12/07/2017 House of Commons

statement... Abby honourable gentleman for Ealing North has

forged new alliance with a member of the SNP. I do not know who should be

more afraid! The statement the Secretary of State for International

Development, Secretary Priti Patel. Thank you. With permission, I would

like to update the house or my departments continued support for

the people of Mosul. The Prime Minister of Iraq called for the

Mosul to be liberated after the city fell to Daesh. This comes after a

manageable oppression by Daesh. Fear of execution, abductions, forced

marriages, destruction of the city, it comes after nine months of heavy

fighting for the Iraqi security forces who faced brutal Daesh

tactics including the use of human shields and suicide bombers. My

honourable friend will provide the house with a more detailed update

tomorrow on the ongoing military campaign in Iraq and Syria and the

UK role in the effort. The declaration that Mosul is free again

is a great victory for the people of Iraq and a great stride forward for

global security. I'm sure that the house will help me commend the

extraordinary bravery of the Iraq forces to put the protection of

civilians at the heart of their military campaign acting to reduce

civilian casualties where they could and risking their lives to evacuate

civilians avoiding the bullets of the Daesh fighters. We should

recognise the professionalism, their sacrifice and they have been backed

up by the international coalition forces including the IRS who have

taken all reasonable precautions during the planning and execution of

air strikes to reduce the risk of civilian lives.

We should also write -- we should also recognise the bravery of the

people of Mosul, the people who have been out -- the children who have

been out of school and who are now back in the classroom. Doctors are

giving life-saving treatment once again to their fellow citizens,

volunteers are clearing the rubble from the streets and public

buildings. We must, though, be realistic about the challenges

ahead. Almost 50,000 homes have been destroyed, although 200,000 people

have returned to their homes in eastern Mosul, over 7000 people are

still displaced. Explosive remnants of this war would be a problem for

many months to come. After winning the battle for Mosul, it is

important to win the peace, and now begins that painstaking task of

rebuilding and reconciling, so that communities can live peacefully

alongside one another once more, and citizens can start to rebuild their

lives. As a global humanitarian leader, the United Kingdom has been

at the forefront of the efforts to support the humanitarian response,

and will continue to stand alongside the people of Iraq in the months

ahead. From the start of the Mosul operations, the UK has provided

shelter, military and -- medical care and food to those who have lost

their homes through the fighting or who have been forced to flee. The

UK's the largest donor to the Iraq humanitarian fund, and we are

providing practical, life-saving support including water in camps for

over 166,000 displaced people, cash assistance to over 50,000 vulnerable

people, and life-saving health care including a trauma hospital to treat

the victims of the fight against Daesh. Today, Mr Speaker, I can

confirm that the UK will provide ?40 million of humanitarian funding this

year, taking our total commitment just in Iraq to ?209 million since

2014. This funding will help to ensure that the displaced

communities, the displaced people, will receive the much needed

shelter, food and medical support, and will provide protection for the

most vulnerable. ?80 million of this funding has already been allocated

to partners who are working hard to deliver assistance around Mosul. The

United Nations has also said funding requirements for Iraq in 2017, at

$984 million. The UK is stepping up, and I continue to call upon my

colleagues in the international development community, the donors,

to follow Britain's lead. They are stashed community must continue to

support the people of Mosul and Iraq. As people return home, they

will need support to rebuild their lives. Humanitarian partners are

helping to re-establish basic services including carrying out food

distribution in areas where markets are not yet functioning, and provide

cash assistance so that vulnerable people can buy what they most need.

And in East Mosul, DFID's humanitarian funding, and Unicef,

has already helped to reopen health facilities and provide clean water

in the liberated areas, which is essential for people to be able to

return home. DFID will also provide ?6 million this year for the

stabilisation efforts, helping to restore basic services and

infrastructure in the liberated areas including in Mosul, and

through UN DUP, funding has already helped to rehabilitate the water

plant in eastern Mosul, and over 750 schools have already reopened, and

about 300,000 children to sit exams. Our funding will also support local

reconciliation, helping displaced people to reintegrate back into

their communities when they return home. Across Iraq, over 1 million

people have returned to their homes, in areas where UK funded

stabilisation projects are working. But ultimately, Mr Speaker, to win

peace in Iraq, the Government will need to unite all Iraqis against

extremism. And address the grievances that led to Daesh's rise,

and persuade all Iraqi communities that they have a fair stake in their

nation's future. The UK will continue to be steadfast in their

support to the Government of Iraq's efforts to drive forward reform,

reconciliation and stabilisation. In conclusion, this week's victory

against Daesh in Mosul marks an important moment in the campaign to

defeat this terror group, and the poisonous ideology, and we will join

our Iraqi friends in celebrating the liberalisation of this historic

city. The UK will continue to provide humanitarian and

stabilisation assistance, and also to support the Government of Iraq's

efforts to build is -- stable, secure and more prosperous Iraq. I

welcome the Secretary of State's statement, and are particularly

welcomed the news of Mosul's liberation after three years. It is

important to defeat Daesh's violent ideology. I would like to pay

tribute to the Iraqi security forces and to the people of Mosul, who has

shown remarkable courage in the face of Daesh's continued oppression. I

would like to also pay particular tribute to the role of the UK

Government in its important work to provide critical aid and emergency

support. The UK's continued role here in the coming days and weeks,

and the secured -- significant funding commitments announced by the

Secretary of State, will save lives and help rebuild Mosul. And I

welcome them. This commitment also represents the important role UK aid

plays not only in standing alongside the people of Iraq, but also in

contributing to long-term peace and stability. I would like now to ask

the Secretary of State a series of questions about her announcement.

First, it is clear that although there is cause for real celebration

in the liberalisation of Mosul, Amnesty International have

identified countless human rights violations on all sides. Both by

Daesh and possibly by the Iraqi forces. These include the use of

civilians as human shields by Daesh fighters, and violation against

children's rights. Amnesty have called for a thorough investigation

of all human rights violations, and possible war crimes carried out

through the liberalisation of Mosul. While the UN human rights chief has

called for a strong culture of accountability now that the city has

been liberated, that the Secretary of State support these calls, and

can she tell us how we can help? Secondly, Mr Speaker, while I

welcome the UK Government's aid response, the false displacement of

numerous refugees in and around Mosul as a result of the past two

years of Daesh occupation requires widespread action, not only on the

building but also on the resettlement of all those displaced.

When can the Government update us on how we can help those who have been

displaced? I would like to end by saying I thank the Secretary of

State again, and I welcome the statement to the House. I thank the

honourable lady for her generous comments and her support with

regards to what has now been achieved in Mosul in particular, and

I agreed that we should all of this moment pay tribute to all the forces

involved in this but also the people who have suffered content --

considerably at the hands of Daesh. The honourable lady's right to point

to the report today, to Amnesty's report, alleging that Iraqi forces

and the human rights violations and concerns. And of course I think it

is important to stress that the security forces and the Coalition

have made every effort during efforts aspect operations to protect

civilians. There is no doubt that now that we are hearing from -- of

alleged violations, quite rightly the state to be thoroughly

investigated, and those found responsible must be held to account.

We also welcome the previous statement and encourage reporting on

the outcome is to follow. The honourable lady raised the issue of

displacement of people. Hundreds of thousands of people have been

affected by what has happened in Mosul and Iraq more broadly. The

focus now has to be on the resettlement, and the reunification

of the country as a whole. The honourable lady will have heard me

speak briefly of the efforts on stabilisation, and that has to be

the focus right now. And UK aid, my department in particular, are

working with my honourable friend, the Secretary of State for defence,

and others across Government and the international community, yes, to

provide support on UN stabilisation efforts in Iraq, securing liberated

areas, securing areas of explosives and making them habitable over

again, but importantly providing the basics, putting in water, power,

clinics and schools, and ensuring that since we know that since 2015

1.8 million people have been displaced in Iraq, and have returned

to their homes were possible, that we focus on the resettlement and the

stabilisation and how we can bring back the prosperity and

stabilisation back to Mosul and the outlying areas in Iraq as well.

Mosul was home to one of the oldest Christian communities in the region,

but religious minorities suffered dreadfully at the heart -- at the

hands of IS. What can DFID do to ensure that such my sorrow that

minorities are able to return to the place of their origins? -- to ensure

that minorities are able to return. I thank the honourable lady for

raising this issue. We now what has happened in the past, particularly

for Christian communities and others, has been a pollen, and we

are now focused on, yes, stabilisation, but ensuring that

Iraq as a whole can be rebuilt on the unified. -- has been abhorrent.

So that all communities can feel they can contribute to a new Iraq,

posted the conflict. We very much welcome the military defeat of DFID

-- Daesh. But in order for the victory to be complete, it is

imperative to address the humanitarian needs of the people in

the city and the surrounding region. Amnesty International have described

the horrors that the people in Mosul have witnessed, and the disregard

for human life by all parties in this conflict. Entire families have

been wiped out. The people of Mosul defends -- deserve to know there

will be justice in reparation, so the harrowing impact of this

operation is fully addressed. UK Government must finally learn the

lessons from Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. It cannot be allowed to

happen in Mosul as it has done in many places before, but the cost and

impact of UK military action towards the relief and reconstruction

efforts to follow. How is the Government working with civil

society on the ground to alleviate the suffering in refugee camps,

which lacks sufficient food, water and electricity to survive the

scorching desert heat 's? And brother Government support

specifically the creation of an independent Commission, as

recommended by Amnesty International, to investigate the

killings by civilians -- the killings of civilians by all sides

in this conflict, as well as air strikes carried out by the UK? I

would like to say again the comments I made to the honourable lady

earlier with regards to the Amnesty International report. Yet read the

comments I made up of the violations that may have taken place, and the

need to have investigations. It is right and proper that all attention

is given to them, and that the -- and that people are brought to

justice. But I think we must also recognise there have been horrific

attacks across the whole of Iraq, because of pointless ideology of --

the poisonous ideology of Daesh. The conduct of Daesh on the atrocities

that have taken place but slightly unforgivable and they will sky

generations to come. -- are totally unforgivable. When many people have

worked to liberate Mosul, in particular Coalition forces and the

Iraqi security forces, our priority is absolutely through UK aid to

ensure that we continue in the humanitarian support that we provide

to those who have been displaced, to support the stabilisation efforts,

and of course that is the focus of much of the British Government, but

all our partners internationally, including the UN, and we will

continue to stand up for those who have been displaced, and importantly

no work to bring peace and stability to Iraq. -- and importantly no work.

I welcome the tone and the extra spot these people in Mosul. With the

experience of others to be followed in Mosul, detectives of Daesh would

be that every public place will be be be trapped with minds and it will

take many years to clear that. Well she committed the Government to do

all she can to help with the technical matter of removing

explosives. It is not the scorching heat that we worry about today, it

is the co-author of the Mosul winter we worry about coming in 34 months'

time, in which Tammy need to find decent accommodation. My honourable

friend is right and I referred in my statement to the fact that we will

spend a great deal of time and resources in rebuilding Mosul but

also Iraq as a hole through the stabilisation approach that we will

put forward. But there is no doubt in terms of the fact that we will

have to invest to reclaim land, the mine huge phrase of the country and

then we announced a substantial commitment to our de-mining assets

in countries that have been unstable through conflict. It is also

registered a that as we move into the latter part of the year that the

weather conditions will change, they will become harsher and we were all

within the international committee have to step up our efforts and

focus our resources on those that will be in need during the harsh

winter that will follow. We will need to rebuild put houses in and

build infrastructure sooner rather than later. I welcome the Secretary

of State's statement and the additional humanitarian assistance

that she has announced and what she has said about the mining. Many

people in Mosul when they return will be deeply traumatised what will

the Government be doing to ensure the mental health care is supported

when they do return? I thank the honourable gentleman for his

question. He is right you think about the trauma of the

psychological trauma, physical trauma as well of course in

recovering and rebuilding after what has happened across Iraq and in

Mosul in particular. I spoke about the fact we will need to

rehabilitate the country at every single level and the destruction

side, schools, but also health centres as well and working with our

colleagues and counterparts internationally within the health

community as well, to ensure the medical assistance and support and

expertise of those that can provide the help to those people that will

need the kind of support we have just touched on is absolutely vital.

The people in the area that wish to return to Mosul have been

traumatised as we heard from many of the many people speaking to day. The

ones who stayed in the area want to go home, but there are very few

homes to go home too. Could my honourable friend explain what we

are doing in this country to help the infrastructure and put a roof

over people's heads, but is she also encouraging other countries to

support the people of the area at the same time? I thank my honourable

friend for her question and she is right to point to the immediate need

that is required for the people, the dispose people, over 1.8 million

people who have returned to their homes and we are working with the

Iraqi Government on stabilisation and also in areas where the U and

stability programme is working. We are working in conjunction with them

to provide the necessary and important infrastructure, power

networks, schools, but also homes because of the level of destruction

that has taken place, which is incomprehensible to us here. The

vast swathes of land and homes that were deliberately destroyed by Daesh

it is our response by to work with our partners to rebuild and rehouse

the many millions who have been displaced. I very much welcome the

Secretary of State's statement. Tens of thousands of children have been

without education in Mosul for many years so it is good you news that

750 schools have reopened, but what work is being done to help schools

be able to tackle the very particular sensitive challenge of

helping older children, teenagers and young adults to plug the gap,

the significant gap in their education and prevent a lost

generation? My honourable friend is right to speak about the lost

generation and this is an issue the whole region in terms of Syria,

Iraq, the level of displacement we have seen of children has been

horrific, and the number of children that have lost their education, been

out of school for several years because of the level of conflict

that has taken place, she will know that the United Kingdom is an

enormous supporter, big funder of the education cannot wait programme

which suckers on this on areas of conflict and on host communities as

well. Jordan and Lebanon in one example in the Syrian region where

we are providing resources to bring a double shift system of education.

Mentioning all the children, it is important but through the funding

and the partners that we work with that they are providing education

and they are. But it is more than education but also technical and

vocational training opportunities through the funding that we are

giving to those governments in particular. A competition amongst

others in colleagues in cream suits! Obviously a man of taste! Can the

Government has previously acknowledged that the cutting of the

food coupon in the Syrian refugee camps light to the mass exodus

thereafter. Acknowledging the proud track record in human tearing aid,

will the honourable friend make it clear to the house that the

international community must step up to the plate when it comes to the

funding of any temporary arrangements with regards to the

displaced people and we've learned those lessons? My honourable friend

is right to raise this issue and one of the things in terms of lessons

learned and being learned is about the increment a share in the lot of

the programming of those in crisis and its humanitarian situations when

it comes to food provision, water and other essentials as well. We

have through the wake taking place many lessons have been learned and

organisations, partner organisations on the ground delivering services

and provisions are working collectively together in a way in

which she refers to in 2013 they were not working together to bring

the vital aid and food distribution that needed it. Can I congratulate

the Secretary of State for what I thought was a very measured and

comprehensive statement on the situation. I have a friend in

Baghdad who was an MP in Mosul. She was also the Culture Secretary. And

so, for her, the devastation of a historically very important city

will have been pretty awful. I'm glad to say that the Secretary of

State is focusing on the humanitarian needs right away

because as honourable members have said, the dramatisation,

particularly of children in the area needs to be looked at right away.

Can I just mention, you talked about the importance of peace. We all want

to see peace in the region, I congratulate the Prime Minister of

Iraq for hopefully getting rid of Daesh from a Mosul. But then, in

Kurdistan, which is in the bottom part of the country -- an important

part, would you agree to is important that the Parliament of

Kurdistan, which has not met for a radio, should meet as soon as

possible? I thank the honourable lady for her remarks and her

thoughtful observations as well in terms of how we need to work

together to bring peace and stability to Iraq, but also to the

region. This is not one thing that one country can do on it so and this

is where the international community can provide guidance, support and

assistance and in particular help with getting the democracy

functioning again, which would be the ultimate symbol of beating Daesh

and the poisonous ideology that they have been propagating across the

region. She is right to highlight the fact that stabilisation, peace

and democracy in the functioning democracy should return again. This

is of course a long-term objective, one that we know will be difficult

because of the level of conflict and instability, but also the level of

destruction and displacement that we had seen. Our focus is the immediate

focus and that is putting people first, children first and rebuilding

the country in the best way that we can through the international

coalition. I do not want the honourable gentleman to feel left

out! Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I have proudly stood on the

manifesto in all of my elections of supporting the international aid and

many criticise that, but would honourable lady agree with me that

it is not just morally right that we can invest in the country of Iraq

because the situation with Daesh in Mosul, that was through the

residents being worried about divisions in the Baghdad Government

and it is investment through this country that we make sure that we

can prevent this happens again. I thank my honourable friend for his

question. Again, for we stating the importance of UK aid and our

commitment to the world's poorest. I think through the work we have been

undertaking through humanitarian support, urgent support which has

been there for a number of years now, but looking ahead to the

stabilisation that we will work to achieve, collectively within the

international development community, we can see UK agent just make a

difference of the people but also bring peace and stability in a way

we would all expect our aid budget but our influence globally through

our aid Brigid to bring to a country such as Iraq. Following the comments

of the Scottish Nationalists spokesman, is not the difference

between the British and coalition forces and Daesh is we go out of our

way to minimise civilian casualties and temperament is exactly the

moment. One of our colleagues is being threatened for her favourite

in her action against Daesh to we not need to send out from a message

in this house that he was out right to take the decisions we did, to

take military actions against Daesh one of those in Iraq and in Syria?

The honourable gentleman is absolutely right that we not only

did the right thing but we will continue to do the right thing,

standing up to these poisonous ideologies and the conduct of these

awful groups around the world. But also the fighters, the people who

fought Daesh as well, and he is right in his comments. Sexual

violence is one of the consistent horrors of war both conventional and

unconventional, it is a deliberate act, a recognisable but repugnant

tactic to shatter the cohesion of people as well as being grotesque

examples of individual human rights abuses. Will the Secretary of State

assures macro that she will look at how DFID will mitigate this vile

form of violence and support the fragile and damaged communities?

Moreover, will she say what how we can deter the oppressors to using

this form of violence in future violence? He mentions the abhorrent

sexual violence against women, girls and particularly the use Ely

community as well. We have called up for those and given any voice to

those being subject to attacks because of Daesh I think in areas of

conflict in particular, it is women and girls who suffer through such

atrocious acts of violence and atrocities and we will continue to

stand up for them through working with our partners, the United

Nations, but also other partners and I think importantly, to answer this

question on what else we will do, we will follow through the prosecutions

of those that are responsible for this, we will hold them to account.

I visited the outskirts of Mosul last October during the conflict and

met counterterrorism personnel. I also visited six camps of refugees

and IDP 's Saudi huge humanitarian operation which I was very impressed

by. I also noted on the radio this morning the deputy commander of

coalition forces said that everything had been done to protect

citizens, but he went on to describe amnesty's report as naive and

reckless. This is in the week that the Saudi Arabia arms sale report

was... Can I say, we are interested in the context of the Amnesty

report, but there is in no need for a verbatim with vegetation of the

contents. Progress has been laminated least slow, but much more

widely, not just that of the gentleman. I'm sure the honourable

gentleman is reaching his end. We need a new democratic settlement in

the province. What is her department doing, and what is our ambassador

doing to make sure we include minorities in that settlement?

The Coalition forces have made an effort -- every effort to protect

civilians, but we're working on stabilisation with all partners to

support and rebuild Mosul. I pay tribute to the Iraqi security forces

and indeed the British Armed Forces for their work. Could the Secretary

of State say what is the situation with another humanitarian threat to

the people of Mosul, which is the Mosul Dam which is an incredibly

dangerous condition and threatens the city of Mosul, being upstream

from it? It is a situation where we are working to put all of it in in

terms of the support that is required in that particular area. We

will continue to do that, and it is an ongoing situation so we are

obviously being very active in the support we can give. Last November I

raised a point of the thousands of women and children who were being

held in slavery by Daesh in Mosul. I asked the Government if they would

seek to provide specialist psychological care once the

liberalisation of Mosul had been complete. Could the Minister tell

me, never Daesh have been driven from the city, what plans the

Government have in place to deal with the specific psychological and

physical needs and the winds of one of the most wickedly abused

communities on this planet? -- the wounds. I refer to the comment I

made earlier on about the support we are providing. Health in terms of

medical but also mental and psychological support, it is

essential after the abhorrent nature of this conflict. Whilst welcoming

the resources the Government are making available for the relief of

the suffering from the conflict, can she ensure that the international

community at no stage is going to lose focus on the politics of the

settlement among Mosul, make sure we are not going to have the continued

institutionalised marginalisation of the complex number of communities

around Mosul, and they all have a stake in the future. My friend is

right to speak about the political stabilisation, and inclusivity as

well in terms of the rebuilding that needs to happen. And we will

continue to work with the Prime Minister and the Government as well

in Iraq to ensure this happens. The tributes the Secretary of State have

made my right, and the ambition is commendable. But the question is how

is this going to be achieved? People talk facile me about learning the

lessons from Iraq, but is it not an example of the correct -- collective

failure to reach construct but culture that -- reconstruct that

culture that many Sunni families sought to seek Daesh as they were

dumped rather than the marauding killers they were? What role with

the UK Government play? We will play our part in every single way that is

necessary, because there are no easy solutions to rebuilding a country,

and also making a country of relational and functional again

after such an abhorrent and appalling conflict. So we will

continue to support the Iraqi Government, obviously in the

response that is required but also in that inclusivity, getting the

politics and security right and getting the stabilisation right.

Does my right honourable friend agree that reconstruction depends

crucially on removing the mines and booby traps? And is she satisfied

that there are adequate capacity there and enough money allocated to

deal with this task speedily, and is there any timetable? Well, again,

this is a vital area in terms of clearing the mines and the IUDs, and

the support we will provide, so first of all the British Government

has provided specific support, and we will be working through the

various funds in Government but also supporting the mine action service

as well on this, but this is not an easy task at all because of what has

happened. The level of destruction in Iraq has been atrocious, so yes,

I work is cut out but we will give all the necessary support to ensure

that mines are cleared and land is returned back to the use in needs to

receive. The liberalisation of Mosul is undoubtedly a very significant

step in the defeat of this evil terror. But does the Secretary of

State agree that it is just as important now that we make sure that

the rebuilding of communities and the deradicalisation of this

communities is just as important in that defeat? It is absolutely right,

deradicalisation has to be a future of the stabilisation approach, and

the rebuilding, but also bringing back together those communities that

have become so divided and fractions. Once again, Britain will

lead the way on this and provide all the necessary support to the Iraqi

Government in doing our bit to bring that stability and peace to the

country. The atrocities of Daesh have failed to deliver a so-called

caliphate. My right honourable friend rightly recognises the role

of the Iraqi forces, but can she also recognise the role of the

female fighters and share what work has been done to ensure their work

despite their voices heard during the construction? First of all, the

point of reconstruction has been a hard fought battle. All -- the

stabilisation will have to take place, but the focus has to be on

bringing together the minority groups of all communities that have

been divided through this atrocious conflict. May I join the right

honourable lady in paying tribute to our brave servicemen and women and

also welcomed the announcement in her statement and UK humanitarian

aid, but can I price on what specific funding will be offered to

women and girls who have been subject to the most unimaginable

sexual violence and heart -- hands of Daesh? We will be providing

humanitarian support required, but also, four to 6000 vulnerable and

displaced people, many women and girls, -- 40 6000. They will also

receive support from the money we are announcing today. -- 40 6000.

You accrue the liberalisation of Mosul is a vindication for both

sides of this House, to give our allies the support they needed, but

which in their agree that one of the most vital things is getting them

back to work, and most -- what specific work for her department be

doing to bring Mosul's economy back to life?

Are great opportunity now is in rebuilding the country, putting

infrastructure in place, but also working collectively with many of

our party -- partners but also the companies that will do -- go in

there. That is a major feature of the stabilisation and rebuilding

work that DFID is leading on, with our colleagues across Government but

also working it's nationally with our counterparts. Point of order.

ICQ guide is to find out whether you have had any notice from the

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on an appendix statement on

the HMRC building programme. His department had to play MIDI over its

decision to move over 1000 jobs from my constituents is to Edinburgh,

despite the fact there was a report damning the future building

programme just before the election, and as things stand, questions are

being made about inappropriate use of funds during powder, until we

have those answers, the public and my constituents can not have

confidence in this Parliament and its processes. I thank the

honourable lady for her point of order. In short I have received no

indication from the Secretary of State for work and pensions of an

intention to come to this -- the House to make an oral statement, I

think something has been announced either in the form of a written

statement or some media communication, but something out

with what I would call oral discourse. That said, the honourable

lady in her relatively short time in the House has become an adroit

deployer of the various mechanisms available to her to pursue the

interests of her constituents. There are some days to go before the House

rises for the summer recess, and if she judges there is an urgency

attached to this matter, I'm sure she will have records to the

appropriate mechanism and I will look out for it. What's more, I

rather imagine the honourable lady will be in her seat, they picked up

and down from it, and business questions tomorrow. -- and leaping

up and down. Speaker-macro, many people including myself will be

disappointed to read in today's paper that the Prime Minister has

postponed the publication of a report that she ordered, to audit

and examine how people of different backgrounds are treated by public

services as part of her mission to tackle burning injustices. The

reason for this delay is record -- reportedly because it is explosive

and pretty bad. Given the genuine and growing concern of this issue,

is it in order for the Prime Minister to postpone publication

because she does not like the findings, and it would look bad for

her Government? And is there a way Parliament can have sight of this

report that the Prime Minister is trying to hide? The short answer to

the honourable lady is that nothing disorderly has taken place. The

timing of Government statements and indeed the release of Government

reports are matters for Government ministers rather than for the chair.

If however there is a completed report, and the honourable lady and

others are keen to know its contents and are not care -- labour is -- I'm

not clear that is no compelling reason it should not be published

sooner rather than later, it is open to the honourable lady before summer

recess to cajole or entice an appropriate Minister to come to the

House. I cannot commit that that will happen, but I have this keen

sense that the honourable lady will be returning to the issue, and

probably seeking some sort of adjudication from me in the days

ahead. Point of order, Debbie Abrahams. Parred during Prime

Minister's Questions, the first secretary claimed that people with

mental health conditions are more likely to be supported by personal

independence payment than by disability living allowance. The

mental health charity mind has made it clear that 55% of people with

mental health conditions transferring from DLA have no award

or a reduced award. I would be grateful if you could advise me on

how we can have the record corrected.

I think it is fair to say that the honourable lady has found her own

salvation. In that she has put her fought on the record in

characteristically robust but also, thankfully, pithy form. -- her

thought. And it will now form part of the official report. And I am

well aware, and I would be failing in my duty if I were not well aware,

but the honourable lady has very strong views on this matter. And

that those mad -- views differ markedly from those of the first

Secretary of State. I think it is fair to say this is probably a

matter for debate, but we should leave it there, albeit only for

today. If there are no further points of order, we come now to the

general debate on the ground full tower fire inquiry. -- Grenfell

Tower fire inquiry. I am looking to the first Secretary of State. I

begin by expressing my deepest sympathy to all those who lost

family members and other loved ones in this terrible tragedy, their

suffering's beyond imagining. Our thoughts also go out to those who

lost their homes and possessions. Since that terrible event on the

14th of June, one month ago, we have all been deeply affected by this

unprecedented tragedy, and words feel inadequate. I would like to pay

tribute to the men and women of our emergency services, many of whom

risked life and limb in their efforts to tackle the fire, and

showed extraordinary courage in their determination to save lives,

and also equally importantly to the many volunteers and charities who

have given their time and much, much more to help the bereaved and those

who have lost their homes. They return to the purpose of the debate.

The chair of the Grenfell Tower inquiry is currently consulting over

the scope of the inquiry's terms of reference. To this debate -- this

debate provides an opportunity for Parliament to provide its views

about an inquiry before these terms are set. It is most important the

chair listens to the views of those most affected by the tragedy, and

takes account of those views when considering the scope of his

enquiries' terms of reference. But I am sure some autumn will want to

reflect on the views expressed in this House today, and of course we

should all be conscious that the survivors of the terrible tragedy

will also be listening to what is said in this House today. And

grateful to my honourable friend forgiving way so early on, but does

he agree that it is important to have an interim report, because if

there are recommendations which affect crucial health issues with

high-rise blocks, then that needs to be attended to as soon as possible.

My honourable friend is correct and he may be aware that there is an

intention to produce an interim report as soon as possible because I

am conscious that one of the great wishes of many of the survivors and

the groups representing them is of a quicker resolution as possible and

in answer to as many as the questions as possible. I thank the

first trip to forgiving way. On the scope of the report, I'm sure there

will be many reports through the debate and I do not want to widen it

too far, but can he assures macro that the scope will look at private

blocks and not just be confined to social housing, because in my

experience as a city centre MP, it is often more difficult for

residents to have their voice heard when you have opaque ownership and

managing agents who are not responsive to residents in private

blocks rather than the social box? The honourable lady makes a good

point. I cannot guarantee what the terms of reference would be because

that is a matter for Sir Martin, but one of the purposes of this debate

is for views like that precisely to be expressed on the issue of private

blocks, I am happy to assure her and the house that the testing regime

for the safety of blocks does extend to private blocks as well. Would you

say what has happened to the independent task force by his

colleague, if it has not yet been convened, if we do not know the

members are what they are doing, would he reconsider sending in

Commissioners, particularly given what we heard this morning that the

person that task of force are reporting to, who despite being a

councillor for 11 years has not been inside a tower block despite being a

canned net years for five years has not been seen fit to go to any of

the tower blocks in her borough? I can reassure the honourable

gentleman that the task force will be reporting to my honourable friend

the Secretary of State and not to Kensington Council, so I hope that

provides him with reassurances. It is an independent body reporting to

the Secretary of State. Could the Secretary of State clarify for us

that the costs struck back task force has any authority whatsoever

or is it advisory? It is an advisory not an executive panel reporting to

the Secretary of State which I think is the proper way to proceed. In his

statement announcing the Inquirer, the Prime Minister that's can I make

some progress's? We're saying the task force has no authority and the

authority remains with the council, so that is a distinction between the

task force powers and the powers that would be available to a

Commissioner if a commission was appointed? The task force will be

overseeing what the council does, but as I have said to his honourable

friends, it will be reporting to the secretary of state who can then

decide the appropriate way to recede, so it is independent of the

council, it is not reporting to the council and it will oversee what the

council is doing. The Prime Minister identified the immediate priority

when she announced the inquiry. Establishing the facts of what

happened at Grenfell Tower in order to take the necessary action to

prevent a similar tragedy from happening again. In Carrie will fill

that and report in two phases with an interim report being published as

soon as possible. Beyond that, it is important that all the wider lessons

from this catastrophe and the inspections of other buildings

around the country that followed it are identified and learnt. The

Samaritan has said, and I quote, I shall make it clear that I want to

consider a broad range of evidence including on the role of relevant

public authorities and contractors to help me answer the important

questions. I give way to the honourable lady. I'm grateful to the

Housing minister on answering my written question. I find it

extraordinary there is no central management or any records kept of

housing contracts within the housing department. There is no situation

where there is no accountability and trams currency. And the degree to

which housing contracts are then contacted to other private

providers. In view of this, with the Government advise whether there are

plans to revisit this? There are a large range of issues on which the

inquiry may well wish to make augmentation to the Government and

the Honourable lady has put that thought on the records now and as I

have said previously as Sir Martin will wish to take note of the views

expressed during this debate. I am grateful to my honourable friend. On

the wider point, he will appreciate that many of the survivors suffered

from carbon monoxide poisoning. This is known as the silent killer and

will he ensure that among the other lessons learned the planned and

proposed review of carbon monoxide alarms does actually go ahead in

October of this year? My honourable friend makes an extremely good point

of the wider point about the range of lessons that need to be learned

from this terrible tragedy and has he will know, there is an expert

panel that will be helping the inquiry that will have a range of

Cesc skills and expertise in areas and he has given rise to an

important issue which is not just Government but the inquiry itself

will want to look at. As the inquiry... I am brittle to the

Minister for giving way. He is right that no stone should be left

unturned in in covering the truth behind the horror that was the

Grenfell Tower fire, but when we talk about wider lessons and action

in the meantime, can I ask this question? Birmingham has 231 tower

blocks, the City Council has rightly decided that it will retrofit

sprinklers in all of those blocks. That will cost ?31 million and the

council has suffered ?700 million of cuts to their budget. Will the

Government unequivocally commit to funding all necessary safety

measures pending the outcome of the inquiry? The safety measures that

are recommended by the Fire Service, the honourable friend of Secretary

of State of communities has said will be met by the Government, so

those are the necessary measures that the Fire Service recommends all

stop the inquiry is designed to ascertain the causes of the

tragedy... For clarity, I believe that the Minister has dismayed a

very important statement. Is he saying that the necessary safety

measures to protect what are 10,000 households in 231 blocks will be

funded by the Government? For clarity, let me look at, let me go

through this, that if the Fire Service recommends that something

needs to be done for safety reasons, and if the local authorities will be

the first Pope 's call to pay for that I'm sure they will want to

follow the Fire Service's recommendation in this, if the local

authority can show it cannot afford it, then central Government will

step in. That is a matter for local authorities and the Fire Service in

the first instance which is clearly be sensible way to proceed. The

inquiry will clearly need to examine all other than circumstances. I

think there have been very generous in giving way. I really need to make

some progress. The inquiry will need to examine all relevant

circumstances leading up to is an surrounding the fire at Grenfell

Tower. It spread to the whole of the building and its effect on

residents. That means looking at circumstances well beyond the design

and construction and modification of the building itself will stop it

will mean looking at the relevant public authorities and contractors

and the broader implications of the fire for the adequacy and

enforcement of regulations. It means looking at the handling of concerns

previously expressed by local residents. Sir Martin is highly

respected. Can I make some progress? And countries there are many who

want to contribute and I have been extremely generous in giving way. I

think the House will benefit from progress. Sir Martin is highly

respected and as a recently retired Court of Appeal judge he brings many

years of judicial experience. Sir Martin and the Government agree that

for this inquiry, consulting on the terms of reference is an important

way of involving those affected by the tragedy. It is clearly right

that those affected by this terrible tragedy and others with an interest

I given the opportunity to shape the terms of reference which will in

turn give direction and focus to the inquiry. Sir Martin has started a

consultation process and is keen to give as many people as possible the

chance to contribute to the consultation. You will consider all

suggestions given to him when drawing up the terms of reference.

He will then make a recommendation to the PM who is responsible for

setting out the terms of reference. I will give way again, but I wish to

finish this section if I may one. Sir Martin said, and I will quote

him at lines because I think this is at the heart of many of the issues

that have arisen. He said I am determined to establish the causes

of the tragedy and ensure the appropriate lessons are learned. To

do this, the inquiry will need to look at all relevant

circumstances... To understand the causes and prevent the tragedy

happening again. To produce a report as quickly as possible with clear

recommendations for action, I will listen to people and consider a

broad range of evidence including on the role as contractors in order to

help me answer this. I want to hear from people directly affected by the

fire and others involved to listen to their views on the shape of the

inquiry and the questions we should be seeking to answer. This is

clearly the right approach to take. Sir Martin has set a deadline of

Friday the 28th of July extended by two weeks from the inquiry's

original deadline following discussions between Sir Martin and

survivors of the fire and other residents of the estate which made

clear that those affected need more time to respond to the consultation.

This extension will allow the inquiry to begin its work in August.

I'm sure we all agree the sooner the inquiry can begin, the sooner we

will have the important conclusions of its report. It's important to

point out that the others will be able to feed into the enquiries are

being choir read by writing to the inquiry are e-mailing the contact

address provided on the inquiry website. The terms of reference can

be revised 20 cars of the inquiry which is likely that it reflects on

what it has learned adding interim report stage before it starts phase

two of its work. I thank my honourable friend for giving way and

I am heartened to hear about the inclusive CV of this inquiry. The

book safety must be at the forefront, so would my honourable

friend 's comment on whether he might look at historically and

confirm whether the inquiry will look into the effectiveness of the

fire regulations and the enforcement regime that was enforced in 2005 and

six respectively. My honourable friend raises a valid and important

point. I can assure that the expert panel which covers a range of

expertise is already looking at art and that will feed into the inquiry.

The honourable gentleman wishes me to give way. Following on from the

question from his honourable friend, the building regulations should be

chief review because this country it is usually ten years, it now 11. It

was recommended in 2013 the regulation should be reviewed, the

Government has been saying since 2011 and after that they would be

done by this year. We do not have too wait for a Republican choir two

save the building regulations should be reviewed. When can we expect the

working party to be re-called to show the work is underway now? I

appreciated the honourable gentleman has huge experience and expertise in

this particular area and I can assure him that one of the things

the expert panel is to ring is seeing if there is still advise

needed to be given urgently to the Secretary of State which needs to be

acted on, so that is The Secretary of State is right

there should be this consultation to try to help rebuild trust of the

local community in the inquiry, but should there not be an advisory

panel that has genuine community members, that are diverse and are

from the community, to advise the panel?

The right honourable gentleman may know that there is already, if you

like, something similar to what he is suggested, a group called

Grenfell United, which indeed my right honourable friend the

Secretary of State and the Minister met last night for a long and

extensive meeting, so I can assure him that the views of those most

affected are obviously being fed into Sir Martin directly, but they

are also having direct communication with the Secretary of State as well.

In terms of the potential appointment of panel members, the

priority at this stage is for consultation on the terms of

reference, which once agreed will allow the inquiry to start work. The

chair will also want to consider what expert assistance might be

required, including the process of consultation. But I want to ensure

the House that Government work is already in hand to address issues

highlighted by this terrible tragedy. DC LG on the Cabinet Office

are working together across the piece, and the wider building safety

probe -- programme which are no honourable members on all sides have

been concerned about. They have ripped all councils and housing

associations, calling for checks to social -- social housing. Have

written to. -- they have written to. A request a Government department --

departments and on's men's bodies, to submit samples for testing from

priority building... I thank him for giving way. I would like to ask the

first secretary if he is aware of a lot of the advice has been quite

contradictory. We appeared initially to be informed that certain types of

cladding had to be removed, that then seemed to be changed to a

position where certain types could be safe in fire systems, we also had

a lack of clarity about whether that testing regime was compulsory, and

now we are informed that actually the department was responding to

landlords' concerns. If the Secretary of State aware that this

kind of flip-flopping is to -- causing a lot of confusion and

concern especially to tenants. The expert panel are continuing to

provide the advice. The advice has been consistently followed by the

department, because clearly they have the expertise to do so. So they

may well discover more, and decide that the first is to change, but it

is all done on the basis of experts in fire safety who are independent

of Government... I'm grateful to the first secretary for giving way. As

somebody who grew up in a two bed council block of flats, the

traditional advice was always stay put and await rescue. I wonder how

many souls perished following the traditional advice that tenants

took, and is that advice changing? That is clearly an issue that may

well be addressed by Sir Martin and the public inquiry, that is clearly

the appropriate form for that sort of investigation to be made. Labour

I am grateful to the first secretary. Even as we speak, before

this inquiry has begun, there continue to be new tower blocks

being constricted and developed in my constituency and around the

country. Can the Secretary of State say what you advice has been given

to planning authorities and those who monitor construction standards,

and to the building industry? The expert panel has published new

advice which was published last week, with a memorandum of

understanding about what should be done about new blocks, so that issue

has very directly been addressed over the past month. Returning to

the issues... One more. I thank him for giving way. In relation to the

points that have just been raised, I have constituents, people with

disabilities who live on high flaws in tower blocks who have raised

grave concerns about what they should do in the event of emergency.

-- high floors. Particularly with regard to whether they should be

taking lifts. Would advice of the state should be part of the extended

enquiries? The smack of this nature. That are already rules in place --

obviously there are rules that are in place.

The fire safety advisers are looking at what happened and what should

happen in future, but it will be the local fire safety authorities that

give that advice. And I'm sure all of them will have been looking very

carefully at the advice they have been giving, particularly to people

wheelchairs who clearly will be very understandably concerned at whether

they are getting the right safety advice, so I would advise her to

talk to her local fire safety officials. If I can return to the

actions that have been taken over the past month, the Cabinet Office

has established a cross Government working group, with a technical

subgroup, to ensure that all technical advice is understood and

is being properly applied. Government is ensuring full

engagement and alignment with activity in the devolved

administrations, and -- as I am conscious they will be particularly

concerned about this as well. DCLG has formed an expert advisory panel

made up of fire safety and building experts, to advise Government on any

immediate action required to ensure buildings are safe, and the Cabinet

Office is working with DCLG's expert panel and others to establish a

remediation plan and next steps towards the review of building

regulations that several members have asked for. All of this is

underway outside the inquiry's timetable, so its completion will

not be dependent on completion of the inquiry's report. I note some of

those affected by this terrible event are concerned that an inquest

would be more appropriate than an inquiry, and that the inquiry might

delay ratification of those who died. I can reassure them there will

be an inquest -- identification. The coroner is already investigating the

deaths. Once the identification of each of the deceased has been

completed, I understand the coroner will open inquest into each

individual death and then adjourn proceedings pending the outcome of

other investigations including the inquiry. The coroner will consider

the inquiry's recommendations to determine whether to resume inquest.

Therefore this process will not delay the formal identification of

victims. I should also reassure those who want a criminal

investigation into this terrible tragedy that this is in hand. The

Metropolitan Police announced the investigation on the 16th of June,

it is one of the largest and most complexes investigations ever

undertaken by the Metropolitan Police, with around 250 specialist

investigators currently engaged. I hope are honourable members will be

reassured by the clear statements about the investigation by the

Metropolitan Police. Detective Superintendent Philip McCormack said

that the investigation would identify and investigate any

criminal offence, and given the deaths of so many people, we are

considering manslaughter as well as criminal offences and breaches of

legislation and read -- regulations. A point reinforced by Sir Martin

Hewitt who said, the investigation we are conducting is a criminal

investigation, that quite obviously starting from the potential that

there is something that effectively amounts to the manslaughter of those

people. It is clear this will be a vigorous, detailed investigation.

The police are determined that if wrongdoing has occurred, the

perpetrators will be brought to justice. The Grenfell Tower

inquiry's is of utmost importance. The Government will provide it with

all the resources it needs to carry out its work thoroughly and rapidly.

We must learn the lessons from this tragedy to ensure nothing like it

happens again. Try the question is that this House has considered the

Grenfell Tower fire inquiry. -- the question is. Today is four weeks to

the days since the Grenfell Tower fire, the worst fire and greatest

loss of life in this country at least since the London Blitz. 158

families have lost their homes, many others have lost loved ones. And all

struggling with the horror and the trauma of losing family members, of

their own escape and being left with absolutely nothing. And this is the

time when they feel -- should feel they can look to their council and

their Government for help, as well as to the overwhelming solidarity

and support of their local community. But so many do not, and

so many feel they simply cannot trust those in authority to listen

to them, and to do what they promise. So this is a very strong

message to ministers, to Kensington and Chelsea Council, and to the

chair of the Prime Minister's public inquiry. Madam Deputy Speaker, today

is one week on from the Prime Minister's deadline for everyone

affected to be found a home nearby, yet just four of the 158 families

from Grenfell Tower have moved into a fresh home, and this is only

temporary. Today is 24 days on from the start of the Government's

testing programme when the Prime Minister said, we can test over 100

buildings a day, yet only 224 tests have been done, almost all on one

type of filler in one type of cladding. Today is four years and

four months on since two official coroner 's' reports following other

fatal tower block fires, yet the Government has still failed to act

on their recommendations. And today is almost three weeks since the

Prime Minister said, and I quote, "We simply have not given enough

attention to social housing," and yet, in her speech yesterday crying

out for any ideas for a domestic policy programme, there was no

mention of housing, and no mention of the words "Social housing." This

is the measure of the Government's response to the Grenfell Tower

tragedy. Too slow to act, too slow to grasp the gravity and the

complexity of the problems, one step off the pace at every stage. So let

me spell out the First Minister and his colleagues. This is the pledge

that this party makes, as the official opposition, above all to

the survivors and the relatives of the families from Grenfell Tower. We

will not rest until all those who need help and a new home have it. We

will not rest until all those culpable have been brought fully to

account. And we will not rest until all measures needed to make sure

this can never, ever happen again are fully in place. Now, we welcome

the Prime Minister's public inquiry, we welcome what the First Minister

said this afternoon about this debate, helping to inform the terms

of reference and the way the inquiry will begin ducted. -- will be

conducted. We will make a submission to the Prime Minister on the terms

of reference, and we will recommend an approach like the MacPherson

inquiry, with panel members, appointed with a deep experience in

community relations, to help overcome this serious gulf in trust

that many in the North Kensington community feel. Let me turn to

housing and help the survivors. The pledges the Government have made to

the families and survivors promised no strings financial assistance,

open access to trauma counselling, guaranteed school places, no legal

action on immigration status or subletting, and we housing, are all

welcome and all important. But there is still a big gap between what

ministers are saying to us in this House, and what the residents and

community in North Kensington are saying is happening to them. On

housing, how is it, one week after the Prime Minister's deadline, that

only four families have moved into a fresh home, and 13 others have been

offered somewhere they feel they can say yes to? Who is finding, checking

and offering this temporary accommodation? Who is providing

reassurance needed for the families? Who is in charge?

I thank him for giving way. These people, the rehousing as of the

upmost importance. But to politicise about the figures and to argue, I

don't know where he is getting the figures from, but I was led to

believe that 139 people had received offers of accommodation and many

families have agreed not yet to engage because they are not quite

ready. So he cannot force them to either. I'm not sure be this

statistics are coming from and whether all this scaremongering

about statistics is helping solve the actual problem this government

is getting on with doing. The speech was back in figure three. If I am

wrong but only four of these families after one month have moved

into a permanent home and are no longer in hotels, you can get up and

correct me, but he is not. It is precisely the decisions and policies

of those in power that the Grenfell Tower residents once challenged. And

it is precisely the questions of policy, of ideology, of

responsibility in government that lie at the heart of the deep changes

needed to fix the housing crisis in this country and her own Prime

Minister has recognised that. 159 families have been offered, as

wearable friend said brightly. Some of those have said that they don't

wish yet to make the move into the housing they have been offered.

Everyone will recognise the needs to meet those wishes. I can assure him

and the House that 159 of the families identified have been

offered more than one accommodation. That commitment has been met. Thinks

the Secretary of State might want to set the record entirely straight

when he winds up this debate. I take him at his word for no. Last week,

we were told there were 158 families who lost homes in the Grenfell

Tower, 139 had been offered accommodation by the Prime

Minister's deadline. Last week, only three had moved out. This week,

today, for weeks on, four have moved out and only a further 13 have

actually been given offers that they feel they can accept. Is a huge gap

between what ministers are seeing here and what residents are saying

they are. That is the problem and the question to the secretary and

the Secretary of State, who is sorting this out, who is in charge,

who is responsible for this continuing failure to provide the

homes for people to start again that they need? I'm sure he would accept

a hotel room is now home and temporary accommodation is no place

to try to rebuild shattered life. So the top and the urgent priority must

be for ministers to sign the permanent homes that are needed. Now

we welcome the 68 homes in Kells internal role that now will be

available as social housing for the residents of Grenfell Tower. -- in

Kensington raw. The rest could be done straightforwardly by doing a

deal with local housing associations to make new houses available, by

leasing or buying vacant private properties in the area, and by

funding the council to build or acquire new homes needed. It make

even force Kensington and Chelsea to use some of that reported ?274

million in reserves to take this urgent priority action. I give way.

Most of the residents who have been decanted are in budget hotels, I

know because I've visited a number who were unceremoniously dumped in

my borough without money or change of clothes and have been there four

weeks. None of those people either because they want to be there.

They're there because they haven't been made appropriate offers. Does

he agree with me that we should be offering decent homes to people who

have suffered extraordinary trauma? I entirely agree with my honourable

friend. He speaks from a very special authority as a neighbouring

MP who has spent a great deal of the last four weeks in the North

Kensington community working alongside our honourable friend, the

new member for Kensington, to try to support and give voice to the

concerns of residents and survivors. Let me move on to safety testing. It

is totally unacceptable, for weeks on from the Grenfell Tower fire,

that ministers still don't know and can't see how many of the country's

other tower blocks are unsafe. And the government's testing programme

is too slow, it is too narrow, it is to confuse. This is a testing

programme in chaos. Only 224 tests done when an estimated 530 tower

blocks have the same cladding. A total of 4000 tower blocks across

the country, this means 24 days after the start of this testing

programme, which we were told it could test 100 buildings a day, we

find tests have been done on only half of the highest risk blocks and

fewer than one in 20 of the total number of tower blocks around the

country. Last week, the Secretary of State said there was no backlog in

testing and tests would be processed within a matter of hours. Given the

continuing shortfall in the number of high-rise buildings that have

been subjected testing, but he sure my absolute bafflement that the

government doesn't appear to know where any of this material actually

is? Yes, I share your bafflement. I share it entirely. I also hear

stories of councils and housing associations that want to test their

buildings may not have the same type of cladding and they simply cannot

get the tests. And I noticed again the first secretary's speech and his

update to this House was entirely free of any facts or figures that

can update us on the chaos of this testing programme. I give way. My

honourable friend will be aware that in my constituency the council has

done the testing and as a result has evacuated over 300 people from

estates. Camden Council is spending its own money trying to make sure

these buildings are fit for purpose before residents are placed in it

again. Does he agree that the government should be giving

financial support to Camden Council and other councils after cutting

their budget for years on end? The short answer is yes. The longer

answer is that I pay tribute to the tough decision that Camden Council

had to make in those circumstances. My fear is that other housing

associations and other councils, landlords of high-rise blocks around

the country, will hold back or potentially cut corners because they

know they cannot afford to do the works required either to remove and

replace cladding or to make the inside is safe and fully fire safety

compliant. And they will do so only because they cannot get a straight

answer from this government, a clear commitment, to make sure this

essential work is done. This leaves hundreds of thousands of residents

in tower blocks around the country uncertain still whether or not their

blocks are safe. I say to the ministers opposite, I hope they stay

for this debate. We will hear from a number of colleagues around the

country, concerns about the testing system that it leaves landlords and

residents confused, it is a testing system that is not meeting the needs

of those residents or of those landlords. And we know from the

Lakanal House fire that cladding is not the whole problem. Only one

component of one type of cladding has been tested until very recently.

No tests on cladding systems, on intuition materials, the interaction

between cladding and installation, or on the installation and fire

breaks between force. I say to the Secretary of State, housing

associations across the country cannot get their type of cladding

tested so they cannot reassure the residents there tower blocks are

safe. Councils like Salford have stopped stripping of cladding from

high-rise flats because they have no guidance from government on what to

replace it with. I thank him for giving way. I want to make a comment

on that point in relation to a council I would like to commend for

the speed at which they were able to remove cladding. Also, my concerned

that with the amount of real cladding that might take place

across the country that we don't see those who might be producing the

cladding jacking up pricing and making it even more expensive to

replace. She is right. Oxford council is in the dark. It simply

does not know what the guidance and advice from government will be. If

you take the cladding off, what do they replace it with that they can

be certain as safe? The first secretary made great play of

independent experts quite rightly in his speech. The panel is there to

advise them on urgent lessons and action necessary. This is very

welcome. I hope this panel can help the government get back on track. I

hope it can deal with some of the following concerns which ministers

will hear from colleagues from other parts of the country. What advice

will the government gives to landlords and what reassurance to

residents, if cladding systems past the second round of tests when they

may have failed the narrow first test? If cladding feels, must it be

taken of tower blocks in all circumstances? And will the

government cover cost of taking it down and replacing it? When will

councils and housing associations be able to get other cladding or

intuition tested? How will the government make sure all internal

fire safety works are now being done inside tower blocks meet the highest

safety standards? And will the government wanted an immediate

review into the approved inspectors responsible for building control

checks, who hires them, who pays them, who approves the

qualifications, starting with all those responsible for signing off

the systems being failed by the government's tests? For weeks on,

ministers what must widen their testing programme, reassure all

high-rise tenants that their buildings are safe or commit to fund

the urgent work necessary to make them safe. The clearest warnings

that there were failures came more than format used ago following the

inquest into fatal tower block fires at Lakanal House and in another

circumstance. There were formal letters to ministers with

recommendations to improve fire safety in high-rise buildings.

Some of the recommendations were simply rejected, like making

internal cable supports fire resistant or on-site information

about a tower block available for firefighters arriving to fight a

police. Ministers said they would act on others but simply have not.

What with retrofitting sprinkler systems, the government passed

responsibility on to landlords. One minister even said in 2014, we

believe it is the responsibility of the fire industry rather than

government. And with overhauling building regulations, the government

promised a review, but this did not happen. And now the Housing Minister

has just told me, this work will now need to be informed by any

recommendations the independent enquiry into Grenfell Tower fire

makes. Can I finish this point? Rather than waiting months or years

longer to start this work, ministers must act now, start installing

sprinkler systems in the highest risk high-rise blocks and start the

overhaul of building regulations which can incorporate any findings

from the fire investigations or from the public enquiry. I give way.

Thank you. Does my right honourable friend, has he picked up the same

rumour that I've picked up on the review of the building regulations

that went on in CLT and I've heard it was Paul is because there were

not the civil servants able to lead on that work

because they were taken off that work because of Brexit and work that

needed to be done to look at Brexit? If that is true, how many other

pieces of work that are essential and urgent and safety-related are on

pause in government right now? There is an even greater question

over a leadership which I will come onto any minute. Finally, I want to

return it to the fundamental issues as the PM described them, that were

raised by the Grenfell Tower fire. When a country is decent and as

well-off as ours fails to provide something as basic as a safe home

for all its citizens, then things must change. Too serious to start

with, first on regulation. -- two areas. Surely all sides of the House

will agree on this, all markets, all consumers, all organisations require

regulation. The require regulation to get quality, safety, ensuring

safe practice, yet this is not the mindset of the current Government.

Never again can we have a Government minister challenged on fire safety

measures as one was after the Camberwell fire permit seeing it is

not the Government's responsibility and justifying this with the

Government's approach to regulations won in to add role. If the PM and

her secretary are at serious about change, they should start by

confirming that this approach has ended with the Cameron George

Osborne era Conservative Government. You are making a very important

point. When I was a junior business man, I was asked by people from

number ten in the Cabinet office whether we should get rid of the

fire safety regulations with respect to girls and ladies nightdresses,

related to furniture, I said no, we didn't get rid of them, nor should

we. He is right. We have to change the culture. I am grateful for that

unexpected support from the Liberal Democrat benches. He makes a very

important, specific point that supports the general argument I am

making this afternoon. On social housing, for decades after the

Second World War, there was a national cross-party consensus about

the value of social housing to help meet the housing needs and

families. There was a recognition families. There was a recognition

that in this country since World War II there has only been one year in

which we have built more than 200,000 homes without the public

sector during at least a third of them. Yet this is also the first

Government since World War II that is providing no funding to help

build new social rented housing and this Government has also ended all

funding through the home thinking unity agency programme for decent

homes, which is the investment to bring a social housing up to

scratch. If the first secretary and the Prime Minister were serious

about social housing, they would live cap on councils borrowing to

build and maintain their homes, restore essential Government

investment to help build a new social housing, guarantee first dibs

on new homes for local people and strengthen the hand of councils to

get better deals from big developers for their residents. Finally, Madam

Deputy Speaker, the Prime Minister wants us to contribute rather than

just criticise. You have to ask, has she asked her cabinet to contribute?

What does the Secretary of State have to contribute to solving the

country's housing crisis, to doing more on the social housing? To

reversing the plunging rate of home ownership in this country,

especially for young people? To giving 11 million private

basic consumer rights? Or preventing basic consumer rights? Or preventing

the rapidly rising level of rough sleeping homelessness on our

streets? Where is the plan? Where is the hope, the leadership? If the

Prime Minister wants a domestic policy programme, if she wants to

find common cause and make fundamental changes to Government

policy, then we stand ready to contribute and we offer our Labour

housing manifesto, published last month, as a starter. If the

Government wants our support, for a plan to tackle the country's housing

crisis, it must raise its sites. If ministers want every support, for

their recovery programme host Grenfell, they must raise their

game. Madam Deputy Speaker, can I start by saying that I do agree with

the honourable gentleman Phil Wentworth on one aspect, which is

that I think he is right to say this was an accident which should not

have happened in a country like ours. I do think he is also right to

argue for a national and clear approach that doesn't just

concentrate on one issue but look at all the issues involved. I thought

he uncharacteristically was not prepared to accept, or at least it

seems so, that over the years on both sides of the Has winning

Government, we have made mistakes in this area and I think if you thought

back to 2005 and 2006 when the enforcement regime was weakened and

the building regulations changed, I think he might just think, was that

really tackling the problem on the issue of building houses over the

previous Labour Government having a deplorable record. I don't think

that he can just be holier than thou in his debate in the way that I

thought he was tempted to do. I would like to start by just paying

tribute to the local community, for all it has done at the Westway

Sports Centre. People were generous, warm-hearted, they put their arms

around the victim's families. Our thoughts, correctly, I with the

victims and families. I would like to pay tribute to the communities of

the Westway and Latimer Road who have come out of this very strongly

indeed. It is time that fires which claim lives in high-rise buildings

was a thing of the past. Just an experience from my own constituency,

in February 2005 there was a fire in Stevenage in Harrow court, at

high-rise flat blocks, 17 stories, two firemen lost their lives,

including my constituent Geoff including my constituent Geoff

Warren. And also a member of the public as well. Jeff came from a

family which is very much committed to public service. He was extremely

brave in the fire and saved lives. His loss was felt in my constituency

and by his family, friends and the and by his family, friends and the

Fire Service in Hertfordshire and Warren Whiteley. This incident led

to a fire investigation by Hertfordshire Fire and Rescue

Service, a very good one. It has had a lot of experience in dealing with

hazardous materials, it fought the Bruntsfield fire as well as been

done. It is generally a highly respected Fire and Rescue Service.

They made recommendations, one of them was that the UK Fire Service

should explore options for high-rise buildings to have provision of

sprinklers. I felt at the time that this was an important matter. We had

a Westminster Hall debate about Hertfordshire firefighter's safety.

The then Fire Mr Siddique Khan met Jeff's father and fire safety

experts to discuss the case for sprinklers to be retrofitted to all

high-rise blocks and experts in sprinklers went to be meeting to.

This hasn't happened, but Robert Warren, he still feels this is an

important way of helping to ensure that there is fire safety in such

blocks. He contacted me recently to say he hoped this could be back on

the agenda. After 2007, the rules were changed for new buildings, over

30 metres high. Which I required now to be fitted with sprinkler systems.

Some local authorities have gone ahead and retrofitted to some of

their blocks. As was mentioned by the honourable gentleman for

Wentworth. Coroners, on two occasions, have recommended

retrofitting sprinklers. It has not been the general rule. We do need a

something that is clear. The British something that is clear. The

automatic fire sprinkler Association automatic fire sprinkler Association

estimates that the cost of fitting a system in Grenfell Tower would have

been around ?200,000. We need to establish the truth of what happened

in Grenfell Tower and make sure it doesn't happen again. I do hope this

issue of the retrofitting of sprinkler systems can be firmly and

urgently considered, because I do think that it is something which

might be long overdue. In terms of the investigations which have been

ordered, there is a police ordered, there is a

investigation which will look at investigation which will look at

criminal wrongdoing, but I think it is good there is a judicial public

enquiry announced by the Prime Minister and the two types of

investigation have different purposes. The public enquiry

investigates an issue about serious investigates an issue about serious

public concern, scrutinising decisions and events. The enquiries

act of 2005 ensures that witnesses can be compelled and documents

brought forward without any difficulties, something which didn't

happen in other forms of enquiry. They are different to criminal

investigations. The parallel criminal investigation into the fire

by the Metropolitan Police will be informed by the public enquiry. If,

for example, fax and recommendations are made in the public enquiry, if

during the course of the investigation of the enquiry comes

across criminal activity, it will obviously pass that, that is its

duty, to the police. There has been some discussion nationally about the

choice of the chair. I would just say this, people come to our country

to have their legal issues resolved, from all over the world. They come

here because we have independent minded judges who don't mind telling

the Government where it gets off and when it's wrong. We have judges of

the highest quality. There is a transparent system which people

trust. That is why the English legal system has been copied all over the

world and why people respected so highly. Our common law system is

excellent. The choice of the chair for this public enquiry was a senior

judge. I think if you look at something like Hillsborough, were a

senior judge presided, nobody would argue that these judges are not

capable of dealing with a complex case and getting right to the heart

of the issues. The Lord Chancellor asked the Lord Chief Justice or a

recommendation of a judge he would be best suited to the task of

leading a public enquiry of this sort, and he recommended Sir Martin

Moore-Bick. Sir Martin is one of the most respected judges, with

extensive experience of trying complex cases, including the

investigation of disasters. He was vice president of the civil division

of the Court of Appeal, one other very most senior judges, until he

retired in December. He will get to the heart of the issue. Members in

all parts of the Houses are determined there will be justice for

the victims of this tragedy and for their families. I believe the

combination of a judge let enquiry and a police investigation will

achieve this. I think you can judge how well a judge is going to judge

an enquiry about how speedily he gets on with the matter in hand. In

this case, Sir Martin has shown by immediately consulting, he opens the

consultation on the 5th of July, to establish the terms of reference,

but seeking a wide range of views. That bodes very well for the

enquiry. He wants to hear from those directly affected by the fire. He is

having a series of meetings to listen to the families. It is

welcome at the chair has been so open to ideas. He said he wants to

establish the terms of reference as soon as possible, so the enquiry can

begin the process of making sure we know what happened and how to stop

it happening again. I am a strong supporter of the judge let enquiry.

I hope it will be possible to have a relatively early interim report

which will deal with some of these key issues, like sprinkler systems

and cladding, so we have that sort of national clear approach which the

honourable gentleman opposite mentioned. I am a strong supporter

of the enquiry, but I would like to see sprinklers strongly on

agenda. Thank you. The Scottish agenda. Thank you. The Scottish

National Party welcomes the Government announcement of a full

public enquiry into this terrible tragedy. We are very clear as others

have already said no still needs to be left unturned in order to

ascertain not just the immediate cause of the fire but the wider

causes of what happened and what went wrong and to ensure appropriate

lessons are learned and to get justice for those affected. Our

thoughts and sympathies are very much with those who were affected by

this terrible tragedy, it goes without saying we pay tribute to the

bravery and professionalism of the first responders and the emergency

services. I want to address the scope and the

nature of the enquiry. I'm glad to see that the days of enquiries were

establishment whitewashes are over. I don't think our society could put

up with such delays again. We must always be mindful that the history

of enquiries in this country has seen many examples of justice being

delayed or denied altogether. It seems to me this most often happens

when those affected by death in disaster come from amongst the ranks

of those with the least in society. I am thinking of innocent Liverpool

football fans unlawfully killed and then wrongfully blamed as the cause

of their own deaths. Bloody Sunday was also different from the Grenfell

Tower enquiry. A Scottish journalist recently brought some words to my

attention. A man told the BBC, we are not per people, when

working-class people, where leaseholders, homeowners, we pay

tax, we pay council tax, we make the economy turned whilst the rich put

us in hazardous positions. He said, we have been neglected from the get

go and we are neglected still. These words may be uncomfortable for some

to hear, but they cannot and should not be ignored. They come from a

survivor. Underlying this tragedy, I believe there is a stark contrast in

our society between those who have wealth, power and influence, and

those who do not. It seems to me at least unthinkable that those with

power, wealth and influence would have been condemned to live in

accommodation which seems to have been such a death trap. So, I say

that this tragedy raises very real questions about the inequalities in

our society and the inadequate provision of social housing in

cities such as London. And there is a very real issue as to whether the

enquiry is going to be of adequate school not just to address immediate

causes of fire and its immediate spread, but systemic issues

underlying the tragedy. So the terms of reference are vital and it is

vital the participants have confidence in the chair and it is

vital that all participants have adequate funding to ensure

representation. Looking at the terms of reference, the Stephen Lawrence

enquiry is often considered as an exemplar of what an enquiry should

do. They are, the terms of reference were simply matters arising from the

death of Stephen Lawrence. In this case, survivors are concerned about

comments from a judge which suggested the enquiry will be

restricted to looking at issues regarding how the fire started,

rather than general issues. We were told last week that the government

expect the enquiry to be as broad an enquiry as possible. What is not

clear to me is whether this House will be able to scrutinise or have

any input into the final framing of those terms of reference and in my

view away should be found to enable this to happen. Because the Grenfell

fire raises issues which concern all of the public across the UK and our

constituents. I have a constituent who has written to me concerned

about the extent of the death toll. The composition seems to include

those who are sometimes forgotten in our society. Members of the public

are concerned that the fact seems to be a refurbishment budget for this

block was spent with an emphasis on cladding that was pleasing to the

eye rather than fire safe and a suggestion that not enough was spent

on fire safety measures. And the public are concerned about the

adequacy of the response to the fire. People have said, where was

the publicly funded infrastructure dealing with relief? Where was the

plan for the aftermath of this? So we need to make sure the terms of

reference of the enquiry encompass these matters, whilst also making

sure the interim report deals with the immediate fire safety issues. We

should never forget that the decades of failure to investigate properly

what happened at Hillsborough began with the controversial decision by

the coroner in the inquest to close off certain questions from proper

investigation. So I believe we must be very careful here not to close

off certain questions arising from how this fire came about from a

proper investigation. Turning to the chair, the problems with the child

abuse enquiry shall as it is vital to have a chair that has the

confidence of those affected. Concerns of residents must be

respected and listen to. If there is doubt surrounding public confidence,