11/07/2017 House of Commons

Download Subtitles




Live coverage of the day's proceedings in the House of Commons, including the remaining stages of the Air Travel Organisers' Licensing Bill.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 11/07/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Order, order. The ayes to the right, 271. The noes to the left, 305.


The ayes to the right, 271, the noes to the left, 305, the noes have it.


Unlock! The question is the amendment made. As many as are of


the opinion, say "aye". To the the ayes have it. We've now, to the


second group amendment one, with which it will be convenient to


consider amendments to be close to. Patricia Gibson to move amendment.


To move the motion, I wish to speak to amendment one in my name and that


of my honourable friend for Portmarnock allowed in. --, and


loads. And requires the Government to undertake an impact assessment


before bringing forward regulations to amend the definition on the list


act. Clause two of the bill requires only... There is a lot of


conversation, I really am struggling. Please can we keep


conversations until people leave the chamber. Patricia Gibson. Clause two


requires only the secretary of state has an affirmative resolution by


both houses but that is not enough. The Government should conduct a


proper consultation and assess potential impact of any changes


proposed to the Atol scheme. That it intends to introduce its secondary


legislation. Any proposals must be fully transparent and consumers and


businesses alike must be formally consulted on the process to allow


for proper scrutiny. We trust the Minister will accept this and our


reasons for proposing this amendment.


The question is amendment one be made.


Minister. Mr Speaker, Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg your pardon, I can


satisfy the honourable lady entirely, I really intend to ensure


there is exactly what she asks for, we have full consultation and impact


assessment with respect to any regulations under the measures I


bring to the house today. On that basis I hope she will withdraw the


amendment, if she does not she will look rather daft.


I rise to speak to amendment three. I am hoping you will select the


amendment for a division. With this amendment we are seeking commitment


by the Minister that the Government would conduct a thorough impact


assessment consultation before implementing the power. The second


clause relates to add travel trusts which is the legal vehicle that


holds the money that is then used to refund consumers and the Atol


protections. It would give the Secretary of State the power to


define a separate trust arrangement to reflect different market models,


prefiguring some of the changes in the holiday package market referred


to by the Minister. This amendment would require the Government to


undertake a full and proper review and public consultation. Before


bringing in any of the changes that would be enabled and that the powers


in clause two. Like clause one, clause two does not see directly


relevant to analysing the EU and UK regulations. Instead it is a dormant


power the Government will retain in order to make considerable changes


to Atol, in particular to air travel trusts. That is where Brexit,


perhaps, does come in, because we're such changes to happen but not where


such changes to happen they would most likely be in the event of


leaving the EU. Richard Moriarty of the Civil Aviation Authority and


trustee of the current air travel trusts spoke about recognising the


possible merits of separating the trust to reflect variations of


products in the market. However, he explained we simply are not there


yet and that it would be one for the Government to use this bill as it


means of making changes without June consultation. The Minister made it


clear in a letter to my honourable friend for Middlesbrough changes


would be made only through the affirmative procedure yet the bill


does not account for any further consultation of part of this


measure. At the impact assessment the Government have undertaken it


explicitly state it does not consider proposals for atoll


reformed beyond what is required in the package travel directive. It


would therefore be rather inappropriate for the Minister to go


beyond that without providing assurances at this stage proper


consultation and scrutiny would take place if they are minded to go


beyond changes already envisaged. During evidence session Mr Moriarty


said he hoped the Government would follow the practice they have


followed so far, consult with regulators, consult with the


industry and do the impact assessment and so on. This amendment


is simply saying that, it is fair and reasonable and guarantees


further changes to scrutiny. Patricia Gibson.


Then the light of the Minister's assurances tonight I withdraw the


amendment. Is it your place amendment one be


withdrawn. Amendment one withdrawn. We now come to question amendment


three. The question is amendment three be made. As many as are of the


opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no".. Claire the lobbies!


Right. The question is that amendment only be made. As many of


of that opinion say aye. To the contrary, no.


order, order. The ayes to the right, 274. The noes to the left, feared


and seven. -- 307. Ayes to the right, turned and 74. The noes to


the left, 307. The noes have it, the noes have it. The question was that


clause two stand part of the bill. As many of that opinion say aye. On


the contrary, no. The ayes have it. The question is that clause four


stand part of the bill. As many of that opinion say aye. On the


contrary, no. The ayes have it. We now come to new clause one. Tricia


Gibson to move. I beg to move new clause one in my name. It requires


the UK Government to report regularly on the threat of Brexit on


consumer protection under the Atol scheme and to report annually on the


progress it has made. Brexit throws up great uncertainties, not least in


the aviation sector, with regards to passenger rights, compensation


schemes and how much change and schemes and how much change and


stability can be expected. There is also the question of how EU airlines


and passengers might be affected. The overriding concern with this


bill, welcome as it is, is consumer concerns must be safeguarded.


Furthermore, such consumer protection is enhanced and updated


as society and technology evolves. Just as they have during our EU


membership. The UK cannot be left behind in a stagnating situation in


this regard in a post Brexit world. New clause one is an extremely


comfort and confidence to consumers. comfort and confidence to consumers.


Otherwise, such a lack of guarantees will leave passengers vulnerable and


potentially put people off booking holidays, which can only be bad news


for an outbound tourism economy. It is so vital for jobs in Scotland and


the rest of the UK and we intend to the rest of the UK and we intend to


do press this matter to a division... The question is the new


clause one will be better second time.


I am grateful, Mr Deputy Speaker. As I said with previous amendments, I


endorse and indeed support this member's partners. Either way, I am


grateful for the honourable lady for withdrawing her earlier amendment


following the assurance I gave her. And they say to the honourable


gentleman opposite that I am committed to fill consultation and


regulations as they are rolled out regulations as they are rolled out


as a result of this legislation. The atoll legislation is not


dependent on the package travel directive, this bill will harmonise


at all with the package travel directive in the immediate term,


however, atoll legislation and protection will exist and remain in


place as we leave the EU. It is made by an framed in and supported by


domestic legislation so whilst I understand the honourable lady's


point, I have to say to her I think the new clause is a necessary, as it


is enshrined in an act of this Parliament and all that Parliament


can change this. Therefore, I hope the honourable lady, mindful of that


and the assurances I have already given about consultation and further


review, and indeed impact assessments, and the fact I


mentioned there will be a review of all of this matters and what I have


said about, I hope, given all of that, she might withdraw the new


clause in her name and the name of others.


These consumer protection measures require an assessment and we will


support the cause. The question is new clause one be ready second. As


many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no".


Division. Clear the lobbies! Order, the question is new clause


one be read a second time. Just sits a minute. The question is new clause


one be read a second time. That is an absolute disgrace. Right, we will


try again and see if we can make progress. The question is new clause


one be read a second time. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To


the contrary, "no". Order. The ayes to the right 273,


the noes the left 308. Thank you. The ayes to the right


273, the noes to the left, 308. The noes have it. Unlock. The question


is I do report is the bill without amendments to the house, As many as


are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". The ayes have


it. Order, order. Let me find out where I am.


I don't believe that for one moment. Order, order. I beg to move the


house has gone through the bill and made no amendment.


Third reading. Minister to move. I am immensely grateful, Mr Deputy


Speaker. What a pleasure it is to move the third reading of this


important bill and to be able to do so in the knowledge it be considered


in the spirit it deserves, there has been properly reasoned and measure


it and sensible debate about its provisions and I am grateful to


members of all sides of the hose for contributing to that process. I do


think it was a little unnecessary we voted once or twice earlier but


let's put that to one side because I fully appreciate opposition must do


its job, if only to maintain the morale of the parliamentary party


that knows it is no need to power now and it was a week or a month or


a year ago. Put that one side. This is an


important piece of legislation which as we said repeatedly brings


up-to-date and up to speed the arrangements under the


which protect travellers. Those which protect travellers. Those


arrangements have been proven time arrangements have been proven time


and time again to be effective. They are necessary and desirable, as has


been acknowledged throughout our consideration. Benjamin Disraeli, we


have heard too little of this afternoon. He said, like all great


travellers, I have seen more and I remember more than I have seen. What


I remember of these considerations is, as I said, they have been


conducted in the way that Parliament should look at all such matters. I


am entirely confident that the bill, as it proceeds, will continue to


provide reassurance to travellers, the necessary provisions for


businesses, and in those terms will do this Government and this


house-proud. It is right that the Government should act in the


interest of the common good. For that is enshrined in all that we are


in my party and I hope that other parties in this House will gradually


over time learn from that. So I welcome entirely the way that we


have dealt with these matters. I look forward to the further


consideration of them was the bill becomes law. I have committed to


review the thoroughly and is the regulations will do, it is important


to amplify it and review the implications of that in the way that


is recommended by this House. We can be proud of this legislation. I am


sure it is not just fit for purpose but necessary, desirable and


efficacious and I move it on that basis. The question is that the bill


be read after time. -- a third time. The Labour Party is supportive of


the Atol bill and we will vote in support of it. But there are


concerns on the impact of some parts of the bill which were expressed


when this was first discussed. We hope that the Minister has taken on


board the points made by Labour, echoed by the SNP, who re-tabled the


amendments in the committee. The House will be aware that the Prime


Minister has asked the opposition to help the Government five providing


some policy suggestions. But it seems that the SNP are not even


asking for help but rather just take Labour's policy ideas as their own


and we should probably take that as a compliment, Mr Deputy Speaker. We


support the bill because it brings Atol up-to-date and it will ensure


that it syncs up with the latest travel directive, extending to a


wider range of holidays and protecting more consumers as well as


a leading UK travel companies to sell more seamlessly across Europe.


Whilst we have some real concerns over whether UK consumers will be is


officially protected by a UBS companies as they will no longer be


subject to Atol, but a member state equivalents, we welcome the changes


which will ultimately help to protect more holiday-makers. The


invitations for tet-mac two after invitations for tet-mac two after


Brexit and also cause for concern. -- four Atol. The bill proposes that


the Secretary of State requires only an affirmative resolution


significantly reform Atol and the significantly reform Atol and the


air travel trust fund. Labour recognises the merit of some reforms


but we believe an impact assessment, fill consultation and scrutiny


should have been required before any fundamental changes are made to


these consumer sections. -- protections. The issue brings to the


forefront uncertainties over the future of the UK of the nation -- of


UK aviation following the decision to leave EU. The Labour Party has


been clear in that whatever framework is chosen, we should


prioritise working in an unchanged operating environment. The service


agreements should be prioritised. As is customary, such agreement should


be negotiated separately from and prior to negotiations on trade with


EU. The Government must not waste the opportunity that this bill


presents to clarify intended future arrangements for our aviation


industry. The UK aviation sector is the largest in Europe, Fab largest


in the world, supporting 1 million jobs and bringing 9 billion into the


Treasury in taxes each. -- third largest. But aviation also provides


a network infrastructure that allows other industries to do well also.


Half a million jobs in the UK tourism industry as a porter by


aviation. 40 but since -- 40% of UK exports go via airports. The EU is


largest destination, 49% of passengers travel there. Airlines


that operate from within UK unable to operate within the EU single


aviation market, which allows them to operate freely within the EU


without restrictions on capacity, frequency and pricing.


Significantly, this includes three you, -- EU open skies agreement.


That allows airlines to deal to fly between the EU and the US. If


Britain leads the year without retaining any form of European


common aviation membership, airlines common aviation membership, airlines


will need to negotiate new lines to operate freely within the EU and


operate transatlantic routes. This means that there will be no legal


framework that allows airlines to fly to those destinations within


with thin -- within the UK. It means airlines could lose the right to fly


Aviation is legally unique. It is Aviation is legally unique. It is


separate from trade agreements and it does not form part of the World


Trade Organisation system. Instead, countries negotiate bilateral or


multilateral are service agreements to provide airlines with legal


rights to fly to certain places. To ensure the continuity of


connectivity, the UK will need to negotiate a new air service


agreement with countries like the US if there is no agreement at the time


the UK leads the EU. Connectivity could be undermined and the UK


ability to trade be much more difficult. It is imperative that the


Government should prioritise retaining an essentially unchanged


operating environment. That is why we should prioritise air services


agreement as part of Brexit negotiations. Does the measures in


this bill are important and will provide additional security to UK


holiday-makers, it is strange the Government find it necessary to


debate was built of the whole house. The measures in the bill were


included previously and passed through the committee stage before


the primaries to decided to call the unnecessary snap general election. I


think that I am right in saying, Mr think that I am right in saying, Mr


Deputy Speaker, these provisions were debated in that bill in normal


than 45 minutes in committee. The Government had not made changes to


proposal. We don't understand why the decision was taken for this


largely niche bill to take up time in the chamber, other than to try


and disguise the fact that this chaotic Government have a thread be


a legislative programme for this Parliament. I just make a point that


as a result of that scrutiny, which the honourable gentleman should not


disparage, because he has played an important part of making it real, we


have had a good debate about the issue of review, impact assessments


and further consultation. Those things very close to his heart. It


has the really useful purpose. He makes a fair enough point, but it


seems, with respect to the Minister, that there has been a terrible waste


of time debating this in the committee of the whole house when in


fact it was dealt with in 45 minutes in committee upstairs. Mr Deputy


Speaker, for sake of appearances, it has been broken up into component


parts and has now been given undue time for debate in this chairman. Of


course. -- in this chamber. I am terribly grateful to remember. It is


of course not a waste of time to discuss anything pertaining to the


whole of the UK in this House and in committee of the whole of the House


because it gives me the opportunity to remind the Minister that we have


three airports in Northern Ireland. We in Northern Ireland are the only


part physically connected to another EU member state, the Republic of


Ireland. It is only important. We don't want to lose traffic and


airport traffic from Northern Ireland to airports like Dublin. She


makes up good point on behalf of our constituency but I don't think


requires your response from me. I thank the Minister for giving way.


This is a bit of an occasion, really, because the opposition


traditionally complain that things are not given time the Government


has tried to rush it through. That there has not been sufficient


examination. The Shadow Minister seems to be making quite a precedent


here that he is complaining this bill has been given too much time.


Why is that? If he will allow me to continue, will make the point in a


minute or two that they are very important issues debated which are


now not going to be debated. And indeed made into legislation. By


breaking up the bill, message was included have been dropped. Measures


which could have been included to improve legislation through


clauses and amendments will no clauses and amendments will no


longer be added because the longer within the scope of forthcoming


bills. The proposal to make the shining lasers and vehicles control


towers and enforceable criminal offence, which were strongly


supported by the side of the House, which we would be happy to support,


has been dropped altogether. That is clearly concerning. We do not want


to see avoidable disasters brought about by the malicious use of


Labour's -- lasers and nor does the Minister. Can he explain why he is


dropped these plans and when he proposes to legislate to tackle this


serious problem?, again there is nothing in the bill for the


inclusion of the much-needed regulations on drones. The


Government respond to the consultation on drones I think in


have made much more progress have made much more progress


already, including making decisions on whether the UK should follow


other countries by establishing a compulsory registration scheme and


getting systematic geo- fencing in place to physically stop drones


getting near airports and other places where they could be


potentially so dangerous. It makes no sense of the Government to have


abandoned the bill in which action on drones could have been included.


These are decisions that will make aviation less safe than it should


such incidents confirmed and the such incidents confirmed and the


first five months of this year, there were 70 last year and 29 in


2015. Just ten in the five years preceding. We need legislation to


regulate the use of drones, to tackle the worrying trend of near


misses with planes. The aviation industry have been clear, Mr Deputy


Speaker, that they need the Government to act on these concerns


now. We on this side of the House have been pressing them on this


issue for many years. Without action, it is a question of when,


rather than if there is a passenger plane involved in a drone related


incident. So will the Minister explain why this has been dropped


and what plans he has to get it right? It is just one month into


this new parliament and the this new parliament and


Government are already running out Government are already running out


of steam. Which is why we have been debating this bill on the floor of


the House rather upstairs in committee. The Prime Minister is


attempting to crowds of policy ideas from the opposition and in this


case, we can assist. The Government needs to bring forward legislation


on the misuse of lasers. On the regulation of drones. And provide


clarity and certainty for UK aviation post Brexit. We welcome the


Government adopting these policies and they will have our full support


if they do so. Leave abruptly supports the bill because it extends


protection is afforded to many more holiday-makers but we one clarity


and a UK-based companies, which longer subject to Atol, will be


provided protection to UK consumers. The best possible framework to


ensure that the sector flourishes but this means preparing ourselves


for the many implications of Brexit on Atol and the aviation sector as a


whole. I and very much work I began in a


welcoming and supporting the Government's majors to update the


Atol scheme to provide more passenger protection and align it


with the latest EU directives and the further progress made in this


debate. I was disappointed to hear the member for Kingston-upon-Hull


complaining that process has taken too long. I would suggest to the


honourable gentleman if he sees this as a problem perhaps he has


contributed to it with his extensive remarks which I am sure we all


enjoyed but he seems to contribute to the problem here that if I is.


I am grateful to the honourable lady. I did not complain it has


taken too long I simply made the point the time in this house is


incredibly important and there is a lot of things discussed and debated


which could have made the legislation but the time has been


wasted. 45 minutes in committee, that was the point.


I believe the Minister has taken on board a very legitimate and legal


concerns expressed tonight about the rights of consumers and how they are


to be protected and have their current rate is guaranteed as we


head towards a post Brexit world. There can and must not be any


diminution or stagnation in passengers' rights as technology


advances. It is heartening to see the way this bill has proceeded


through the house and the ensuing debate and I will be delighted to be


part of it. Briefly, I don't want to delay the


house... I am sure the Minister will beg the lead of the house to address


the house again. I do not want to detain the house at


length, except... Except to say that to affirm my thanks to all members


who have contributed to this debate. I hear what the honourable gentleman


says about the previous bill, he drew attention to those elements of


the bill which were not being considered today, this is very much


part of that earlier bill, but we have made clear in the Queen's


Speech we intend to bring further legislation in the area of transport


and I'm happy to continue to have conversation about drones and


lasers, as he suggested. It has been in the debate, a good bill and I


think we will leave it at that. The question is the bill be now read


the third time. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the


contrary, "no". The ayes have it, the ayes have it.


We now come to the motion relating to high-speed two and electronic


deposits of documents. I call the Minister Michael Ellis to move the


motion. Thank you very much. I beg to move


the motion in the name of the Leader of the House. Her Majesty's gracious


speech gave notice of the Government's intention to introduce


a hybrid bill to parliament later in the year to take forward the next


phase of HS2. As a hybrid bill that will be governed by the Standing


Orders for private business. Parlour's review of the Standing


Orders following the passage of the high-speed rail London West Midlands


act has not yet concluded and is the first significant review since 1948.


It is therefore necessary to move this motion to update parliamentary


procedure to reflect developments in technology since 1948. If I may I


will explain briefly the changes to the house which replicate those the


house authorised in 2013 ahead of the introduction of the previous


hybrid bill. The house will be aware along with the HS2 hybrid bill later


this year we will provide Parliament with the environmental statement.


This will set out the likely significant environmental effects of


the scheme and put forward proposals for alleviating those effects. For a


project of this magnitude that is a considerable level of detail


involved. We expect the statement to be up to 12,000 pages long. It is of


course important local communities can easily find out what the impact


will be on their local area. However, current Standing Orders


require a us to deposit a hard copy of that document to every local


authority area along the line of the route. In this day and age that is


inconvenient for the communities involved, especially for parish


councils, many of which do not have sufficient space so they asked us to


deliver it elsewhere, often a library nearby. That is why the


motion allows for the electronic deposits of Bill documentation for


the HS2 hybrid bill. I am most grateful honourable friend


and as one who is seriously opposed to this hybrid bill which runs right


through my constituency and want to make quite sure if he would be good


enough to give us written undertaking there will be provision


of written material of the kind he describes, although I understand why


it should be in electronic form. It is a promise of power, it does


not require documents to be deposited in electronic format only,


if deposit location once all the documents and hard copy, HS2 Limited


will provide them so. The motion allows for the electronic deposit of


Bill documentation for the HS2 Hybrid bill, making it easier for


communities across the route to find the information most relevant to


their area without having to work through an otherwise enormous


document and will also make it but like I will give way to my


honourable friend. What will happen if because of the


cruelty of this Government the libraries have been closed and there


was therefore room for the hard copies of the bill, even though the


local areas wanted them. How would you handle that? I don't


accept the characterisation of my right honourable friend. On previous


occasions nearby community libraries have been asked to store Rabat has


been storage problem so I anticipate alternative mechanisms could be in


place. As I said, it should be noted that is a permissive power. It does


not require documents be deposited electronically only so if a location


once all the documents and hard copy HS2 will provide them so and in all


cases HS2 Limited will make available the key document and hard


copy such as the bill itself and the nontechnical summary of the


environmental statement. Further, members of the public will be able


to phone his chest to Limited can ask for free hard copies of the


nontechnical summary -- HS2 Limited, the local community area report and


maps. If you deposit location with that document in electronic form but


does not have the equipment to make them available to the community, HS2


will also provide the equipment and it -- at its own expense. This is a


wholly sensible organisation of standing order requirements that


were originally conceived in the 19th century and is about making it


easier for people to engage with the hybrid bill process and therefore


ensuring the most effective decision-making by Parliament.


Of course he just sort of widely referred to the maps, of course the


maps, specifications, the limits of deviation, he knows perfectly well


how much always involves. Can I have an assurance from him if it is


required all those things will also be made available in hard copy? Yes.


Reasonable request, yes. This is a wholly sensible modernisation of


standing order requirements and is easier for people, about making it


easier for people to engage with the hybrid bill process. I commend this


motion to the house. The question is motion number three,


as on the order paper. Can I start by thanking the deputy


Leader of the House or his explanation of the changes in


Standing Orders for the purposes of the bill. Hybrid bills are a rarity


in the house, public bill proposes a law that affects the private


interests of a particular person or organisation. This bill will affect


the general public and specific household along the route of the HS2


line phase two. The house has already agreed these changes in


similar circumstances for phase one of the HS2 project from London to


the West Midlands and these changes relate to phase two of the project


allowing for the construction of the route from Birmingham to crew,


approximately 50 miles apart. These changes allowing for electronic


copies and documents to be made available are eminently sensible.


Could I ask the deputy Leader of the House if you could clarify a couple


of things. On the motion under section three, it says copies of so


much of it as the person may reasonably require and such copies


made, be provided in electronic form. Could he come from those


documents will not unreasonably be withheld and the request will be


complied with. I appreciate people cannot ask for documents out of the


area of which they do not have an interest but could she say who will


actually make the decision about whether it is a reasonable request?


Could see also can from households along the Birmingham to Crewe of


route, who will be directly affected, will be able to receive a


free copy of documents relating to the area? The honourable member has


suggested some rural areas may not have a good internet access and may


not be proficient in IT, in some cases, but that should have those


documents free of charge or can he can they will be gone so was that he


mentions a telephone number that people can ring to HS2, can he can


from this will not be at the premium rate and will be free of charge?


Could the Leader of the House say when we are likely to have the first


reading of the bill? Will receive before the house rises for the


summer recess? I'm sure we could agree amendment generally through


the Procedure Committee we do not have to keep coming back to end to


Standing Orders to include a reference to electronic copies. I am


sure we could agree that. In the event Her Majesty's opposition


support these changes in the Standing Orders, which are in line


to previous amendments to Standing Orders, it will be no surprise to


the house I rise to my feet on this small motion before the house this


evening. It may surprise colleagues sitting


alongside me I rise to welcome this particular provision. As a veteran


of the hybrid bill process in this place there is no doubt the hybrid


bill process is arcane and has tremendous problems with its


practices and procedures. Certainly, my constituents and many


constituents of other honourable members have been at the mercy of


the hybrid process, hybrid bill process. I am afraid I shudder when


I hear the front bench say the environmental statement will be at


least 12,000 pages, I have experienced something just as large


for phase one of the HS2 process and these are indeed very own page


documents. I have to ask the deputy Leader of the House if there is


going to be sufficient navigable instruments, as it is being served


up to people electronically, because I and so that many of my


constituents that the documents presented by the HS2 Limited were


very difficult to navigate, very hard to find. I would like some and


should insist that has been improvements in the way in which


people can move around these very large documents. The deputy leader


has already given assurances nothing in this order tonight will prevent


communities access and paper copies and we must not forget that is a


digital divide. Many of the people affected by this project are elderly


and the Lord affected by this project are elderly and to easily


access on computers large documents. It is very important those people


have access, free of charge, to those sections of the document that


relate to their properties or the area around is that particular part


of the route. I give way. Does my right honourable friend also


agree when this material comes electronically and then has to be


turned into a person's home or office -- turn a person's home or


office into the kind of material they make sense and can read, the


complexity of the documents, design specifications and all the other


things and monumental volume of paper really does become very


daunting indeed. Lastly, does she agree, or our previous debate and


consultation, that HS2 better get its act together and consultation as


well and do it properly? I am grateful for that intervention.


It is quite clear that HS2 needs to improve not only its consultation


processes but as communication processes, which are absolutely


still failing in many instances. I will. I'm very grateful to the


honourable lady for allowing me to intervene. It is a small but very


important point. The issue that she has just raised about older people


not being familiar, often, with technology and electronic documents.


We often see that older people suffer from vision impairment or I


impairment. Often people need real copies. Will she seek reassurance


that was a disadvantage of seeing documents will have some assistance


with that? Can I just say, I think she makes a very good point. What I


am keen on insuring is that in a process that is so inequitable,


where the citizen receives very where the citizen receives very


help, that we try to impress on the front bench and HS2 Ltd that there


are people who need assistance to navigate these documents and


understand them. And I feel passionately that this needs to be


the case. If you have seen people who are losing their house having to


appear before the select committee of this House, when a silk, QC,


highly expensive barrister is that against them and they have no help,


she will understand the reason why I am poor the front bench to make sure


there are suitable things in place to help them. We ask that the


telephone line would be a free telephone line but I go for the than


that. I would like to make sure the front bench and shows that telephone


line is actually manned by competent people who actually know what


they're talking about and can get people through the process easily.


Because that is extremely important in my view. Very disappointed,


however, that at the moment there is nothing here to allow petitioners in


the process when this will comes forward, in the petition process, to


petition electronically, unless the front tells me differently. I have


had to bring in petitions from constituents myself into this House.


And for the pleasure of defending your properties, they were charged


?20. I was collecting money and documents and bringing them in to


facilitate that process. Now, my constituency is not fired outside


London. -- not far. The people affected by this phase of HS2 Ltd


further up the country and I would have fought the front bench would


have looked at how constituents of other MPs who are going to be


affected by these two are able to put in petitions this time. -- phase


two. I implore the front bench to look at that because it is a matter


of priority. I think we should wipe out the ?20 fee which is either fish


nor fowl. It is an insult to people who want to defend their properties


and have their voice heard. I deal that will be cancelled. -- do hope


that. I have another question to ask. Because in this motion, the


Deputy Leader will that any requirement relating to private


business to make a document available for the sale of prescribed


offices... If it is made available Foreign Office in London. I would


like his assurances that this will not be only place it will be on


sale. Because as phase two, when the bills introduced, goes


Birmingham Northfield, I wonder if Birmingham Northfield, I wonder if


it would be sensible to have this in Manchester, for example, which I


think that the more assistance for the people affected by this project.


I would very much like to know when the bill will be introduced but


they'll so would very much like to know when the second reading is


anticipated. Because I think, when we have another hybrid bill of this


size and complexity at affecting so many people, that it is important


that as much warning as possible is given by the Government and HS2 Ltd.


And all the information is readily available well in advance and with


explanations of the people can get their heads around it. There is no


doubt that there will be support for the phase to Bill across all sides


of the House. And once again you will find a very small number of MPs


perhaps opposed to it by raising questions about it. So the


Government need not fear that it will not get its business. But if it


is going to embark on a project of this size and complexity, please


learn from the lessons and mistakes that were made on phase one and did


not play people on phase two through the same agonies that we had in


phase one. If we do not learn and we do not then take action, we are


failing people in this country. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And


just go to set couple of words. Firstly, the changes are, as the


shadow Leader of the House said, sensible. It makes sense to move to


electronic means where possible. I want to point to some members that


some members have been concerned about the electronic issue and


access to hard copy. There are issues with people on benefits being


forced to move online. We have to remember there is a disparity here


in attitudes. In terms of what the honourable member said, I would


agree in terms of any consultations with people. People must be able to


interact with expats are people who understand the documents and can


explain them in an impartial way. Some people have difficultly reading


maps online or in hard copy. It is very important people can access


that information and understand that. So certainly out of the


Government to make sure any consultations do allow people to


have full access to understand that information. I would also like to


ask the Leader of the House, the Deputy Leader of the House, has


there been any savings identified through this measure? It would seem


sensible that they would be savings, but that equally seems to be


balanced up with a rather generous offer of giving out IT equipment. I


wonder if there has been an assessment made of how much IT


equipment will be discussed as well. I have already made a couple of


interventions and I am extremely interventions and I am


grateful to my very distinguished grateful to my very distinguished


and right honourable friend for all the work she has done on phase one,


which has set a pattern for what is to be done on the second phase,


which so directly and detrimentally affects my own constituency. May I


make one suggestion? Then I will allow the Minister to reply. It is


simply this. Birmingham has been mentioned. As a matter of fact, if


you take the line between Birmingham and Crewe, the more central place


happens to be Staffordshire. Could she give consideration to using the


County Council facilities, which are extremely good, where copying could


be done and that sort of thing at a central point, where people from my


constituency at both ends of the line would be able to visit with a


minimum amount of inconvenience? That is all I need to say for the


time being. Madam Deputy Speaker, with the leave of the House, if I


may answer some of these points with a limited amount of time available.


As far as my right honourable friend...


As far as my right honourable The right honourable lady opposite


asked what is meant by "Reasonable". A reasonable request means weighing


up HS2, the cost of meeting the request, against whether there is a


genuine need for the information in the format requested will stop so,


reasonable requests, for hard copies, by individuals, will be met.


These can be requested from local authorities who will be provided


hard copy for inspection or directly from HS2. I am asked by a couple of


honourable members about when the bill will be laid. I can simply say


soon at this point. All reasonable requests for hard copies of maps,


section drawings, by individuals will be met. I can also say that and


as to the point raised by my honourable friend that is fired as


audio is concerned, we are proactively considering ordeal in


Braille and easy read versions. That is for accessibility for all


persons. I have noted complaints made about the telephone line and I


will look into that matter. I understand it is a London number,


jazz of the honourable lady's question about the rate, but I will


look into it. The issue is raised about London and whether documents


can be stored elsewhere, a tiny number of people requesting this.


But we will certainly look into those reasonable requests. Will he


give way on that important point? Very briefly. Is it plans to


translate this into other languages? I am not aware of any such plans at


the moment. We are considering the issue of Braille. I'm so grateful.


Can he tell you what the appeal processes if HS2 does not been a


request to be reasonable? -- does not deem. It is clear that all


reasonable requests will be met. Reasonable requests will be met and


certainly further consideration can be given to that in due course. But


this is a sensible modernisation of the standing orders, which are


frankly 19th-century standing orders which have not undergone radical


reform since 1948. I will give way very briefly. Lastly, I know that he


had questions put to him, but the question of Stafford and Stafford


County Council buildings being the place where people can go would be a


very, very convenient point. My right honourable friend, the Leader


of the House, is particularly alive to all the concerns raised,


including the localities involved including the localities involved


and local committees involved. The issue that my right honourable


friend raises is that we'll be considered, as far as Stafford is


concerned. In the circumstances, I beg to move. The question is motion


number three as on the order paper. As many as are of that opinion say


aye. On the contrary, no. The ayes have it, the ayes have it.


I beg to move that this housed in a ledger. The question is that this


House do now adjourn. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I'm


delighted to see my honourable friend, the Minister, in this place.


I am hopeful that she is in a cooperative mood. As she will be


aware, I am raising a very small but, in my opinion and others',


important point seeking a small change in the Mental Health Act


1983, section 130 six. She will be aware that I have raised this twice


previously. First in a Ten Minute Rule Bill in 2014. And I do not


proceed with this. There was a whole ongoing Government review. The


second occasion was almost exactly one year ago when I raised it in our


judgment debate. I was prompted to see the change initially having seen


it first hand in the streets of London when I was with a couple of


officers, in a response car. The officers, in a response car. The


first call was a dashed to in the 14th floor of the Council


residential tower block. A mother nervously let officers and she saw


her daughter, 22, standing on a window ledge threatening to jump. We


quickly established that the doctor had the history of genuine suicide


attempts and as the young lady was clearly put out by the uniformed


police officers, fortunately, we were joined very prompted by three


father officers, to plain clothes. -- two of them were in plain


clothes. One was female. She was very strict and persuasive and


managed to persuade the young woman to come down off the windowsill, sit


on the bed and proper matters through. This made it quite clear,


she made it quite clear that she needed psychiatric help. Much effort


was put into persuade her is possible to go to a place of safety


for psychiatric assistance. This was vehemently refused and when pressed,


she struggled to head for the window and jump, yet again. The other four


police officers stood on tiptoe those waiting to catch.


The question is that this housed in a ledger. -- is that this House


should now adjourn. Subtitles will resume


on Tuesday In Parliament at 2300.