 to 19-year-olds rising to an

:01:36. > :01:38.additional ?500 million per year. We have maintained funding for the

:01:39. > :01:43.adult education budget which supports adult skills participation,

:01:44. > :01:50.in cash terms, ?1.5 billion per year. We have limited reforms to

:01:51. > :01:52.higher education to drive greater competition and teaching standards,

:01:53. > :01:57.together this adds up to a comprehensive package of support for

:01:58. > :02:01.education at all stages of life. We want to ensure that every school has

:02:02. > :02:05.the resources it needs of which is why we have protected the schools

:02:06. > :02:11.budget in real terms since 2010. We set out our intention to increase

:02:12. > :02:15.funding further in our manifesto, as well as continuing to protect the

:02:16. > :02:20.pupil premium to support the most disadvantaged pupils. We recognise

:02:21. > :02:25.that schools are facing pressures, beyond the total amount of funding

:02:26. > :02:28.going into our schools, we know there are two crucial questions.

:02:29. > :02:32.Firstly, we know that how schools use the money is important in

:02:33. > :02:37.delivering the best outcomes for pupils. We will continue to provide

:02:38. > :02:42.support to help schools use their funding effectively. Second, we know

:02:43. > :02:46.that how funny is distributed across the country is anachronistic and

:02:47. > :02:49.unfair. -- how funding is distributed cost of the current

:02:50. > :02:53.system is in urgent need of reform. We have gone further than any

:02:54. > :02:57.previous government in reforming school funding. The second stage of

:02:58. > :03:03.our consultation on a national funding formula for schools closed

:03:04. > :03:06.in March. I am grateful to all the 25,000 people who responded as well

:03:07. > :03:09.as two honourable members who contributed in the more than ten

:03:10. > :03:13.hours of Parliamentary debates on school funding and any face-to-face

:03:14. > :03:17.meetings during the period. It is important we consider carefully how

:03:18. > :03:20.to proceed and as outlined in the manifesto, we will make sure that no

:03:21. > :03:26.school has its budget cut as a result of the new formula, and we

:03:27. > :03:29.remain committed to working with Parliament and bringing forward

:03:30. > :03:36.proposals that will command a consensus. We will set out our plans

:03:37. > :03:40.shortly. Angela Rayner. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think the Minister for

:03:41. > :03:44.schools. But there is no sign of the Education Secretary, and where is

:03:45. > :03:51.the Prime Minister? She is not running her party, she is running

:03:52. > :03:56.away from her party. The Education Secretary bid for extra money for

:03:57. > :04:00.schools this week and not at Cabinet, but on the front page of

:04:01. > :04:03.the Telegraph, and no wonder, when Arlene Foster got ?1 billion, she

:04:04. > :04:09.must be the most expensive right-winger since Cristiano

:04:10. > :04:15.Ronaldo! Can he confirm there was an increase in school funding of ?150

:04:16. > :04:19.per pupil in Northern Ireland, and is there any extra Treasury funding

:04:20. > :04:22.for education and the rest of the country or not? He has said the new

:04:23. > :04:28.funding formula will avoid cash cuts, so where is the funding for

:04:29. > :04:31.that coming from? New money or just cuts elsewhere? When he says no

:04:32. > :04:38.school will lose out, can they confirm this is in cash terms and

:04:39. > :04:42.not in real terms? They promised an extra ?4 billion for schools in the

:04:43. > :04:46.manifesto, is that now Government policy and how much of that is for

:04:47. > :04:52.each year? They were going to raise the money by scrapping infant school

:04:53. > :04:55.meals, is that still policy? Will he provide universal free breakfasts in

:04:56. > :05:00.primary schools and does he finally have proper costings for this? And

:05:01. > :05:04.is he still planning to fund new and expanded grammar schools, or has

:05:05. > :05:07.that now been abandoned as well? The Education Secretary was not the only

:05:08. > :05:12.one haggling with the Chancellor in the Sunday papers. Her predecessor,

:05:13. > :05:15.now the Environment Secretary, said he always listened to public sector

:05:16. > :05:20.pay bodies. He must have forgotten he actually abolished the school

:05:21. > :05:23.support staff negotiating body. Will the Minister now look at reinstating

:05:24. > :05:29.the Peabody for support staff, and does he support the lifting of the

:05:30. > :05:32.1% pay cap in education? The First Secretary also called for a national

:05:33. > :05:37.debate on tuition fees so will he give us one on the floor of this

:05:38. > :05:43.House? On the latest fee hike, which they sneaked through during the last

:05:44. > :05:47.election campaign. Will he centrally funded any safety measure for school

:05:48. > :05:52.builders for recess as well as looking at student issues? Two years

:05:53. > :05:56.ago they were elected on a manifesto that promised no cuts to funding of

:05:57. > :06:02.any school or any pupil. Will they finally meet that promise? Pies-mac

:06:03. > :06:12.we are spending record amounts on schools. We are spending. Rising to

:06:13. > :06:16.?42 billion in 2019 to 20. We will respond to the consultation shortly.

:06:17. > :06:23.But what the public can be confident of is that what we promise in our

:06:24. > :06:27.response will be deliverable, and it will be delivered. Most economic

:06:28. > :06:31.commentators know that the wild promises made by Labour during the

:06:32. > :06:37.general election to spend billions of pounds a year of taxpayers

:06:38. > :06:40.bolt-macro money, nationalising the energy yesterday, what industry, the

:06:41. > :06:45.rail industry, and the billions of pounds of promises made across a

:06:46. > :06:49.whole range of spending areas was simply -- would soon be had over ?50

:06:50. > :06:54.billion a year to our annual deficits, leading to a crisis of

:06:55. > :06:58.confidence amongst those they expect to lend the Government that money,

:06:59. > :07:03.and that in turn would lead to a catastrophic damage to our economy,

:07:04. > :07:06.an economy that today under this Government has produced strong

:07:07. > :07:11.economic growth, Reckitt numbers of jobs and the lowest level of

:07:12. > :07:17.unemployment for over 40 years. -- record numbers. It is a strong

:07:18. > :07:20.economy that funds public service, it is economic chaos that leads

:07:21. > :07:25.straight to the IMF and emergency cuts. The honourable lady raised a

:07:26. > :07:31.number of questions. On the issue of the schoolteachers' review body,

:07:32. > :07:36.that has submitted its 27th report this Secretary of State, which makes

:07:37. > :07:42.recommendations for the 20 17th he award for teachers and school

:07:43. > :07:44.leaders. -- 2017 pay award. We need to carefully consider that report

:07:45. > :07:50.and we will publish the report together with our response and a

:07:51. > :07:51.draft revised schoolteachers's pay and conditions document as soon as

:07:52. > :08:00.possible. She asked about universal free

:08:01. > :08:03.school meals in infant school. We have listened carefully to the

:08:04. > :08:06.proposal to remove infant free school meals and we have decided

:08:07. > :08:11.it's right to retain the existing provision. Universal infant free

:08:12. > :08:16.school meals ensure children receive a nutritious meal during the day. It

:08:17. > :08:21.saves hard-working families hundreds of pounds per year and boost

:08:22. > :08:24.educational achievement, especially among children from the most

:08:25. > :08:29.disadvantaged backgrounds. She also asked about fire safety in schools.

:08:30. > :08:33.We are conducting a survey of all the schools to find out what

:08:34. > :08:39.cladding they have on those schools. Where we find schools over four

:08:40. > :08:42.stories, or 18 metres that have cladding, we are asking fire

:08:43. > :08:46.inspections to conduct an urgent inspection of the fire safety of

:08:47. > :08:50.those schools. In view of the level of interest and other business I

:08:51. > :08:57.have to accommodate, I appealed to colleagues to ask brief, preferably

:08:58. > :09:01.single sentence questions. Tim Lawton. Whilst appreciating this

:09:02. > :09:06.government has done more to address the fair funding formula, the

:09:07. > :09:09.Minister knows from his own county, the worst funded shire county in the

:09:10. > :09:12.country that head teachers face urgent decisions now. In view of the

:09:13. > :09:17.fact the consultation has already been put back one year, can we have

:09:18. > :09:20.an urgent steer on where this formula is going to be resolved

:09:21. > :09:26.before the recess, because these challenges are facing our

:09:27. > :09:30.headteachers now. I welcome the question, it was precisely to deal

:09:31. > :09:34.with the historic underfunding of counties such as West Sussex and the

:09:35. > :09:40.other 40 counties across this country that we went ahead and

:09:41. > :09:44.consulted on a national funding formula. I think other governments

:09:45. > :09:50.prior to this one should have done so in the past. I accept his

:09:51. > :09:55.concerns. We already made announcements about 2017-18. We will

:09:56. > :09:57.respond to the second phase of the consultation shortly and have a

:09:58. > :10:04.response to that in the normal course of events. The Queen's Speech

:10:05. > :10:08.has seen a U-turn after you turn with key flagship policies being

:10:09. > :10:12.ditched, including grammar schools in order to appease backbenchers.

:10:13. > :10:17.These U-turns make an absolute mockery of the Prime Minister's

:10:18. > :10:22.strong and stable mantra. We welcome the U-turn on the decision to scrap

:10:23. > :10:27.free school lunches, but again note and regret this decision was taken

:10:28. > :10:30.not with the interest of pupils at heart, but rather to protect a

:10:31. > :10:37.fragile Queen's Speech from a weakened government. In their

:10:38. > :10:41.manifesto the Tories had planned to save 650 million from free school

:10:42. > :10:45.meals and use it in the schools budget. It is now incumbent upon the

:10:46. > :10:50.government to provide urgent confirmation on how they will stand

:10:51. > :10:56.by their manifesto pledge to make sure no school has its budget cut.

:10:57. > :11:02.Where will be 650 million come from, or have they decided to scrap this

:11:03. > :11:05.additional funding? I have already responded to the point. We have

:11:06. > :11:09.committed ourselves to the fact no school will lose funding as a

:11:10. > :11:13.consequence of moving to the National fair funding formula. We

:11:14. > :11:16.will respond in due course to that consultation and there she will find

:11:17. > :11:20.out the answers to her questions. I would say to the honourable lady

:11:21. > :11:27.that today we have announced, published results from the Key stage

:11:28. > :11:31.two results showing an 8% result increase based on a new and more

:11:32. > :11:35.demanding curriculum that is on a par with the best curricula for

:11:36. > :11:42.primary schools in the world. I ask her to look at whether the Scottish

:11:43. > :11:47.education system is in comparison to that in England. The solution is

:11:48. > :11:50.fairer funding. Does my honourable friend agree that those who argue

:11:51. > :11:55.for greater funding must be honest as to where it's coming from? For

:11:56. > :12:01.every five minutes this statement continues, national debt, already at

:12:02. > :12:05.1.7 trillion, increases by ?400,000. For those who argue for more

:12:06. > :12:09.funding, are arguing for more debt being loaded on the children of our

:12:10. > :12:16.schools. When we came into office in 2010 we inherited an annual budget

:12:17. > :12:21.deficit of ?150 billion, we were spending 150 billion more in that

:12:22. > :12:25.year than we received in income. That 150 billion is equal to about

:12:26. > :12:30.9.4% of the total income of the country. We have reduced the deficit

:12:31. > :12:35.thanks to the hard work of this government and the sacrifices the

:12:36. > :12:38.people of this country have made. Notwithstanding those efforts we

:12:39. > :12:45.have managed to protect core school funding in real terms and are

:12:46. > :12:53.protecting record funding for schools. I urge the Minister to come

:12:54. > :12:56.to Huddersfield to look at pupil funding and what teachers and head

:12:57. > :13:01.teachers and support staff think of what he has said today. The fact of

:13:02. > :13:07.the matter is morale is very low indeed in the teaching profession,

:13:08. > :13:12.and that's largely down to him and his government. We are spending

:13:13. > :13:16.record amounts of funding on our schools. ?41 billion this year. We

:13:17. > :13:22.understand there are cost pressures that schools have to face with

:13:23. > :13:26.higher employee National Insurance contributions and higher employer

:13:27. > :13:29.contributions to pensions. And funding the 1% pay rise over that

:13:30. > :13:35.period. But we wouldn't have had to make those sacrifices and deal with

:13:36. > :13:43.those efficiencies if we hadn't had to inherit a record budget deficit

:13:44. > :13:48.in 2010, and if we hadn't dealt with that budget deficit, we wouldn't

:13:49. > :13:51.have the strong economy we have today with record levels of

:13:52. > :13:58.employment and the lowest levels of unemployment in 40 years. Esther

:13:59. > :14:02.McVey. Can the Minister of State confirm what this means for Tatton

:14:03. > :14:07.schools in particular and Cheshire schools in general and there will be

:14:08. > :14:10.no cuts in their funding? And very happy to confirm to my right

:14:11. > :14:16.honourable friend, and it's very good to see her back in her place,

:14:17. > :14:20.and very happy to confirm that no school will see a cut in funding as

:14:21. > :14:30.a consequence of the reforms to our national funding formula. Would the

:14:31. > :14:40.Minister confirm whether he's going to protect school budgets in real

:14:41. > :14:46.terms. A school in my constituency is facing ?700,000 shortfall because

:14:47. > :14:55.of your so-called fair funding formula. It is not fair. We need

:14:56. > :15:02.increases in real terms. The new national funding formula comes in in

:15:03. > :15:06.2018-19. As I said in my opening comments to this urgent question, no

:15:07. > :15:12.school will see a cut in funding as a consequence of moving to the

:15:13. > :15:16.National funding formula. He's alluding to the cost pressures on

:15:17. > :15:20.schools that are occurring between 2016-17 and over the next four

:15:21. > :15:25.years. We have already incurred about 3% of those cost pressures,

:15:26. > :15:29.and there is between 1.5 and 1.6% cost pressures over the next three

:15:30. > :15:33.years according to figures from the ISS. We are helping schools tackle

:15:34. > :15:37.those cost pressures. There wouldn't be those cost pressures if we were

:15:38. > :15:42.not having to deal with historic budget deficit we inherited in 2010.

:15:43. > :15:46.Those cost pressures are being born across the public sector, but

:15:47. > :15:50.because we are prudent with our public finances, that's why we have

:15:51. > :15:56.record numbers of employment and opportunities for young people when

:15:57. > :16:00.they leave our school system. The Minister is rapidly becoming my

:16:01. > :16:03.favourite minister. At the beginning of the consultation period every

:16:04. > :16:07.single school in Southend would lose out. The minister listened, that is

:16:08. > :16:12.no longer the case and there is more funding overall. Can I ask the

:16:13. > :16:15.Minister specifically to look at bulge funding where there is a need

:16:16. > :16:20.in the medium term but not the long-term, to provide places for

:16:21. > :16:24.extra pupils. I'm grateful to my right honourable friend for his kind

:16:25. > :16:27.comments. I hope the same response will come from members of the other

:16:28. > :16:31.side of the house and perhaps in due course you will have that response

:16:32. > :16:35.from them. He is right that we have to deal with growth in pupil numbers

:16:36. > :16:38.and there are provisions within the new funding formula for growth. We

:16:39. > :16:44.will take his views into account when we respond to the national

:16:45. > :16:49.funding formula. May I congratulate my honourable friend in calling this

:16:50. > :16:55.urgent question today. I think once again we are seeing delusion from

:16:56. > :16:57.ministers and members opposite. This discussion today and the warning

:16:58. > :17:02.from headteachers this morning is not about the way the cake is being

:17:03. > :17:07.cut, it's the size of the cake per pupil. That size of cake is being

:17:08. > :17:12.reduced every year because of increased costs. When will ministers

:17:13. > :17:17.actually meet the shortfall in real terms cuts to schools so we don't

:17:18. > :17:21.see headteachers having to cut back on teachers and teaching support

:17:22. > :17:28.staff? I'm grateful for the question. She has said something we

:17:29. > :17:32.have tried to make clear for a long time. There is a distinction between

:17:33. > :17:37.the national funding formula and the overall level of school funding. She

:17:38. > :17:41.has been honest and made that clear distinction. The national funding

:17:42. > :17:46.formula is a way of distributing our funding across the school system in

:17:47. > :17:51.a fairer way based on a first stage consultation that allocates

:17:52. > :17:55.significant funding on a per pupil basis for deprivation and low prior

:17:56. > :17:58.attainment, all principles that were universally agreed upon when we

:17:59. > :18:03.consulted in the first measure. There are cost pressures facing the

:18:04. > :18:06.school system arising from things such as increased pension

:18:07. > :18:09.contributions, general inflation and higher employer 's national

:18:10. > :18:13.insurance contributions. We have already said no school will lose

:18:14. > :18:16.funding as a consequence of introducing the National fair

:18:17. > :18:21.funding formula and we will respond to that consultation in due course.

:18:22. > :18:26.I would like to thank the Minister for recognising that the current

:18:27. > :18:32.system is flawed and actually funding should be focused on whether

:18:33. > :18:35.need is. For places like in Medway, that have been charged with

:18:36. > :18:39.delivering an historic number of new homes over the next 15 years, can

:18:40. > :18:43.the minister assure me that the funding will also go to places like

:18:44. > :18:49.Medway where we are in need of more school places in the 15 years. I

:18:50. > :18:52.know my honourable friend takes a great deal of interest in education

:18:53. > :18:56.and is very experienced in the field. She is right that as pupil

:18:57. > :19:02.numbers increase, so we increased the number of school places. In a

:19:03. > :19:06.last parliament we created more than 500,000 new school places to deal

:19:07. > :19:10.with the increasing population of primary school pupils. We intend to

:19:11. > :19:14.create another 600,000 new school places over the course of this

:19:15. > :19:19.Parliament, and that's in contrast to the last Labour government that

:19:20. > :19:23.cut 200,000 primary school places at a time when we knew there was an

:19:24. > :19:27.increase in the birth rate. Can I take the Minister back to the

:19:28. > :19:30.question from my honourable friend, the Minister for Manchester Central.

:19:31. > :19:35.This is the crux of this. If you introduce their funding at a time

:19:36. > :19:39.when there greater cost pressures on schools, those that lose under the

:19:40. > :19:42.funding formula lose doubly because of cost pressures. Can I urge the

:19:43. > :19:46.Minister to lobby the Treasury to get the extra money to grow the

:19:47. > :19:50.cake. He will have the support of this side of the house if he does

:19:51. > :19:53.that. I hope we will have his support for the new funding formula.

:19:54. > :19:58.We have said no school will lose under that new funding formula.

:19:59. > :20:01.Don't forget we were clear and transparent and showed the effect of

:20:02. > :20:06.the national funding formula on every single school budget based on

:20:07. > :20:13.2016-17 to show people how it would affect them. It was mathematic that

:20:14. > :20:16.there would be winners and losers when you applied the formula to a

:20:17. > :20:21.year that currently exists. We are now saying no school will lose

:20:22. > :20:25.funding under that formula, even if they did when we showed the

:20:26. > :20:29.spreadsheet showing how that formula would apply. He is right, we could

:20:30. > :20:33.have decided not to introduce the new funding formula at a time when

:20:34. > :20:38.schools are facing these cost pressures. But we took the view that

:20:39. > :20:41.there is more important to address the unfairness in the way school

:20:42. > :20:44.funding was distributed at a time of fiscal constraint than it would be

:20:45. > :20:51.at a time of more ample school funding. The Minister knows Bradford

:20:52. > :20:54.district has some of the lowest outcomes in the education system,

:20:55. > :20:57.yet the government was planning to cut funding from the Bradford

:20:58. > :21:02.district in its original proposals, including in every school of the

:21:03. > :21:06.Shipley constituency leaving one primary School, one week before the

:21:07. > :21:10.general election, to say they were considering closing the school on

:21:11. > :21:13.Friday afternoons. I'm sure the timing of that was entirely

:21:14. > :21:17.coincidental! Can the Minister confirm that no school in the

:21:18. > :21:20.Shipley constituency and Bradford district would lose any funding, and

:21:21. > :21:25.there is no need for any school at all to close on a Friday afternoon,

:21:26. > :21:29.which causes a great deal of anger and concern among parents at that

:21:30. > :21:34.school. I'm happy to give my honourable friend that confirmation.

:21:35. > :21:37.As we said in the manifesto, and as I have confirmed today, no school

:21:38. > :21:41.will lose funding as a consequence of moving to the new fairer funding

:21:42. > :21:47.system. We are helping schools tackle the cost pressures they are

:21:48. > :21:51.facing. We are helping them on how to manage their budgets. We are

:21:52. > :21:56.introducing national buying schemes to help schools to spend non-staff

:21:57. > :22:00.spend in a more efficient way, and we expect we can save around ?1

:22:01. > :22:07.billion across the school system as a consequence of the National buying

:22:08. > :22:12.schemes we are introducing. No doubt the Minister agrees with me that

:22:13. > :22:16.given the financial pressures, or policy decisions should represent

:22:17. > :22:21.clear-cut value for money. I therefore welcome the reported

:22:22. > :22:25.U-turn on grammar schools, but given the financial case for free schools

:22:26. > :22:28.is iffy at best, will be government put a stop to their expansion,

:22:29. > :22:35.especially in areas with surplus places. The free schools programme

:22:36. > :22:41.has been hugely successful. 29% of free schools inspected are rated

:22:42. > :22:45.outstanding by Ofsted. Of the mainstream free schools approved

:22:46. > :22:50.since 2014, 80 6% have been in areas where there was a need for more

:22:51. > :22:53.school places. Of the remaining 14%, they are places where the parents

:22:54. > :23:00.are unhappy with the quality of school places.

:23:01. > :23:10.English has the best educational outcomes in the United Kingdom. Is

:23:11. > :23:17.it not time we celebrated the policies which are working? My

:23:18. > :23:23.honourable friend is absolutely great. The statistics published

:23:24. > :23:35.today showed an increase in the reading and rating statistics. An

:23:36. > :23:47.increase in the amount of children passing the four Nik check. 147,000

:23:48. > :23:54.for six-year-olds passed that test than would have done had we not

:23:55. > :24:04.introduced the test. Can the Minister answer a direct question

:24:05. > :24:09.was a direct answer? In my constituency, there will be a cut in

:24:10. > :24:15.peer pupil funding. The school in her constituency will see a cut as a

:24:16. > :24:24.consequence of a move to the new National Funding Formula. I right

:24:25. > :24:27.honourable friend will recall, probably with school, my question to

:24:28. > :24:34.three weeks before the general election. As Arnold Schwarzenegger

:24:35. > :24:43.would say, a back. I will ask the same question. The new National

:24:44. > :24:48.Funding Formula would mean that my schools would benefit by one third

:24:49. > :24:56.would not. Is he noticing that that is not the case and all schools will

:24:57. > :25:01.actually benefit? I am happy to see my honourable friend back in his

:25:02. > :25:09.place. He is absolutely right. No schools will see a cut in funding in

:25:10. > :25:12.his constituency. Will the Minister stop playing games? What schools

:25:13. > :25:18.wanting or is the total amount of money they have to invest in the

:25:19. > :25:24.school and their pupils. This has not protected school funding. It is

:25:25. > :25:29.insulting to my constituents for me to pretend otherwise. What would

:25:30. > :25:36.they say to the parents to make constituency with VC 10% cut in the

:25:37. > :25:42.funding by 2021. The am not receiving a cut in funding. That is

:25:43. > :25:48.the essence of this is. What we have said is we are spending record

:25:49. > :25:58.amounts of money on school funding. ?41 billion this year. Rising by a

:25:59. > :26:05.further ?1 billion next year. This new National Funding Formula may

:26:06. > :26:16.previously have seen a cut in funding, but it will no doubt be the

:26:17. > :26:20.case. -- not be the case. Children in Gloucestershire received almost

:26:21. > :26:26.half of what the London authority receives. Could he tell us, so I can

:26:27. > :26:35.reassure parents and governors, when we are likely to see the National

:26:36. > :26:47.Funding Formula introduced? We are moving to it in 2018-19. We will be

:26:48. > :26:58.responding to the consultation very shortly to them.

:26:59. > :27:05.My constituency is rich in talent but one of the coolest and we can

:27:06. > :27:15.stick country. Many of the schools will suffer each peer pupil funding

:27:16. > :27:19.cut of ?115. What does the schools minister half to seek to disputing

:27:20. > :27:26.headteachers ceasing desperately difficult decisions as to which

:27:27. > :27:30.teachers, teaching assistants the sack? Holding back the life chances

:27:31. > :27:38.of children who deserve the very best start in life? I have seen some

:27:39. > :27:42.very good practice in the schools that they visited with the

:27:43. > :27:50.honourable gentleman. As they say, under the new National Funding

:27:51. > :27:57.Formula, no school will lose under the peer pupil funding basis. I give

:27:58. > :28:08.my commitment on it. I realise there are cost pressures facing schools.

:28:09. > :28:14.It will be about 1.5% this year in the next couple of years. We are

:28:15. > :28:21.helping schools deal with the cost pressure. We are helping them deal

:28:22. > :28:27.with that, both with how to manage staff budgets but also non-staff

:28:28. > :28:33.spin. That is why we are introducing national buying schemes, the ability

:28:34. > :28:38.for schools to publish services together to deliver greater

:28:39. > :28:48.efficiency. I would like us to move on at quarter past one. We can take

:28:49. > :28:57.some more questions and answers, assuming both are relatively brief.

:28:58. > :29:06.With the introduction of the National Funding Formula mind games

:29:07. > :29:11.be spread out over several years probably be available straightaway?

:29:12. > :29:19.We do not want to make sure any school loses 11.5% a year at the

:29:20. > :29:24.start. I cannot give him a reassuring to until we respond to

:29:25. > :29:31.the consultation. As the Minister agree that the increased national

:29:32. > :29:39.insurance and pension contributions are resulting in cuts in the

:29:40. > :29:43.classroom and impacting on labelling and also affecting children's

:29:44. > :29:50.behavioural issues? There are cost pressures. One of the cost pressures

:29:51. > :29:56.identified as the increased employer contributions to the teacher pension

:29:57. > :30:01.scheme. That is part of a range of measures that are helping to tackle

:30:02. > :30:06.a historic budget deficit which we have reduced from 9.9% of national

:30:07. > :30:12.income down to 2.2% of national income. We need to make sure we keep

:30:13. > :30:22.the economy strong. Our determination as to do that. Can

:30:23. > :30:37.colleagues encourage house-building in towns and villages where schools

:30:38. > :30:48.are facing falling school rolls? I honourable friend makes a good

:30:49. > :30:57.point. We are trying to ensure that we corroborate that. I think Crewe

:30:58. > :31:03.is the worst funded area in Cheshire. I am worried that a

:31:04. > :31:20.primary school is cutting six teaching assistants including the

:31:21. > :31:24.only one who can speak Polish. We have 23 children for whom English is

:31:25. > :31:28.not their first language only will know have no support. I would like

:31:29. > :31:37.him to come to speak to what he just because they are very concerned. I

:31:38. > :31:41.think the honourable lady would be fairly Minister visited the school,

:31:42. > :31:47.rather than myself. If she was so generous as to invade me, I would be

:31:48. > :31:54.collated to visit. I would be delighted to visit and the speaker

:31:55. > :32:01.would be dealt very welcome to join us on a visit. It was very important

:32:02. > :32:05.that we introduced this National Funding Formula. For too long,

:32:06. > :32:11.certain areas have been underfunded. This is what this is designed to

:32:12. > :32:15.tackle. Even under the formula, we are schools would lose in other

:32:16. > :32:23.parts of the country, the no longer do so. The National Funding Formula

:32:24. > :32:31.is needed in Dorset and Poole. They are amongst the 11 worst funded

:32:32. > :32:36.local authorities. The policy should be uncontroversial. Can the Minister

:32:37. > :32:41.as sure is that this policy is on track? We intend to press ahead with

:32:42. > :32:49.the National Funding Formula and it was one of the core principles under

:32:50. > :32:56.pinning how it would work. There is a large element of peer pupil

:32:57. > :33:02.funding. It does a traffic widespread support, but we have made

:33:03. > :33:08.an announcement that no school will lose out on funding. It has been

:33:09. > :33:19.brought in to areas which have been disadvantaged. Will the Minister

:33:20. > :33:23.stop this doublespeak language of an increase in the budget. We know what

:33:24. > :33:30.we are talking about. In real terms, the budget is not increasing for the

:33:31. > :33:35.last seven years. Teachers have had a cut of 3p per hour in the wages in

:33:36. > :33:40.the last seven years. Morale was rock bottom. Will the Minister at

:33:41. > :33:43.least admit that we need urgent action in increasing funding to

:33:44. > :33:53.reverse the cuts which have already taken place? The language is to see

:33:54. > :33:57.that as a cut in funding when there is not one. I have acknowledged that

:33:58. > :34:01.there are funding pressures over the four-year period. We are helping

:34:02. > :34:06.schools to manage these cost pressures. These cost pressures are

:34:07. > :34:13.the because we are having to tackle an historic budget deficit which was

:34:14. > :34:24.inhibited -- which is managing to the author recognisable of jobs. But

:34:25. > :34:31.the funding will increase as pupil numbers continue to increase.

:34:32. > :34:36.Schools have been losing out under this current funding formula for

:34:37. > :34:43.years. Can the Minister confirm that as a result of the changes he is

:34:44. > :34:46.proposing, this unfairness., not only in Basingstoke but throughout

:34:47. > :34:51.Hampshire? I can give that assurance. This is this a sword

:34:52. > :34:56.because the local authorities up and down the country that for more than

:34:57. > :35:03.12 years have suffered from being underfunded. The funding formula is

:35:04. > :35:07.based on out of date data and we are determined to tackle that fearless.

:35:08. > :35:14.We have said no school will lose funding under the new funding

:35:15. > :35:20.formula. This is the total red herring in this debate. Before it

:35:21. > :35:24.has even come in, schools are having to lay off staff, increase staff

:35:25. > :35:31.sizes, cut back on the curriculum and headteachers are struggling to

:35:32. > :35:36.recruit and retain good stuff. When is the Minister going to tell us

:35:37. > :35:44.what he's going to do about the problems already taking place? We

:35:45. > :35:48.believe education is the best economic policy that is. That is why

:35:49. > :35:56.we are improving standards in primary schools, in the curriculum.

:35:57. > :36:01.We have revised and reformed the GCSE implemented in this country so

:36:02. > :36:05.the children leave our schools with an education on a par with the best

:36:06. > :36:11.in the world. We have protected school funding in real terms, but

:36:12. > :36:18.they do acknowledge there are cost pressures over a four-year period.

:36:19. > :36:23.We are helping schools to deal with those pressures, but these are cost

:36:24. > :36:27.pressures been fixed rate across the public sector and the earlier

:36:28. > :36:33.because we have two deal with the economic mess left by the last

:36:34. > :36:38.Labour government. Given that he teachers all over the country wrote

:36:39. > :36:42.to parents seeing the funding would be cut quite dramatically, what will

:36:43. > :36:48.my honourable friend do to make sure that patients receive the good news

:36:49. > :36:51.that there will be no reduction in peer pupil funding? We'll do our

:36:52. > :37:02.best to convey the message no school funding under the new National

:37:03. > :37:09.Funding Formula rule is out. -- will lose out. Pupils at the Kingsway

:37:10. > :37:15.Academy rest yesterday received a text message referring to the

:37:16. > :37:23.Northern schools trust website. When they went there, they were told the

:37:24. > :37:32.school would be closing. We have said it is not financially viable.

:37:33. > :37:40.It's sudden funding we see ?250,000 by call in the local council

:37:41. > :37:46.funding. Is this any way to run a school system? I will look into the

:37:47. > :37:53.case she is freezing. Schools have to consult before any school closes.

:37:54. > :37:57.There is a set process. It is not just about money. The Labour Party

:37:58. > :38:02.think they can just throw money at things and when they did that it did

:38:03. > :38:10.not work. When we were in government, the amount of people

:38:11. > :38:16.taking the core subjects actually fell and hurt. When we came in

:38:17. > :38:24.office in 2010, only one in five took that combination of core

:38:25. > :38:25.academic GCSEs. That is no two in five and we want to see that rising

:38:26. > :38:38.further. Many of my primary schools and all

:38:39. > :38:41.my high schools have told me they are preparing for real-time cuts

:38:42. > :38:44.over the next few years. One school is being faced with closure. How

:38:45. > :38:50.will this help children's mental health in schools. We take mental

:38:51. > :38:56.health in our school system extremely seriously and we will

:38:57. > :38:59.publish a green paper on mental health before the end of the year to

:39:00. > :39:05.make sure all children are taught about mental health risks. As I have

:39:06. > :39:14.said repeatedly in the responses to the surge in question, no school

:39:15. > :39:17.face a funding shortage. He didn't mention standards in school wants.

:39:18. > :39:21.In a county of Nottinghamshire, one of the West funded in the country,

:39:22. > :39:28.standards are rising, and is 90% of my young people now go to good or

:39:29. > :39:35.outstanding skills, 30% higher than 2010. Thousands of young people come

:39:36. > :39:38.out of a city of Nottingham because standards are higher despite less

:39:39. > :39:42.money. Will the government continue to focus relentlessly on standards

:39:43. > :39:49.in education? My honourable friend is absolutely right. Academic

:39:50. > :39:52.standards are key and school standards of behaviour are key in

:39:53. > :39:59.underpinning a rise in academic standards. That's why we have

:40:00. > :40:03.focused on improving the curricula. The government 's current plans mean

:40:04. > :40:07.cuts of over ?600 per head for students in Liverpool schools. Is

:40:08. > :40:16.the minister now saying there will be no cuts at all in real terms from

:40:17. > :40:20.any aspect of government funding? We have said there will be no cut in

:40:21. > :40:26.per-pupil funding as a result of moving to the National fair funding

:40:27. > :40:28.formula. I have acknowledged the cost pressures in her area and other

:40:29. > :40:54.parts of the country. We are having to deal with a budget

:40:55. > :41:04.deficit. It's imperative we deal with the budget deficit if we are to

:41:05. > :41:09.continue to have a strong economy. It will take as many years as it

:41:10. > :41:13.takes to get down to zero. We must now move on. There is extensive

:41:14. > :41:16.interest in this subject but these matters will be treated on

:41:17. > :41:25.subsequent occasions. In a moment I will call Seema Malhotra to make an

:41:26. > :41:29.application to propose a debate on a significant and important matter

:41:30. > :41:33.that should have urgent action on standing order number 24. The

:41:34. > :41:39.honourable member has three minutes to make such an application. Seema

:41:40. > :41:42.Malhotra. I seek leave to propose this house debate a specific and

:41:43. > :41:45.important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely the

:41:46. > :41:49.report on the inspection by Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of prisons

:41:50. > :41:53.of Feltham Young offenders institution. This report, published

:41:54. > :41:58.on June 30, follows an unannounced inspection earlier this year. It

:41:59. > :42:07.reports on both Feltham children and young people and young adults, makes

:42:08. > :42:11.for shocking reading. Both raised numerous concerns, but particularly

:42:12. > :42:15.relating to the matter of safety and educational purposeful activity in

:42:16. > :42:19.each. The report found the prison is extremely unsafe for staff and boys

:42:20. > :42:24.and young people within and has become more dangerous even since the

:42:25. > :42:28.inspections in 2014 and 2015 respectively. The increased violence

:42:29. > :42:33.combined with staffing shortages has meant 15-18 -year-olds are

:42:34. > :42:41.unrestricted regimes which according to the Chief inspector did nothing

:42:42. > :42:47.to contribute to their education, social education or safety. The last

:42:48. > :42:50.inspection in 2015 is marked. The report suggests things have got

:42:51. > :42:54.markedly worse in the last two years and a serious crisis point has now

:42:55. > :42:59.been reached. The youth justice system is there to work to prevent

:43:00. > :43:02.children and young people from under 18 from offending or reoffending.

:43:03. > :43:07.What's happening now is a dereliction of duty. 15-18

:43:08. > :43:11.-year-olds are receiving an average 7.5 hours of education per week.

:43:12. > :43:17.19,000 hours of schooling per year have been lost through nonattendance

:43:18. > :43:20.and cancellation of classes. The regime has been described as quite

:43:21. > :43:27.simply not safe for either staff or boys. Some of the young men are

:43:28. > :43:31.being locked up for 22 hours every day. During the inspection they

:43:32. > :43:36.found a third of prisoners were locked up during the core not

:43:37. > :43:41.receiving training or education. Indeed the media is also reporting

:43:42. > :43:45.today a High Court ruling that a 16-year-old boy's human rights were

:43:46. > :43:48.breached by him being kept in solitary confinement at Feltham

:43:49. > :43:50.Young offenders and that he was unlawfully denied access to

:43:51. > :43:56.education and the ability to mix with other inmates. There is an

:43:57. > :43:59.urgent need responses to these issues from the government and a

:44:00. > :44:04.clear plan to address them, including whether the cuts have now

:44:05. > :44:08.led to an unsafe level of resources, the statutory duty and contracts for

:44:09. > :44:12.the provision of education in prison, staffing levels, staffing

:44:13. > :44:14.recruitment, staff experience and staff retention. Factors

:44:15. > :44:18.contributing to increased violence and whether or not now is the time

:44:19. > :44:23.for an urgent rethink on Feltham's future. Young people were becoming

:44:24. > :44:26.out of the youth justice institutions more traumatised and

:44:27. > :44:31.with reduced life chances than when they went in. This our next

:44:32. > :44:34.generation. We're supposed to be an advanced society. These are

:44:35. > :44:38.children, and their future and welfare should be a matter for

:44:39. > :44:42.urgent debate of this house. I am grateful to the honourable lady, who

:44:43. > :44:52.asks for leave to propose a debate on a specific and important matter

:44:53. > :44:54.that should have urgent, namely the report to the Feltham Young

:44:55. > :44:57.offenders institution. I have listened carefully to the

:44:58. > :45:02.application, but I am not persuaded it should be debated under the terms

:45:03. > :45:05.of standing order number 24. The honourable lady is experienced and

:45:06. > :45:09.versatile member of this house and she should know there are other

:45:10. > :45:13.opportunities to secure attention to the issue. She will know what some

:45:14. > :45:22.of those other opportunities are in both question and debate form. And I

:45:23. > :45:27.have a feeling she will be heading towards the table office before long

:45:28. > :45:34.in order to try one of those other options. We will leave it there for

:45:35. > :45:40.now. Indeed, port of order, Diana Johnson. In the final speeches the

:45:41. > :45:44.former Right Honourable member for league made to the house on

:45:45. > :45:49.contaminated blood, he made a compelling case for the fact there

:45:50. > :45:52.was evidence of criminal acts that had taken place in that contaminated

:45:53. > :46:00.blood scandal. We know it is the biggest treatment disaster in the

:46:01. > :46:05.history of the NHS. According to the front page of the Daily Mail today,

:46:06. > :46:10.they have set out criminal acts that allegedly took place, whether it is

:46:11. > :46:15.now appropriate for the Secretary of State for Health to come to the

:46:16. > :46:26.house and say what he intends to take as The Right Honourable member

:46:27. > :46:29.for Lee -- Leigh, and whether a public enquiry would happen, and if

:46:30. > :46:31.that wouldn't take place then the police would be notified on the

:46:32. > :46:36.evidence the Right Honourable member for Leigh had in his possession. I

:46:37. > :46:40.wonder, Mr Speaker, if you have had any indication from the Secretary of

:46:41. > :46:44.State for Health whether he intends to come to the house to make a

:46:45. > :46:47.statement. I'm grateful to the honourable lady for that point of

:46:48. > :46:51.order. I have seen the Secretary of State for Health a couple of times

:46:52. > :46:55.today, most recently in the chamber and much earlier this morning when I

:46:56. > :47:01.was returning from Mike health giving swim, and he was arriving at

:47:02. > :47:06.the house on his bicycle. We exchanged the courtesies as the

:47:07. > :47:09.honourable lady would expect, saying good morning. The right Honourable

:47:10. > :47:14.gentleman didn't on that occasion give me any indication that he plans

:47:15. > :47:18.to make a statement on this matter, nor has he since done so. I have to

:47:19. > :47:21.admit I was not familiar with the headline the honourable lady refers

:47:22. > :47:25.to. Not least because the organ in question is not part of my daily

:47:26. > :47:31.reading matter, which I'm sure the honourable lady will readily

:47:32. > :47:34.understand, it's not a paper that is ordinarily of interest to me

:47:35. > :47:38.whatsoever. I have to admit the headline is an important one

:47:39. > :47:42.concerning a very important story. I'm not aware of any plans by the

:47:43. > :47:45.government to make a statement, as I have said, but clearly the issue

:47:46. > :47:49.will not go away and I will remember the final intervention of the then

:47:50. > :47:54.right honourable member for Leigh, and very powerful indeed it was. I

:47:55. > :48:00.rather suspect the right honourable lady will return to it, especially

:48:01. > :48:05.especially if she judges it to be urgent and she will know what

:48:06. > :48:12.opportunities of available to her if she thinks it is urgent. Point of

:48:13. > :48:16.order, Mr Paul Blomfield. On the 8th of February, I asked the then

:48:17. > :48:20.Minister for exiting the European Union, the right Honourable member

:48:21. > :48:29.for Clywd West, about allegations it was the jurisdiction of the European

:48:30. > :48:39.Court of Justice to preside over notice of withdrawing from Euroton

:48:40. > :48:46.as well as withdrawal from the EU. It was said it would not be possible

:48:47. > :48:50.to leave the EU and continue current membership of Euroton. This has now

:48:51. > :48:54.been contradicted and it has been said it was in fact the role of the

:48:55. > :48:57.European Court of Justice that lay behind the government 's decision. I

:48:58. > :49:02.wonder whether you can advise me how we can find out the truth behind

:49:03. > :49:08.this matter as to why the government is leading us out of the important

:49:09. > :49:16.treaty on Euroton. I don't think it's for me to seek to penetrate the

:49:17. > :49:20.inner recesses of ministerial minds to ascertain precisely what their

:49:21. > :49:24.motivation is in the pursuit of policy. I think my short answer to

:49:25. > :49:29.the honourable gentleman, when he asks how should he take this matter

:49:30. > :49:36.forward is, by the tabling of questions, which probably needs to

:49:37. > :49:42.be very precise and focused if he is to elicit the information he seeks.

:49:43. > :49:45.That would be my guidance to him. Although I have indulged the

:49:46. > :49:49.honourable gentleman on this occasion, because I couldn't know

:49:50. > :49:53.precisely what he would ask until he asked it, what he has asked,

:49:54. > :49:56.although no doubt of enormous interest and great relevance to him

:49:57. > :50:01.and many others, doesn't constitute a point of order. It's not a

:50:02. > :50:06.responsibility of the chair to advise consistency of statement. Or

:50:07. > :50:10.indeed from persons previously connected with government. If that

:50:11. > :50:16.were one of the responsibilities of the chair, the chair would find it a

:50:17. > :50:21.holy disproportionate amount of his or her time to keep up with matters.

:50:22. > :50:24.He has made his concern clear and no doubt that has been heard on the

:50:25. > :50:29.Treasury bench. If the Minister would he feel he had been inaccurate

:50:30. > :50:32.in statements to the house, that Minister would have responsibility

:50:33. > :50:39.to set the record straight. Point of order, Mr petered out. Regarding

:50:40. > :50:45.estimates of 2017-18. The calling of a general election only two years

:50:46. > :50:54.into a Fixed-term Parliaments Act abuse altered hung parliament and

:50:55. > :50:57.the delay in chairman is of select committee, combined to create an

:50:58. > :51:01.unprecedented situation with regard to scrutiny of public finances.

:51:02. > :51:08.Ministers on their side are deeply concerned the government is asking

:51:09. > :51:10.Parliament to vote on a motion tonight, ?568 billion without

:51:11. > :51:14.debate, avoiding what many of us believed to be proper and correct

:51:15. > :51:17.parliamentary scrutiny of finances. Such scrutineers of particular

:51:18. > :51:21.interest for thousands of public sector workers who are currently

:51:22. > :51:25.receiving mixed messages from the government on pay. Presumably these

:51:26. > :51:30.estimates published today still reflect the public pay cap, and

:51:31. > :51:34.where the money from the Northern Ireland settlement will come from.

:51:35. > :51:38.Mr Speaker, could you as custodian of the house, and its long tradition

:51:39. > :51:43.of transparent scrutiny of government spending since the bill

:51:44. > :51:50.of rights in 1689, although not personally since 1689, advise us as

:51:51. > :51:56.to what course might be taken to find an appropriate consideration of

:51:57. > :51:59.estimate. I appreciate the gentlemen's consideration that I am

:52:00. > :52:04.not that old. So far as the passing reference the gentleman made in his

:52:05. > :52:09.point of order to the election of chairs of select committees is

:52:10. > :52:15.concerned, the house is due to treat that matter today. It may well be I

:52:16. > :52:20.have something to say on that matter today. I concern -- share the

:52:21. > :52:24.concern of the honourable gentleman, and indeed of both sides of the

:52:25. > :52:27.house, that chairs of select committees should be elected sooner

:52:28. > :52:31.rather than later and the committee should be constituted as quickly as

:52:32. > :52:37.possible so they can undertake their important tasks of scrutiny.

:52:38. > :52:41.Parliament, and parliamentarians will always be served by such an

:52:42. > :52:44.approach. I understand his concern the house should be asked to

:52:45. > :52:48.organise the expenditure of large amounts of public money without the

:52:49. > :52:52.opportunity for debate, but I assure him there is nothing underhand or

:52:53. > :52:55.disorderly for this. It's in accordance with the standing orders

:52:56. > :52:59.and the house's agreed estimates procedure. This is not one of those

:53:00. > :53:05.days whether house is invited to debate matters recommended by

:53:06. > :53:08.liaison committee. That said, it's always open to the house to

:53:09. > :53:11.reconsider procedures. I'm aware that the procedure committee has

:53:12. > :53:17.recently published a report on estimates procedure, a report to

:53:18. > :53:20.which a government response is awaited. So there may be opportunity

:53:21. > :53:26.for the house to look at these matters before too long. I hope that

:53:27. > :53:32.is helpful both to the honourable gentleman and indeed to the house.

:53:33. > :53:43.Presentation of Bill, Secretary shad jig Javad.

:53:44. > :53:59.in the second reading, what indeed? Tomorrow. Tomorrow. Thank you.

:54:00. > :54:11.European Union (Approvals) Bill, second reading. To move the bill to

:54:12. > :54:20.be read a second time, I invite the Minister. We want to go for draft

:54:21. > :54:30.decisions granted by the European Union, of rely on article 352. This

:54:31. > :54:36.allows the European Union to take action over the ten year period on

:54:37. > :54:43.issues for which there is no specific power given. This can only

:54:44. > :54:53.be given by the unanimous support of all member states. Parliament must

:54:54. > :54:58.first give its approval. Section eight of the European Union it says

:54:59. > :55:04.minister me vote in favour of an article three tries to decision only

:55:05. > :55:08.if the draft decision is approved by an act of Parliament. I am pleased

:55:09. > :55:16.that members of both houses will have the chance to scrutinise and

:55:17. > :55:23.whether to approve such measures. The United Kingdom is going to leave

:55:24. > :55:28.the European Union and until that is deseeded, really mean a member of

:55:29. > :55:35.the European Union and all the rates and rules of that remain in place.

:55:36. > :55:41.That means exercising the United Kingdom rates at the European Union.

:55:42. > :55:45.It does not matter whether the involve the United Kingdom directly,

:55:46. > :55:52.they could make a difference to the context of negotiations. While we

:55:53. > :55:55.are leaving, we will continue to retain a friendship and alliance

:55:56. > :56:00.with all the European countries. We have been working in partnership

:56:01. > :56:09.with European Union members states for decades to build a prosperous

:56:10. > :56:21.and stable Europe. I will give way. Order! The honourable member was

:56:22. > :56:26.totally convinced it was him. The other member was equally convinced

:56:27. > :56:39.it was him. Please put us out of our misery. I was referring to the

:56:40. > :56:43.honourable member for Bridgwater. I know from government and colleagues

:56:44. > :56:49.across the house, my honourable friend would say that the Council of

:56:50. > :56:56.Europe was still an important body. It continues to play an important

:56:57. > :57:05.part for human rates and low continue to play that important

:57:06. > :57:09.role. I thank my honourable friend form that intervention. I commend

:57:10. > :57:17.him for all his work within the Council of Europe and seek that will

:57:18. > :57:18.continue long after we have successfully concluded our

:57:19. > :57:28.negotiations to leave the European Union. We set out a key important

:57:29. > :57:34.strategy for establishing a new partnership with the European Union.

:57:35. > :57:39.I will make a little progress and then give way. That vision for a

:57:40. > :57:45.partnership is in the best interests in the United Kingdom will mean we

:57:46. > :57:51.also continue to work with the European Union with tackling areas

:57:52. > :58:00.of common interest. I am much encouraged by the Minister but just

:58:01. > :58:05.simply to see we are not brothers and sisters in Europe, but we will

:58:06. > :58:10.be cousins and we will seek to maintain good relations with the

:58:11. > :58:14.European Union despite the fact that we are going to leave. I heartily

:58:15. > :58:21.agree with my honourable friend that we will continue to foster good

:58:22. > :58:24.relations with our European Union friends long after we leave the

:58:25. > :58:32.European Union. Keeping that in mind, we are content at all four

:58:33. > :58:36.decisions that this bill addresses are reasonable, proportionate, in

:58:37. > :58:40.keeping with our best interests and will not result in any additional

:58:41. > :58:48.financial burden on the United Kingdom. As I say, Article 352

:58:49. > :58:51.decisions must be agreed by all the European Union member states. When

:58:52. > :58:57.all member states are in a position to vote on a decision, the European

:58:58. > :59:03.Council will schedule a meeting of Council of the European union can.

:59:04. > :59:11.If member states vote to approve, the European Parliament will be

:59:12. > :59:15.asked to approve the draft decision. If so, decisions they've adopted in

:59:16. > :59:28.two European Union law. All member states apart from the United Kingdom

:59:29. > :59:39.that all states apart from the United Kingdom and Germany have

:59:40. > :59:45.accepted the second article. It has been suggested that as we negotiate

:59:46. > :59:51.our exit from the European Union that the United Kingdom should

:59:52. > :59:58.abstain from decisions in the European Council. Can the minister

:59:59. > :00:03.explain the impact on others abstaining on these decisions? I

:00:04. > :00:11.thank my honourable friend. I can assure him that we're we not to pass

:00:12. > :00:16.this bill this afternoon, then the decisions, the draft decisions,

:00:17. > :00:22.would not be able to proceed. We are still members of the European Union

:00:23. > :00:29.and therefore part of our consent is required for these draft decisions

:00:30. > :00:33.to take effect. I am very grateful. She has been very generous. She

:00:34. > :00:41.indicated one other country of which is yet to ratify this, namely

:00:42. > :00:49.Germany. As she any indication as to when that support may come from

:00:50. > :00:56.Germany? I thank my honourable friend for the intervention. Any

:00:57. > :01:02.such comment would be speculation, which I intend to avoid. I could

:01:03. > :01:09.point out that Germany, like the United Kingdom, do have to have the

:01:10. > :01:14.consent of the national parliament before the ministers can vote on

:01:15. > :01:23.such draft decisions as these. All other member states, apart from

:01:24. > :01:26.Germany and ourselves, have agreed the fundamental rights agency

:01:27. > :01:30.decisions and we do not believe that any of these draft decisions are

:01:31. > :01:35.contentious. The government is committed to being constructive in

:01:36. > :01:41.the native kingdom 's engagement with the unique European Union.

:01:42. > :01:47.Holding up business which is simple and uncontroversial would undermine

:01:48. > :01:51.that approach. It is therefore clearly in the interests of the

:01:52. > :01:56.United Kingdom to approve these draft decisions. The annoying them

:01:57. > :02:04.could have a negative impact on the European Union negotiations for

:02:05. > :02:07.Britain's Brexit. There will of course be further opportunities to

:02:08. > :02:12.examine more fundamental aspects of the work of the European Union in

:02:13. > :02:18.other debates, but I'm sure other members will recognise that whatever

:02:19. > :02:21.the views on our exit from the unique European Union, it is in our

:02:22. > :02:29.interest to approve these draft decisions through. Will the Minister

:02:30. > :02:33.confirm that as part of our ongoing relationship with the European

:02:34. > :02:39.Union, that the provisions of the trade agreement which have been

:02:40. > :02:42.secured with Canada will also be fully implemented in the United

:02:43. > :02:49.Kingdom and that we will continue to play a pivotal role with the

:02:50. > :03:00.European Union and encouraging free trade with Canada? I welcome the

:03:01. > :03:04.intervention. I remember his excellent work when he was he trade

:03:05. > :03:10.representative to Canada. I can assure him that the seat of

:03:11. > :03:18.negotiations concluded between the European Union and Canada will apply

:03:19. > :03:22.to the United Kingdom as long as we are members of the European Union.

:03:23. > :03:29.After that point, it will be up to us to decide the terms of any future

:03:30. > :03:37.trading relationship with Canada,. I will not go any further on that. I

:03:38. > :03:45.want to make progress. I will conclude my remarks on Canada and

:03:46. > :03:49.treat. It is clearly in the interests of the United Kingdom to

:03:50. > :03:54.approve these draft decisions as dealing decisions could have a

:03:55. > :04:00.negative impact as they were seen on our exit negotiations, including

:04:01. > :04:05.discussions on any future framework. There will be further opportunities

:04:06. > :04:12.to examine more fundamental aspects. I will give way. Surely the Minister

:04:13. > :04:22.would confirm that the Canadian trade agreement along with all the

:04:23. > :04:28.others will know apply to us if both the United Kingdom and Canada wish

:04:29. > :04:32.to do so. I accept the first part of what my honourable friend says, but

:04:33. > :04:37.they do not wish to predict the future in terms of what the United

:04:38. > :04:41.Kingdom and Canada will find of importance to discuss in the trade

:04:42. > :04:50.relationship in the years to come. The first two decisions. The first

:04:51. > :04:55.two decisions will enable two countries, Albania and Serbia to be

:04:56. > :05:00.granted observer status in the European Union is fundamental rights

:05:01. > :05:08.agency. I will give way to the honourable gentleman. I was not

:05:09. > :05:17.going to raise this, but as her colleagues have done so, point

:05:18. > :05:22.estimate as the United Kingdom given to renegotiating that table steel

:05:23. > :05:29.with Canada? I would remind him of the scope of this bill that we are

:05:30. > :05:35.debating. It really does not include a lot of detailed discussion about

:05:36. > :05:40.our future trade relationship with Canada. The Canadian decision is

:05:41. > :05:47.about competition law and not about trade. The fundamental rights agency

:05:48. > :05:51.was set up to support the European Union institutions and its member

:05:52. > :05:53.states by improving knowledge and awareness of fundamental rights

:05:54. > :05:59.within the European Union with a view to ensuring respect of

:06:00. > :06:04.fundamental rights. They do that through the collection and analysis

:06:05. > :06:13.of information. They can also formulate on for individual topics,

:06:14. > :06:16.either at the request or at the request of European Union

:06:17. > :06:23.institutions. It is about raising the awareness of fundamental rights.

:06:24. > :06:29.European Union accession candidate countries can be given observer

:06:30. > :06:32.status. This allows the agency to collect and analyse fundamental rate

:06:33. > :06:38.data from these countries but does not allow them the right to vote in

:06:39. > :06:44.decisions as part of the management board of the agency. I will give

:06:45. > :06:50.way. How does she see this differing from what the Council of Europe

:06:51. > :06:59.does? The Council of Europe looks after democracy within Europe and

:07:00. > :07:04.Kelly's own the same state takeover activities as the agency does? The

:07:05. > :07:09.goal of the agency is to provide expertise on fundamental rights to

:07:10. > :07:15.the European Union institutions, member states country seeking

:07:16. > :07:20.ascension. The specific tasks of the agency are to analyse and sheer

:07:21. > :07:23.information on fundamental rights within the European Union, to carry

:07:24. > :07:31.out scientific research and surveys on that, to formulate opinions on

:07:32. > :07:35.specific topics, either on its own initiative or those requested by

:07:36. > :07:42.other European Union institutions or to raise awareness of fundamental

:07:43. > :07:49.rights issues within the European Union. Albania was granted candidate

:07:50. > :07:54.status in 2014. The United Kingdom supported that on the condition that

:07:55. > :08:01.Albania redoubled its reform efforts, with particular focus on

:08:02. > :08:02.justice and home affairs, especially tackling organised crime, corruption

:08:03. > :08:19.and illegal migration. UK welcomed Albania's progress in

:08:20. > :08:21.July 20 16. Albanian must now fully implement the reform package as soon

:08:22. > :08:28.as possible so this can underpin other reforms. Serbia was granted EU

:08:29. > :08:33.candidate status in 2012 and accession negotiations were launched

:08:34. > :08:41.in January 30 14th with the first four negotiating chapters opened

:08:42. > :08:44.during 2016. The UK continues to support Serbia on its reform path,

:08:45. > :08:54.including on funding projects in Serbia. I will give way. Witchy

:08:55. > :08:58.comment on whether Serbia's membership of the agency would have

:08:59. > :09:03.any impact on the pursuit of war crimes in Serbia as part of its

:09:04. > :09:13.effort to increase human rights? -- would she comment. I can't comment

:09:14. > :09:18.specifically on the likely impact on the treatment of war crimes in

:09:19. > :09:22.Serbia, a subject about which the Foreign Office is extremely

:09:23. > :09:28.concerned, as I presume is my honourable friend. But I think it

:09:29. > :09:32.can only be a mark of progress for Serbia to be admitted in the way

:09:33. > :09:42.that this decision enables them so to be. I will give way to the

:09:43. > :09:45.honourable gentleman. I can't accept what she says that this is a mark of

:09:46. > :09:52.progress. This sounds like motherhood and apple pie Euro speak,

:09:53. > :09:56.exactly the same words were used during the accession of Croatia, and

:09:57. > :10:04.have Croatia handed over their war criminals? Have they got the rule of

:10:05. > :10:08.law in Croatia yet? All of which was promised. They have one of the

:10:09. > :10:13.longest borders in the EU used for sex trafficking and people

:10:14. > :10:18.trafficking. Why does she believe there will be improvements with

:10:19. > :10:21.Albania and Serbia? To correct the honourable gentleman, I don't think

:10:22. > :10:26.I said I thought there would be improvements, I said I thought it

:10:27. > :10:33.would be a mark of progress. I was trying to limit my enthusiasm to

:10:34. > :10:38.that degree, mindful of what he has said about Croatia. However, I would

:10:39. > :10:45.say that it's early days, and I think we can only go down the path

:10:46. > :10:49.of progress, and the UK continues to support Serbia on its reform path,

:10:50. > :10:55.including through funding projects in Serbia. Serbia has more work to

:10:56. > :11:00.do on anti-discrimination policies, to improve the situation of

:11:01. > :11:03.vulnerable people, and to ensure freedom of expression. Observer

:11:04. > :11:10.status at the fundamental rights agency should help Albania and

:11:11. > :11:13.Serbia to reform in the areas we are discussing. Albania and Serbia

:11:14. > :11:16.should also be allowed to benefit from instances of good practice and

:11:17. > :11:21.evidence from other EU member states in relation to human rights. The

:11:22. > :11:26.government is therefore satisfied of the need to support these two

:11:27. > :11:31.decisions. The third and fourth decisions are necessary to implement

:11:32. > :11:35.a cooperative agreement between the EU and Canada on competition

:11:36. > :11:38.enforcement. The decisions will allow the agreements to be signed

:11:39. > :11:43.and allow conclusion of the agreement after it has been approved

:11:44. > :11:48.by the European Parliament. This competition agreement will replace

:11:49. > :11:55.an existing agreement that has been in place since 1999. It replicates

:11:56. > :11:58.and builds upon the provisions in the earlier agreement by allowing

:11:59. > :12:05.the European Commission and the Canadian competition bureau to

:12:06. > :12:09.exchange evidence obtained during evidence investigations including

:12:10. > :12:14.confidential information and personal data. The existing

:12:15. > :12:18.cooperation agreement with Canada dates from June 19 99. At that time

:12:19. > :12:26.the exchange of evidence between the parties was not regarded as needed.

:12:27. > :12:30.In the meantime the bilateral cooperation between the European

:12:31. > :12:33.Commission and the Canadian competition bureau has become more

:12:34. > :12:38.frequent and deeper as concerns substance. I will give way to the

:12:39. > :12:44.honourable gentleman. The government has already said to the Brexit

:12:45. > :12:47.select committee, which I served on in the last Parliament, that upon

:12:48. > :12:51.withdrawal from the EU we will no longer benefit from the issues she

:12:52. > :12:55.is talking about, particularly information exchange agreements

:12:56. > :13:00.between our competition regulator and the Canadian competition bureau.

:13:01. > :13:06.This ends much of the legislation we are discussing today is rather

:13:07. > :13:13.pointless. Can check Spain at pulling out of global deals, such as

:13:14. > :13:16.we are discussing today, renders it? I have explained the importance of

:13:17. > :13:23.the decision is primarily to support our role as a continuing member of

:13:24. > :13:30.the EU until the negotiations are complete in two years' time. For

:13:31. > :13:36.that long, we will be covered by it. After that date, we will have to see

:13:37. > :13:41.what we agreed during the negotiations. But the existing

:13:42. > :13:43.competition agreement with Canada does not allow confidential

:13:44. > :13:57.information sharing, and The New one does. Returning to that point in a

:13:58. > :14:02.few minutes, it's become more frequent and deeper as concerns

:14:03. > :14:05.substance. The absence of the possibility to exchange information

:14:06. > :14:10.with the Canadian competition authority is regarded as a major

:14:11. > :14:13.impediment to effective cooperation. The proposed changes to the existing

:14:14. > :14:18.agreement will allow the European Commission and the Canadian

:14:19. > :14:23.competition bureau to exchange evidence which both sides have

:14:24. > :14:28.obtained in their investigations. This will in particular be useful in

:14:29. > :14:33.all cases where the alleged anti-competitive behaviour affects

:14:34. > :14:38.transatlantic or world markets. Many worldwide or transatlantic cartels,

:14:39. > :14:44.including Canada and through Canada, the commission will get a good

:14:45. > :14:48.opportunity to provide access to a additional information regarding

:14:49. > :14:53.these cartels. Cooperation with third party competition authorities

:14:54. > :14:55.is now standard practice in international competition

:14:56. > :15:00.investigations. In addition to the agreement with Canada, the EU has

:15:01. > :15:06.concluded dedicated cooperation agreements with the USA, Japan,

:15:07. > :15:10.Korea and Switzerland. If I may return to the intervention by the

:15:11. > :15:17.honourable gentleman, I omitted to say that even after Brexit

:15:18. > :15:19.negotiations have been complete, the competition agreement with Canada

:15:20. > :15:22.will continue to apply to British companies if they are trading with

:15:23. > :15:30.the single market of the European Union. The most advanced agreement

:15:31. > :15:35.is the one with Switzerland, which contains already provisions on the

:15:36. > :15:37.exchange of evidence and the proposed update would bring the

:15:38. > :15:41.agreement with Canada to the same level as the one concluded with

:15:42. > :15:47.Switzerland. I am sure that honourable members will agree that

:15:48. > :15:52.the ability to share information for effective and efficient

:15:53. > :15:55.international competition enforcement is increasingly

:15:56. > :16:01.important. Access to information from other jurisdictions can be

:16:02. > :16:04.important in reaching a robust enforcement decision. Cooperation

:16:05. > :16:10.and information sharing between jurisdictions can help ensure

:16:11. > :16:14.enforcement bodies do not reach different decisions based on

:16:15. > :16:18.different sets of information. The agreement contains general

:16:19. > :16:20.safeguards for the transfer of information and additional

:16:21. > :16:26.safeguards for the transfer of personal data. Personal data can

:16:27. > :16:32.only be shared with the express written consent of the person or

:16:33. > :16:38.company to which it relates. In the absence of consent, personal data

:16:39. > :16:40.can only be shared where both competition authorities are

:16:41. > :16:46.investigating the same related conduct or transaction. Furthermore,

:16:47. > :16:52.the transfer of personal data will be subject to independent oversight.

:16:53. > :16:57.The agreement also contained safeguards for information provided

:16:58. > :17:01.by company under the EU cartel amenity, or leniency programme. This

:17:02. > :17:04.information cannot be shared without the express written consent of the

:17:05. > :17:09.individual or company that provided that information. As I have noted,

:17:10. > :17:16.there are no financial implications for the UK of the decisions. I

:17:17. > :17:21.confirm that I do not consider that any of the bill's provisions

:17:22. > :17:27.interfere with the rights set out in the European Convention on human

:17:28. > :17:30.rights, so no issues arise about the Bill's compatibility with those

:17:31. > :17:37.rights. It is intended the bill will come into force on the day of Royal

:17:38. > :17:41.assent. I will give way to the honourable gentleman. I wonder why

:17:42. > :17:44.there is no cost, surely if we are to have an added layer of complexity

:17:45. > :17:52.sharing layer, which might be a good thing to do, there must be a cost to

:17:53. > :17:57.the officials' time in doing that. I am assured there are no costs

:17:58. > :18:02.associated with these decisions. Other than the normal course of

:18:03. > :18:06.government business. It is intended that the bill will come into force

:18:07. > :18:13.on the Dale of Royal assent, and for reasons I have outlined, I commend

:18:14. > :18:25.the bill to the house. The question is the Bill read for a second time.

:18:26. > :18:30.This bill was indeed in the Queen's Speech, in the background notes it

:18:31. > :18:37.talks about it helping Brandt Serbia and Albania observer status at the

:18:38. > :18:43.EU's rights agency, and there will be agreement for enhanced

:18:44. > :18:46.cooperation between competition regulators in the EU and Canada. I

:18:47. > :18:50.can't be the only one somewhat surprised as this Bill being the

:18:51. > :18:56.second bill to be given a second reading in the new parliament. And

:18:57. > :19:01.it was given such a priority, given what might have happened, and what

:19:02. > :19:06.was at one point in the Conservative Party manifesto. Indeed, we could

:19:07. > :19:09.have suggested some alternatives. Addressing the pay cap, as members

:19:10. > :19:14.of the Cabinet are now doing, as members of the Conservative Party

:19:15. > :19:17.are now doing. There seems to be an argument there. Something we could

:19:18. > :19:22.have been debating in the house at this time. Are you aware the Civil

:19:23. > :19:26.War in Yugoslavia was an horrific and scarring experience for our

:19:27. > :19:29.whole continent. We shouldn't belittle it by underestimating the

:19:30. > :19:33.importance of those nations getting up to our level in terms of human

:19:34. > :19:37.rights and so on. He's absolutely right, which is why it was in the

:19:38. > :19:41.Queen's Speech. I was just questioning why it was given such

:19:42. > :19:47.high prominence and put forward as the second piece of legislation,

:19:48. > :19:52.given that it is only two lines. Why wasn't something more weighty put

:19:53. > :19:57.forward first? I mentioned the pay cap and the turmoil in the

:19:58. > :20:00.Conservative Party, the agonising going on about whether public

:20:01. > :20:05.servants should be given a pay rise or not. The debate over tuition

:20:06. > :20:13.fees. Whether there should be more police and firefighters. I will give

:20:14. > :20:17.way again. I fear he may be being a little bit churlish. He has the

:20:18. > :20:21.opportunity now to set out what the Labour Party's position is in

:20:22. > :20:26.relation to this Bill. Of course he is entitled, so long as the speaker

:20:27. > :20:30.allows him to do so, about what should have been debated at this

:20:31. > :20:34.time. He has the opportunity to debate this subject now, so what

:20:35. > :20:37.does he have to say about it? I'm grateful for the honourable

:20:38. > :20:41.gentleman's enquiry just now. I could not know what the honourable

:20:42. > :20:44.gentleman could say until he has said it, but now that he has said it

:20:45. > :20:50.is, I could tell him he shouldn't have said it. It would be advisable

:20:51. > :20:58.now for the honourable gentleman to return to the subject matter of the

:20:59. > :21:02.European Union approvals Bill, and may I gently remind the honourable

:21:03. > :21:05.gentleman, quite a seasoned parliament Eric, consists of two

:21:06. > :21:10.clauses, and I say this not least for the benefit of those attending

:21:11. > :21:15.to proceedings elsewhere, the second is extent, commencement and short

:21:16. > :21:19.title. The only substantive clause is cause number one. The question of

:21:20. > :21:29.the pay cap is a matter of enormous interest, but it's wholly irrelevant

:21:30. > :21:36.as to the question of the Republic of Albania and Republic of Serbia,

:21:37. > :21:41.the European agency Court of fundamental rights, and Canada with

:21:42. > :21:49.respect of competition law. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. You may

:21:50. > :21:56.even have stolen parts of my speech with what you just read out. We do

:21:57. > :22:02.have the European Union approvals Bill. The second course of which is

:22:03. > :22:10.the name of the bill. Labour will not be opposing the EU approvals

:22:11. > :22:16.Bill at this stage. Members will be pleased to learn that. We are

:22:17. > :22:20.committed on this site to ensuring the United Kingdom fulfils its

:22:21. > :22:25.responsibilities as a member of state of the EU, not least in the

:22:26. > :22:32.very important matter of the progress being made by the former

:22:33. > :22:37.member states of Yugoslavia. We will do so until the time of withdrawal

:22:38. > :22:40.from the European Union, and we will continue to scrutinise European

:22:41. > :22:47.Union matters that come before Parliament.

:22:48. > :22:52.It addresses draft decisions to the Council of the European Union. The

:22:53. > :22:58.first relates to the participation of the republics of Albania and

:22:59. > :23:01.Serbia, as it serves in the EU for fundamental rights, and the signing

:23:02. > :23:05.of a conclusion of the agreement between the EU and government of

:23:06. > :23:10.Canada regarding the application of competition laws and includes the

:23:11. > :23:14.exchange of information between the EU and Canadian competition bureau.

:23:15. > :23:19.Returning first to the involvement of Serbia and Albania in the

:23:20. > :23:23.fundamental rights agency. The fundamental rights agency replaced

:23:24. > :23:29.the European monitoring Centre of racism and xenophobia in 2007. As

:23:30. > :23:35.set out on the year report website, it advises EU institutions and

:23:36. > :23:42.national governments, especially in the areas of discrimination, access

:23:43. > :23:46.to justice, racism and xenophobia -- Europa. Data protection Acts and

:23:47. > :23:50.children's rights. Areas of work are determined through a five-year

:23:51. > :23:55.framework and main priority areas including the fighting of racism and

:23:56. > :24:01.xenophobia, and related intolerance. EU candidate countries can

:24:02. > :24:06.participate in the fundamental rights agency as observers. The bill

:24:07. > :24:12.proofs two draft decisions on the participation of the Republic of

:24:13. > :24:17.Albania and Serbia in observers of the fundamental rights agency. The

:24:18. > :24:23.decision will not confirm observers status through Albania and Serbia

:24:24. > :24:33.but association councils, Albania and Serbia can determine in this

:24:34. > :24:37.becoming observers. Under the draft Council decisions, Albania and

:24:38. > :24:40.Serbia would both appoint an observer and ultimate observer in

:24:41. > :24:44.the work of the agency 's management board, on an equal footing with the

:24:45. > :24:49.member and alternate members appointed by EU member states, but

:24:50. > :24:53.without the right to vote. They would also participate in

:24:54. > :25:03.initiatives undertaken by the agency and make a financial contribution to

:25:04. > :25:08.yet. In an explanatory memoranda in March 2016, the honourable member

:25:09. > :25:12.for each and Walton, who was then, and is now, a minister in the

:25:13. > :25:17.Justice Department, said the government supports Albania and

:25:18. > :25:26.Serbia becoming a member, agreeing that it would UK subject firm but

:25:27. > :25:31.fair conditionality. Albania and Serbia will make a contribution to

:25:32. > :25:37.the EU budget, in order to participate, ranging between 160,000

:25:38. > :25:41.to 183,000 euros per year. The draft decisions have been cleared out the

:25:42. > :25:47.European Scrutiny Committee and the Lords Europe select committee. As

:25:48. > :25:52.the minister said in her remarks, this is an opportunity for us to

:25:53. > :25:55.support the progress being made in human rights, in the two countries

:25:56. > :26:04.in question. I completely agree with what she said on that point. I give

:26:05. > :26:08.way. I see the member for served on those, that both the Labour Party

:26:09. > :26:12.works with the Council of Europe with Albania and with the Balkans to

:26:13. > :26:16.make sure that they are monitored and understood. It's an enormous

:26:17. > :26:22.amount of work by this place, with parliament roads across Europe, to

:26:23. > :26:26.continue the work you talk about. I commend the member, he will actually

:26:27. > :26:30.give praise. There are in peace here doing the work already. He's

:26:31. > :26:37.absolutely right to make that point, I thank him and join him in praising

:26:38. > :26:43.colleagues across the house, for their work on these very important

:26:44. > :26:46.matters. But, I have a particular question for the Minister, which did

:26:47. > :26:53.come up in some interventions, which is what would be the nature of our

:26:54. > :26:59.involvement in the agency? A similar question would apply to a number of

:27:00. > :27:06.agencies. Both immediately after Brexit, how does she envisage the

:27:07. > :27:11.transitional arrangements being handled? And, what she sees as the

:27:12. > :27:14.longer-term arrangements for our involvement in this and similar

:27:15. > :27:21.agencies. That is something she could come back to in her wind-up?

:27:22. > :27:25.Turning to the agreement between the EU and Canada on competition, there

:27:26. > :27:30.is already an agreement between the EU and Canada in competition

:27:31. > :27:33.matters. It extends powers to both sides, so they can exchange evidence

:27:34. > :27:39.that they've collected in the course of their investigations. The

:27:40. > :27:43.honourable gentleman give way? I'm grateful for the honourable

:27:44. > :27:48.gentleman for giving way. I just want him to repeat his question in a

:27:49. > :27:53.little more detail, my understanding of the fundamental rights agency is

:27:54. > :27:58.there to help interpret and work on community law and member states. If

:27:59. > :28:05.we left the EU it would no longer be relevant in that context to the UK

:28:06. > :28:10.and itself? Yes, I had moved on to the second part but I will come back

:28:11. > :28:16.to what he said. I think we need to know what our relationship would be,

:28:17. > :28:21.as his honourable friend just said, were carried out by members of the

:28:22. > :28:27.house, over many years, has been extremely important in making

:28:28. > :28:35.progress in both countries named in this piece of legislation. And

:28:36. > :28:41.elsewhere. It's important we have a sense from government of how we

:28:42. > :28:47.would stay involved in the work of agencies, including this one,

:28:48. > :28:51.because I think this country, all members would agree, this country

:28:52. > :28:56.has a very important role to play, in the EU or not. Does the

:28:57. > :29:01.honourable gentleman agree with me that when it comes to human rights

:29:02. > :29:06.in this country, and indeed across Europe, a key part of human rights

:29:07. > :29:09.is the European Convention of human rights, unaffected by this. That

:29:10. > :29:18.must remain the key and most important element. I completely

:29:19. > :29:23.agree. I will move onto the EU and Canada relationships. The EU

:29:24. > :29:26.Commission cites that the absence of a power to exchange information with

:29:27. > :29:31.the Canadian competition authority is now in danger becoming an

:29:32. > :29:36.impediment, as cooperation between the two parties has increased. The

:29:37. > :29:41.Minister made that point. Cooperation with other competition

:29:42. > :29:47.authorities is standard practice in international competition

:29:48. > :29:51.investigations. The EU has cooperation agreements with the

:29:52. > :29:55.United States, Japan and Korea, the most advanced being with

:29:56. > :30:00.Switzerland, similar to the Canada agreement, and has proved, as the

:30:01. > :30:10.minister said, uncontroversial. Many worldwide or transatlantic cartels

:30:11. > :30:18.include Canada in their operations, and the Canadian commission will

:30:19. > :30:21.have a good opportunity via this agreement to gain additional

:30:22. > :30:28.information concerning those cartels, and whether practice is

:30:29. > :30:31.anti-competitive or not. I thank the honourable member for giving way,

:30:32. > :30:36.does the member except that this serves as an interesting template

:30:37. > :30:43.for how we take forward competitive activities after Brexit? It may

:30:44. > :30:50.serve for other members of the British Commonwealth, to look at how

:30:51. > :30:56.we pattern that relationship? I think that is a good point. I will

:30:57. > :31:02.come later to further questions on the arrangements after we leave the

:31:03. > :31:08.EU, so we can continue to benefit from these kinds of arrangements

:31:09. > :31:15.that are set out in this section of the bill. We need to ensure that

:31:16. > :31:21.arrangements are in place to address anti-competitive practice Raw in

:31:22. > :31:27.this country, and where it affects interests across the world. --

:31:28. > :31:34.practices in this country. That's a point, that the Minister can come

:31:35. > :31:39.back to in her wind-up. I appreciate your indulgence. The issue of

:31:40. > :31:43.setting a pattern is how it should be done, do you agree it impacts

:31:44. > :31:47.greatly on our nearest neighbour, the Republic of Ireland? If we get

:31:48. > :31:50.the relationship right between ourselves and Canada, getting it

:31:51. > :31:59.right with the Republic of Ireland will help to bolster our trade? I

:32:00. > :32:07.think we are potentially in danger of wandering away from the subject!

:32:08. > :32:12.I have no idea why members opposite find that funny, but there we are.

:32:13. > :32:16.Obviously, the DUP are particularly exercised on that, among other

:32:17. > :32:21.points. I dare say that is something for the Minister to pick up and for

:32:22. > :32:26.another day... He will be particularly concerned by it.

:32:27. > :32:31.Competition delivers benefits to consumers, to businesses, and to

:32:32. > :32:35.society as a whole. Therefore, competition policy contributes to

:32:36. > :32:41.contributing in jobs, investment and growth. By enforcing competition

:32:42. > :32:43.rules, sanctioning, breeches and promoting a competition culture

:32:44. > :32:50.internationally, the proposed agreement will improve

:32:51. > :32:54.administrative competition and the Canadian competition bureau.

:32:55. > :32:59.Ultimately, consumers in the EU and in Canada benefit from competition

:33:00. > :33:04.policy and sanctions which contribute to stronger deterrents of

:33:05. > :33:07.anti-competitive behaviour. More effective competition enforcement

:33:08. > :33:10.results in more open and competitive markets, where companies compete

:33:11. > :33:18.more freely enabling them to generate wealth and jobs. It is a

:33:19. > :33:24.better choice of products at low prices. This agreement has been

:33:25. > :33:30.similar to that in place since June 1999, with additional improvements

:33:31. > :33:35.on the exchange of information. Even after we have left the EU, UK

:33:36. > :33:46.companies operating in the EU will be subject to the jurisdiction of

:33:47. > :33:51.the European Court in anti-trust investigations, as all non-EU

:33:52. > :33:58.countries are. Information on United Kingdom companies will still be

:33:59. > :34:01.transferable after Brexit, however, after Brexit, the European

:34:02. > :34:06.Commission will still share information about the UK companies

:34:07. > :34:10.with Canada, that will not be bounced to share the information

:34:11. > :34:18.received from Canada about the UK with the UK. -- will not be bound.

:34:19. > :34:23.This agreement relates to administrative cooperation between

:34:24. > :34:26.the EU Commission and Canadian competition bureau, so public

:34:27. > :34:29.consultation and an impact assessment was not considered

:34:30. > :34:34.necessary by the government, and as the Minister has said on a number of

:34:35. > :34:37.occasions, she does not think there are financial implications. The

:34:38. > :34:44.government noted in its explanatory memorandum that this agreement will

:34:45. > :34:46.have no impact on UK law, or financial implications. The European

:34:47. > :34:51.Scrutiny Committee did not at first clear the proposals, and the chair

:34:52. > :34:55.of the committee, who I dare say is going to make a contribution to this

:34:56. > :35:02.debate, requested further information about whether in and in

:35:03. > :35:06.what way the UK could participate in an agreement following withdrawal.

:35:07. > :35:10.The minister responded to the committee on the 24th of October,

:35:11. > :35:15.stating that the government will ensure that the UK is the

:35:16. > :35:21.strongest... In the strongest possible position to cooperate on

:35:22. > :35:25.competition matters with international partners. There are a

:35:26. > :35:28.number of options for securing the means of international cooperation

:35:29. > :35:32.as any cooperation agreement depends on negotiation with the EU, and

:35:33. > :35:38.negotiations with any other countries like Canada. It is too

:35:39. > :35:44.early to say what exact form the international cooperation will take.

:35:45. > :35:48.I think that does raise a number of questions about transition

:35:49. > :35:53.arrangements in the longer term. In response to that letter, the

:35:54. > :35:56.documents and those subsequently cleared by the committee, that

:35:57. > :36:04.brings us to the arrangements and what they will be after we leave the

:36:05. > :36:08.EU. She mentioned in her letter about seeking to extend current

:36:09. > :36:16.arrangements, so I would ask her if she could indicate how long she

:36:17. > :36:22.thinks that would be necessary? And what guarantee she feels that will

:36:23. > :36:25.give us? If it is possible to extend existing arrangements. United

:36:26. > :36:29.Kingdom companies operating in the EU will be covered by this

:36:30. > :36:34.agreement, the difference will be that the European Commission will

:36:35. > :36:37.continue to share information with Canada about UK companies but that

:36:38. > :36:42.will not be shared with the UK unless a further agreement is

:36:43. > :36:45.reached. She said in her letter that any cooperation agreement will

:36:46. > :36:54.depend on negotiations. How long does she think those negotiations

:36:55. > :36:57.are likely to take? What will she be seeking to achieve as a result of

:36:58. > :37:01.those negotiations? I think that we are at the point where we need

:37:02. > :37:04.government ministers to begin to answer some questions about

:37:05. > :37:08.transition arrangements and longer term on this matter and many others.

:37:09. > :37:14.There's no doubt that competition is vital to the economy, and the

:37:15. > :37:17.success of our businesses and prosperity of the people of our

:37:18. > :37:21.country. Encouraging healthy competition is vital, the role of

:37:22. > :37:25.national government and international cooperation is to

:37:26. > :37:30.create a fair market, not only a free one. To avoid anti-competitive

:37:31. > :37:35.practices, whether preventing the creation of cartels through mergers

:37:36. > :37:39.and acquisitions, or preventing undercutting exploitation of workers

:37:40. > :37:44.in smaller businesses, the use zero hours contracts were workers have

:37:45. > :37:48.little choice, the banks who only found those with liquid assets, the

:37:49. > :37:56.delays payment of invoices by larger firms, they are all examples of

:37:57. > :38:00.anti-competitive practices and exploitative practices, they are all

:38:01. > :38:05.examples where government nationally and internationally should be

:38:06. > :38:09.looking at ways of intervening. Playing its part in setting a level

:38:10. > :38:12.playing field. And being a partner to business and the workforce as

:38:13. > :38:21.well. Government should be encouraging

:38:22. > :38:26.those wishing to start to grow a business. It should be investing,

:38:27. > :38:29.have the right strategy for infrastructure and skills. And an

:38:30. > :38:35.industrial strategy. But underpinning that is the approach to

:38:36. > :38:40.competition, and I think that's what this bill is all about. We need the

:38:41. > :38:48.questions answered about what happens after we leave the EU and

:38:49. > :38:52.those arrangements. The nature of the points made by the Minister in

:38:53. > :38:58.her letter to the European scrutiny committee are very important. They

:38:59. > :39:05.show just how complex some of these questions are. I think it's time we

:39:06. > :39:13.started to get some answers to those questions. I'm following his speech

:39:14. > :39:18.very closely. He has now mentioned the European scrutiny for the second

:39:19. > :39:22.time, I think. Would he join me in calling for that committee to be

:39:23. > :39:25.reconstituted as quickly as possible, because doesn't it

:39:26. > :39:30.demonstrate the important work that committee does, and it should get

:39:31. > :39:34.going straightaway? I don't know if he was in the chamber before the

:39:35. > :39:41.debate started, but my honourable friend the number for Bootle made an

:39:42. > :39:48.impassioned plea to Mr Speaker for just this to happen, and for select

:39:49. > :39:54.committees to reconvene as soon as possible. So I agree with him. On

:39:55. > :39:59.this side of the referendum result, we accept we are leaving the

:40:00. > :40:02.European Union, but we need to make sure we are negotiating strong

:40:03. > :40:08.transitional arrangements and there is no cliff edge for the economy. We

:40:09. > :40:11.need to put a much greater priority than we have seen from the

:40:12. > :40:15.government so far on retaining the benefits of the single market and

:40:16. > :40:20.Customs union. We shouldn't accept watering down of workers' rights,

:40:21. > :40:23.and environmental standards, as a result of Brexit. We will seek

:40:24. > :40:30.significant improvements to the repeal bill to ensure there is

:40:31. > :40:34.proper oversight for this use of new powers and no drop in EU rights and

:40:35. > :40:41.protections. And in that context, I think what we have been discussing

:40:42. > :40:49.this afternoon is really important. As the minister said, to paraphrase,

:40:50. > :40:54.we will seek, on this side anyway, a strong at collaborative new

:40:55. > :41:00.relationship with the EU, not as members, but as partners. On this

:41:01. > :41:06.site we will seek to remain a member of common agencies that benefit the

:41:07. > :41:11.UK, such as Eurojust, and I would add to that arrangements we are

:41:12. > :41:16.discussing today, perhaps. We have to get this right. We are not in a

:41:17. > :41:20.strong position as we enter negotiations. I want to see the

:41:21. > :41:25.Prime Minister change her approach. She must drop the no deal as a

:41:26. > :41:29.viable option, but a stronger emphasis on jobs, the economy and

:41:30. > :41:33.retaining the benefits of the single market and the customs union, and

:41:34. > :41:36.bring parliament back, as we have seen today, into the Brexit process.

:41:37. > :41:42.The fact we are debating this bill shows we must retain the benefits of

:41:43. > :41:45.cooperation we currently have with the EU and relationships we

:41:46. > :41:49.currently have. I said at the start this Bill was only of four draft

:41:50. > :41:53.decisions, but it's indicative of what is to come as we address the

:41:54. > :41:56.challenges of Brexit, and as far as this bill goes, the Minister really

:41:57. > :42:01.does need to answer the questions about transitional arrangements and

:42:02. > :42:04.negotiations so we can continue to share information that benefit our

:42:05. > :42:14.economy and the people of this country. As has already been

:42:15. > :42:19.mentioned, the European scrutiny committee, of which I was chairman

:42:20. > :42:25.for six years, has actually cleared these documents, and we did have

:42:26. > :42:30.some reservations about one aspect of them, which was the fact that we

:42:31. > :42:37.wanted to know how all of this would work out in terms of the Brexit

:42:38. > :42:44.negotiations after we had left the European Union. But basically, there

:42:45. > :42:48.is a necessity for this bill, because as the minister pointed out,

:42:49. > :42:55.although we are leaving the EU, nonetheless we are still, under

:42:56. > :42:59.sections two and three of the European Communities Act 1972, still

:43:00. > :43:02.within the framework of the requirements to comply with EU

:43:03. > :43:09.rights and obligations until Brexit takes effect. There are some who are

:43:10. > :43:13.hoping that somehow or other, all this will be kicked into the long

:43:14. > :43:20.grass and we will have arrangements that take us into a world of

:43:21. > :43:25.never-never land, and it will all somehow disappear. I think there are

:43:26. > :43:28.those in the House of Lords who might take that view, and there may

:43:29. > :43:34.be some in the House of Commons. Although I was extremely glad to

:43:35. > :43:37.note that on the issue of certain matters, particularly the single

:43:38. > :43:42.market and Customs union, the decision that was taken on the

:43:43. > :43:49.Queen's Speech made it clear, and subsequent events seem to have

:43:50. > :43:54.confirmed that, that the Labour Party, the opposition, have actually

:43:55. > :43:58.become extremely realistic about the single market and all that goes with

:43:59. > :44:06.it. These sorts of arrangements are implicit in the Brexit negotiations

:44:07. > :44:12.and the Brexit outcome. Returning to the issue of Albania and Serbia,

:44:13. > :44:20.yes, certainly the builders have to to provide Parliamentary approval of

:44:21. > :44:23.these decisions, and European scrutiny committee had no

:44:24. > :44:26.reservation or concern after they had heard from the minister

:44:27. > :44:34.concerned, perhaps the same minister, I am glad to say, who

:44:35. > :44:38.wrote me a letter back last year. There is an important issue here,

:44:39. > :44:45.however, and that is Albania and Serbia are not by definition

:44:46. > :44:52.countries who are likely to become candidates during the period of our

:44:53. > :44:58.own process of negotiation of exit. Mr Juncker himself has said he

:44:59. > :45:02.doesn't think there will be any enlargement until after we have left

:45:03. > :45:08.the European Union, and therefore, to that extent, it will not impinge

:45:09. > :45:14.upon us, and we don't have to take a position specifically on Albania and

:45:15. > :45:17.Serbia in terms of their candidature. I would say with

:45:18. > :45:21.reference to this particular document, which makes a lot of

:45:22. > :45:26.reference to the fundamental rights agency, one thing that hasn't been

:45:27. > :45:30.mentioned in this debate is the Charter of fundamental rights, and

:45:31. > :45:35.that is embedded in the Lisbon Treaty arrangements. It's a matter

:45:36. > :45:45.of law. Although I strongly resisted our being drawn into it, we have a

:45:46. > :45:52.European scrutiny committee enquiry asking how Lord Goldsmith and his

:45:53. > :45:56.negotiations had failed so dramatically, that we thought we

:45:57. > :46:02.were not going to be members of the Charter of fundamental rights, but

:46:03. > :46:10.we ended up being in that framework. The question of the fundamental

:46:11. > :46:14.rights agency, which itself deals with promoting dialogue with civil

:46:15. > :46:17.society in order to raise public awareness of fundamental rights,

:46:18. > :46:22.which would be part and parcel of the functions which will be carried

:46:23. > :46:27.through by virtue of this bill in respect of Serbia and Albania, does

:46:28. > :46:31.have something of a vacuum in it, because we will not be part of the

:46:32. > :46:35.Charter of fundamental rights after we have left, but we are for the

:46:36. > :46:40.time being. To that extent, there is a kind of problem which I'm not

:46:41. > :46:44.going to invite the Minister to enlarge upon, I hope she is glad to

:46:45. > :46:47.know. But I want to put it on the record that the Charter of

:46:48. > :46:51.fundamental rights should never have applied to others in the first

:46:52. > :46:56.place. It was a botched job by the then the Labour Party in government.

:46:57. > :47:01.We are now saddled with the fact that we are in it, but fortunately

:47:02. > :47:09.as a result of Brexit we will be coming out of it. However, the

:47:10. > :47:13.agency has come as part of its role, a fight against racism, xenophobia

:47:14. > :47:19.and intolerance, all of which I'm sure we would agree with as a matter

:47:20. > :47:24.of principle. I think the involvement of Albania and Serbia in

:47:25. > :47:27.this process will enable an element of self education to take place.

:47:28. > :47:33.That's really the object of it, so that they can become more aware than

:47:34. > :47:37.they previously have been. Because, take Serbia. I have been in this

:47:38. > :47:43.house long enough to be here at the time of Sarajevo and all that went

:47:44. > :47:57.with it, the loss of itch, -- the loss of itch -- Milosevic. These

:47:58. > :48:02.were horrible people. The reality is, the breaches of the rights of

:48:03. > :48:06.these people in Serbia were so horrific that it is still living

:48:07. > :48:14.with us to this day. I think it would be very important for these

:48:15. > :48:19.two countries, Albania and Serbia, to be incorporated and absorbed into

:48:20. > :48:25.the processes by which fundamental rights are looked at. I don't like

:48:26. > :48:29.the Charter of fundamental rights, not because I'm against human

:48:30. > :48:32.rights, but actually because I don't like the idea that some of the

:48:33. > :48:36.adjudication that do take place. That's not to say that it isn't

:48:37. > :48:41.important that these two countries should be involved in that process.

:48:42. > :48:48.So I don't really have any reason, any more than the committee of which

:48:49. > :48:55.I was chairman at the time this was decided. We originally asked for

:48:56. > :48:59.some information and further comment from the minister. We got it, and we

:49:00. > :49:05.were satisfied and cleared the documents. Indeed, the documents

:49:06. > :49:12.were also cleared by our counterpart in the House of Lords and so on. I

:49:13. > :49:20.simply want to say on that subject that I believe what the Minister has

:49:21. > :49:26.said is fair, and I wouldn't want in anyway to stand in the way of the

:49:27. > :49:30.approval of this bill. I ought to say, just with reference to the

:49:31. > :49:35.question of the accession process which I referred to earlier, it does

:49:36. > :49:38.take quite a long time for these two countries to become members of the

:49:39. > :49:45.European Union. They will come in after we have left. And there is a

:49:46. > :49:51.resolution of the European Parliament on Brexit which calls for

:49:52. > :49:55.the transition period to be no longer than three years. The

:49:56. > :50:00.commission's negotiating guidelines for Brexit talks state that any

:50:01. > :50:05.transition must be limited in time. I will just leave that on the

:50:06. > :50:12.record, because some people seem to have got this idea that transition

:50:13. > :50:18.is an everlasting journey. Well, it's not. We are leaving, and that's

:50:19. > :50:22.that. And by the time Albania and Serbia become members of the

:50:23. > :50:27.European Union, if they do, we will be out. That'll be a good thing for

:50:28. > :50:35.the United Kingdom. I ought to add that the Minister for Justice, on

:50:36. > :50:42.the 22nd of March 2016, which you will note before the referendum took

:50:43. > :50:45.place, stated that we were committed to engaging constructively with the

:50:46. > :50:52.EU and we supported enlargement of the EU to the rest of the Balkans,

:50:53. > :50:59.subject to what he described as fair and firm conditionality. He made

:51:00. > :51:04.much the same comment as I have just made with regard to self education,

:51:05. > :51:10.saying that participation will assist both country's accession to

:51:11. > :51:15.the EU. He also confirmed at that time that proposals would only move

:51:16. > :51:17.forward once all the other member states had completed constitutional

:51:18. > :51:26.requirements, which we are doing here. My honourable friend, the

:51:27. > :51:31.member for West Dorset and North Poole raised the question of

:51:32. > :51:34.Germany. They too have to have Parliamentary approval, and as far

:51:35. > :51:42.as I am aware that will be forthcoming. They have an interest

:51:43. > :51:48.in a continuation of the EU in a way we do not. Turning to the EU Canada

:51:49. > :51:52.competition and cooperation enforcement, this was again approved

:51:53. > :52:00.and cleared by the European scrutiny committee. I declare an interest as

:52:01. > :52:03.somebody who served on that committee in the last parliament. As

:52:04. > :52:07.my honourable friend received any assurances as to when the committee

:52:08. > :52:12.will be reconstituted, and will he agree with me that it is absolutely

:52:13. > :52:12.necessary that is a matter of urgency that committee is

:52:13. > :52:23.reconstituted? I'm glad to respond, we have been

:52:24. > :52:28.engaged on the subject, when the house was dissolved for the general

:52:29. > :52:36.election, to write to the Chief Whip, and to ask him to be sure that

:52:37. > :52:41.we did get the committee reconstituted. Immediately after the

:52:42. > :52:46.election, because the last time, in 2015, the whole process went on

:52:47. > :52:52.until I think it was November. By which time, we had a monument of

:52:53. > :52:59.documents, and of course, in the meantime, many things are now being

:53:00. > :53:07.decided in the European institutions. Many are directly

:53:08. > :53:10.relevant to Brexit negotiations, so it is incredibly important that they

:53:11. > :53:14.should have the opportunity to assess the sorts of things which are

:53:15. > :53:21.being decided, subject to clearing these documents. As honourable

:53:22. > :53:26.members may know, some do, so don't, I have to say. If we impose a

:53:27. > :53:30.scrutiny reserve on the document, it's important enough to be debated,

:53:31. > :53:33.and Council ministers cannot conclude consideration of those

:53:34. > :53:42.matters and the government cannot make a decision to carry the matter

:53:43. > :53:46.through, until that debate has taken place. When you have a whole pile of

:53:47. > :53:52.documents, I understand it was something in the order of 200 at the

:53:53. > :53:55.moment, that are in the pipeline, with the memoranda that go with

:53:56. > :54:00.them, explaining the government position, that would be highly

:54:01. > :54:04.interesting in terms of the position the government is adopting, with

:54:05. > :54:10.regard to negotiation positions on those documents. What my honourable

:54:11. > :54:14.friend rightly raises is the question of getting on with this

:54:15. > :54:19.job, and I'm given to understand, without committing anybody to

:54:20. > :54:23.anything, that they are taking steps to accelerate the process because it

:54:24. > :54:26.is so important, and later this afternoon we will be discussing

:54:27. > :54:33.other select committees which will have their schedules shorted

:54:34. > :54:40.agricultural to it and -- their schedules sorted, and the leadership

:54:41. > :54:44.of those committees will be decided upon. I understand they have been

:54:45. > :54:53.subject to discussion between the usual channels. I'm not expected

:54:54. > :54:58.expecting it to be terribly controversial but we need to get

:54:59. > :55:04.ahead with it, if I can turn to the question of the Canada agreement. To

:55:05. > :55:13.say that I entirely endorse what the minister said about this, again,

:55:14. > :55:17.this matter was the subject of discussion within the European

:55:18. > :55:33.Scrutiny Committee, and we agreed that we would let it go ahead, and I

:55:34. > :55:38.will say, however, that explanatory notes on the bill are regarding the

:55:39. > :55:46.EU after Brexit, that is the bit we need to be most concerned about at

:55:47. > :55:52.the moment. What business indicate is following the UK exit from the

:55:53. > :55:57.EU, UK companies operating within the EU will still be subject to the

:55:58. > :56:01.jurisdiction of the European Commission in entering trust

:56:02. > :56:05.negotiations, and where thresholds are met, in merger investigations

:56:06. > :56:09.and in the same way as other non-EU companies operating with the EU,

:56:10. > :56:12.information relating to EU companies based in the EU would still be

:56:13. > :56:21.transferable under the new agreement. This is becoming a bit of

:56:22. > :56:29.a hot potato. We had at the other day, I made a representation to the

:56:30. > :56:34.Prime Minister on citizens writes, we had questions on city regulation

:56:35. > :56:38.and here we are having it coming up again. I think some people are

:56:39. > :56:45.making too much of this, trying to make out that somehow or another,

:56:46. > :56:49.there's an enormous amount emerging on programmes were sometimes we find

:56:50. > :56:56.ourselves listening and perhaps we should switch off! The real problem

:56:57. > :57:01.here is that we've got to say in the European Court of Justice -- got to

:57:02. > :57:07.stay. This is complete rubbish, we do not have to stay. But far more

:57:08. > :57:11.than that, we are not can to stay in the European Court of Justice. The

:57:12. > :57:17.reason is, we will be repealing sections two and three of the

:57:18. > :57:20.European Communities Act 1972, and I know the Labour Party and the

:57:21. > :57:23.opposition have been quite clear that we will not stay in the single

:57:24. > :57:28.market with the customs union and that raises some of the biggest

:57:29. > :57:33.issues relating to the European Court of Justice. Frankly, what

:57:34. > :57:43.we've got to do is come up with some sensible arrangements, without, as I

:57:44. > :57:46.said in the house the other day, without prejudice to regaining our

:57:47. > :57:52.judicial sovereignty, at the same time to arrive at some sort of

:57:53. > :57:58.tribunal which would enable us to be able, by the use of a parallel,

:57:59. > :58:02.bilateral, what is known as a source of law agreement. To end up with a

:58:03. > :58:09.decision-making process which does not and cannot keep us in the

:58:10. > :58:15.European Court of Justice. It isn't a matter of opinion or wishful

:58:16. > :58:20.thinking, it's a fantasyland. I thank the honourable gentleman for

:58:21. > :58:24.giving way. I would like to ask the honourable gentleman about the case

:58:25. > :58:27.of the British company at the moment, which, under our current

:58:28. > :58:33.competition agreement with the EU, if a British company has got a case

:58:34. > :58:37.which they believe his anti-competitive with a European

:58:38. > :58:42.company, they can take direct redress, whereas under the

:58:43. > :58:46.relationships between the EU, the UK and Canada, although we will have

:58:47. > :58:51.competition corporation, if we pass this bill, there will be no direct

:58:52. > :58:54.redress for a British company if they are concerned by the

:58:55. > :58:59.anti-competitive activities of a Canadian company. Whilst I

:59:00. > :59:02.completely understand your concerns with the European Court of Justice

:59:03. > :59:07.going forward, one of the things we do want to see, with our largest

:59:08. > :59:11.trading partner, is a means of address and enforcement which means

:59:12. > :59:15.British companies will be able to take direct redress with our largest

:59:16. > :59:20.trading partner when they need to. Does the honourable member think

:59:21. > :59:28.that they EEA model might be of interest here? I'm not at all

:59:29. > :59:35.convinced by the EEA route, I don't want to get into all of that now,

:59:36. > :59:38.but the EEA involves the EU. Eft is a different story, I specifically

:59:39. > :59:47.raised it with the Prime Minister a few years ago, because I have been

:59:48. > :59:51.having fruitful discussions with the president of the EFTA court and his

:59:52. > :59:55.advisers, he has been speaking to the Foreign Office and others, as

:59:56. > :00:01.chairman of the European scrutiny committee and others. It's an

:00:02. > :00:06.interesting proposition. I am not saying we will do exactly the same

:00:07. > :00:10.in terms of resolving jurisdiction questions as it happens at the

:00:11. > :00:18.moment with EFTA but the advantage of the EFTA model is that it is

:00:19. > :00:21.completely independent of the EU. It follows the European Court of

:00:22. > :00:29.Justice decisions for the most part. Not always. And graduate have

:00:30. > :00:35.noticed that, not many people have. What is important is this is where

:00:36. > :00:40.we end up, having a constructive discussion about the best means of

:00:41. > :00:44.being cousins rather than brothers and sisters. As I put you into

:00:45. > :00:49.mentioned earlier on. We all have a mutual interest in ensuring that we

:00:50. > :00:53.have a proper jurisdiction or answer to these questions, and I'm not

:00:54. > :00:57.going to attempt to design a model standing on my feet here and now.

:00:58. > :01:05.But I think it may be something along the lines of a retired... I

:01:06. > :01:11.don't want to be held to this, but I'm giving it as a thought. Perhaps

:01:12. > :01:14.a retired judge from the European Court, together with a retired

:01:15. > :01:18.member of our Supreme Court, and an independent judge to go with it.

:01:19. > :01:26.Effectively you get the benefit of listening to the arguments which

:01:27. > :01:32.breach the two jurisdictions -- porridge. We are interested for the

:01:33. > :01:36.sake of the companies which my honourable friend has just referred

:01:37. > :01:41.to -- porridge. To nature that we give them the answers they need. It

:01:42. > :01:47.is a practical question. To answer the general point we made, I think

:01:48. > :01:51.it is important, we need to make sure that we end up with something

:01:52. > :02:00.that works, without prejudice to our legislative sovereignty, and at the

:02:01. > :02:05.same time, providing an answer to the people who we have to serve as

:02:06. > :02:09.members of Parliament within our constituencies and throughout the

:02:10. > :02:13.UK. With those words, Mr Deputy Speaker, many congratulations to

:02:14. > :02:18.you, if I may, for the first time on seeing you here yet again! As you

:02:19. > :02:24.may have noticed, I'm still here as well! For practical purposes, I draw

:02:25. > :02:28.my speech to a conclusion by saying I don't in any way want to interfere

:02:29. > :02:33.with the process because it's not really going to affect us in the

:02:34. > :02:36.longer term but actually it is important that we act in a sensible

:02:37. > :02:43.and responsible manner, to ensure that we do not rock the boat in the

:02:44. > :02:48.meantime. Andrew? Thank you. Since it is also my first opportunity, may

:02:49. > :02:52.I congratulate you on coming back to the chair, Mr Deputy Speaker? I'm

:02:53. > :02:56.grateful to the minister setting out the provisions of this bill on the

:02:57. > :03:00.first two draft decisions, we welcome the opportunity to give

:03:01. > :03:03.support to the participation of Albania and Serbia as observers in

:03:04. > :03:09.the EU agency for fundamental rights. As the agency says,

:03:10. > :03:13.fundamental rights sets up minimal standards to make sure a person is

:03:14. > :03:18.treated with dignity. Whether this is the right to be free from

:03:19. > :03:25.discrimination on the basis of your age, ability or ethnic background,

:03:26. > :03:33.these rights should be respected, promoted and protected. They are

:03:34. > :03:37.shared values, with the SNP and the Scottish Government, and we have

:03:38. > :03:41.them dear. For example, we demonstrate this in Scotland by

:03:42. > :03:46.using limited new powers to build a social security system with dignity

:03:47. > :03:49.at the heart. Contrast with the UK Government rolling out dysfunctional

:03:50. > :03:54.Universal Credit regime, punishing the disabled, those on low wages and

:03:55. > :03:58.be vulnerable. Regarding Serbia and Albania, while there is a lot of

:03:59. > :04:02.work to be done, this is an important step for both countries on

:04:03. > :04:07.their journey to improving the lives of citizens. They deserve credit for

:04:08. > :04:12.their repressed and we know joining the EU is also the will of both

:04:13. > :04:17.nations. Serbia was formally announced as an EU candidate in

:04:18. > :04:24.2012, it has already opened ten 35 chapters of succession. Last week,

:04:25. > :04:30.Serbia's newly elected Prime Minister talked of a strategic

:04:31. > :04:34.orientation towards the EU, which represents the values that we stand

:04:35. > :04:39.for. She stated that is the place where Serbia should be. Similarly,

:04:40. > :04:44.elections in Albania this week showed once again a renewed

:04:45. > :04:50.commitment to the EU. The two largest parties are pro-EU and a

:04:51. > :04:56.survey has shown that over 95% of citizens support EU membership. In

:04:57. > :04:59.their commitment to EU, they have shown willingness and a commitment

:05:00. > :05:07.to improving fundamental rights of their citizens and to restoring

:05:08. > :05:11.peace. They see the EU as a vehicle for peace across Europe. Indeed,

:05:12. > :05:17.it's worthwhile recalling, since his name has been mentioned already

:05:18. > :05:21.today, Juncker's tribute to the recently deceased German Chancellor

:05:22. > :05:28.Helmut Kohl, he said that it was on the day that they decided to march

:05:29. > :05:32.south east, in a voice choked with tears, he said it was one of the

:05:33. > :05:36.most beautiful days of his life that he, as German Chancellor, could

:05:37. > :05:43.bring Europe back together again after all the harm Germany caused.

:05:44. > :05:48.Juncker said as his friend that nobody was embarrassed by his tears,

:05:49. > :05:52.it was Europe at its best. We play at a small part in the rights of

:05:53. > :05:57.people across the Western Balkans as a great thing. What a shame that our

:05:58. > :06:00.government, this UK Government, is hell-bent on pulling Scotland out of

:06:01. > :06:07.the very partnership that delivers these protections. This is despite

:06:08. > :06:12.people in every Scottish local authority voting to remain in the

:06:13. > :06:17.EU. It's also not lost on us that the bill comes days after the

:06:18. > :06:21.fundamental rights of people, in particular and those of the LGBT

:06:22. > :06:25.community in Northern Ireland, being questioned because of a back door

:06:26. > :06:30.deal with the DUP, to keep this Tory government in power. I'm happy to

:06:31. > :06:36.give way. When it comes to protecting the human rights of those

:06:37. > :06:40.in the UK, be that Scotland, or Northern Ireland, is it the

:06:41. > :06:44.convention, which is by far the most important of asserting those rights,

:06:45. > :06:47.and we need to keep that in mind? The honourable gentleman makes a

:06:48. > :06:51.good point about the mention of the convention but we need to take every

:06:52. > :06:56.opportunity to make sure we protect the rights of citizens. Mr Speaker,

:06:57. > :07:02.turning to the third and fourth draft decisions, we on the SNP bench

:07:03. > :07:05.welcome further formalisation of the working relationship between Canada

:07:06. > :07:10.and the EU in regard to competition laws. These draft decisions in

:07:11. > :07:13.particular serve as a reminder of the good business and trading

:07:14. > :07:18.opportunities the EU provides for the UK. A bad Brexit deal, or the

:07:19. > :07:26.fact you're scum of ludicrous idea of no deal, will make

:07:27. > :07:39.or a fractured or ludicrous idea of no deal. Scotland could lose as

:07:40. > :07:44.much. Independent estimates could cost 80,000 jobs in a decade. The

:07:45. > :07:49.average wage could fall by ?2000 per year per head. But this...

:07:50. > :07:54.For the record, could the member confirm that Scotland's largest

:07:55. > :08:01.trading partner is the rest of the United Kingdom? I'm happy to confirm

:08:02. > :08:05.that, but I'm also happy to point out how important Scotland is for

:08:06. > :08:10.the rest of the UK in terms of a trading partner. This treaty shows

:08:11. > :08:16.that there are many impending costs of hard Brexit. The rights of

:08:17. > :08:20.citizens who might find they face additional burdens. The library

:08:21. > :08:25.notes in this legislation, as the Minister mentioned earlier, says

:08:26. > :08:27.that it carries no cost to the government, but that doesn't mean

:08:28. > :08:35.subsequently losing these protections were on the no cost to

:08:36. > :08:41.our citizens and businesses. Areas of EU competition regulation, for

:08:42. > :08:45.example, anti-trust, cartels, mergers and state aid, the sectors

:08:46. > :08:50.covered, agriculture and food, consumer goods, energy and

:08:51. > :08:54.environment, financial services, information and communication

:08:55. > :08:59.technologies, media, motor vehicles, pharmaceuticals, postal professional

:09:00. > :09:03.services, sport, telecommunications and transport. It's yet another

:09:04. > :09:07.example, and we have heard no update today on where we have no clarity

:09:08. > :09:11.from the UK Government over Brexit proposals from them on something

:09:12. > :09:20.fundamental to UK companies operating in the EU. And ultimately

:09:21. > :09:25.and importantly to our citizens, this agreement will mean information

:09:26. > :09:28.obtained during the competition enforcement investigations may be

:09:29. > :09:34.discussed and transferred between the European communication and the

:09:35. > :09:41.Canadian competition bureau. It's intended to increase the to conclude

:09:42. > :09:45.competition and enforcement regulations efficiently, and it

:09:46. > :09:49.should be welcome. We are advised to follow in the UK's exit from the

:09:50. > :10:00.European Union, UK companies operating within the EU will still

:10:01. > :10:05.be subject to the jurisdiction, so will the Minister confirm with food

:10:06. > :10:11.that agreement has been met and when it was decided. Mr Deputy Speaker,

:10:12. > :10:17.as we know following the 2.4 billion euros fine on Google, the EU is

:10:18. > :10:22.considering giving tougher competition powers to allow for

:10:23. > :10:26.earlier and faster intervention in potential anti-trust cases. After

:10:27. > :10:29.Brexit the UK will have no say over these types of decisions, which

:10:30. > :10:35.could potentially involve UK companies. How does this government

:10:36. > :10:40.intend to deal with the indication for businesses and consumers of

:10:41. > :10:43.having no voice in the direction of EU competition law? I think we

:10:44. > :10:47.really need to hear some commitments. The Right Honourable

:10:48. > :10:51.member for Stone didn't want to be held to anything, but isn't it about

:10:52. > :10:55.time the UK Government were held to at least some things on the future?

:10:56. > :11:01.While we on these benches are keen to approve these draft decisions,

:11:02. > :11:06.the nature of the bill shows how deep and wide our current

:11:07. > :11:10.protections are in the EU. In Scotland we remain determined to

:11:11. > :11:13.give people hope for the future. And for the protections they currently

:11:14. > :11:18.take for granted, that they will continue to benefit from them, for

:11:19. > :11:23.their families and businesses. I believe there are many people on all

:11:24. > :11:27.sides of this chamber who are passionate about dignity, freedom

:11:28. > :11:32.sand protections, as I and we in the SNP are. Whatever the future holds,

:11:33. > :11:37.it will be important for those voices to make themselves heard. And

:11:38. > :11:49.when they do, we will be ready to support them. The next speaker. I

:11:50. > :11:56.think this is a time for everyone to make congratulations to the Deputy

:11:57. > :12:02.Speaker on your successful real action. Let me do so again on behalf

:12:03. > :12:08.of the whole house. Let me reflect on what we are doing here... As my

:12:09. > :12:14.honourable friend the member for Stone has said, we are not going to

:12:15. > :12:19.be here, we're not going to be in the EU when Albania and Serbia are

:12:20. > :12:25.admitted as members. So we are taking a role as members now of the

:12:26. > :12:32.European Union, to set out something for their benefit for the future. I

:12:33. > :12:37.think that's an important point to remember. We are acting responsibly

:12:38. > :12:41.with our membership now of the European Union. We are not simply

:12:42. > :12:47.washing our hands of two countries that I will comment on in a moment.

:12:48. > :12:54.I think that's a very important point to make. The question I asked

:12:55. > :12:58.in my intervention of the Minister, of what is the difference between

:12:59. > :13:03.the agency for fundamental rights, and what the Council of Europe does,

:13:04. > :13:07.is a very relevant one. The description she gave what the agency

:13:08. > :13:13.does was exactly what the Council of does. And I could not get a

:13:14. > :13:18.cigarette paper between the two definitions. As many other members

:13:19. > :13:24.have made by way of intervention, many of us as members of the Council

:13:25. > :13:29.of Europe, are actively involved in the process of monitoring Albania

:13:30. > :13:34.and Serbia and their participation, for example, in elections. And we

:13:35. > :13:37.will continue to do so for many years after we have left the

:13:38. > :13:43.European Union. Because the Council of Europe is not an EU body, and

:13:44. > :13:50.therefore we will continue, I hope, anyway, as members of the Council of

:13:51. > :13:57.Europe, with its subsidiary body, if I can use that phrase, which is the

:13:58. > :14:01.short European Court of Human Rights. It's important to recognise

:14:02. > :14:05.that it's the Council of Europe that owns the European Court of Human

:14:06. > :14:12.Rights and owns the convention. I will come on to say something about

:14:13. > :14:18.that in just a second. But in terms of Serbia and Albania, as my

:14:19. > :14:26.honourable friend from South Suffolk said, we shouldn't take lightly the

:14:27. > :14:29.situation in Serbia. I have spent many years in Central and Eastern

:14:30. > :14:35.Europe in order to help develop those countries along the path of

:14:36. > :14:41.democracy and market economy. It seems to me to be only a few years

:14:42. > :14:46.ago that we were looking at a Serbia that was full of warlords, that was

:14:47. > :15:03.full of all the banks of the Balkans at the time. -- full of the angst of

:15:04. > :15:07.the Balkans. I spent a lot of time working with Serbian members of

:15:08. > :15:10.Parliament. This was done on a cross-party basis. One of the

:15:11. > :15:16.members was actually a Serbian Socialist member of Parliament, who

:15:17. > :15:21.I had the extreme pleasure of working with. But they have come so

:15:22. > :15:27.far in what they are trying to do, in what they have achieved, and

:15:28. > :15:34.where they are going. The cooperation that we had encompassed

:15:35. > :15:38.all the areas, all the three areas that the Council of Europe looks

:15:39. > :15:44.after, which are democracy, human rights and the rule of law. I think

:15:45. > :15:55.it's important to stress those. Because Serbia, we have two

:15:56. > :16:01.incidents, two examples of Serbia's problems in the region. One is

:16:02. > :16:05.Kosovo, where members of the European Union, still some members

:16:06. > :16:12.do not recognise Kosovo as a separate state. And Montenegro. I'm

:16:13. > :16:15.pleased to say that at the last Council of Europe meeting we had the

:16:16. > :16:23.Prime Minister of Montenegro come to talk to us. That shows the enormous

:16:24. > :16:24.respect there is between these two countries for their respective

:16:25. > :16:31.institutions and for their individual members of those

:16:32. > :16:37.institutions. Albania is a slightly different case. Albania was, I

:16:38. > :16:43.think, the 35th member of the Council of Europe. And we still

:16:44. > :16:51.monitor Albanian elections very closely. In fact, I was invited to

:16:52. > :16:54.go and be a monitor of the recent Albanian elections, but was unable

:16:55. > :17:03.to do so because of a general election here. I think what we have

:17:04. > :17:06.seen their is an enormous difficulty, and an enormous

:17:07. > :17:12.difficulty of corruption, for example. I am the Prime Minister's

:17:13. > :17:17.trade envoy to Nigeria, a place that has a reputation for corruption, but

:17:18. > :17:21.I can tell you that Albania runs at a very close second in terms of the

:17:22. > :17:26.level of corruption that we see there. I said to an honourable

:17:27. > :17:32.friend that I would say that during this debate and he said, you better

:17:33. > :17:35.watch out, there are gangs of Albanians wondering about wanting to

:17:36. > :17:41.throw you into the back of a brute of a car and do away with you. Well,

:17:42. > :17:48.I have said it and taken at risk. What the minister set out as the

:17:49. > :17:52.responsibilities for the agency, that it collect, analyses and

:17:53. > :17:55.disseminate subjective, reliable and comparable information related to

:17:56. > :18:00.the situation of fundamental rights in the EU. As I said earlier, I see

:18:01. > :18:06.no difference between that and what the Council of Europe does. If I can

:18:07. > :18:11.turn to what the Council of Europe is doing in Serbia and Albania.

:18:12. > :18:15.Taking Serbia first, what the Council of Europe is doing is

:18:16. > :18:19.strengthening the capacities for law enforcement and judiciary in that

:18:20. > :18:26.country. Specifically in the fight against corruption. An additional

:18:27. > :18:31.project aims to harmonise Court practices and raise judges'

:18:32. > :18:36.capacities to ensure consistent applications of the judgments of the

:18:37. > :18:41.European Court of Human Rights. Those seem to me to be identical to

:18:42. > :18:46.the activities that the agency undertakes on behalf of the EU. I do

:18:47. > :18:52.think there ought to be considerable cooperation between the Council of

:18:53. > :18:57.Europe and the agency in order to take these things forward. I would

:18:58. > :19:02.like to point out as well, and this indicates how far Serbia has come,

:19:03. > :19:06.that Serbia plays an active role on a regional basis in promoting

:19:07. > :19:14.minority protection. That includes particularly protection for the Roma

:19:15. > :19:20.community and an inclusive form of education. If we turn to Albania for

:19:21. > :19:24.a second, the overall strategic objective in Albania of the Council

:19:25. > :19:30.of Europe, is to promote the reform agenda. That's right across a number

:19:31. > :19:35.of different sectors. And the protection of human rights,

:19:36. > :19:40.anti-discrimination, the fight against corruption and organised

:19:41. > :19:44.crime. Reform of the judiciary. And particularly, freedom of the media

:19:45. > :19:50.and free and fair elections in line with general European standards is

:19:51. > :19:56.all part of the efforts to increase good governance and democratic

:19:57. > :20:02.participation. I know Albania has a long way to go behind the other

:20:03. > :20:10.countries of the Council of Europe and the EU in being able to take its

:20:11. > :20:16.agenda forward, but nevertheless, the council is working on that will

:20:17. > :20:24.stop and while it would be churlish of me to deny the rights of Serbia

:20:25. > :20:29.and Albania to be members of the agency on the basis that is set out

:20:30. > :20:34.in the bill and in the agreement with them, I do think that the

:20:35. > :20:39.European scrutiny committee could have looked more carefully at what

:20:40. > :20:45.the Council of Europe is doing in this area and could have pointed out

:20:46. > :20:50.the overlap between what the Council of Europe is doing and what the

:20:51. > :20:54.agency is trying to do. We have talked about the length of time it

:20:55. > :21:03.takes for access and to take place. I would suggest the accession takes

:21:04. > :21:08.such a long time because there is very little in the way of

:21:09. > :21:12.cooperation and harmonisation in the individual organisations involved in

:21:13. > :21:19.this are trying to do. Those are the comments I would make on Serbia and

:21:20. > :21:23.Albania. I do think they should be admitted. To answer the question

:21:24. > :21:27.that was made by the honourable gentleman who isn't in his seat any

:21:28. > :21:36.more from the other benches about what we do to put pressure on Serbia

:21:37. > :21:41.and Albania, they have come out of a horrendous period in their history.

:21:42. > :21:46.The thing we have to do is welcome them into our institutions. The

:21:47. > :21:52.thing we have to do most of all, and this is where we work very

:21:53. > :21:57.effectively in the Council of Europe in this, is not necessarily to

:21:58. > :22:03.harmonise the legislation to make it compliant with the EU as the agency

:22:04. > :22:07.does. All of that can be taken care of. What we do is to work with them

:22:08. > :22:13.to include them as part of the bigger European family, and to put

:22:14. > :22:19.the pressure on them to act in the right way in their own countries. As

:22:20. > :22:24.those other members of the Council of Europe will affirm, I'm sure,

:22:25. > :22:30.that is a practice that is very effective in the way of dealing with

:22:31. > :22:37.this issue. So I do welcome them in this. I can't think of a reason to

:22:38. > :22:44.keep them out of it. But I would just ask for more cooperation across

:22:45. > :22:45.the board there. If I can turn very briefly to the Canadian competition

:22:46. > :22:55.issue... If I can turn to the Canadian

:22:56. > :22:59.competition issue, other speakers have commented on it, personally I

:23:00. > :23:02.see no difficulty in exchanging information and having a better

:23:03. > :23:07.system for exchange information, whether via the EU or with Canada

:23:08. > :23:13.directly. As a result of activities that take place. On that note, Mr

:23:14. > :23:20.Deputy Speaker, I will sit down. Ian Paisley. Thank you, Mr Deputy

:23:21. > :23:24.Speaker, on the brief comments I wish to make, let me add my

:23:25. > :23:27.congratulations to you, as you fulfil what has become your rightful

:23:28. > :23:33.place in this house. In sharing these proceedings as Deputy Speaker,

:23:34. > :23:37.it's good to see you in your place. It's also a privilege to follow

:23:38. > :23:41.after some of the speeches made here today, especially the speech made by

:23:42. > :23:45.the right honourable gentleman from stone, I often think when he speaks

:23:46. > :23:51.on these issues, that his constituency is so badly

:23:52. > :23:55.underwhelmed in terms of its naming, it should be called the ruck, though

:23:56. > :24:07.right honourable gentleman acts like the ruck, solid on these issues --

:24:08. > :24:12.the rock. Such skill in this particular area, I wholeheartedly

:24:13. > :24:16.concur but the point that he put before the house, that the scrutiny

:24:17. > :24:22.committee on these issues should be reactivated and done so very

:24:23. > :24:25.quickly. As we exit the EU, we will need to scrutinise these matters

:24:26. > :24:32.very clearly, and very closely, and spend some time ensuring that we

:24:33. > :24:36.consider the details that will, of course, come up during the exit

:24:37. > :24:40.process. The scrutiny committee is a vehicle that could be used for that

:24:41. > :24:45.advantage and I wish them well in his quest to have the committee

:24:46. > :24:49.re-established. I also agree in the terms of the point he made about the

:24:50. > :24:53.Charter of rights, I think it is an absolute dog's dinner, and I will

:24:54. > :24:59.not invite the Minister to comment on that, but I do think that he made

:25:00. > :25:10.a valid point in that regard. Of course, much of the shared values

:25:11. > :25:15.that we co-write today indiscretions kingdom, under our own rights

:25:16. > :25:20.-based, law, we too quickly cast but aside and think all of these rights

:25:21. > :25:24.were given to us by the EU. Of course, we bestowed much of the

:25:25. > :25:28.principles and fundamental principles of rights to our

:25:29. > :25:33.neighbouring states, and last year, indeed, in a display in Westminster

:25:34. > :25:36.Hall, it's celebrated many of the fundamental rights originating year

:25:37. > :25:41.from employment rights, right the way through to anti-slavery

:25:42. > :25:46.activities. I think we should take more pride that this nation is the

:25:47. > :25:53.bastion of rights, and has encouraged rights around the world,

:25:54. > :25:57.and I also agree with the point made by the honourable gentleman on the

:25:58. > :26:06.benches opposite, that we are not leaving the EEC HR, which is an

:26:07. > :26:11.incredibly important point. -- the ECHR, it is not affected by Brexit.

:26:12. > :26:16.People forget that whenever you mention Brexit, it is too commonly

:26:17. > :26:21.called that we are leaving Europe, we aren't. We are leaving an

:26:22. > :26:32.economic club that failed us. That is the point that needs to be made.

:26:33. > :26:35.The member for Inverness, a backroom deal on rights between my party and

:26:36. > :26:41.its understanding with the government of the day. I would like

:26:42. > :26:45.to make it absolutely clear, Mr Deputy Speaker, that the rights of

:26:46. > :26:53.the unborn child, in my view, and in the views of people in my party and

:26:54. > :27:00.on this bench Trump any political agreement which is put in place. Let

:27:01. > :27:05.me make that abundantly clear. If anyone thinks that we take a view

:27:06. > :27:09.that we would treat the issue of life and the sanctity of life on a

:27:10. > :27:13.political deal, they do not understand me and they do not

:27:14. > :27:17.understand my party. They need to be aware of that. For it to be

:27:18. > :27:23.characterised in that way, I think, is grossly unfair to members of my

:27:24. > :27:28.party. The honourable member makes a point about something I said about

:27:29. > :27:33.the deal. I was not making any point about children born or otherwise.

:27:34. > :27:43.But actually about LGBT concerns, in Northern Ireland. I think you should

:27:44. > :27:46.be willing to clarify? I am happy for that, but what happened in the

:27:47. > :27:50.last week in this house and with the passing of the Queen's speech and

:27:51. > :27:54.amendments that were not moved, reference was made to that and it

:27:55. > :27:58.should be clear that in my view and in the views of my party, the

:27:59. > :28:04.unborn, even in the words of Hillary Clinton, is a human being, that

:28:05. > :28:10.according to science, it feels pain and knows a motion, and it is

:28:11. > :28:15.fearfully and wonderfully made. -- nose in motion. I believe my party

:28:16. > :28:27.will take a stand on that issue, irrespective of other agreements. In

:28:28. > :28:30.the issue of competition, mentioned under the bill of competitive rights

:28:31. > :28:34.which have been identified, I welcome what has been put in the

:28:35. > :28:38.Labour Party manifesto on page six of the manifesto. It emphasises the

:28:39. > :28:43.importance of what we are actually discussing today, when it says that

:28:44. > :28:48.the Labour Party is going to ensure that we leave the EU, I welcome

:28:49. > :28:53.that. When we leave the EU, it means we do not half leave it, we don't

:28:54. > :28:59.partly leave it, we get out. I think that is essential, we get out the

:29:00. > :29:04.customs union and get out of the single market. We cannot actually

:29:05. > :29:09.address competition matters in the way that they have been identified

:29:10. > :29:13.in this bill, with Canada, for example. If we do not get out of the

:29:14. > :29:18.customs union. It is crucial we leave the customs union, we cannot

:29:19. > :29:23.make free trade agreements with any other country unless we are free to

:29:24. > :29:29.do so. So, the quest for freedom is incredibly important. This was

:29:30. > :29:33.driven home to me recently in some correspondence I received from a

:29:34. > :29:39.large steel processor here in the UK. Of course, I will give way. And

:29:40. > :29:43.grateful for you giving way. He is raising important points to do with

:29:44. > :29:49.the competition element of this bill, you touched on the

:29:50. > :29:54.intervention earlier on. I wonder if you would say a little about how you

:29:55. > :29:58.see the relationship between the north and south of Ireland working?

:29:59. > :30:06.I will certainly comment on that, after I have made this point about

:30:07. > :30:09.the steel industry. I received this note from the managing director of

:30:10. > :30:15.John Reid and Sons, a massive company which has been in existence

:30:16. > :30:19.for 98 years, they wrote to me and said to remain in the customs union

:30:20. > :30:25.would mean that we cannot do our own trade deals with the rest of the

:30:26. > :30:29.world. We have exported to over 140 countries throughout and 98 years in

:30:30. > :30:34.business, and we have an idea of what we are actually talking about.

:30:35. > :30:39.The customs union is a terrible tragedy for third World agriculture

:30:40. > :30:43.fisheries and events proper trade. That is someone who knows what they

:30:44. > :30:48.are talking about, they are at the coal face everyday. I think it is

:30:49. > :30:52.important that that point is reflected in this debate. The

:30:53. > :30:56.honourable member has asked me to comment on some points made about

:30:57. > :31:03.how this impacts on the Republic of Ireland. I think you would be giving

:31:04. > :31:06.me great leniency, if I were to speak at length today on the

:31:07. > :31:11.Republic of Ireland and what a future trade deal would look like.

:31:12. > :31:14.Even though you would likely consider me rule me out of order,

:31:15. > :31:18.but I would like to touch upon the point. Could I commend to all

:31:19. > :31:23.members of the house that they go to the library and get a copy of Policy

:31:24. > :31:28.Exchange documents, which have just been published this month, written

:31:29. > :31:33.by Ray Bassett, a former ambassador from the Republic of Ireland to the

:31:34. > :31:37.United Nations. The title of the document is "After Brexit, will

:31:38. > :31:45.Ireland be next to exit?" An important policy paper which sets

:31:46. > :31:50.out compelling reasons as to why the Republic of Ireland must follow the

:31:51. > :31:55.UK out of the EU. Because, if they fail to do so, it is fair trade that

:31:56. > :32:03.will be ruined. It's something we have in common with Canada on this

:32:04. > :32:07.point. For example, Canada's protecting fishing for its own

:32:08. > :32:11.companies. We discussed at some length in the media that fishing

:32:12. > :32:17.rights of the UK. Of course, in the Republic of Ireland, their fishing

:32:18. > :32:20.waters are currently under finished because the Republic of Ireland

:32:21. > :32:27.wants to encourage the rest of the EU to fish in our waters. Once we

:32:28. > :32:30.claim those fishing waters back, Mr Deputy Speaker, the rest of the EU

:32:31. > :32:34.will want to fish in Ireland's fishing waters and put pressure on

:32:35. > :32:39.the Republic of Ireland and steal their catch. It is for those reasons

:32:40. > :32:42.why it is essential we understand the commercial reasons that lie

:32:43. > :32:47.behind why it is important for Ireland to exit the EU. I've

:32:48. > :32:50.probably pushed you enough, Mr Deputy chairman, my comments on the

:32:51. > :32:54.Republic of Ireland, I wish the front bench would encourage me again

:32:55. > :33:00.and ask me another question on that issue, and I would push that matter

:33:01. > :33:05.even further. You may not get the red flag but I think we have to make

:33:06. > :33:08.it absolutely clear that the sorts of agreements, I said this earlier,

:33:09. > :33:13.the sorts of agreements we discussed today with what was in the Bill

:33:14. > :33:21.gently impact on a pattern of how we do, since future. -- how we do,

:33:22. > :33:27.nurse in future. The Canadian aspects of this are very important.

:33:28. > :33:33.It is how Canada will be treated after we leave, and the relationship

:33:34. > :33:42.we have with Canada. We need to look at what is contained in this

:33:43. > :33:46.particular bill. In response to the points made by the member for

:33:47. > :33:50.Henley, when the UK leaves and Albania and Serbia join, I would

:33:51. > :33:56.like to say, good luck with that. It will be some club to be part of at

:33:57. > :34:01.that point but that would be unfair. They will ultimately be matters for

:34:02. > :34:05.what is left of the EU, but by the time the Ascension rights are

:34:06. > :34:10.actually achieved, I think the EU will be a very different country,

:34:11. > :34:17.Surrey, a very different club to what it currently is now. When the

:34:18. > :34:23.EU leads, as predicted, when Ireland leaves the EU, with Serbia and

:34:24. > :34:27.Albania wishing to join, we may, at that point, consider what is in

:34:28. > :34:33.their greater interests. The charges of them being a member of the EU

:34:34. > :34:38.will be announced. Since 2014, the Republic of Ireland has had to pay

:34:39. > :34:43.over ?1 billion to be a member, they previously paid nothing. If that is

:34:44. > :34:48.what Ireland has two fork out, what world countries like Serbia and

:34:49. > :34:52.Albania had to fork out in this new club and in this new arrangement? I

:34:53. > :35:00.leave these points for the house today and hope the minister will

:35:01. > :35:05.reflect on those and touch on those. It is a great pleasure to follow the

:35:06. > :35:08.member for North Antrim who speaks with eloquence and with authority as

:35:09. > :35:11.ever. Let me pick up with those issues raised at the beginning of

:35:12. > :35:17.his speech. It's the first opportunity I have had to

:35:18. > :35:21.congratulate you, and I do so under your election. It's the first

:35:22. > :35:30.opportunity I had to say how delighted I am to return, and I will

:35:31. > :35:36.do my very upmost to repay that trust that my constituents have put

:35:37. > :35:41.in me. I will make a short contribution to this debate. This

:35:42. > :35:46.afternoon. Not least because I see some honourable colleagues who want

:35:47. > :35:51.to cut sure I, Mr Deputy Speaker. I stand here as someone who voted to

:35:52. > :35:55.leave the EU, who has an optimistic vision of our country outside of the

:35:56. > :36:01.EU. But the irony is not lost on me. That this afternoon we are debating,

:36:02. > :36:07.two countries who want to accede to the EU, whilst we, the UK, are in

:36:08. > :36:12.fact leaving the European Union. Be that as it may, it's an important

:36:13. > :36:18.debate and it is important that we get it right. As the minister said,

:36:19. > :36:21.at the dispatch box and in correspondence, it is important that

:36:22. > :36:27.while we are still a member of the EU, that we fully engage in the

:36:28. > :36:30.subject, and that is what we are doing this afternoon. Mr Deputy

:36:31. > :36:36.Speaker, a rather helpful explanatory note, and indeed with

:36:37. > :36:41.the honourable member for central Sefton, he is temporarily out of his

:36:42. > :36:44.seat. And other honourable members, they have mention the European

:36:45. > :36:49.Scrutiny Committee. It is clear the works of that committee permeate

:36:50. > :36:52.throughout this bill. Although that is not the purpose of this bill, I'm

:36:53. > :36:57.delighted it gives me the opportunity to say what an important

:36:58. > :37:00.job that committee does. I once again declare an interest having

:37:01. > :37:04.served on that committee, but I would like to reaffirm the point

:37:05. > :37:08.that I think it is essential that the scrutiny committee gets up and

:37:09. > :37:13.running as quickly as possible and the former chairman of the

:37:14. > :37:17.committee, and I hope the next chairman of the committee, the

:37:18. > :37:21.honourable member for Stone, emphasises there are documents

:37:22. > :37:30.piling up even as I speak. I simply re-the point and the -- reemphasise

:37:31. > :37:36.the point and the urgency and on the order paper there is no reference to

:37:37. > :37:41.the scrutiny committee and the debates later on this afternoon.

:37:42. > :37:46.Picking up on one point, Mr Deputy Speaker. The very first occasion the

:37:47. > :37:51.scrutiny committee did not clear this legislation from scrutiny, but

:37:52. > :37:55.required further clarification. I'm delighted the Minister in her place

:37:56. > :37:59.provided that clarification, which enabled the scrutiny committee to

:38:00. > :38:06.clear this document from committee and enabled this process to happen.

:38:07. > :38:10.We of course must emphasise we are leaving the EU but for as long as we

:38:11. > :38:14.remain members we will play a full and sensible part, that is what we

:38:15. > :38:17.do this afternoon and Mr Deputy Speaker I'm delighted to have played

:38:18. > :38:25.a very small part in this debate this afternoon.

:38:26. > :38:33.It is a pleasure to be speaking from the backbenches once again. I had

:38:34. > :38:36.almost forgotten about the whole standing up and sitting down thing.

:38:37. > :38:44.I want to welcome this legislation and offer it my support. In so doing

:38:45. > :38:48.I want to speak to the provisions as they specific relate to Canada and

:38:49. > :38:52.broaden them out within the realms of the debate and within the Bill,

:38:53. > :38:57.about our relationship more generally with Canada and moving

:38:58. > :39:01.forward. I do this as a former trade envoy to Canada, a role I very much

:39:02. > :39:06.enjoyed before I was made a minister. It is one I think we need

:39:07. > :39:14.to fill again at some point in the near future and I can think of one

:39:15. > :39:18.or two possible candidates for that. Tall, dark handsome, former

:39:19. > :39:27.ministers from the North of England, for example. Where are they, in

:39:28. > :39:33.deed! It is very nice to have a bill before the House today naming

:39:34. > :39:38.Canada, because it was 150 years ago since the British, North America act

:39:39. > :39:43.which established the Confederation of Canada and the celebrations took

:39:44. > :39:49.place throughout Canada for that. It is nice 150 years later to be

:39:50. > :39:56.recognising Canada's birthday. And also to be recognising the

:39:57. > :39:59.200-year-old birthday of the bank of Montreal, which is the bank with the

:40:00. > :40:04.longest presence in the United Kingdom. The competition provisions

:40:05. > :40:08.in this piece of legislation are very sensible and they operate on a

:40:09. > :40:14.basis for future relationships with Canada once we have left the

:40:15. > :40:18.European Union. I want to use this debate in my few words this

:40:19. > :40:22.afternoon to explain why I feel this particular relationship is so

:40:23. > :40:28.important and is worthy of more attention from Her Majesty's

:40:29. > :40:32.government over these coming years. We have the important shared

:40:33. > :40:38.heritage with Canada, one which has been strengthened through conflict

:40:39. > :40:41.and war. It was a reminder just recently, when the Bletchley Park

:40:42. > :40:52.commemorative badge was presented by our representative in Ottawa to

:40:53. > :40:56.96-year-olds Sonia Morrow rips Sinclair who escaped from the

:40:57. > :41:11.approaching Nazi armies in Czechoslovakia and worked in the

:41:12. > :41:16.important work with signals. It is obviously have a shared language,

:41:17. > :41:22.shared legal system and shared government. It is a relationship

:41:23. > :41:28.that post Brexit can flourish on those commonalities and it makes

:41:29. > :41:40.economic sense for us to develop this relationship more closely. UK

:41:41. > :41:47.experts to Canada in 2015... Exports to Canada. We have commonalities and

:41:48. > :41:53.agreements be that on the provisions of this bill and competition but

:41:54. > :41:58.also with regards to the recently agreed EU and Canada trade Treaty,

:41:59. > :42:04.which is a good basis of a treaty between this country and Canada once

:42:05. > :42:08.we leave. Because of the nature of European decision-making, I think we

:42:09. > :42:12.can do better following our exit from the European Union on the basis

:42:13. > :42:17.of that relationship. We are well placed to succeed and do well from

:42:18. > :42:21.that relationship post Brexit. Not least because of the friendly

:42:22. > :42:25.business environment and shared heritage, but of our strong presence

:42:26. > :42:32.in the market, in particular as a result of investment from this

:42:33. > :42:36.government, and I knew that and saw that for myself and so have valued

:42:37. > :42:41.it was in my time as a trade envoy. We had an excellent team led by the

:42:42. > :42:47.High Commissioner Howard Drake, who was very well regarded. But also by

:42:48. > :42:50.our consul general and director of trading Canada, Kevin McGuirk and

:42:51. > :42:57.who is based in Toronto. I saw how well regarded he was and how

:42:58. > :43:02.well-connected on a business level the government was as a result of

:43:03. > :43:06.those relationships. Two weeks ago I was in discussions with our consul

:43:07. > :43:12.general in Vancouver, Nicole Davidson who is doing a great job. I

:43:13. > :43:16.want to put a bit of meat on the bones about what we need to do more

:43:17. > :43:23.to get the maximum advantage from this relationship post Brexit. I

:43:24. > :43:26.talked about the need for us to recognise first of all, which I

:43:27. > :43:31.think this government has, the importance of this relationship post

:43:32. > :43:37.Brexit. We have the Leader of the Opposition, newly elected Leader of

:43:38. > :43:41.the Opposition in Canada wrote a piece in favour of Brexit in the

:43:42. > :43:44.run-up to the election. The Canadian government said it wants to be as

:43:45. > :43:50.helpful as possible to us through this process. And the possible,

:43:51. > :43:59.probable premiere of Alberta, Jason Kenney, was also an advocate of

:44:00. > :44:04.Brexit over there. It is important to us, this relation because Canada

:44:05. > :44:09.is campaigning for a place on the UN Security Council at the moment. In

:44:10. > :44:14.doing that, I call on the government to recognise, not also be importance

:44:15. > :44:18.of its relationship of Canada at a federal level, but recognise Canada

:44:19. > :44:22.is a country of several different economies at provincial relationship

:44:23. > :44:27.with those governments, three of which are represented here in the

:44:28. > :44:32.United Kingdom, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec is vitally

:44:33. > :44:35.important. My page on this piece of legislation in a broad sense is for

:44:36. > :44:40.us to recognise what we have achieved to the EU and to our

:44:41. > :44:45.bilateral arrangements with Canada has a close relationship. But what

:44:46. > :44:49.we need to do to put a bit more, as I said, meat on the bones to

:44:50. > :44:52.strengthen that relationship. There is work going on for that at the

:44:53. > :44:57.moment. I would call on ministers to make sure they are fully cognisant

:44:58. > :45:05.of this important relationship, putting the effort and attention

:45:06. > :45:09.that is required into that through visits and make sure our network is

:45:10. > :45:15.as strong as it needs to be to make sure we get the good deal to replace

:45:16. > :45:20.other things, into the future. It does involve a recognition of the

:45:21. > :45:24.specifics of the provincial position in Canada, both politically and

:45:25. > :45:28.economically. On that, I have nothing else to say, Mr Deputy

:45:29. > :45:33.Speaker, other than to end where I began, which is a happy birthday to

:45:34. > :45:40.Canada for its 150 years, which I am sure the House will agree with. Can

:45:41. > :45:45.I just say, it is worth reminding members to get into the habit of

:45:46. > :45:50.standing because then I know who wants to speak because the list is

:45:51. > :45:54.changing quicker than I have seen the list change before. Somebody who

:45:55. > :46:00.believes in open competitive markets because they foster in innovation,

:46:01. > :46:06.create the wealth we need for public services, I believe to have those

:46:07. > :46:10.free markets, we must have robust competition powers so we can take

:46:11. > :46:17.action against companies that act in anti-competitive manners. In the

:46:18. > :46:22.21st-century world, the economic actors are frequently more global

:46:23. > :46:26.players, especially in areas like digital markets. It is important we

:46:27. > :46:33.can work with other countries on competition issues. I remember a

:46:34. > :46:37.couple of years ago, I was in silicon valley with politicians from

:46:38. > :46:42.Germany, the Netherlands, Poland 's and the Czech Republic. Many players

:46:43. > :46:47.in silicon valley where telling us about their concerns about how

:46:48. > :46:52.Google was acting at the time. When I went with that group of

:46:53. > :46:56.politicians to meet the head of search for Google, I have never seen

:46:57. > :47:02.a company with so many lawyers in one room. Because they knew the

:47:03. > :47:07.power back countries could take when acting together. It was interesting

:47:08. > :47:11.couple of weeks ago to CB European Commission competition taking action

:47:12. > :47:15.on a proposed fine for Google. That has some controversy and it may

:47:16. > :47:20.creates a precedence of how platforms can act in the future. But

:47:21. > :47:25.it is also important in a like that, that those who are taking the action

:47:26. > :47:29.can be clear there is a level playing field and they are not

:47:30. > :47:33.singling out, for example, an American company when they wouldn't

:47:34. > :47:38.do the same to a British or a European one. One of the benefits of

:47:39. > :47:46.having a co-operation deal, such as we are discussing today, is that by

:47:47. > :47:55.working to -- together, it won't single out our own anchor Raqqa

:47:56. > :47:59.companies on a different level of jurisdiction than others. It also

:48:00. > :48:05.brings bigger resources in order to take on big cases. For the UK post

:48:06. > :48:09.Brexit, we will want to make it very clear to the world we are prepared

:48:10. > :48:13.to take on competition cases for very big players. So therefore,

:48:14. > :48:20.being able to cooperate with other countries, is very important. Canada

:48:21. > :48:24.is a dear friend to the UK, as my honourable friend has pointed out.

:48:25. > :48:29.But the Canada free trade agreement, if I can talk briefly, is not the

:48:30. > :48:34.perfect model for the future UK EU relationship. I remember how the

:48:35. > :48:39.Canada free trade agreement removes many, many tariffs from different

:48:40. > :48:43.trades. We voted it through in the European Parliament on the 15th of

:48:44. > :48:50.February, the day after Valentine's Day. I remember celebrating that now

:48:51. > :48:54.we would have tariff free chocolate, a great benefit!, but it also does

:48:55. > :48:58.not create anything like the deep level of market access that I

:48:59. > :49:03.believe this government seeks for our future relationship with Europe.

:49:04. > :49:09.If we chose that model just off the shelf, it would create many new

:49:10. > :49:12.nontariff barriers in areas like digital and financial services. It

:49:13. > :49:17.wouldn't give anything like the regulatory cooperation level we

:49:18. > :49:22.seek. British car manufacturers wouldn't even be consulted in a

:49:23. > :49:26.consultation of stakeholders about potential changes to international

:49:27. > :49:33.rules on card transactions. I do think we will need to have a deeper

:49:34. > :49:38.model. I do think we need to make sure our competition and cooperation

:49:39. > :49:42.has a dispute resolution mechanism for companies, as well as countries.

:49:43. > :49:52.I was particularly pleased to hear the honourable member 4/ suggesting

:49:53. > :49:58.that the courts may prove a good or interesting basis for that dispute

:49:59. > :50:08.resolution going forward. Because coming from the honourable member

:50:09. > :50:12.for Stoke, stone, sorry it is such a powerful message you are giving with

:50:13. > :50:19.all of your experience that may be a pragmatic solution going forward.

:50:20. > :50:25.Finally, I would say, and picking up from his suggestion we need to move

:50:26. > :50:28.from being brothers and sisters to being close cousins, in developing

:50:29. > :50:33.that future relationship, there will be areas where we need to have some

:50:34. > :50:37.serious discussions and arguments. I would suggest this is not one of

:50:38. > :50:43.them. Allowing other countries to come together on issues like human

:50:44. > :50:47.rights and competition cooperation, it's something we should allow the

:50:48. > :50:52.pass and not block and therefore, save our discussions and arguments

:50:53. > :51:01.for where they are needed. Thank you. Can I join the long queue of

:51:02. > :51:04.those who paid tribute to you upon your real election and the

:51:05. > :51:11.outstanding role you play in this House. As the member for Sefton

:51:12. > :51:15.Central said from the start, we support the European Union approval

:51:16. > :51:20.is and proposals tabled by the minister today. More generally, we

:51:21. > :51:25.are leaving the European Union. In that process, we will fight to put

:51:26. > :51:29.jobs in the economy first, neither will we accept the watering down of

:51:30. > :51:34.rights and standards. If I can say this to the honourable member from

:51:35. > :51:40.North Antrim, we are right to be concerned over that. One example

:51:41. > :51:44.from my past, I took the case of the Eastbourne Dustman all the way to

:51:45. > :51:54.the European Court of Justice about 15 years ago, when, for ten years,

:51:55. > :51:59.writes on transfer under TUPE, and had it not been for those European

:52:00. > :52:04.mechanisms, we would never have seen those rights enforced in this

:52:05. > :52:08.country. We will be leaving the European Union, but we will not

:52:09. > :52:13.accept anything that water down rights and standards. I think he is

:52:14. > :52:19.aware that under the proposed repeal bill, there would be a transposition

:52:20. > :52:23.of European law into UK law under Westminster jurisdiction. Of course,

:52:24. > :52:28.that would be, on the face of it, to include the rights to which he

:52:29. > :52:34.referred. I think that is understood on his own front bench, is it not?

:52:35. > :52:40.The rights in question under TUPE are guaranteed in British law. I

:52:41. > :52:44.think what is crucial at the next age, this is not a debate for today,

:52:45. > :52:50.but what is crucial at the next stage is both what happens

:52:51. > :52:54.post-leaving the European Union, in terms of continuation of guarantees

:52:55. > :52:56.certainty for workers and their rights, as well as enforcement

:52:57. > :53:01.mechanisms in the event of there being a dispute.

:53:02. > :53:07.We strongly believe in the importance of a collaborative

:53:08. > :53:11.relationship with the EU, we would no longer be members but it is

:53:12. > :53:15.essential that we are partners. The right honourable member for Stone

:53:16. > :53:19.earlier on referred to the notion of cousins, I sometimes think the way

:53:20. > :53:23.this debate is conducted by some in government, it is more akin to an

:53:24. > :53:28.estranged couple in a difficult divorce. At the next age,

:53:29. > :53:34.partnership will be absolutely essential which is one of the

:53:35. > :53:38.principles enshrined in the Bill. It benefits Britain and on key issues,

:53:39. > :53:44.like cross-border security or in this case cross-border trade. As we

:53:45. > :53:48.leave the EU it is essential that we do put in place new and sensible

:53:49. > :53:53.arrangements. We support the bill both because it is right, and

:53:54. > :54:00.because I agree with the right honourable lady from Chelmsford who

:54:01. > :54:07.I think I just promoted,! I agree with the honourable lady for

:54:08. > :54:11.Chelmsford, if I can use my word, not the Hayes, it amounts to the

:54:12. > :54:19.same as her words, it would be wrong to nip it on -- nit-pick on a

:54:20. > :54:23.measure of this kind. In terms of the substantive issues, on the

:54:24. > :54:29.participation of Albania and Serbia on the work of the agency for

:54:30. > :54:31.fundamental rights, we have heard, I think, powerful contributions,

:54:32. > :54:37.including from the honourable member for Henley, as to the origins of the

:54:38. > :54:43.F RA and why it is so important, not least because it was an initiative

:54:44. > :54:50.born out of war in continental Europe, and the role played over

:54:51. > :54:54.many years in terms of advising on fundamental rights and

:54:55. > :55:00.discrimination, access to justice, xenophobia and racism, it is right

:55:01. > :55:04.that we should have an agency promoting those principles, rights

:55:05. > :55:13.and values throughout Europe. It's all the more important now. It is

:55:14. > :55:18.deeply welcome that we have both Serbia and Albania locked into that

:55:19. > :55:25.process at the next ages. Serbia, in the not too distant past, backed by

:55:26. > :55:31.war, and the country of Albania, that worse for many years under a

:55:32. > :55:38.totalitarian regime. Both candidates for the future of the EU, for the

:55:39. > :55:43.European Union to decide, both will contribute and participate to the F

:55:44. > :55:47.RA, the proposal in question has been cleared by the European

:55:48. > :55:50.Scrutiny Committee and the Lords Europe select committee, we

:55:51. > :55:55.therefore strongly select what is in the bill today. If I may move onto

:55:56. > :56:02.the EU Canada competition agreement, the honourable lady for Chelmsford

:56:03. > :56:06.was right, it's important if one has global free trade that we have

:56:07. > :56:10.effective mechanisms to combat anti-competitive behaviour. That has

:56:11. > :56:14.to be in the best interests of consumers, companies, and crucially

:56:15. > :56:21.also in needs to be effectively endorsed. I can make one other point

:56:22. > :56:24.in relation specifically to Canada. The honourable member for Brigg and

:56:25. > :56:29.Goole was right when he referred to the historical relationship we have

:56:30. > :56:33.with Canada and looking to the future, in his words, the economic

:56:34. > :56:40.good sense to develop that good relationship with Canada. As far as

:56:41. > :56:45.the proposal is concerned, we have in place existing relations, what is

:56:46. > :56:51.being proposed to extend the plans in evidence and information on both

:56:52. > :56:54.sides, through the course of investigations, to make the obvious

:56:55. > :57:02.point that it is the absence of such a power which can be imperative...

:57:03. > :57:06.An impediment to effective enforcement and if what is being

:57:07. > :57:09.proposed is right and similar arrangements are in place as the

:57:10. > :57:17.Minister referred to earlier with other countries out the EU, such as

:57:18. > :57:23.Switzerland. We support what is contained in the bill. If I may say

:57:24. > :57:31.this in conclusion, questions over and above what the honourable member

:57:32. > :57:35.for Sefton Central opposed earlier on, one is what would be the

:57:36. > :57:40.transitional arrangements, because crucially, as we stand now,

:57:41. > :57:48.companies operating in the EU are still subject to the same rules on

:57:49. > :57:54.mergers. In future, the EU will share information about UK companies

:57:55. > :58:00.with Canada, but will not share the information it receives from Canada

:58:01. > :58:03.about the UK with the UK. It poses a big question about what happens

:58:04. > :58:10.post-Brexit, in terms of transitional arrangements and how it

:58:11. > :58:14.works in future. The other question is, in relation to the agency for

:58:15. > :58:19.fundamental rights, I would ask the Minister to clarify what will be the

:58:20. > :58:24.ongoing relationship with the agency? Fall of the reasons I've

:58:25. > :58:31.spelt out, it is critical that we are part of a pan-European mechanism

:58:32. > :58:35.which is about human rights and combating racism and xenophobia,

:58:36. > :58:45.never more important in the current climate than it has been in the

:58:46. > :58:49.past. Minister for the house, briefly? Mr Speaker, I'm grateful to

:58:50. > :58:57.have the opportunity with the Leader of the House to respond to the

:58:58. > :58:59.debate. The bill will approve four draft European Council decisions,

:59:00. > :59:05.first the participation of the Republic of Albania and Serbia in

:59:06. > :59:10.the fundamental rights agency, and the Republic of Albania and Serbia

:59:11. > :59:16.both want to become members of the EU. This measure does not extend the

:59:17. > :59:19.competence of the fundamental rights agency, and Albania and Serbia

:59:20. > :59:25.should be supported to increase their human rights awareness and

:59:26. > :59:30.promotion of fundamental rights in their countries. I was pleased at

:59:31. > :59:37.the support given by the house to that position. If I may deal with a

:59:38. > :59:44.few questions, raised by honourable member is on those two decisions,

:59:45. > :59:48.firstly, honourable member is for South Suffolk and my honourable

:59:49. > :59:52.friend for Stone, for whom I must express appreciation of his work by

:59:53. > :59:57.chairing the scrutiny committee, on the issue of the impact on Serbia's

:59:58. > :00:02.war crimes record, the decisions will allow Serbia to have access to

:00:03. > :00:06.the expertise of the agency, and allow data on human rights in Serbia

:00:07. > :00:13.to be gathered and shared, providing steps to improve Serbia's human

:00:14. > :00:21.rights protections, and the UK continues to urge Serbia to meet

:00:22. > :00:30.obligations, to cooperate fully with the tribunal. The honourable member

:00:31. > :00:36.for Sefton Central asked about the UK remaining part of the FRA post

:00:37. > :00:41.Brexit and the government is looking at the UK's relationship with all EU

:00:42. > :00:46.bodies including the fundamental rights agency as part of the exit

:00:47. > :00:51.negotiations. My honourable friend, the member for Cheltenham, made the

:00:52. > :00:56.point that FRA was completely distinct from the European

:00:57. > :01:01.Convention of human rights and our membership of that convention

:01:02. > :01:04.continues post-Brexit. My honourable friend for Henley spoke with

:01:05. > :01:09.considerable authority on the work of the Council of Europe, on which

:01:10. > :01:14.he is a member. And the overlap between that body and the FRA. I

:01:15. > :01:17.share his hopes and belief that the valuable work of the Council of

:01:18. > :01:27.Europe will continue long after Brexit. Turning now to the

:01:28. > :01:32.cooperation agreement between the EU and Canada on the competition

:01:33. > :01:36.enforcement, the UK has a large number of companies well placed to

:01:37. > :01:39.compete internationally in a system of genuine, free and open

:01:40. > :01:46.competition. The agreement will help ensure this by facilitating

:01:47. > :01:51.enforcement between international cartels. There are a number of

:01:52. > :01:55.questions in this area. First of all, the honourable member for

:01:56. > :02:00.Birmingham, Erdington and the honourable member for Inverness

:02:01. > :02:10.asked about UK companies continuing to be subject to the EU, it has

:02:11. > :02:14.jurisdiction over the European single market and that will continue

:02:15. > :02:18.after we leave the EU and UK companies will have to comply with

:02:19. > :02:27.EU competition law, when they operate within the EU single market.

:02:28. > :02:33.Just as US, or Canadian companies, do. The honourable member for Henley

:02:34. > :02:38.asked on the difference, sorry, I've already covered that point, the key

:02:39. > :02:47.point about the Council of Europe is about standard-setting and

:02:48. > :02:51.overseeing these matters. We welcome greater cooperation on international

:02:52. > :02:59.competition enforcement, and the honourable member for Sefton Central

:03:00. > :03:06.asked after EU except, will we have to continue to share information

:03:07. > :03:11.received from Canada within the UK, between the EU and UK. The UK

:03:12. > :03:15.Government will be free to enter into its own arrangements, to share

:03:16. > :03:18.information with Canada directly. Any agreement will need to be

:03:19. > :03:25.negotiated between the UK and Canada for the future. The honourable

:03:26. > :03:29.gentleman also asked about international agreements after the

:03:30. > :03:36.UK leaves the EU. And whether this agreement provides a model. The UK

:03:37. > :03:40.well, as I said, be free to enter international agreements on

:03:41. > :03:46.competition and we believe this is a good model. So, all in all, Mr

:03:47. > :03:49.Speaker, we've had a good debate, on the cooperation of international

:03:50. > :03:53.competition enforcement which will ensure that there is a level playing

:03:54. > :03:58.field for British business to continue to compete upon, and I

:03:59. > :04:02.think I've answered most of the points raised by honourable member

:04:03. > :04:07.'s during this debate, and I commend the bill to the house. The question

:04:08. > :04:17.is that the bill is read a second time. I think the ice have it.

:04:18. > :04:26.Permission to moved formally? As many of the opinion saying aye? The

:04:27. > :04:36.ayes have it. The business of the house select committee 's motion,

:04:37. > :04:44.and we... Minister to move. On the order paper. As many are off the

:04:45. > :04:55.opinion same aye? I think the ayes habit. -- the ayes habit. We come to

:04:56. > :05:03.these notions that I must advise will be debated together. It is

:05:04. > :05:08.helpful to know that if the motion on allocation of chairs is agreed

:05:09. > :05:13.to, the ballot for the election of select committee chairs, including

:05:14. > :05:19.the chair of the backbench business committee, will be held on Wednesday

:05:20. > :05:25.the 12th of July, from 10am to 4pm, it in committee room eight. I hope

:05:26. > :05:29.this meets with the approval of colleagues, it seems to be important

:05:30. > :05:33.that we get on with the business of electing chairs of select committees

:05:34. > :05:37.and as soon as possible with the election of parties by members of

:05:38. > :05:41.these committees, in the interest of Parliament and the interest of good

:05:42. > :05:46.government, that these mechanisms are established without further

:05:47. > :05:52.delay. Nominations will open as soon as the motion is agreed, and may be

:05:53. > :05:56.submitted in the table office of the procedural hub in Portcullis House.

:05:57. > :06:00.Nominations will close at 3pm on Friday the 7th of July. To be met

:06:01. > :06:05.with more details about the elections, they will be made

:06:06. > :06:08.available to members and published on the intranet. Just before I

:06:09. > :06:13.called the deputy leader of the house, literally itching to favour

:06:14. > :06:19.the house with his eloquences, colleagues can note I must add one

:06:20. > :06:23.other point. Specifically, I must tell the house I've had a request,

:06:24. > :06:31.perfectly properly had a request, from the honourable gentleman, the

:06:32. > :06:35.member for Harwich and North Essex, for clarification of the application

:06:36. > :06:43.of standing order 122 letter A, for his position of the public

:06:44. > :06:48.administration committee in the 2010-2015 Parliament and of the

:06:49. > :06:52.Constitutional affairs committee since 2015. Having taken

:06:53. > :06:55.comprehensive advice from the clerks, and reflected on the matter

:06:56. > :07:02.myself, I've decided the eight-year term limit does apply to the

:07:03. > :07:08.honourable member, on the basis that the committee which he chaired

:07:09. > :07:14.between 2015 and 2017 was in effect. The same committee as in 2010 to

:07:15. > :07:21.2015 albeit with an extended remit. That is in common with several other

:07:22. > :07:26.chairs, if re-elected next week, the term of office would expire eight

:07:27. > :07:31.years after his election in 2010 on the 10th of June 20 18. Others are

:07:32. > :07:35.free to put their names forward in the ballot and if elected, they can

:07:36. > :07:41.have existing terms of the order amended or repealed, is the matter

:07:42. > :07:45.within the select committee on procedure. My responsibility is not

:07:46. > :07:52.to speculate as to what the standing order may be in the future, but what

:07:53. > :07:57.a proper interpretation of it now means. That is what I was asked to

:07:58. > :08:02.do and that is what I have done. I hope that is clear to colleagues. I

:08:03. > :08:03.called the deputy Leader of the House, Mr Michael Ellis, to move the

:08:04. > :08:12.first motion. I beg to move the motions on the

:08:13. > :08:16.order paper standing in the name of the leader of the House and the

:08:17. > :08:20.Prime Minister and the leaders of the three opposition parties. Motion

:08:21. > :08:25.number four will have the effect of making the women and equality is

:08:26. > :08:31.committee a permanent select committee of this House. Motion

:08:32. > :08:35.number five serves to exiting the European Union in this Parliament as

:08:36. > :08:40.exactly as the last Parliament. Motion number six allocates the

:08:41. > :08:46.chairs of select committees as within the parties and buy you Mr

:08:47. > :08:54.Speaker, to reflect the party balance in this House. I beg to

:08:55. > :09:03.move. The question is the motion on the women inequalities committee as

:09:04. > :09:11.on the order paper. Kat Smith? No. Formally. Mrs Maria Miller. I wanted

:09:12. > :09:17.to make a submission in support of this motion and welcome the fact the

:09:18. > :09:21.government has decided to make track permanent. It was a recommendation

:09:22. > :09:27.made by the committee before the general election and something that

:09:28. > :09:31.my right honourable friend the member for Aylesbury undertook to

:09:32. > :09:35.put on a permanent footing and I really welcome this measure. I think

:09:36. > :09:40.the committee has proven its worth. The scope of the work that is being

:09:41. > :09:44.undertaken, everything from looking at transgender rights for the first

:09:45. > :09:50.time on the floor of the House of Commons, through to what we did on

:09:51. > :09:55.Brexit on equalities issues. I am glad to see the women and equalities

:09:56. > :10:01.select committee retains his name as set out. It does look at those

:10:02. > :10:04.issues which are the responsibilities of ministers,

:10:05. > :10:11.including women's issues and equality issues as well. Can I come

:10:12. > :10:15.in drawing my comments to a close, raised two particular points, which

:10:16. > :10:22.may be issues other past select committee chairs have equal

:10:23. > :10:26.questions about? First, I would really like to know from my

:10:27. > :10:29.honourable friend sitting on the front bench, the financial support

:10:30. > :10:34.for select committees are going to be sufficient for the scrutiny that

:10:35. > :10:38.is required of government policy at such an important time in our

:10:39. > :10:43.parliament's history? We need to make sure select committees,

:10:44. > :10:47.including the women and equalities select committee have the financial

:10:48. > :10:54.resources and the manpower resources they require. Secondly, that the

:10:55. > :10:59.proceedings of committees are treated with respect? Both in terms

:11:00. > :11:03.of the need for committees to be able to sit in perhaps protected

:11:04. > :11:11.time, when the House is sitting, so they are not unnecessarily curtailed

:11:12. > :11:14.or interrupted, particularly when they are gathering evidence. I think

:11:15. > :11:20.also in the role of committees, such as the women and equalities select

:11:21. > :11:26.committee, in taking the work of this Parliament around the world. To

:11:27. > :11:32.be able to do that with the help and support of the government whips and

:11:33. > :11:37.also the opposition whips as well. I will draw my remarks to a close

:11:38. > :11:39.then, Mr Speaker but reiterate my thanks to this government who have

:11:40. > :11:44.done more than any other to support the establishment of a scrutiny

:11:45. > :11:54.committee for women and equalities and I think for that, they should be

:11:55. > :12:04.applauded. Harriet Harman. I beg your pardon. We will hear from Mr

:12:05. > :12:09.Wishart first. I don't want to detain the right honourable lady for

:12:10. > :12:14.very long. Just a couple of remarks about the orders on the paper. I

:12:15. > :12:19.would like to support motions number four and five the women and

:12:20. > :12:22.equalities and the European Union committees. They are a welcome

:12:23. > :12:29.addition to the select committees we have. Also your remarks, we should

:12:30. > :12:33.make sure the election of chairs is as speedily as possible on the

:12:34. > :12:37.membership of committees, it is important we get these committees up

:12:38. > :12:41.and running soap government departments are properly scrutinised

:12:42. > :12:46.for the work they undertake. I know that the setup of the select

:12:47. > :12:49.committees will be five Conservative members, five Labour members and one

:12:50. > :12:54.Scottish National Party member as the ordinary membership of select

:12:55. > :13:02.committees. It is something we do support. I know there will probably

:13:03. > :13:06.be a more detailed conversation, to put it as elegantly as I can about

:13:07. > :13:16.the life span of the House committees. Nine Conservative

:13:17. > :13:25.members, seven Labour committee members and two SNP membership, for

:13:26. > :13:28.the standing membership, I know this is something that perhaps as a

:13:29. > :13:33.little bit of concern for the government in order to get things

:13:34. > :13:36.through but I hope any proposal on suggestion is put to the floor of

:13:37. > :13:41.the House so it will be properly debated and would be stitched up

:13:42. > :13:44.behind closed doors because it is important the standing committees of

:13:45. > :13:48.the House is on the floor of the House and all members of Parliament

:13:49. > :13:53.have an opportunity to contribute to that. You are right, there was a

:13:54. > :13:58.conversation about the tenure of the chairs of select committees, where

:13:59. > :14:02.there was concern raised about the eight-year rule of the two

:14:03. > :14:06.parliaments which impacted on two or three select committee chairs. My

:14:07. > :14:12.understanding is this was passed to the procedure committee to do a

:14:13. > :14:18.brief report about these issues. I hope they come forward with that at

:14:19. > :14:21.an early opportunity. With those remarks, can I say I very much

:14:22. > :14:25.support what is in these motions and I think we should get the select

:14:26. > :14:30.committees up and running as quickly as possible and it is down to the

:14:31. > :14:36.good business of scrutinising this government and government

:14:37. > :14:40.departments. Harriet Harman. Thank you Mr Speaker. Can I thank the

:14:41. > :14:43.deputy leader for bringing this motion to the House and I strongly

:14:44. > :14:47.supported and in particular I welcome putting the women and

:14:48. > :14:51.equality select committee on a permanent footing. I was leader of

:14:52. > :14:57.the House back in the day and I should have done this, but I find

:14:58. > :14:59.myself congratulating, I am baffled, but it congratulating him for

:15:00. > :15:05.bringing this forward and all credit to the government for doing that. It

:15:06. > :15:08.was first established in 2015, the women and equalities select

:15:09. > :15:12.committee but with women from all sides of the House and indeed three

:15:13. > :15:17.men on the committee, it has covered a wide area of work from Brexit

:15:18. > :15:23.negotiations to women being forced to wear high heels. I think it is

:15:24. > :15:27.more than showed, justifies being put on a permanent footing alongside

:15:28. > :15:31.the other select committees, because of the strong committee leadership

:15:32. > :15:36.been given to the select committee by the honourable member for

:15:37. > :15:42.Basingstoke in just the two short years she has been chairing it. I am

:15:43. > :15:47.sure nobody will be saying, as some people will be saying outside, it's

:15:48. > :15:52.all not necessary, we are all not equal now while I wish I were the

:15:53. > :15:57.case, we are all equal now. I wish that were the case, it is not true.

:15:58. > :16:03.We have made a rapid and immense progress, but there is still much

:16:04. > :16:07.further to go. Despite having a woman Prime Minister, still most

:16:08. > :16:10.decisions, whether it is commercial decisions, decisions in the private

:16:11. > :16:16.sector or the public sector, are made by men. You only have to look

:16:17. > :16:21.at the Brexit negotiating team. God help us. Eight of them, seven men

:16:22. > :16:29.and one woman. Why couldn't they have selected that team on merit?

:16:30. > :16:35.Select committees are members working together across the House.

:16:36. > :16:39.Not because we are all the same, because we all do have profound

:16:40. > :16:43.differences in the different parties, but in recognition of where

:16:44. > :16:49.we do agree, it makes sense to work together and it makes no sense not

:16:50. > :16:51.to. All sides of the House have expressed commitment on childcare

:16:52. > :16:56.and I know a number of select committees will be concerned about

:16:57. > :17:01.this. But let's see how it is actually working out in practice.

:17:02. > :17:04.This is a particular issue for women because of the remaining, persistent

:17:05. > :17:09.unequal division of labour in the home. There is a shared commitment

:17:10. > :17:15.across the House in tackling domestic violence, and rightly so.

:17:16. > :17:20.The daily toll of black guys, punctured lungs, broken ribs, the

:17:21. > :17:26.weekly toll of murdered women shames our society. But we have to be

:17:27. > :17:31.certain that we don't see things set back with cuts to the police, cuts

:17:32. > :17:36.to the courts, cuts to councils and the prosecution service, potentially

:17:37. > :17:40.making women less safe. I think we have got a shared commitment across

:17:41. > :17:48.the House for women's income inequality. In 2005, women's income

:17:49. > :18:04.on average per year, was 55% of men's. By 2010, it had risen to 70%.

:18:05. > :18:07.But I suspect it has now stalled. What I would like to see is agenda

:18:08. > :18:10.impact assessment brought forward to the House with the red book at the

:18:11. > :18:12.same time as the Chancellor publishes the budget statement. I

:18:13. > :18:14.know we have a shared commitment across the House to tackle rape and

:18:15. > :18:18.sexual offences. Most sexual offences are not reported. We know

:18:19. > :18:22.that fear that she will be blamed prevents many women going to court,

:18:23. > :18:27.let alone giving evidence. So I hope that across the parties, we can

:18:28. > :18:32.change the law to make it clear that what ever your past sexual history,

:18:33. > :18:36.it's not relevant as to whether you consented in this particular case

:18:37. > :18:40.and your past sexual history should never be dragged through the courts.

:18:41. > :18:48.I hope we will reverse the Ched Evans ruling. There are more women

:18:49. > :18:53.in this House and never before. 208. I am especially proud of the 119

:18:54. > :18:59.Labour women. And I warmly welcome all of them, the newly elected and

:19:00. > :19:08.the re-elected. But in the House as a whole, we are still outnumbered

:19:09. > :19:13.2-1 and also we last less long than our male colleagues. Not because

:19:14. > :19:18.we're not as tough, durable and as excellent as the men, clearly we

:19:19. > :19:23.are, but we are more likely to be in marginal seats. Therefore there is a

:19:24. > :19:29.turnover of women which there isn't in men. Therefore, women in this

:19:30. > :19:33.House, are not only outnumbered numerically, but also are less in

:19:34. > :19:39.seniority. I think the women inequalities committee will show

:19:40. > :19:43.women in this House, working together to highlight persisting

:19:44. > :19:47.inequalities in this country and will insist we make more progress.

:19:48. > :19:55.So I am pleased to support this motion. Andrew Percy. I wasn't

:19:56. > :19:59.intending to speak on this particular motion, but then I heard

:20:00. > :20:03.the speech of the honourable lady and wanted to agree with some of

:20:04. > :20:08.what she had to say and also pick her up on 12 points. Before that I

:20:09. > :20:13.will stop by greeting with the commentary of other members,

:20:14. > :20:18.particularly the member for Perth in that I hope we can approach this new

:20:19. > :20:24.arrangement of a balanced parliament of a more sensible man less partisan

:20:25. > :20:30.way and that will be the responsibility of those members who

:20:31. > :20:33.sit on those committees. It is important we get these committees

:20:34. > :20:40.established and we get the chairs in place and get the members are

:20:41. > :20:43.elected. I know when I served on the Northern Ireland committee, the

:20:44. > :20:47.Health Select Committee and the regulatory reform committee, how

:20:48. > :20:54.difficult it can be. I am not making a pitch to be on any of those, but

:20:55. > :20:59.it is important to reform. I also agreed with a great deal of what the

:21:00. > :21:03.right honourable lady the Camberwell and Peckham said with regard to the

:21:04. > :21:09.women's inequalities committee. I am proud that it has been established

:21:10. > :21:12.under this party and I'm proud that it is the Conservative Government

:21:13. > :21:17.that not only has a female Prime Minister, the second one of course,

:21:18. > :21:23.women don't do quite a good at being elected to be leader of the party

:21:24. > :21:27.opposite. But I'm glad this is on a permanent footing. When we talk

:21:28. > :21:32.about equalities in this House, it is not just about gender. There are

:21:33. > :21:36.many others who come from nontraditional, poorer backgrounds,

:21:37. > :21:41.who perhaps think the houses and always representative of those of us

:21:42. > :21:47.who come from more challenged backgrounds. And replacing a man

:21:48. > :21:51.with a middle class or upper middle-class woman perhaps isn't

:21:52. > :22:00.perhaps doing a great deal for quality. I think we should always be

:22:01. > :22:07.cautious of the fact that people... The right honourable lady doesn't

:22:08. > :22:11.like this point I'm making but it is about backgrounds and where they

:22:12. > :22:16.come from and their work history. If I had stood up and made the comments

:22:17. > :22:20.she made, in a moment I will give way, but if I stood up and made the

:22:21. > :22:24.comments she had made about their team being put together of seven

:22:25. > :22:27.women and one man and maids disparaging comments, as it came

:22:28. > :22:37.across about the Brexit negotiating team, then I suspect she would be up

:22:38. > :22:40.on her feet having a go. There is a major issue of class inequality in

:22:41. > :22:44.this country and that is why I would like to see this government

:22:45. > :22:48.implement clause one of the equality act which requires all government

:22:49. > :22:51.departments and all public organisations to take into account

:22:52. > :22:55.the importance of narrowing the gap between the top and the bottom in

:22:56. > :23:00.all public policy and operational decisions they make. If they care

:23:01. > :23:01.about class and income inequality, then implement clause one of the

:23:02. > :23:09.equality act. That's why when I was a

:23:10. > :23:14.schoolteacher before I got elected to the parliament, it really irked

:23:15. > :23:19.me that the gap between the top 10% best performing schools and worst

:23:20. > :23:24.performing schools actually got wider and that social mobility also

:23:25. > :23:29.decreased so I would agree with her on that. The point I'm simply making

:23:30. > :23:36.is I don't think it helps the case of equality is to stand up and make

:23:37. > :23:40.what I thought were belittling comments because of the base of its

:23:41. > :23:44.gender. I agree more generally with her point with regards to the women

:23:45. > :23:50.and equality committee under the chairmanship of the right honourable

:23:51. > :23:55.lady for Basingstoke but I do hope the committee will also understand

:23:56. > :24:03.there is... This is a huge subject and there are huge inequality that

:24:04. > :24:08.have existed for decades. It is an important piece of work but one

:24:09. > :24:11.where it is better if people in pursuing the agenda of wanting to

:24:12. > :24:20.close the gap don't make inflammatory comments on the route

:24:21. > :24:25.to that. Because, Mr Deputy Speaker, I agree with the Speaker's drive to

:24:26. > :24:29.modernise and rebalance the House, the power it has against the

:24:30. > :24:35.executive, I don't wish to detain us any further from approving the

:24:36. > :24:39.motion which will re-establish the select committees which have such an

:24:40. > :24:47.important part to play in that objective. Just a couple of words on

:24:48. > :24:51.motion four. I commend the Government for bringing it forward.

:24:52. > :24:54.It's right that the commitment the Government gave during the last

:24:55. > :24:59.parliament but the women and equalities select committee is a

:25:00. > :25:05.statutory basis and to do so on this occasion is the right thing to do as

:25:06. > :25:08.well. As a member of the last women and equality select committee within

:25:09. > :25:15.the previous parliament under the brilliant chairmanship of the Member

:25:16. > :25:17.for Basingstoke, I think it was a real constitutional innovation and

:25:18. > :25:22.the significance of that committee was not just a committee that

:25:23. > :25:26.produced reports, it was significant within its presence within our

:25:27. > :25:30.constitutional life as well, a point made many times by people who came

:25:31. > :25:33.to visit from other countries who rightly or wrongly looked to the

:25:34. > :25:38.place for leadership on these issues. I've might say one other

:25:39. > :25:43.thing about the Speaker who was not in his place so I feel able to

:25:44. > :25:56.praise him without blushing too much, but I believe his modernising

:25:57. > :25:59.drive has made available... His work on inclusion in particular has been

:26:00. > :26:03.commendable and also created conditions in which we could even

:26:04. > :26:08.last week discuss how this might be put on a statutory basis. One last

:26:09. > :26:12.word as someone who has served on that committee for the last couple

:26:13. > :26:16.of years. Many people would often ask why a straight white man would

:26:17. > :26:22.volunteer or choose to be on that committee and the answer is simple.

:26:23. > :26:25.For as long as women's equality is an issue for women, it's an issue

:26:26. > :26:32.about society and when we seek to hold back 50% of people in our

:26:33. > :26:37.communities, we hold back 100% of our population. For that reason

:26:38. > :26:41.alone, I think the work done by the last Parliamentary women equalities

:26:42. > :26:47.select committee, particularly on bringing women further into politics

:26:48. > :26:50.into our public life, identified significant issues around bullying

:26:51. > :26:57.and intimidation, the sport needs to be put in place even at lower

:26:58. > :27:02.levels. And we had four party leaders or representatives of their

:27:03. > :27:07.party coming to sit before us, all men, underlines the fact there is

:27:08. > :27:10.much further to go. The other area where we struggled was where we

:27:11. > :27:13.looked at flexible working patterns and ways in which we could make the

:27:14. > :27:19.workplace more available to people coming from different backgrounds. I

:27:20. > :27:24.think to be honest we struggled to square the circle on how you do that

:27:25. > :27:27.in areas where it is less easy to do flexible working such as areas of

:27:28. > :27:32.low pay and I know that will be a focus for the committee going

:27:33. > :27:35.forward. I commend this motion, I think it's an excellent innovation

:27:36. > :27:42.and we should be rightly proud in this parliament that we are bringing

:27:43. > :27:46.it forward. Again, I support the motion, I wanted to talk briefly

:27:47. > :27:50.about timetabling as well. It's got the House is moving to collect the

:27:51. > :27:54.chairs of the select committee next week. It doesn't give the House much

:27:55. > :27:57.time to let members of the committees before the summer recess

:27:58. > :28:04.and I think there should be a concern that if members are selected

:28:05. > :28:09.in September, many won't do their work formally until October which

:28:10. > :28:12.will be a gap of five months. In the normal course of Parliament in a

:28:13. > :28:15.Fixed-term Parliaments Act the committees can prepare their

:28:16. > :28:19.workload and work towards the end of the session but because of the

:28:20. > :28:24.nature of the last general election, many committees have had to abruptly

:28:25. > :28:28.stopped their work. If they are looking to pick up some of that work

:28:29. > :28:33.there will be a gap and a change in membership. Committees don't just

:28:34. > :28:39.scrutinise decisions of this House but also outside bodies too. I raise

:28:40. > :28:51.the point now so there can be consideration in the future if there

:28:52. > :28:58.is a way in which new committees can be created without disbanding, and

:28:59. > :29:06.we may have an absence of five months without any committee

:29:07. > :29:10.sitting. To briefly respond to some of the points made, firstly my right

:29:11. > :29:14.honourable friend from Basingstoke, it is I agree is important that

:29:15. > :29:18.financial support is sufficient for proper scrutiny and also Her Majesty

:29:19. > :29:21.'s government I can assure her and the House will always respect the

:29:22. > :29:33.work of the committees of this House. They have undoubtedly got

:29:34. > :29:35.stronger. The right honourable lady from Camberwell and Peckham, I would

:29:36. > :29:41.just like to take this opportunity to thank her for her comments about

:29:42. > :29:47.the women's inequality committee being made permanent and commend her

:29:48. > :30:02.for her work over the years. Mr Speaker, I to move.

:30:03. > :30:13.The ayes have it. The next question is on the motion of standing orders,

:30:14. > :30:18.the question is on the motion of the standing orders of the committee on

:30:19. > :30:26.existing European Union, that's on the order paper, is that opinion say

:30:27. > :30:33.aye... On the contrary know. The ayes have it. The question is the

:30:34. > :30:39.motion on select committees allocation of chairs as on the order

:30:40. > :30:53.paper, as many of that opinion say aye... The contrary no. The ayes

:30:54. > :30:57.have it. We now come to the general debate

:30:58. > :30:58.improvements to southern railway. I improvements to

:30:59. > :31:00.now call the secretary of State to now call the secretary of State to

:31:01. > :31:05.move the motion. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. You will recall last

:31:06. > :31:10.summer the southern rail network was already bedevilled by a dispute

:31:11. > :31:13.causing disruption for thousands of people and damaged the economy

:31:14. > :31:17.across the region but it wasn't the only problem is that southern rail

:31:18. > :31:22.faced. Too many infrastructure failures, a lack of joined up

:31:23. > :31:26.management between track and training, as well as the problems

:31:27. > :31:30.most of our commuter rail networks face after attracting more and more

:31:31. > :31:36.passengers each year, far more than it used in the days of British rail.

:31:37. > :31:39.This is a railway line faced and faces a massive capacity challenge,

:31:40. > :31:45.so that was the background to my decision to ask an experienced

:31:46. > :31:48.leader, Chris give, to produce advice for my department on what to

:31:49. > :31:52.do to get things back to normal for passengers. What was behind the poor

:31:53. > :32:01.performance on the route and how we could solve it. I asked Chris Gibb

:32:02. > :32:08.for his advice because he has more than 40 years' worth of experience

:32:09. > :32:12.in the industry. I would like to recognise and thank him for his

:32:13. > :32:17.contribution. His recommendations have already been assessed and 34 of

:32:18. > :32:23.his 38 assessments are already being worked on by my department, the rail

:32:24. > :32:27.industry and GDR who operate Southern, but his findings made

:32:28. > :32:31.clear the industrial action is the main cause of destruction for

:32:32. > :32:37.southern passengers or was last year when things were at their worst. As

:32:38. > :32:43.Southern passengers know how much the rail service has improved,

:32:44. > :32:49.performance has been consistently better since the New Year, the PPN

:32:50. > :32:54.public performance measure is up more than 20 percentage points.

:32:55. > :32:57.That's much better, it's not best, there is a long way still to go but

:32:58. > :33:01.it's clearly much better than it was. So things are getting better

:33:02. > :33:07.for passengers, the railway has been working much better, that's why it

:33:08. > :33:11.is tragic that the union's leaderships now want to carry on a

:33:12. > :33:15.battle which is meaningless and unnecessary. The performance of this

:33:16. > :33:18.railway is only going to carry on improving if industrial action by

:33:19. > :33:24.those unions stops. They seem unwilling to come to the party.

:33:25. > :33:28.Aslef started their overtime ban again last week resulting in

:33:29. > :33:31.Southern passengers having 25% of trains cancelled each day. Just when

:33:32. > :33:46.passengers fought the service was passengers fought the service was

:33:47. > :33:46.are at the mercy of unions. I have called this

:33:47. > :33:47.asked unions many times to call off asked unions

:33:48. > :33:55.the disruption to people's daily lives through this ongoing action.

:33:56. > :33:59.My right honourable friend is well aware of the inconvenience suffered

:34:00. > :34:10.to many on the line because of the strike and the previous strikes. Is

:34:11. > :34:13.he aware of the unions working together being encouraged by the

:34:14. > :34:16.Labour Party or does he see this as a straight interunion rivalry? Let

:34:17. > :34:20.me stress again, I know just how difficult this has been for his

:34:21. > :34:24.constituents and others. Their lives have been disrupted, turned upside

:34:25. > :34:27.down, and a whole variety of different ways and it certainly the

:34:28. > :34:33.case in the other stages the unions looks like they were working

:34:34. > :34:36.together on this. I don't think relations now between the unions are

:34:37. > :34:40.as warm as they once were but I'm clear there is a direct link between

:34:41. > :34:43.the actions of the Labour Party leadership in trying to cause

:34:44. > :34:48.disruption for the Government this summer and the decisions to

:34:49. > :35:00.victories industrial action. It is unacceptable that senior figures in

:35:01. > :35:04.the Labour Party are encouraging trade unions to take action this

:35:05. > :35:07.summer. Is the Secretary of State aware that the president of the RMT

:35:08. > :35:12.has described his objective as speaking to bring down the

:35:13. > :35:15.Government? And what the Secretary of State join me in saying that is

:35:16. > :35:22.an appalling motive for ruining the lives of our constituents? My

:35:23. > :35:26.honourable friend is absolutely right, this is a shocking state of

:35:27. > :35:29.affairs and the reality is there are some thoroughly good people working

:35:30. > :35:33.on our Railways, people who don't agree with the current action,

:35:34. > :35:36.people who want to do the right job for the passenger and their

:35:37. > :35:41.leadership now is leading them up a path they don't want and is in no

:35:42. > :35:45.ones interest. Following on from that point, I'm not sure whether my

:35:46. > :35:49.right honourable friend has heard the statement from Mr Hedley who was

:35:50. > :35:55.on activist within RMT, who was on Russian TV today and said within our

:35:56. > :35:59.rule book and antagonistic relationship, we want to overthrow

:36:00. > :36:04.capitalism and create a socialist form of society... How does that

:36:05. > :36:09.help our passengers? The trouble is this is all about politics, my

:36:10. > :36:12.honourable friend is right, this is not about the interests of

:36:13. > :36:18.passengers getting on with their everyday lives and it's a tragedy.

:36:19. > :36:24.Would he acknowledge Page 93 of the Gibb report has a graph showing that

:36:25. > :36:28.long before the days of the industrial action Southern was the

:36:29. > :36:33.worst performing company? And secondly would he explain why he

:36:34. > :36:36.himself has not got round the table with the unions and GDR? The

:36:37. > :36:42.Government cannot pretend it has nothing to do with them given that

:36:43. > :36:51.Gibb said the Secretary of State is already determining the direction of

:36:52. > :37:02.this dispute. Slightly surprised the honourable lady hasn't declared an

:37:03. > :37:06.interest because she has received motions from the RMT union. Can you

:37:07. > :37:11.please advise the House whether honourable member has an interest

:37:12. > :37:14.declared, for example I understand the honourable member for Brighton

:37:15. > :37:20.Pavilion is sponsored by the RMT union, that she should do so if

:37:21. > :37:23.speaking on this matter. I think it is up to each individual member to

:37:24. > :37:28.note whether they do have an interest or not, and my suggestion

:37:29. > :37:31.is I have no knowledge and I have to be quite honest that any member is

:37:32. > :37:36.sponsored by a trade union under the present legislation.

:37:37. > :37:42.What we have work to do since last year is sort out some of the

:37:43. > :37:45.underlying problems with the management of this railway line,

:37:46. > :37:50.joining of the operation of the track and train, spending more money

:37:51. > :37:55.on infrastructure and performance has been rising steadily since the

:37:56. > :38:00.start of the year. Their dandified range of problems and as I have said

:38:01. > :38:05.to the House, we are working to solve those problems. But it has

:38:06. > :38:09.been made clear, the principal cause of the disruption experienced by

:38:10. > :38:14.constituents and others was the industrial action by the unions. He

:38:15. > :38:19.said those passengers would have experienced a relatively normal

:38:20. > :38:25.service but for that action. If the principal reason for these delays is

:38:26. > :38:28.industrial action, does that not mean that ?300 million the

:38:29. > :38:37.government pledged in January is a waste of money? No, it doesn't.

:38:38. > :38:41.Because one of the things I found most disappointing is the way in

:38:42. > :38:46.which the unions and others, when we have provided additional money for

:38:47. > :38:50.the infrastructure, owned and operated by Network Rail, an

:38:51. > :38:54.additional ?20 million last year and 300 million being spent now to stop

:38:55. > :38:57.things like regular signal failures, or they can do is misrepresent the

:38:58. > :39:02.situation and claim we are giving that money to the train operator.

:39:03. > :39:07.They know it is not true and it is not the case. One part of solving

:39:08. > :39:10.the problem on this railway and make sure it is the good performing

:39:11. > :39:20.railway it hasn't necessarily been, is to spend money on the

:39:21. > :39:24.infrastructure... I will give way. Is surely not part of the problem

:39:25. > :39:30.there are not enough drivers on the network so when drivers don't take

:39:31. > :39:34.voluntary overtime, over which is voluntary, by its very nature, the

:39:35. > :39:39.train operator is unable to operate its trains. It is not the fact that

:39:40. > :39:43.drivers are not doing their volunteering job of taking over

:39:44. > :39:50.time, it is the fact the operator has not trained a peanut drivers and

:39:51. > :39:57.I do declare an interest, I received donations from RMT, because I know

:39:58. > :40:03.to work with unions, we can get a better deal on our railways. The

:40:04. > :40:06.honourable gentleman is quite right, which is why at the start of this

:40:07. > :40:11.year we launched an enormous recruitment programme and there are

:40:12. > :40:15.350 trainees coming to the system at the moment. As he will know, the

:40:16. > :40:19.system of training drivers in this country is tied up in red tape,

:40:20. > :40:25.union agreements and passed working practices so we cannot train drivers

:40:26. > :40:29.as quickly as I would like. I think it is a nonsense that we should

:40:30. > :40:37.depend on overtime to run any part of our rail system on normal working

:40:38. > :40:40.days. We intend, as part of our strategy to end that situation. It

:40:41. > :40:47.will be a bloke to those who depend on overtime as part of their regular

:40:48. > :40:59.income. And the drivers on Southern are not keen to see their overtime

:41:00. > :41:05.disappear. I should say that I have taken a train by Southern for an

:41:06. > :41:12.operation in East Grinstead this morning. I am looking for serious

:41:13. > :41:17.investment in the Redhill area and the track layout in Croydon and

:41:18. > :41:22.Reigate it needs a 12 car platforms so it can get proper services into

:41:23. > :41:28.London. Would he provide the resources for Network Rail simply to

:41:29. > :41:32.do the design, potential design of a proper station at Reigate because it

:41:33. > :41:37.is my constituents who are hit by the fair tariff and the overcrowding

:41:38. > :41:45.on a service with all the faults that have been identified in the

:41:46. > :41:49.report. I can give my honourable friend and assurance I am working

:41:50. > :41:52.with what we will need to do to go forward for the Brighton mainline to

:41:53. > :41:56.make sure it is capable of meeting the challenges of the future. It

:41:57. > :42:01.hasn't had investment over the years. We are spending far more

:42:02. > :42:06.money on the rail network than has been spent in this country for

:42:07. > :42:10.decades. The Brighton mainline is one line that has been neglected, it

:42:11. > :42:15.is a reason why its performance is so poor and it is something we have

:42:16. > :42:21.to change. I thank the Minister for giving way. I was are interested the

:42:22. > :42:25.minister criticised there weren't enough drivers but also how more

:42:26. > :42:32.drivers have been recruited. Chris Gibb, in his report, identified, I

:42:33. > :42:36.understand at least one losing bidder including more drivers and it

:42:37. > :42:41.may have been the case the bidder with the fewest drivers won. So it

:42:42. > :42:45.is complete for the Minister to indicate he didn't realise they won

:42:46. > :42:50.the contract actually on fewer drivers. Surely he must recognise

:42:51. > :42:54.that? I was the Secretary of State at that time. What I am trying to do

:42:55. > :42:59.is sort out the problems I have got now. I am clear we don't have enough

:43:00. > :43:04.drivers on this railway. No dispute, that is why we have launched a big

:43:05. > :43:07.recruitment drive. I wish those drivers who are coming on stream

:43:08. > :43:14.now. But those with links to the unions know it takes about 15 months

:43:15. > :43:17.to train driver. I don't think it is sensible, it shouldn't take that

:43:18. > :43:20.long. But we are bringing onstream new drivers as rapidly as we can

:43:21. > :43:27.within the confines of union agreements. Recommendations, we are

:43:28. > :43:30.doing a whole variety of different things to ensure we deal with the

:43:31. > :43:35.problems on this railway. But I don't think we should forget the

:43:36. > :43:41.core issue that Chris Gibbs's main finding and there are lots of things

:43:42. > :43:45.to learn that everybody, but what he says is the principal cause of the

:43:46. > :43:48.disruption last year which caused misery to so many people was the

:43:49. > :43:53.action of the trade unions. It is the union executives though called

:43:54. > :44:01.strike action and disputes. They can call it. They are disputes between

:44:02. > :44:07.unions... I am grateful. Firstly it is worth reiterating, the one thing

:44:08. > :44:10.Chris Gibb was excluded from investigating in his report was

:44:11. > :44:16.industrial relations. He was not allowed to go into it. He did say

:44:17. > :44:19.that has been the single greatest cause of short-term inconvenience.

:44:20. > :44:27.He also said under the section of the report which is titled, How Did

:44:28. > :44:32.It Get To This Point? He said, I do not believe any single party has

:44:33. > :44:37.been the cause. Can I beg, on behalf of passengers, we get beyond the

:44:38. > :44:42.finger-pointing of this debate. And we all act with a degree of

:44:43. > :44:46.humility. Every single party bears responsibility for where we are

:44:47. > :44:49.today, from the unions to the franchises and government. Can he

:44:50. > :44:56.accept his own responsibility, accurate humility and say what... We

:44:57. > :45:00.all want to speak and I am not getting out anybody in particular,

:45:01. > :45:06.but if we had short interventions, everybody will get to speak. The

:45:07. > :45:10.Secretary of State. We talk about where we are now. Two weeks ago we

:45:11. > :45:13.had a railway that was performing better, a service that most people

:45:14. > :45:18.using it say was better than last year. We had a joined a management

:45:19. > :45:22.structure between track and trained operator. We had a programme of

:45:23. > :45:27.ongoing spending to try and remove those perennial breakdowns that

:45:28. > :45:32.cause frustration, the signal failure and points failure and the

:45:33. > :45:35.rest. And then lo and behold, unnecessarily we have strike action

:45:36. > :45:40.threatened, work to rule taking place against the things the unions

:45:41. > :45:44.have already been doing for the past six months, to be working well and

:45:45. > :45:47.deliver improvements. We have something that was getting better

:45:48. > :45:52.after a lot of work by a lot of people and it is a tragedy we are

:45:53. > :46:00.taking a step backwards. If he wants this railway line to get better,

:46:01. > :46:03.please talk to his friends in the unions and say, you don't need to do

:46:04. > :46:08.this. It is the wrong thing to do and it must stop. I will give way.

:46:09. > :46:12.Does he not agreed me, what ever the union is concerned about, the only

:46:13. > :46:15.way to resolve their concerns is get back round the table overtime bans

:46:16. > :46:20.on strike action will not resolve it and it makes life worse for

:46:21. > :46:28.passengers. I agree with that. What I find battling over the pay deal is

:46:29. > :46:34.that Aslef are balloting for industrial action on a 24% pay rise

:46:35. > :46:39.including productivity changes that they have accepted on the other part

:46:40. > :46:42.of the company on the Thames Link and great Northern links. Why would

:46:43. > :46:49.they accept the deal in one part of the company and threaten strike

:46:50. > :46:53.action and another part. Most of us look at the situation, railway line

:46:54. > :46:57.getting better, things on the men, ideal most people would say is

:46:58. > :47:01.completely generous, which has been accepted by the union and the other

:47:02. > :47:07.part of the company, why on earth would this be returning to a

:47:08. > :47:18.situation of industrial action. I give away one more time. Thank you.

:47:19. > :47:22.Why is it the Secretary of State can't go out publicly and say to

:47:23. > :47:32.both unions and the train operator, let's meet together? With no

:47:33. > :47:41.preconditions to negotiate this. What is it that the Secretary of

:47:42. > :47:46.State wants to meet the union separately. We had constructive

:47:47. > :47:49.talks earlier this year. I will pay tribute to the leader of Aslef the

:47:50. > :47:54.way they conducted themselves in January and February. It is a matter

:47:55. > :47:57.of disappointment in our they have returned to militancy when I thought

:47:58. > :48:02.there was constructive dialogue taking place. Those talks happen,

:48:03. > :48:07.they were facilitated by the General secretary of the TUC and a senior

:48:08. > :48:11.rail executive. We reached an agreement which did not pass the

:48:12. > :48:16.referendum. There was an offer on the table for the stuff. That offer

:48:17. > :48:19.with a substantial pay upgrade, productivity improvements, that has

:48:20. > :48:24.been acceptable to the unions on Thames Ling and great Northern. It

:48:25. > :48:30.is a disappointment we cannot deal with this issue once and for all. He

:48:31. > :48:34.will be aware this morning, several of us across the House met

:48:35. > :48:39.representatives from the RMT. I have to say, at the end of the meeting,

:48:40. > :48:43.it perplexed us as to why still no deal has been done, given the very

:48:44. > :48:51.small number of trains which have been leaving without that second

:48:52. > :48:56.person on board. The very narrow difference between GT are and the

:48:57. > :49:00.unions on how one preaches that. There did seem to be some union

:49:01. > :49:04.enmity going on as a reason for prolonging this strike. Can we not

:49:05. > :49:08.just get all of them around the table, bang some heads together and

:49:09. > :49:14.get our constituents are train service that stops disrupting their

:49:15. > :49:18.lives? There is no reason why talks cannot start again tomorrow. Come

:49:19. > :49:22.back round the table. They are trying to turn the clock back. There

:49:23. > :49:27.have been sensible arrangements in place for years that does not

:49:28. > :49:31.require a train to be cancelled if the previous member of staff has

:49:32. > :49:38.been delayed. Are we going to modernise are ways or not? Are ways

:49:39. > :49:44.are packed, we need to look for smart use of technology, smart ways

:49:45. > :49:48.of working and we need to invest in infrastructure to make sure it is

:49:49. > :49:54.reliable. Those are the things we want to do, those are the things we

:49:55. > :49:57.plan to do. The union should stop fighting, change and modernisation.

:49:58. > :50:02.Nobody is losing their jobs, nobody is having their pay cut, and I think

:50:03. > :50:07.we will need more customer service staff in the future, rather than

:50:08. > :50:10.fewer. I am not in the business of removing staff that work with

:50:11. > :50:13.customers, but we need the freedom to adapt, develop and equip itself

:50:14. > :50:21.for the challenges of the future. This dispute is all about preventing

:50:22. > :50:25.that from happening. It is about retaining union abilities to hold

:50:26. > :50:34.the railways. It has been a tragedy for the people of the Southern rail

:50:35. > :50:39.way. Just as we thought the services were getting better, it started

:50:40. > :50:45.again. Stop doing this to the unions, call of action and we will

:50:46. > :50:51.talk to you again. The question is as on the order paper. Andy

:50:52. > :50:55.Macdonald. May I make it clear from the outset, I am a proud member of

:50:56. > :50:59.the labour and trade union movement and I am happy to declare the

:51:00. > :51:05.support I have received from all three trade unions in the rail

:51:06. > :51:09.industry. I am grateful for this opportunity to debate things in the

:51:10. > :51:13.Gibbs' Report. It should be noted, this debate should have taken six

:51:14. > :51:18.months ago when the report was finished and presented to the

:51:19. > :51:21.Secretary of State. Unfortunately the Transport Secretary decided to

:51:22. > :51:24.sit on the report for six months and wait until after the general

:51:25. > :51:30.election before publishing it, denying this place and most

:51:31. > :51:32.importantly, denying passengers the opportunity to scrutinise its

:51:33. > :51:38.assessment into the Southern rail fiasco. The secretary of state

:51:39. > :51:41.shouldn't bury reports until after a general election when passengers

:51:42. > :51:48.deserve the opportunity to see the findings immediately. Last week, the

:51:49. > :51:55.Association of British commuters went to the High Court seeking a

:51:56. > :52:01.judicial review of the government's handling of Southern, motivated by

:52:02. > :52:04.the Transport Secretary's refusal to assess the claims of Southern, who

:52:05. > :52:09.are questing they may not be found in breach of their contracts for

:52:10. > :52:15.their abysmal performance, the worst in the country. These claims were

:52:16. > :52:19.made in April 2016, over a year ago. The High Court of Mao ordered the

:52:20. > :52:26.Secretary of State to produce a report into Southern rail within 14

:52:27. > :52:29.days. Long-suffering passengers shouldn't have to resort to

:52:30. > :52:33.crowdfunding for legal action to seek accountability and the

:52:34. > :52:41.secretary of state should not have to be dragged, kicking and screaming