14/12/2017

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:00 > 0:00:01the Act of Parliament which triggered Article 50. The terms of

0:00:01 > 0:00:05Article 50 were well-known to this House and they have a fixed duration

0:00:05 > 0:00:14of two years.Can the Secretary of State tell us what recent

0:00:14 > 0:00:17discussions he's had with representatives of the UK financial

0:00:17 > 0:00:24sector on the effect of the UK leaving the single market, as there

0:00:24 > 0:00:29are increasing reports of jobs being transferred to other EU countries.

0:00:29 > 0:00:34Since the creation of our department we have engaged closely with the

0:00:34 > 0:00:38financial services industry and received representations from UK

0:00:38 > 0:00:41finance for city UK, Association of foreign banks and investment

0:00:41 > 0:00:46Association as well as many firms in Edinburgh which is a global leader

0:00:46 > 0:00:48in the asset management and insurance industry. We'll continue

0:00:48 > 0:00:53to work closely with them and colleagues at the Treasury to ensure

0:00:53 > 0:00:56our financial services industry thrives.Will the government

0:00:56 > 0:01:05consider negotiating our continued participation in Erasmus?The Prime

0:01:05 > 0:01:10Minister said we will continue in areas of culture and education. I

0:01:10 > 0:01:15believe this is something we will explore in the next phase of talks.

0:01:15 > 0:01:19Last week's agreement recognise the rights of Northern Ireland citizens

0:01:19 > 0:01:22in line with the Good Friday Agreement. All the government be

0:01:22 > 0:01:25seeking the same rights for my constituents in Bristol to work,

0:01:25 > 0:01:32travel and live in the European Union?The issue of onward movement

0:01:32 > 0:01:36in the European Union is an issue we wish to continue to press. It's

0:01:36 > 0:01:39interesting that the European Parliament made resolutions

0:01:39 > 0:01:42yesterday that it would support the right of UK nationals to have

0:01:42 > 0:01:45movement within the EU. This is something we will continue to take

0:01:45 > 0:01:51forward into the next phase of the negotiations.On financial services,

0:01:51 > 0:01:56how hopeful ministers that through the negotiations the UK will retain

0:01:56 > 0:02:04a passport for service providers to trade across the EU?We are at the

0:02:04 > 0:02:07start of negotiations on the future relationships but I think we should

0:02:07 > 0:02:10explore all the possibilities to make sure the UK and the EU continue

0:02:10 > 0:02:14to benefit from the fact we have a global financial services Centre in

0:02:14 > 0:02:20London and the UK.Mr Speaker, B Secretary of State for Scotland said

0:02:20 > 0:02:23the government would bring forward amendments to close 11 of the EU

0:02:23 > 0:02:26Bill, well these amendments be published and shared with the

0:02:26 > 0:02:33Scottish Government had Welsh Assembly before being tabled?The

0:02:33 > 0:02:37honourable gentleman is ingenious in raising the topic of amendments. Of

0:02:37 > 0:02:43course we will want to insular as we take forward our engagement with the

0:02:43 > 0:02:48devolved administrations this issue of clause 11 is addressed.Thank

0:02:48 > 0:02:59you. Order. In view of the interest in the House and outside, I wish as

0:02:59 > 0:03:04an exception to the general rule to make a statement about the replies

0:03:04 > 0:03:07which I had sent today to those honourable members who have written

0:03:07 > 0:03:14to me recently asking me to grant precedence to matters of privilege

0:03:14 > 0:03:21relating to the motion agreed by the House and the 1st of November

0:03:21 > 0:03:24covering Brexit impact assessments. Several members have sought

0:03:24 > 0:03:29precedents to raise an alleged contempt in relation to the accounts

0:03:29 > 0:03:33ministers have given over the past 15 months of the sectoral analysis

0:03:33 > 0:03:39and assessment work undertaken by departments in preparation for

0:03:39 > 0:03:44Brexit. I have carefully considered the representations made to me as

0:03:44 > 0:03:51well as discussing the issue and the practice of the House with the Clerk

0:03:51 > 0:03:56of the House. I have to judge only whether to give precedence to a

0:03:56 > 0:04:05motion on the floor of the House. Ministers could with the advantage

0:04:05 > 0:04:10have been considerably clearer in their statements, particularly in

0:04:10 > 0:04:16challenging lines of questioning in the select committees which were

0:04:16 > 0:04:22based upon a genuine misconception. However, from the evidence which I

0:04:22 > 0:04:27have seen to date, I have concluded that the test which I am bound to

0:04:27 > 0:04:31apply that there is an arguable case that there has on this matter been a

0:04:31 > 0:04:41contempt of the House has not been met. Other members have written to

0:04:41 > 0:04:45me seeking precedents to raise an alleged contempt in relation to the

0:04:45 > 0:04:51response by the Secretary of State to the motion for an address agreed

0:04:51 > 0:04:54on the 1st of November. I have carefully considered the

0:04:54 > 0:04:58representations made to me as as discussing the issue and the

0:04:58 > 0:05:05practice of the House with the Clerk of the House. I have to judge only

0:05:05 > 0:05:08whether to give precedence to a motion on the floor of the House.

0:05:08 > 0:05:15While it was most regrettable that the Secretary of State, a point I

0:05:15 > 0:05:20made to him privately but I now state publicly, unilaterally excised

0:05:20 > 0:05:25some material from the papers which he provided, and that it took so

0:05:25 > 0:05:32long to provide the papers, I also feel bound to pay due attention to

0:05:32 > 0:05:36the formally recorded view of the committee that the Secretary of

0:05:36 > 0:05:42State had complied with the order of the 1st of November. I have

0:05:42 > 0:05:46concluded from the evidence which I have seen to date that the test

0:05:46 > 0:05:52which I am bound to apply that there is an arguable case that there has

0:05:52 > 0:05:58on this matter been a contempt of the House has not been met in this

0:05:58 > 0:06:04case. I do not judge that points of order can arise from these rulings.

0:06:04 > 0:06:13Business question, Valerie Vaz 's topic at the Leader of the House

0:06:13 > 0:06:17please update the House on the forthcoming business. Leader of the

0:06:17 > 0:06:25House Andrea Leadsom.Thank you Mr Speaker. The business for the week

0:06:25 > 0:06:30commencing the 18th of December will be Monday the 18th of December

0:06:30 > 0:06:35consideration in committee of the Finance Bill Day one. Tuesday the

0:06:35 > 0:06:3719th of December, continuation of consideration in committee of the

0:06:37 > 0:06:43Finance Bill Day two, followed by a motion to approve a statutory

0:06:43 > 0:06:47instrument relating to terrorism, followed by a motion to approve

0:06:47 > 0:06:53European documents relating to the Schengen information system.

0:06:53 > 0:06:56Wednesday the 20th of December, conclusion of continuation of

0:06:56 > 0:07:01committee of the European Withdrawal Bill Day eight. Thursday the 21st of

0:07:01 > 0:07:04December, General debate on Russian interference in UK politics and

0:07:04 > 0:07:08society followed by a general debate on matters to be raised before the

0:07:08 > 0:07:11forthcoming adjournment. The subjects for these debates were

0:07:11 > 0:07:15determined by the Backbench Business Committee. Friday the 22nd of

0:07:15 > 0:07:18December the House will not be setting. The business of the week

0:07:18 > 0:07:23commencing the 8th of January will include on Monday the 8th of January

0:07:23 > 0:07:27the second reading of the taxation cross-border trade Bill. Colleagues

0:07:27 > 0:07:31will also wish to know that remaining stages of the European

0:07:31 > 0:07:35Union Withdrawal Bill will take place on Tuesday the 16th and

0:07:35 > 0:07:43Wednesday the 17th of January 2018. Mr Speaker, six months have passed

0:07:43 > 0:07:48since the awful tragedy at Grenfell Tower. Our hearts go out to those

0:07:48 > 0:07:52who suffered such trauma and have had to rebuild their lives after

0:07:52 > 0:07:58such terrible loss. This was a truly unimaginable tragedy and it should

0:07:58 > 0:08:00never have happened. Today's memorial service will remember those

0:08:00 > 0:08:08we lost and will thank the emergency services, the recovery team, the

0:08:08 > 0:08:10community, public support workers and volunteers who did everything

0:08:10 > 0:08:19they could on that terrible night. Valerie Vaz.Thank you. Can I thank

0:08:19 > 0:08:22the Leader of the House for the future business. I note cheese only

0:08:22 > 0:08:26gone as far as the 8th of January so I'm not sure with a date for the

0:08:26 > 0:08:30restoration renewal has also been fixed for the 11 or if it's going to

0:08:30 > 0:08:34be moved. Mr Speaker, they say good things come in threes. Firstly

0:08:34 > 0:08:43tomorrow it is Save the Children Christmas Jumper Day. Secondly, we

0:08:43 > 0:08:47congratulate the new member of the Alabama the Democrat Doug Jones on

0:08:47 > 0:08:53his victory that politics is about hope and not division. Thirdly, the

0:08:53 > 0:08:59matter of yesterday. We are very pleased that finally Parliament has

0:08:59 > 0:09:03been recognised as being sovereign. It brings back to Parliament the

0:09:03 > 0:09:10final vote on the deal so Parliament can have a say, just as every

0:09:10 > 0:09:15Parliament in the EU will have a say on the deal. It enables us to do our

0:09:15 > 0:09:22job. Mr Speaker, you thought three was the magic number, actually four

0:09:22 > 0:09:26is the magic number. Before anything happens to those MPs who voted to

0:09:26 > 0:09:30bring sovereignty back to Parliament, let's remember there are

0:09:30 > 0:09:34many rebels still sitting in this House. One of the things that are

0:09:34 > 0:09:40going to flow from the EU Withdrawal Bill are the many SIs which will be

0:09:40 > 0:09:43coming out. The government has conceded the amendment from the

0:09:43 > 0:09:48procedure committee so can I ask when will the new committee be set

0:09:48 > 0:09:52up, the sifting committee? Can she ensured the cheque comes from the

0:09:52 > 0:09:57opposition? Mr Speaker I've heard what you said about the content and

0:09:57 > 0:10:00the sexual analysis of the assessments. I have seen the

0:10:00 > 0:10:07documents. We have to almost sign a note to say we cannot reveal what's

0:10:07 > 0:10:12in it. We are democratically elected members of Parliament, we cannot

0:10:12 > 0:10:14share that information with our constituents, I don't think that is

0:10:14 > 0:10:21acceptable. If there is any commercial information in there that

0:10:21 > 0:10:28may or may not be excluded, and if it's just a matter of fact, I can

0:10:28 > 0:10:32see no reason why members can't see the documents in the reference

0:10:32 > 0:10:36library and why it can't be published. I'm not sure if I can

0:10:36 > 0:10:40reveal this bit but in the footnotes, many of the footnotes,

0:10:40 > 0:10:44from the office of National is to do so it is in the public domain in any

0:10:44 > 0:10:50event. -- Office of National Statistics. Having undertaken the

0:10:50 > 0:10:52biggest reorganisation in the NHS the government has embarked on

0:10:52 > 0:11:00another one with transformational plans. They now intend to bring

0:11:00 > 0:11:05forward regulations to support the setting up of accountable care

0:11:05 > 0:11:09organisations, an idea imported from the United States. It's not clear

0:11:09 > 0:11:13how the ACOs will be accountable to the public and what level of private

0:11:13 > 0:11:17sector involvement there will be and what implications that will be for

0:11:17 > 0:11:25NHS staff. We've had CCG 's, STP 's, ACOs, it's becoming an anachronism

0:11:25 > 0:11:29of incompetence from this government. The Shadow Secretary of

0:11:29 > 0:11:32State for help has written to the leader to ask whether the

0:11:32 > 0:11:38regulations will be published in the New Year. Can I ask is that the

0:11:38 > 0:11:44government's intention to do so and if so when? Can the leader reassure

0:11:44 > 0:11:49the House there will be adequate time for a debate and vote? Again

0:11:49 > 0:11:52we've got a government that cannot make a decision. We've got a new

0:11:52 > 0:11:55industrial strategy but made a decision on the Swansea tidal

0:11:55 > 0:12:01lagoon. There was a letter on the 20th of November signed by 100

0:12:01 > 0:12:06businesses. We've had adjournment debates from members on our side,

0:12:06 > 0:12:09we've had oral questions, written questions on the latest one says a

0:12:09 > 0:12:13decision will be made in due course. Could the Leader of the House please

0:12:13 > 0:12:16say what that means, or is it the case the government don't want to

0:12:16 > 0:12:24make an investment in Labour Wales? Turning to the motion of the

0:12:24 > 0:12:29opposition day and how the information has been dealt with,

0:12:29 > 0:12:32it's crucial for us, the opposition and members of Parliament to hold

0:12:32 > 0:12:35the government to account. We've got a situation where the Leader of the

0:12:35 > 0:12:40House said on the 26th of October that the relevant Minister will

0:12:40 > 0:12:45respond to opposition Day motion is no later than 12 weeks. There was a

0:12:45 > 0:12:51point of order last week by my honourable friend the shadows

0:12:51 > 0:12:55negative state of education. She said she received a response on the

0:12:55 > 0:12:59tuition fee motion that had no bearing on the motion. It was done

0:12:59 > 0:13:04in a written statement on the last day so it didn't give us an

0:13:04 > 0:13:07opportunity to question the Minister on that. Could the Leader of the

0:13:07 > 0:13:10House meet with me and perhaps discuss with the House authorities

0:13:10 > 0:13:13how we can take this forward and have proper information so that we

0:13:13 > 0:13:18can hold the government to account which is what our job is. Mr

0:13:18 > 0:13:22Speaker, I fail to mention previously the passing away of Jimmy

0:13:22 > 0:13:30Hurd MP. He was a good servant of this House, he was chairman of the

0:13:30 > 0:13:34European scrutiny select committee and the panel of chairs for 14

0:13:34 > 0:13:40years. He served this House well. I want to honour his memory just as

0:13:40 > 0:13:44I've joined the Leader of the House in honouring the memory of those who

0:13:44 > 0:13:51died at Grenfell Tower. There was a memorial yesterday which you

0:13:51 > 0:13:54attended and there will be a memorial in St Paul's Cathedral

0:13:54 > 0:14:00today attended by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.

0:14:00 > 0:14:03The shadow Housing Minister has asked the Prime Minister why, when

0:14:03 > 0:14:07she said I have fixed deadline of three weeks everyone affected to be

0:14:07 > 0:14:12found a home nearby, but that hasn't taken place. Mr Speaker, as you let

0:14:12 > 0:14:16the hammock candle yesterday in Speaker 's house, candles will be

0:14:16 > 0:14:21lit to remember the innocent dead at St Paul's which will take place any

0:14:21 > 0:14:26minute now -- Hannukah candle. One-minute people watching TV or

0:14:26 > 0:14:29doing their homework, the next minute they are dead. The light has

0:14:29 > 0:14:33gone out of their lives but the flame of remembrance will continue

0:14:33 > 0:14:43to burn as we remember them today and always.

0:14:43 > 0:14:50Thank you Mr Speaker and certainly I share in the great tribute from the

0:14:50 > 0:14:59lady opposite to those who suffered in the Grenfell Tower tragedy. Our

0:14:59 > 0:15:03thoughts with them today and all the time. The government has been

0:15:03 > 0:15:06committed in the last six months, all the way through, that the

0:15:06 > 0:15:13families and survivors will have needs taken care of. Something the

0:15:13 > 0:15:20government remains committed to. I also want to pay tribute to Jamie

0:15:20 > 0:15:26Hood, a great servant to the house. The honourable lady asks about the

0:15:26 > 0:15:31scheduling of the debate on restoration, she will be were a

0:15:31 > 0:15:36number of representations have been made from members across both sides

0:15:36 > 0:15:40of the house. Looking into options other than those before the debate

0:15:40 > 0:15:45to take place. A number of priorities to consider. We are

0:15:45 > 0:15:50listening to representation being made on the debate. Future of

0:15:50 > 0:15:53business will continue to be announced in the usual way. The

0:15:53 > 0:16:01honourable lady asks about the issue of the shifting committee. I want to

0:16:01 > 0:16:06pay tribute to my honourable friend, proposing amendments that I have

0:16:06 > 0:16:13been happy to confirm I will propose changes to standing orders once the

0:16:13 > 0:16:23bill has received Royal assent. The honourable lady asks about viewing

0:16:23 > 0:16:31the analysis and you yourself have just confirmed that after taking

0:16:31 > 0:16:34advice from the Brexit select committee you are satisfied that

0:16:34 > 0:16:49they are satisfied, this is a very important point. Addressing the

0:16:49 > 0:17:01major challenges facing the hills give challenge system. Improving

0:17:01 > 0:17:13integration. I think we can all agree, it is vital that we focus on

0:17:13 > 0:17:19making the most productive use, out of the resources available. On the

0:17:19 > 0:17:30subject of opposition day debates, when a motion has been approved by

0:17:30 > 0:17:34the house, the relevant Minister will respond to the resolution by

0:17:34 > 0:17:46making a statement no more than 12 weeks after the debate.

0:17:49 > 0:18:05We will be able to open any actions that have been taken. It is a very

0:18:05 > 0:18:10complex and the track record is excellent, 26% of electricity

0:18:10 > 0:18:25derived from renewables, improving low carbon and electricity resources

0:18:25 > 0:18:36should not be ignored. I just want to reiterate that we are working

0:18:36 > 0:18:44closely with the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to provide

0:18:44 > 0:18:58that we can provide social housing. It may be sensible to have another

0:18:58 > 0:19:03Grenfell Tower United meeting in six months. We will not forget what we

0:19:03 > 0:19:11heard this week, so we can learn more from those who have life after

0:19:11 > 0:19:16death. Remembering the Foreign Secretary's visit to Iran, it could

0:19:16 > 0:19:23be a good idea that the relevant ministers look back into deportation

0:19:23 > 0:19:27from this country and ask if it is seriously sensible to try to expel

0:19:27 > 0:19:32somebody who has been living here for most of their life, after

0:19:32 > 0:19:39criminal attack has lost hands and feet. And also to review the case,

0:19:39 > 0:19:47when someone who has not lived in Ghana for more than a year since he

0:19:47 > 0:20:03was four. Up for deportation.The only thing missing in that

0:20:03 > 0:20:15fascinating essay, request for a statement or debate.Next week.

0:20:15 > 0:20:22Referred to the first week back. Zero statement or debate. It is not

0:20:22 > 0:20:25beyond the competence. Can I gently say to other members, if they wish

0:20:25 > 0:20:33to imitate the right honourable member, this should not seek to

0:20:33 > 0:20:41imitate him in length today.Thank you Mr Speaker. I absolutely share

0:20:41 > 0:20:45my right honourable friend's for the review of the experience of

0:20:45 > 0:20:52survivors six months on from today. With regards to his point on

0:20:52 > 0:20:55deportation I am not aware of the specific keys but Foreign Office

0:20:55 > 0:21:01ministers will discuss those with. Can I thank the leader of the house

0:21:01 > 0:21:06for announcing next week, and thank you for the helpful statement and I

0:21:06 > 0:21:15fully appreciate but in the wider context something has to change. We

0:21:15 > 0:21:22have to get back onto an even keel, these difficulties are down to the

0:21:22 > 0:21:26fact that these governments are not prepared to participate fully in the

0:21:26 > 0:21:32Democratic stature is of this house. We have satisfactory, contrary to

0:21:32 > 0:21:35all democratic instincts, badly letting down constituents that we

0:21:35 > 0:21:43represent and serve. When government diminish, bad start happens and bad

0:21:43 > 0:21:50stuff happens in the context of this. It has to stop. Return the

0:21:50 > 0:21:54house to the conditions prior to the last election, diminish democracy we

0:21:54 > 0:22:06can proud of. I know it is party season, but today few site the

0:22:06 > 0:22:13morning after the night before. You can almost feel the groggy heads,

0:22:13 > 0:22:17defeat for Brexit plans. Hopefully this is going to be the first steps

0:22:17 > 0:22:22of the brakes on sanity. I think one of the lessons from last night has

0:22:22 > 0:22:27to be that it is conclusive that you have cross-party talks across the

0:22:27 > 0:22:31house about the Brexit process and that must involve the democratic

0:22:31 > 0:22:37assemblies across the United Kingdom. Mr Speaker, can we have a

0:22:37 > 0:22:40debate on trading standards. I think the feeling in Scotland is that we

0:22:40 > 0:22:46have been sold a Tory pup. Scottish Conservative MPs said they would

0:22:46 > 0:22:55come down here, proudly and defiantly, taking on the Scottish

0:22:55 > 0:23:06Government. Nothing other than the conservative lobby for this. Down to

0:23:06 > 0:23:13the whip. Scotland is demanding the money back. If we cannot get the

0:23:13 > 0:23:16money back, can we at least have these honourable gentleman replaced

0:23:16 > 0:23:25by champions for Scotland who will act for the entries in this house.

0:23:25 > 0:23:28Thank you Mr Speaker. The honourable gentleman is obviously on good form

0:23:28 > 0:23:40this morning. He made a slip up, calling my friends, gentlemen. A

0:23:40 > 0:23:47lady or two among them. I take that seriously. They make an enormous

0:23:47 > 0:23:52contribution to the constituencies in Scotland. Regularly attending

0:23:52 > 0:23:55this, so that they can't raise particular issues. I encourage them

0:23:55 > 0:24:03to do that. The honourable gentleman does not mention the two billion

0:24:03 > 0:24:06additional funding for Scotland that was announced by the Chancellor in

0:24:06 > 0:24:10the recent budget that should be a very good boost to Scottish

0:24:10 > 0:24:14finances. That should actually enable the Scottish Government not

0:24:14 > 0:24:21to take the step of making Scotland the most highly taxed part of the

0:24:21 > 0:24:25United Kingdom. Also raising the question of democracy and listening.

0:24:25 > 0:24:32He will be aware... In this place we have had countless opportunities to

0:24:32 > 0:24:35discuss Briggs, the government has been listening and I myself have

0:24:35 > 0:24:38taken part in a number of discussions about how we can more

0:24:38 > 0:24:45carefully accommodate the views of this house, we have been listening

0:24:45 > 0:24:49carefully and I have been delighted to accommodate the effort and

0:24:49 > 0:24:51procedures of the committee, something that the house was keen to

0:24:51 > 0:25:00see. We have had eight hours of protected debate every day, eight

0:25:00 > 0:25:04days of the committee. Exhaustively looking at every aspect. This is

0:25:04 > 0:25:09certainly not evidence of a failure to communicate or engage. The

0:25:09 > 0:25:12government is listening and we are keen to engage across the house.

0:25:12 > 0:25:17That is good to continue to be the case as we seek to leave the

0:25:17 > 0:25:22European Union with a good deal for all parts of the native kingdom. --

0:25:22 > 0:25:23United.

0:25:28 > 0:25:31Before the debate announced, will she reflect on the fact that many of

0:25:31 > 0:25:37Winston Churchill's greatest war time speeches, were made from Church

0:25:37 > 0:25:47House. Would she consider that would be an appropriate location?Well...

0:25:47 > 0:25:53My honourable friend will no doubt want to take part in the debate on

0:25:53 > 0:25:58the question of restoration but it is vital that we focus on the key

0:25:58 > 0:26:07issues. Protecting the Paris for future generations. It is a heritage

0:26:07 > 0:26:13site, 1 million visitors every year. The future is paramount. So to,

0:26:13 > 0:26:17costs to taxpayers. We absolutely have to focus on the best value for

0:26:17 > 0:26:24money that we can.Can I thank the leader of the house for the business

0:26:24 > 0:26:28statement, and also for the meeting that she had with me last week to

0:26:28 > 0:26:36discuss a range of issues. Can I as again for early notice of any time

0:26:36 > 0:26:38allocation for the backbench business committee for January so

0:26:38 > 0:26:44that members can have ample notice for times. How the chamber and

0:26:44 > 0:26:50Westminster Hall. A little gripe... The backbench business committee has

0:26:50 > 0:27:03a membership of eight. Usually, four. Can I ask that we actually

0:27:03 > 0:27:14looked at that in standing orders. Possibly a similar forum, could she

0:27:14 > 0:27:18possibly have a word with her colleague, with the committee of

0:27:18 > 0:27:25selection and ask him not to pick members of the backbench business

0:27:25 > 0:27:27committee for the statutory instrument committee at the same

0:27:27 > 0:27:34time.I am always very happy to address representations from the

0:27:34 > 0:27:37honourable gentleman. I will look into the point that he has

0:27:37 > 0:27:48mentioned.Last week, the general electorate announced the loss of

0:27:48 > 0:27:541000 jobs in my constituency and could we have a statement from the

0:27:54 > 0:28:02government both on the support that will be provided to those trained

0:28:02 > 0:28:06and excellent workers to find other work but also to show how the United

0:28:06 > 0:28:11Kingdom government will support power engineering saw that it can

0:28:11 > 0:28:18maintain and grow the position in research, manufacturing and export?

0:28:18 > 0:28:24I am very sorry to hear of these potential losses. My honourable

0:28:24 > 0:28:27friend is absolutely correct to support constituents. The government

0:28:27 > 0:28:31meets with the general electorate to discuss business and November

0:28:31 > 0:28:34announced plans for the global restructuring. Consultation under

0:28:34 > 0:28:39way on the redundancies and the timescale is yet to be announced.

0:28:39 > 0:28:45The government stands ready to support anyone who loses their job

0:28:45 > 0:28:51through the DWP rapid response service.I want to raise the issue

0:28:51 > 0:28:57of rough sleeping. My constituents are contacting me, very concerned

0:28:57 > 0:29:04especially in this weather weather rapid rise of people sleeping on the

0:29:04 > 0:29:10streets. Hull council have done good work to prevent 500 cases of

0:29:10 > 0:29:15homelessness but a 75% increase and I wanted to know if we can get the

0:29:15 > 0:29:21government debate on why it has since 2010 rough sleeping has

0:29:21 > 0:29:26doubled in this country, particularly the last year.

0:29:26 > 0:29:31The honourable lady is right to raise the subject. It is extremely

0:29:31 > 0:29:36disturbing to see anyone sleeping rough in our country. The government

0:29:36 > 0:29:43is investing a significant sum to eliminate rough sleeping altogether

0:29:43 > 0:29:52by 2027 but the Harvard by 2022. Certainly in my own area, the Hope

0:29:52 > 0:29:55centre in Northampton is doing excellent work as are so many

0:29:55 > 0:29:59homeless charities around the country to ensure that during this

0:29:59 > 0:30:02cold patch nobody is having to sleep rough. I shared the honourable

0:30:02 > 0:30:08lady's concern and she may wish to seek a backbench debate to discuss

0:30:08 > 0:30:17this concerning issue.Following on from my colleague, this week to bury

0:30:17 > 0:30:21vulnerable people were driven from Taunton Deane and left in Bridgwater

0:30:21 > 0:30:25on an excuse which I find unacceptable in the 21st century.

0:30:25 > 0:30:28They unfortunately were left to tonight 's fending for themselves

0:30:28 > 0:30:34and a tragedy could have occurred. If it wasn't very kind people we

0:30:34 > 0:30:37would have had a nightmare on our hands. Can I follow my Labour

0:30:37 > 0:30:41colleagues to say can we please have a debate in this House and homeless

0:30:41 > 0:30:46people and people who are vulnerable in our society. Can we please have a

0:30:46 > 0:30:53debate in government time to talk about this.Just before the Leader

0:30:53 > 0:30:55of the House responds I listened most attentively to what the

0:30:55 > 0:31:01honourable gentleman said, but can I just very politely say to him that

0:31:01 > 0:31:06if he is going to refer to another honourable member's constituency it

0:31:06 > 0:31:12would be a courtesy to notify that member in advance. That's all I want

0:31:12 > 0:31:15to say. Matters should be sorted out between colleagues but I think that

0:31:15 > 0:31:19that is what I would call a point of courtesy rather than a point of

0:31:19 > 0:31:30order.I completely share the concern about homelessness and rough

0:31:30 > 0:31:35sleeping. It is something that is a huge worry across the House and died

0:31:35 > 0:31:41in courage all members to consider combining to have a backbench debate

0:31:41 > 0:31:46on the subject. We have implemented the Homelessness Reduction Act.

0:31:46 > 0:31:51We've allocated £550 million to tackle homelessness and Rob sleeping

0:31:51 > 0:31:57through to 2020 and also 10 million of funding to support eight new

0:31:57 > 0:32:00social impact project so we can give targeted support of the most

0:32:00 > 0:32:06difficult issues around rough sleeping.I'm grateful to the Leader

0:32:06 > 0:32:09of the House that she is thinking about moving the date of the debate

0:32:09 > 0:32:12because it is better not to have it on a Thursday. Can I ask whether we

0:32:12 > 0:32:19can have a debate on Ipsa, specifically because of the way I

0:32:19 > 0:32:25will stop treated. Most employers bring forward the December staff and

0:32:25 > 0:32:32salary payment before Christmas. Why can't Ipsa do that?The honourable

0:32:32 > 0:32:36gentleman raises a very interesting point which I am happy to look into

0:32:36 > 0:32:46and his behalf.

0:32:46 > 0:32:51Mr Speaker, East Worthing will be briefer than West Worthing. When we

0:32:51 > 0:32:56going to have a debate on the parlous state of children's social

0:32:56 > 0:33:10care?My honourable friend and I share a deep interest in the plight

0:33:10 > 0:33:14of the earliest years and the importance of secure early

0:33:14 > 0:33:17attachment for the future mental and emotional well-being of children,

0:33:17 > 0:33:24right the way through their lives. I certainly and always happy to

0:33:24 > 0:33:26support in his efforts to achieve debates in this House on that

0:33:26 > 0:33:36subject.I have details here from Norfolk police of regular occasions

0:33:36 > 0:33:41when people are held unlawfully by the police while they are waiting

0:33:41 > 0:33:45for mental health services to respond. In one case someone was

0:33:45 > 0:33:48detained for 68 hours in police custody. We know this is now

0:33:48 > 0:33:55happening around the country quite readily. Will the Leader of the

0:33:55 > 0:33:59House arrange for the Health Secretary to make a statement to

0:33:59 > 0:34:03this House? It is surely intolerable that the police are put into a

0:34:03 > 0:34:07position where they are having to detain people unlawfully because of

0:34:07 > 0:34:17failures of mental health services. Well, what I can say to the

0:34:17 > 0:34:22gentleman is the government has shown a huge commitment to mental

0:34:22 > 0:34:27health services. I share his concern about the specific point he raises

0:34:27 > 0:34:31and I do encourage him to try and attend health questions next Tuesday

0:34:31 > 0:34:38where he will get the opportunity to ask ministers directly.Thank you Mr

0:34:38 > 0:34:41Speaker for your words about the courtesies of this House and the way

0:34:41 > 0:34:45we should conduct ourselves. I wanted to say that last week I met

0:34:45 > 0:34:48with the Taunton Chamber of Commerce and most of the members of that

0:34:48 > 0:34:52chamber are small and medium-sized businesses and are the backbone of

0:34:52 > 0:34:57our thriving economy in Taunton and Wellington. Enabling them to grow is

0:34:57 > 0:35:00really important as we move forward, especially with Brexit. Could we

0:35:00 > 0:35:08have a debate on how to benefit this sector in the south-west with

0:35:08 > 0:35:12specific reference on how to unlock opportunities through the government

0:35:12 > 0:35:18is commendable industrial strategy? I totally agree with my honourable

0:35:18 > 0:35:23friend. SME's are the lifeblood of our economy and they deserve our

0:35:23 > 0:35:26praise and support. Taunton Chamber of Commerce are putting some

0:35:26 > 0:35:30incredibly smart measures in place to support local businesses and I

0:35:30 > 0:35:34congratulate them for that. Our industrial strategy will support

0:35:34 > 0:35:38businesses. The retail sector will benefit from business rate relief,

0:35:38 > 0:35:45cutting £10 billion of red tape and improving access to finance.

0:35:45 > 0:36:01LAUGHTERThank you Mr Speaker. Let me tell the House about my

0:36:01 > 0:36:12constituent. He wasn't allowed to take breaks. He was then refused

0:36:12 > 0:36:17annual leave and was prevented from carrying annual leave over. Due to

0:36:17 > 0:36:23the tribunal fees he wasn't able to take them to court. I've managed to

0:36:23 > 0:36:27get him some money back but they haven't engaged in any meaningful

0:36:27 > 0:36:32way with myself to get him full compensation. Can I get a statement

0:36:32 > 0:36:36confirming the Leader of the House will review how they treat employees

0:36:36 > 0:36:43and advise how I can get that settlement back?As he often does

0:36:43 > 0:36:46the honourable gentleman raises a very serious constituency issue and

0:36:46 > 0:36:50I recommend to him that he seeks an adjournment debate so he can address

0:36:50 > 0:36:58this directly with ministers.This evening I'll be joining the upfield

0:36:58 > 0:37:01Chamber of Commerce that their Christmas dinner celebrating small

0:37:01 > 0:37:06businesses across my constituency providing opportunity and security.

0:37:06 > 0:37:12In fact, since 2010 1000 jobs have been created every day. Will the

0:37:12 > 0:37:16Leader of the House provide time for debate on the government's success

0:37:16 > 0:37:23in employment?Well, I'm very pleased to join my honourable friend

0:37:23 > 0:37:28in welcoming the latest employment figures and in congratulating

0:37:28 > 0:37:33upfield Chamber of Commerce that the work they do to support businesses.

0:37:33 > 0:37:37There are 325,000 more people in work than this time last year. Youth

0:37:37 > 0:37:43unemployment is down 416,000 since 2010. Figures I'm sure the whole

0:37:43 > 0:37:51house will welcome.Last night we had the unedifying sight of a

0:37:51 > 0:37:53government Minister frantically coming to the dispatch box to give

0:37:53 > 0:37:56concessions to his own backbenchers to push through government policy.

0:37:56 > 0:38:01Last week we had clause 11 of the EU Withdrawal Bill where many of the

0:38:01 > 0:38:04backbenches on the government side said it was deficient but amendments

0:38:04 > 0:38:08were brought forward. Can we have a statement or debate when the

0:38:08 > 0:38:11government will bring forward amendments to crawl seven which her

0:38:11 > 0:38:16side says is deficient in the Bill? -- clause seven.The honourable

0:38:16 > 0:38:22gentleman will be aware that they ate as I've just announced of the EU

0:38:22 > 0:38:25Withdrawal Bill will be debated next week so he may wish to raise his

0:38:25 > 0:38:31point Ben -- day eight will be debated next week the whole house

0:38:31 > 0:38:35will agree constituency thought to be equalised but the departure.--

0:38:35 > 0:38:39we will be cutting the cost of governance. Can she make sure any

0:38:39 > 0:38:44private members Bill coming along that my correct this debate gets the

0:38:44 > 0:38:54money billet needs? -- Bill that it needs.I will look closely at what

0:38:54 > 0:39:05might honourable friend suggests. Can if I may declare an interest. I

0:39:05 > 0:39:10travel to Bangladesh to see the Rohingya refugee camps. Can I ask

0:39:10 > 0:39:14the Leader of the House, can we have a debate on the situation of the

0:39:14 > 0:39:17Rohingya? I know there have been a number of debates focusing on the

0:39:17 > 0:39:24crisis as people fled Myanmar. The situation of 800,000 people living

0:39:24 > 0:39:29in camps and 36,000 unaccompanied children, 30,000 women who have been

0:39:29 > 0:39:33raped and are now pregnant, the need for clean water, the need for

0:39:33 > 0:39:37refugees, we need to know what the ongoing commitment about our

0:39:37 > 0:39:43government and ministers will be to help the plight of the Rohingya.

0:39:43 > 0:39:46Festival I commend the honourable gentleman who are going to see fit

0:39:46 > 0:39:50himself, I know a number of honourable members from all sides of

0:39:50 > 0:39:54the House have been to lend their own personal support and I commend

0:39:54 > 0:39:58all of them for that. It is a harrowing case. We've had three

0:39:58 > 0:40:02debates and questions on this subject in September and I know the

0:40:02 > 0:40:07government is watching it incredibly closely. My right honourable friend

0:40:07 > 0:40:09the International Development Secretary has announced further UK

0:40:09 > 0:40:14aid of £12 million to try and help support the Rohingya people,

0:40:14 > 0:40:18bringing the UK's total support of £59 million. I also want to commend

0:40:18 > 0:40:24the generosity of the British people who have personally contributed

0:40:24 > 0:40:26millions of pounds to helping support the plight of the Rohingya

0:40:26 > 0:40:38people.According to the latest Office of National Statistics

0:40:38 > 0:40:44figures, unemployment in Crawley has reduced by 59% since 2010. Can we

0:40:44 > 0:40:48have a debate early in the New Year and continuing economic policies

0:40:48 > 0:40:52that increase employment and therefore more revenue for our

0:40:52 > 0:40:57important public services?I'm delighted to hear about the

0:40:57 > 0:41:02employment statistics in my honourable friend's constituency. I

0:41:02 > 0:41:07know he shares my enthusiasm for the fact employment is up more than 3

0:41:07 > 0:41:10million since 2010. That's more people than ever before with these

0:41:10 > 0:41:19security of a pay packet to support themselves and their families.The

0:41:19 > 0:41:21government's draft ombudsman Bill is of great interest to many of my

0:41:21 > 0:41:26constituents who are victims to the attacks of the technology pension

0:41:26 > 0:41:29scheme which cannot be investigated due to a loophole in the law. Will

0:41:29 > 0:41:33the leader find the time for this important Bill to come to the House

0:41:33 > 0:41:39in the New Year?The honourable lady will be aware that the government

0:41:39 > 0:41:44considers carefully all of the potential different bills and tries

0:41:44 > 0:41:49to accommodate as far as possible those important bills that improve

0:41:49 > 0:41:52the lives of all of our constituents. She raises an

0:41:52 > 0:41:58important issue and I will look at it.Can we have a debate in this

0:41:58 > 0:42:02House and very damaging policies being pursued by the SNP with regard

0:42:02 > 0:42:08to taxation which will have a huge impact on my constituents and across

0:42:08 > 0:42:14Scotland? Does my right honourable friend agree with me that the SNP

0:42:14 > 0:42:17should stick with their manifesto commitment of not raising the basic

0:42:17 > 0:42:23rate of income tax which they went to the Scottish public with, to stop

0:42:23 > 0:42:29Scotland being the highest taxed part of the UK?My honourable friend

0:42:29 > 0:42:35continues to be a champion for his constituents and he's absolutely

0:42:35 > 0:42:39right to raise his concerns. Income tax powers were an important part of

0:42:39 > 0:42:42the Smith commission recommendations and we have devolved them through

0:42:42 > 0:42:47the Scotland Act of 2016. It does say a lot about the priorities of

0:42:47 > 0:42:51the Scottish Government that within just a year of having these powers

0:42:51 > 0:42:55they are threatening to renege on a manifesto commitment. As I said

0:42:55 > 0:43:00earlier, it would be a great shame that if Scotland were to become the

0:43:00 > 0:43:09highest taxed part of the UK.Mr Speaker, does the Leader of the

0:43:09 > 0:43:14House understand that 1,300,000 people will be killed this year by

0:43:14 > 0:43:20road death? Does she understand also that this week we have had global

0:43:20 > 0:43:24legislators from all over the world in this Parliament including the

0:43:24 > 0:43:30Speaker of the Moldovan Parliament here debating the auspices of the

0:43:30 > 0:43:34zero foundation that we will actually tackle this? It's the

0:43:34 > 0:43:38greatest epidemic of our time, can we have a debate on it in the New

0:43:38 > 0:43:50Year?I'm certainly aware that the government have tried hard to insert

0:43:50 > 0:43:53year -- ensure that we reduce incidence of road traffic accidents

0:43:53 > 0:43:56and tried to provide all drivers with the right know-how to be able

0:43:56 > 0:44:01to drive safely and carefully. He will be aware of legislation coming

0:44:01 > 0:44:05forward for driverless vehicles and that is an opportunity to improve

0:44:05 > 0:44:11road safety. But nevertheless he may well wish to seek an adjournment

0:44:11 > 0:44:14debate so you can discuss the specific and good work of the

0:44:14 > 0:44:19organisation he mentions.Thank you. The government is committed to

0:44:19 > 0:44:23helping at least another 11 million children in the poorest countries

0:44:23 > 0:44:29get a decent education by 2020. Will the leader find the time to hold a

0:44:29 > 0:44:32debate on the importance of investing in education as a means to

0:44:32 > 0:44:40helping children out of poverty?

0:44:40 > 0:44:42My honourable friend raises something the Government is

0:44:42 > 0:44:47extremely proud of and that is our efforts at international aid support

0:44:47 > 0:44:52all young people everywhere to get a decent education and I do encourage

0:44:52 > 0:44:57him to seek an adjournment debate or perhaps a backbench debate so all

0:44:57 > 0:45:00colleagues can celebrate the contribution of the UK people

0:45:00 > 0:45:09towards ensuring education for all. With an estimated 1400 people with

0:45:09 > 0:45:13dementia stuck in hospital on Christmas Day, dementia patients

0:45:13 > 0:45:17will make up a quarter of people who will spend this Christmas Day in

0:45:17 > 0:45:22hospital because of delays in finding them care. The Alzheimer

0:45:22 > 0:45:33Society described hospital wards as being turned into waiting rooms...I

0:45:33 > 0:45:38think we all share in the desire to see, particularly at Christmas, as

0:45:38 > 0:45:42many people as possible receiving the right sort of care and

0:45:42 > 0:45:47protection and also some company. I think the issue of loneliness is

0:45:47 > 0:45:52also something that's been raised in this chamber a great deal. We all

0:45:52 > 0:45:56know that the NHS faces increased pressures at wintertime and that's

0:45:56 > 0:46:02why we have put in place an extra £335 million on top of the

0:46:02 > 0:46:10previously announced 100 million for A&E departments. Beds have been

0:46:10 > 0:46:15freed up since February and areas continue to work to increase that

0:46:15 > 0:46:20number to 3000 extra beds over the winter period. Really important for

0:46:20 > 0:46:22those who find themselves in hospital during the Christmas

0:46:22 > 0:46:34period.Will the Leader of the House join me in congratulating the Cancer

0:46:34 > 0:46:41Research UK committee for launching Cancer Research UK hat and scarf.

0:46:41 > 0:46:45Some colleagues are in the gallery today showing off the wonderful

0:46:45 > 0:46:53staff. Will the leader consider calling a debate on the excellent

0:46:53 > 0:46:55work of charities in fighting cancer and will the right honourable friend

0:46:55 > 0:47:02agree with me it is a fetching item that will no doubt raise lots of

0:47:02 > 0:47:08money for Cancer Research UK?By sheer coincidence, this morning I

0:47:08 > 0:47:12decided to wear a pink jacket, and when my honourable friend presented

0:47:12 > 0:47:17me with one of these wonderful scarves that Elaine and her

0:47:17 > 0:47:21colleagues have produced for Cancer Research UK I was absolutely

0:47:21 > 0:47:26delighted to find the chill in this chamber could be offset by something

0:47:26 > 0:47:30warm from Scotland. I'm absolutely delighted with the contribution of

0:47:30 > 0:47:36all of those volunteers to come Syriza, having had family members

0:47:36 > 0:47:40suffer from this terrible disease myself. We should all celebrate the

0:47:40 > 0:47:46excellent work of volunteers.If I had known of the intention of the

0:47:46 > 0:47:50honourable gentleman in advance and of the sartorial plans of the Leader

0:47:50 > 0:47:54of the House, I would myself have worn a pink tie of which I'm proud

0:47:54 > 0:48:00to say I have several. Nevertheless the important point is the great

0:48:00 > 0:48:02cause has been eloquently highlighted and that is what this

0:48:02 > 0:48:13place exists to do.Could she asked the Department for Work and Pensions

0:48:13 > 0:48:22to come before the House to talk about personal independence

0:48:22 > 0:48:27payments. I had a case of a lady recently who had cancer which has

0:48:27 > 0:48:31had life changing effects on Earth. When I challenged the case, they

0:48:31 > 0:48:38said it had been below standard. Can she ask them to come urgently and

0:48:38 > 0:48:44make a statement?The honourable gentleman raises concerning case and

0:48:44 > 0:48:49I'm sure ministers would be happy to talk to him about this. In fact if

0:48:49 > 0:48:53he wants to e-mail me I can take it up on his behalf but I would say

0:48:53 > 0:48:57this Government has been committed to helping those with disabilities

0:48:57 > 0:49:02to take control of their own care and to be able to be funded to meet

0:49:02 > 0:49:06their own needs and also to help them get into work, which for many

0:49:06 > 0:49:11people gives them the opportunity to contribute and have the

0:49:11 > 0:49:14self-confidence that arises from being able to work within their

0:49:14 > 0:49:20capability to do so.On one of the and busiest Saturdays in the run-up

0:49:20 > 0:49:28to Christmas in Totnes, local activists decided to parade with a

0:49:28 > 0:49:34real coffin and leave a large carefully constructed model of a

0:49:34 > 0:49:38coffin at my constituency office. Does the Leader of the House feel,

0:49:38 > 0:49:43particularly in light of the report on intimidation in public life, this

0:49:43 > 0:49:48overstepped the line of decency and there are real dangers in using the

0:49:48 > 0:49:51imagery of death directed against individuals to whip up hatred and

0:49:51 > 0:49:56most importantly of all this kind of thing deters good candidates from

0:49:56 > 0:50:04applying for public life.Yes, I was disgusted, as I'm sure all

0:50:04 > 0:50:08honourable and right honourable members work to hear about the awful

0:50:08 > 0:50:13experience of my honourable friend, and really high at the time texted

0:50:13 > 0:50:18heard to say I hope she was OK. That must have been terrifying, truly

0:50:18 > 0:50:23horrible. We should all condemn it and call it out wherever we see this

0:50:23 > 0:50:29kind of behaviour. I think the report into the abuse and

0:50:29 > 0:50:32intimidation of candidates highlights that this is not a simple

0:50:32 > 0:50:39matter of holding politicians to account. This goes far beyond that

0:50:39 > 0:50:47and it will be a deterrent to seeing the calibre of candidates we want so

0:50:47 > 0:50:57we all combine in condemning that action against my friend.Can the

0:50:57 > 0:51:03Minister arrange for a debate in Government time, and don't refer me

0:51:03 > 0:51:07for an adjournment debate, on the impact of Brexit on the national

0:51:07 > 0:51:19health service and the threat of privatisation?Since this September,

0:51:19 > 0:51:22the Department for exiting the EU has answered departmental questions

0:51:22 > 0:51:26on three occasions including just before now. They have made several

0:51:26 > 0:51:31oral statements. Deputy ministers have appeared before the select

0:51:31 > 0:51:38committee on three occasions and that's in addition to the many hours

0:51:38 > 0:51:41we have already spent discussing legislation and we will of course be

0:51:41 > 0:51:45discussing further legislation in great detail over the next 18 months

0:51:45 > 0:51:49so I'm sure the honourable gentleman will have ample opportunity to raise

0:51:49 > 0:51:56his specific interests.Can we have a debate on government time with

0:51:56 > 0:52:01relation to dementia? Many members in this House have family members

0:52:01 > 0:52:05who suffer from this wicked and cruel disease. Can we have a debate

0:52:05 > 0:52:09where we look at not just the disease itself, but the social care

0:52:09 > 0:52:13system, the health service and all other aspects of society that

0:52:13 > 0:52:19touches on dementia and hopefully let's take this action forward.My

0:52:19 > 0:52:23honourable friend raises an issue that is of concern to all of us in

0:52:23 > 0:52:27our constituencies and often also in our families and it's certainly

0:52:27 > 0:52:31something that is an increasing problem in the UK and across the

0:52:31 > 0:52:34world and something we should regularly discuss so I do encourage

0:52:34 > 0:52:38him to seek perhaps a backbench debate on that subject so we can

0:52:38 > 0:52:41look at exactly what further measures can be taken to ensure we

0:52:41 > 0:52:45do the best we can for those suffering from dementia and their

0:52:45 > 0:52:53families and friends.As part of the work of the cross-party commission,

0:52:53 > 0:52:56looking into the root causes of youth violence, this week we heard

0:52:56 > 0:53:02from a panel of experts about the public health approach to reducing

0:53:02 > 0:53:06violence and the evidence -based results they have achieved. Can we

0:53:06 > 0:53:13have a debate on this extremely important issue?The honourable lady

0:53:13 > 0:53:17has worked hard on this issue and I commend her for that and I do

0:53:17 > 0:53:21encourage her to seek an adjournment debate on the subject. I'm sure it

0:53:21 > 0:53:26would be of interest to a great number of members.On Tuesday night

0:53:26 > 0:53:30members from across the House attended the Grenfell United meeting

0:53:30 > 0:53:39on which you made a deeply emotional and moving introduction. But the

0:53:39 > 0:53:44reality is that most survivors gave stories that are truly harrowing.

0:53:44 > 0:53:49The reality is that this Christmas most of those survivors will still

0:53:49 > 0:53:57be in hotels or bed and breakfast accommodation. Equally, the people

0:53:57 > 0:54:03of this country have very willingly parted with huge amounts of money in

0:54:03 > 0:54:07compensation for those victims. The money can't bring their relatives

0:54:07 > 0:54:11back but that money does not appear to be going and reaching the victims

0:54:11 > 0:54:17and those people last ill in temporary housing. So could we have

0:54:17 > 0:54:21two statements, Mr Speaker, one from the Secretary of State on the

0:54:21 > 0:54:29progress of rehousing the survivors, but also from the Secretary of State

0:54:29 > 0:54:32for Culture, Media and Sport who are responsible I understand for the

0:54:32 > 0:54:34money being distributed to the victims on where the money is going

0:54:34 > 0:54:39and how it will reach the victims so they can live their lives at least

0:54:39 > 0:54:48in some degree of comfort.My honourable friend raises some very

0:54:48 > 0:54:52important points and I will very happily go away and discuss that

0:54:52 > 0:55:03with our honourable friends in the DCLG. Latest figures I have are that

0:55:03 > 0:55:09142 of the 151 households of accepted an offer of either

0:55:09 > 0:55:12temporary or permanent accommodation, 99 of these have

0:55:12 > 0:55:18moved in and of which 54 households have moved into temporary

0:55:18 > 0:55:22accommodation and 45 into permanent accommodation. But I think is all

0:55:22 > 0:55:27honourable members will know and appreciate, we can move only at the

0:55:27 > 0:55:32pace that those survivors wish to go out and it's a very difficult area

0:55:32 > 0:55:37and nobody wants to force anybody to move at a pace they are

0:55:37 > 0:55:41uncomfortable with. I hope all honourable members will rest assured

0:55:41 > 0:55:46the Government is utterly determined to provide the right level of

0:55:46 > 0:55:51support and care for all those who are still very much suffering at the

0:55:51 > 0:55:58present time.Is it possible, given the ongoing problems with the

0:55:58 > 0:56:03roll-out, that we can have a statement or an urgent debate on

0:56:03 > 0:56:08Universal Credit? There's a family in my constituency who were told to

0:56:08 > 0:56:13claim Universal Credit and shut down their child tax credit claim. That

0:56:13 > 0:56:18was the wrong advice as they had more than two children. They are now

0:56:18 > 0:56:24being told to claim job-seeker's allowance which HMRC won't backdate

0:56:24 > 0:56:30or reinstate their tax credits. So they are living on less than £1 60

0:56:30 > 0:56:36per day. Given the UN's target of nobody should be below two dollars

0:56:36 > 0:56:42per day, how does that sit with the Government's anti-poverty strategy?

0:56:42 > 0:56:49The honourable gentleman raises a very concerning constituency matter.

0:56:49 > 0:56:54He may well wish to raise that specific point on Monday. On

0:56:54 > 0:56:59Universal Credit more generally, the Government really has listened, this

0:56:59 > 0:57:04is an attempt to ensure that Universal Credit provides a good

0:57:04 > 0:57:09solution for people that combines six PVS benefits into one, that

0:57:09 > 0:57:15improves access to childcare -- six previous benefits into one, it

0:57:15 > 0:57:20enables them to keep more of what they earn as they move into work.

0:57:20 > 0:57:25They can get 100% of their first payment up front if they need to and

0:57:25 > 0:57:28return it over 12 months. We have introduced an overlap for those

0:57:28 > 0:57:33already receiving housing benefit to ensure a smooth transition onto the

0:57:33 > 0:57:37new system, and really importantly Universal Credit is expected to

0:57:37 > 0:57:44boost employment by 250,000. Because it is a simpler system that makes

0:57:44 > 0:57:56sure work always pays.A family run high street shop in my constituency

0:57:56 > 0:58:00recently received national and international notoriety by taking on

0:58:00 > 0:58:04the big hitting supermarkets and produced the ultimate heart-warming

0:58:04 > 0:58:10Christmas advert for the production cost of just £7. I strongly

0:58:10 > 0:58:14recommend all members of this House to go online and look at it. But can

0:58:14 > 0:58:19I ask my right honourable friend if we can have a debate on how we

0:58:19 > 0:58:24promote our independent high-street shops, showing that through sheer

0:58:24 > 0:58:30imagination and ingenuity, David really can't take on Goliath.I

0:58:30 > 0:58:33congratulate Harford hardware on their Christmas advert. It just goes

0:58:33 > 0:58:41to show the kind of entrepreneurial spirit in our businesses. We aim to

0:58:41 > 0:58:44support businesses like this to prosper and grow so they can compete

0:58:44 > 0:58:52with the likes of Moz the monster with their own successful Christmas

0:58:52 > 0:58:56campaigns.My constituent Matthew pounder was served an eviction

0:58:56 > 0:59:00notice when he chose to switch to a month by month contract rather than

0:59:00 > 0:59:06sign up to a 12 month tenancy. He later discovered letting agents.

0:59:06 > 0:59:10Told his landlords Matthew wanted to leave the property. The agents try

0:59:10 > 0:59:14to force him out of the home in order to profit from the fees of a

0:59:14 > 0:59:20new tenancy. Can we look at how we can strengthen regulations on how to

0:59:20 > 0:59:23protect renters.

0:59:23 > 0:59:27Again, the honourable gentleman raises an important and concerning

0:59:27 > 0:59:33case. As I've mentioned there are DWP questions on Monday. It may be

0:59:33 > 0:59:38tricky but he may find a way to be able to raise the question there.

0:59:38 > 0:59:41More generally what I would say to the honourable gentleman is the

0:59:41 > 0:59:46government is looking at measures to protect rental tenants better. The

0:59:46 > 0:59:50draft measures coming forward and consultations and wait to try and

0:59:50 > 0:59:53ensure that people in rented accommodation have protected

0:59:53 > 0:59:57tenancies and more security in the longevity of their ability to remain

0:59:57 > 1:00:07in their home.Good news, more people are getting on their bike. In

1:00:07 > 1:00:12my constituency for work or leisure. That's a good thing because it's

1:00:12 > 1:00:17very polluted in my constituency. But a number of my constituents have

1:00:17 > 1:00:21contacted me about shared spaces and the danger of pedestrians mixing

1:00:21 > 1:00:25with cyclists and the impact on people with impaired vision. Could

1:00:25 > 1:00:32the Leader of the House find time for a debate on this safety issue?I

1:00:32 > 1:00:35know my honourable friend always speaks up for her constituents and

1:00:35 > 1:00:39particularly she is concerned about congestion and a big fan of cycling

1:00:39 > 1:00:45so I commend her for that. She's right to raise the issue of sharing

1:00:45 > 1:00:48pavements between cyclists and pedestrians and I encourage her to

1:00:48 > 1:00:51seek an adjournment debate so she can talk about the specific concerns

1:00:51 > 1:00:57she has.I've recently been contacted by five constituents who

1:00:57 > 1:01:03have told me that the pain infusions they need are being stopped because

1:01:03 > 1:01:07of government cuts to East Riding CCG. Please can we have an urgent

1:01:07 > 1:01:13debate on the levels of funding for the CCGs to provide therapeutic care

1:01:13 > 1:01:19so these people can continue to have some quality of life?What I can say

1:01:19 > 1:01:27is that NHS funding will be over half £1 trillion from 2015 to 2020.

1:01:27 > 1:01:34We have record funding for the NHS. Record numbers of doctors, nurses

1:01:34 > 1:01:37and midwives. Last year the NHS treated more people than ever

1:01:37 > 1:01:42before. The Commonwealth fund has rated the NHS the number one health

1:01:42 > 1:01:45system in the world for the second time in a row. There is record

1:01:45 > 1:01:50funding available to the NHS. Where she has specific concerns she should

1:01:50 > 1:01:53absolutely raise them with ministers, but be in no doubt this

1:01:53 > 1:01:59government is absolutely committed to a successful NHS that protects

1:01:59 > 1:02:03our people and the people of this country benefit from the amazing

1:02:03 > 1:02:07work done by all our NHS staff

1:02:07 > 1:02:09country benefit from the amazing work done by all our NHS staff.

1:02:09 > 1:02:16Would the Leader of the House join me in welcoming ID cards for

1:02:16 > 1:02:20Britain's 2.5 million military veterans and will she provide time

1:02:20 > 1:02:26for a debate for our veterans and the Armed Forces Covenant?I do

1:02:26 > 1:02:30commend the honourable friend to the work he does as the treasurer of the

1:02:30 > 1:02:34APPG on the Armed Forces Covenant. As the Prime Minister has already

1:02:34 > 1:02:39said, those who have served deserve recognition for their sacrifice and

1:02:39 > 1:02:44we will continue to make sure they get it. As part of the government's

1:02:44 > 1:02:48continued commitment to the veterans card will ensure the public can

1:02:48 > 1:02:52recognise our heroes when they are accessing specific support such as

1:02:52 > 1:02:59for health care, housing and the charitable sector.Tonight Cardiff

1:02:59 > 1:03:02has been designated officially as a music city and can I congratulate

1:03:02 > 1:03:09the campaign and colleagues in Cardiff for that achievement. In the

1:03:09 > 1:03:13New Year when my honourable friend brings in his ten minute rule Bill

1:03:13 > 1:03:17on January the tent, will she take a look at it and consider giving it

1:03:17 > 1:03:20government time in order to make sure that other parts of the country

1:03:20 > 1:03:27can benefit from having great music venues into the future?I think

1:03:27 > 1:03:33music brings enormous pressure right across the UK and I congratulate

1:03:33 > 1:03:36Cardiff for the opportunity to celebrate musical achievements. I'm

1:03:36 > 1:03:40not completely familiar with the event that he is raising but I

1:03:40 > 1:03:44congratulate them and wish them every success with it. I will of

1:03:44 > 1:03:52course look closely at the ten minute rule Bill.Enfield is very

1:03:52 > 1:03:55fortunate to benefit from three local theatres, the Millfield

1:03:55 > 1:04:01chicken shed and the Birkdale. I'll be taking my grandchildren to the

1:04:01 > 1:04:11Millfield to enjoy Dick Whittington over the Christmas period. These

1:04:11 > 1:04:17kind of local facilities are very important. Can we have a early

1:04:17 > 1:04:21debating government time about how the government's very deep cuts to

1:04:21 > 1:04:25local authorities has affected the ability of the arts venues to

1:04:25 > 1:04:31provide these kind of events and programmes for local people?

1:04:31 > 1:04:39Certainly can I congratulate all those taking part in those plays at

1:04:39 > 1:04:43Christmas time. The pantomime is such good fun, my family continues

1:04:43 > 1:04:51to enjoy it. It is important we continue to enjoy and support those

1:04:51 > 1:04:55local venues and the arts are a vital part of a thriving UK economy.

1:04:55 > 1:04:59She will be pleased to know there are these CMS questions next week,

1:04:59 > 1:05:06she can raise how this government supports the arts and she will have

1:05:06 > 1:05:16the chance before Christmas to put her questions to ministers.May we

1:05:16 > 1:05:21have a debate on the needful easylaw lords etched by the all-party

1:05:21 > 1:05:31Parliamentary Group -- Lucy's law. Lucy was a black spaniel who was

1:05:31 > 1:05:39puppy farms and sadly died.I think the honourable lady is absolutely

1:05:39 > 1:05:44right to raise this issue. We are a nation of animal lovers. I myself as

1:05:44 > 1:05:49Defra Secretary was pleased to change the rules on puppy licensing

1:05:49 > 1:05:54and it's important we continue to do everything we can to enhance our

1:05:54 > 1:06:00already very high standards of animal welfare.Like many across

1:06:00 > 1:06:04this House I'm becoming increasingly concerned about the impact of

1:06:04 > 1:06:09government policies on the mental help of my constituents, especially

1:06:09 > 1:06:13those moving onto Universal Credit over Christmas. Can we have a debate

1:06:13 > 1:06:21in government time on the impact of government policy on mental health?

1:06:21 > 1:06:25The honourable gentleman is right that mental health is a very key and

1:06:25 > 1:06:31important issue across the UK. He will be pleased to know that around

1:06:31 > 1:06:341400 more people are accessing mental health services every day

1:06:34 > 1:06:39compared to 2010, that is up 40%. There is a fivefold increase in the

1:06:39 > 1:06:44number of people accessing talking therapies since 2010 and spending on

1:06:44 > 1:06:48mental health has increased to a record 11.6 billion. There is a long

1:06:48 > 1:06:51way to go and I certainly was delighted to see the government's

1:06:51 > 1:06:56launch of the green paper on mental health last week. I'm sure the

1:06:56 > 1:07:00honourable gentleman will want to take part in that discussion and

1:07:00 > 1:07:09provide his input to it.Mr Speaker, this week the humanitarian

1:07:09 > 1:07:13organisation the Enough Project published a report which outlines

1:07:13 > 1:07:17the government of Sudan's continued oppression of religious minorities

1:07:17 > 1:07:21and support for extremist groups. Despite the Sudanese government

1:07:21 > 1:07:24claims of improving human rights, there is an ongoing campaign of

1:07:24 > 1:07:30violence against Christians, Muslims and other groups. The Leader of the

1:07:30 > 1:07:36House agreed to a statement on this matter?The honourable gentleman

1:07:36 > 1:07:40raises a very serious issue about human rights and particularly the

1:07:40 > 1:07:44rights of different religious groups. As ever I encourage him to

1:07:44 > 1:07:53seek an adjournment debate on the very important points he raises.

1:07:53 > 1:07:58There is her tanned the world are meant amongst many disabled people

1:07:58 > 1:08:02about the extraordinary statement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that

1:08:02 > 1:08:07one of the reasons for Britain's low productivity figures is the

1:08:07 > 1:08:10excessive number of disabled people in the workforce. This is the

1:08:10 > 1:08:18reverse of the truth, because every disabled person who comes from

1:08:18 > 1:08:22benefits to full-time work improve productivity figures. When can we

1:08:22 > 1:08:28have a debate to celebrate the great work of all governments and the

1:08:28 > 1:08:32European Union in increasing opportunities for disabled people to

1:08:32 > 1:08:36get into the workplace, and to thank them for their heroic contributions

1:08:36 > 1:08:43to our economy?The honourable gentleman is raising a really

1:08:43 > 1:08:48important point about the contribution of disabled people to

1:08:48 > 1:08:51our economy, and I'm absolutely delighted to thank and praise them

1:08:51 > 1:08:55from the dispatch box for the contribution they make. There are

1:08:55 > 1:09:00now more than 600,000 more disabled people in work over the last three

1:09:00 > 1:09:06years, 3.5 million people now in work who have disabilities. This

1:09:06 > 1:09:08government has a proud record of supporting them and encouraging

1:09:08 > 1:09:18them.Following yesterday's victory in Parliament over the meaningful

1:09:18 > 1:09:29vote, will the Leader of the House make time available for a DeXEU

1:09:29 > 1:09:38ministered to set out the assessment they have conducted over the impact

1:09:38 > 1:09:43of Brexit?As ever the honourable gentleman uses terms that I would

1:09:43 > 1:09:48not personally use. There will be ample opportunities for him to raise

1:09:48 > 1:09:53any questions that he has about the arrangements of the UK as we seek to

1:09:53 > 1:09:58leave the EU with the best possible deal for all of the United Kingdom

1:09:58 > 1:10:02and for our EU friends and neighbours. That is what the

1:10:02 > 1:10:06government is determined to do to fulfil the referendum that took

1:10:06 > 1:10:11place last year that took the very clear decision that the UK will be

1:10:11 > 1:10:19leaving the European Union.Last week I chaired an event has chaired

1:10:19 > 1:10:23of the social enterprise all-party group on Chris White a former Member

1:10:23 > 1:10:26for Leamington and I mentioned this to the current member earlier.

1:10:26 > 1:10:35Chris's report reviewed the public services value Act and recommended

1:10:35 > 1:10:45to strengthen, extend social value including to this praise. --

1:10:45 > 1:10:50displays.It sounds like a very interesting report. Not one I'd seen

1:10:50 > 1:10:53myself but I think the honourable gentleman is right to raise it. We

1:10:53 > 1:10:57need to look at ways to ensure we get the best value for the public

1:10:57 > 1:11:04purse than para gym to seek an adjournment debate -- and I

1:11:04 > 1:11:08encourage him.I received notification from the post office

1:11:08 > 1:11:13that their branch in my constituency was closing. I understand they were

1:11:13 > 1:11:17aware for almost a year but they just gave myself and constituents

1:11:17 > 1:11:22three weeks notice. To rub salt in, they also asked me if I had any idea

1:11:22 > 1:11:26who might be interested in taking over the branch. This is no way to

1:11:26 > 1:11:31run a business let alone a public servers. Can we have a debate on the

1:11:31 > 1:11:35competence and accountability of those running the post office?I'm

1:11:35 > 1:11:40genuinely sorry to hear that, I think that is unusual. Normally with

1:11:40 > 1:11:44post office closures all members receive good prior notice in

1:11:44 > 1:11:47colluding specific requests for suggestions on who might be

1:11:47 > 1:11:51interested in taking over, and obviously quite often we as MPs are

1:11:51 > 1:11:54in a position to suggest individuals. I'm generally sorry to

1:11:54 > 1:11:57hear about that. He may be interested to know that next

1:11:57 > 1:12:02Wednesday there is a debate on post office closures in Westminster Hall

1:12:02 > 1:12:12and he may wish to take part in that.One in ten fathers suffer with

1:12:12 > 1:12:15postnatal depression and the suicide rate rapidly increases in men

1:12:15 > 1:12:20between the age of 30 and 43 after having a child. My constituents Mark

1:12:20 > 1:12:25Williams has been campaigning on these subjects. Can I ask the Leader

1:12:25 > 1:12:29of the House to find some time for a government debate to bring new light

1:12:29 > 1:12:33onto this part of mental health that has a real impact on fathers across

1:12:33 > 1:12:40the UK?I'm absolutely sympathetic to the honourable gentleman's point

1:12:40 > 1:12:46and in fact I may even have heard a speech by the gentleman he mentions.

1:12:46 > 1:12:51This is a subject that I care passionately about, the perinatal

1:12:51 > 1:12:58period. Not least of which because of pre-, Perry and postnatal

1:12:58 > 1:13:01depression of both mothers and fathers but of course the extremely

1:13:01 > 1:13:06profound impact that can have on the future long-term mental health of

1:13:06 > 1:13:11their child. I am very sympathetic to the honourable gentleman's point

1:13:11 > 1:13:14and I positively encourage him to seek a backbench debate on this

1:13:14 > 1:13:18subject because I know there are members who take a big interest in

1:13:18 > 1:13:25early years.The Leader of the House will be aware of industrial action

1:13:25 > 1:13:31by driving examiners this week and the concerns of many bad management

1:13:31 > 1:13:40of the DVLA are refusing to negotiate. Can we have a debate and

1:13:40 > 1:13:45ask the Department for Transport to intervene in this matter?I think

1:13:45 > 1:13:49the honourable gentleman may wish to take this up directly with the

1:13:49 > 1:13:52Department for Transport ministers. I think he will recognise that a

1:13:52 > 1:13:56debate on this subject would be very helpful to try and move things

1:13:56 > 1:13:59forward. If there are good ideas suggested by members of Parliament.

1:13:59 > 1:14:03Nevertheless it would be the ministers to intervene if there is

1:14:03 > 1:14:13intervention necessary.The people in Syria were subject to a horrific

1:14:13 > 1:14:18attack which killed 1700 people and since then 400,000 civilians have

1:14:18 > 1:14:24suffered constant artillery bombardment and the blocking of

1:14:24 > 1:14:28medical evacuations. May I ask for a statement on the representations he

1:14:28 > 1:14:35is making to help the people of eastern Ghouta and what further

1:14:35 > 1:14:43efforts can be taken to secure peace?This government has shown our

1:14:43 > 1:14:46very strong commitment to bed sharing in finding a solution to the

1:14:46 > 1:14:52problems of Syria but also in providing aid to alleviate the

1:14:52 > 1:14:57suffering of so many who have been displaced or driven away altogether

1:14:57 > 1:15:00into neighbouring countries. I think we can be proud of our contribution

1:15:00 > 1:15:05but the honourable gentleman may well wish to raise that adds an

1:15:05 > 1:15:18adjournment debate so he can speak direct with ministers.

1:15:18 > 1:15:23We now come to the select committee statement. The honourable gentleman,

1:15:23 > 1:15:29the Member for Tunbridge Morley, will speak on his subject for up to

1:15:29 > 1:15:33ten minutes during which time no interventions may be taken. At the

1:15:33 > 1:15:36conclusion of his statement I will call members to put questions on the

1:15:36 > 1:15:41subject of the statements and I shall of course therefore call the

1:15:41 > 1:15:45honourable gentleman to respond to those questions in turn. Members can

1:15:45 > 1:15:51expect to be called only once. Interventions should be questions

1:15:51 > 1:15:57and should be brief. The front bench may take part in questioning. By now

1:15:57 > 1:16:04called the chair of the foreign affairs select committee.Thank you,

1:16:04 > 1:16:07Mr Speaker, and it's a great privilege to give the first select

1:16:07 > 1:16:12committee statement to this House, to this Parliament, in this

1:16:12 > 1:16:17Parliament. It's a huge pleasure because we are delegated from this

1:16:17 > 1:16:22House to investigate a particular area, in our case foreign affairs

1:16:22 > 1:16:25and we are now reporting back to the House on our findings. The Foreign

1:16:25 > 1:16:30Affairs Committee chose to publish its report on the ethnic cleansing

1:16:30 > 1:16:37of the Rohingya population having heard harrowing testimony. It has

1:16:37 > 1:16:41rightly drawn the attention of all sides of this House and has seen

1:16:41 > 1:16:48honourable members from the City of Durham, Kettering, Bolton South

1:16:48 > 1:16:52East, Ealing Southall, Wolverhampton South West, tooting, Colchester and

1:16:52 > 1:16:56Cardiff Central take a personal interest in this issue. I pay

1:16:56 > 1:17:01particular tribute to those honourable members who have visited

1:17:01 > 1:17:05parts of the refugee community in Bangladesh to hear directly from the

1:17:05 > 1:17:09victims. The committee was able to be clear that the violence against

1:17:09 > 1:17:14the Rohingya is ethnic cleansing and may constitute crimes against

1:17:14 > 1:17:18humanity and even genocide because of the testimony we received. We are

1:17:18 > 1:17:22pleased the Government's initial equivocation about the term has now

1:17:22 > 1:17:28been clarified and the Minister has been clear that the 650,000 who have

1:17:28 > 1:17:33crossed the border into Bangladesh since August were driven out by the

1:17:33 > 1:17:36Burmese authorities. The displacement is a compelling sign of

1:17:36 > 1:17:40a desperate population and the traumatic experiences they have

1:17:40 > 1:17:45described are reminiscent of atrocities elsewhere. In the face of

1:17:45 > 1:17:52such abuse we must ask what 2005 UN resolution we agreed on the

1:17:52 > 1:17:57responsibility to protect requires of us. The first must surely be the

1:17:57 > 1:18:01UK Government conducts its own legal analysis. Such analysis from a

1:18:01 > 1:18:05permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and indeed

1:18:05 > 1:18:11the pen holder on Burma would help shape understanding of the issue and

1:18:11 > 1:18:17structure of global response. Today this is needed more than ever.

1:18:17 > 1:18:23Research found that at least 9000 Rohingya died between the 25th of

1:18:23 > 1:18:32August and the 24th of September. The charity MSF states that in the

1:18:32 > 1:18:38most Conservative estimations, at least 6000 of those deaths have been

1:18:38 > 1:18:44caused by violence. This stays the investigation conducted by the

1:18:44 > 1:18:49Burmese military was brutal enough to take the case to the

1:18:49 > 1:18:55International criminal Court for crimes against humanity. We also

1:18:55 > 1:19:02heard reports of sexual violence being used and the Secretary-General

1:19:02 > 1:19:12is expected to be there this week. We welcome too the actions taken by

1:19:12 > 1:19:15the human rights Council to hear about the degradation and treatment

1:19:15 > 1:19:23of minorities in Burma. These build on the achievements of our own

1:19:23 > 1:19:27representatives in the UN to secure a very strong presidential

1:19:27 > 1:19:33statement. Burma's response to this growing wadi of evidence or indeed

1:19:33 > 1:19:39evidence of bodies has been exceptionally poor. The commission

1:19:39 > 1:19:43was clear and recall for its recommendations to be implemented in

1:19:43 > 1:19:47full. That's why the committee calls on the UK to consider sanctions on

1:19:47 > 1:19:50individuals connected with the military regime and particularly on

1:19:50 > 1:19:59the Commander in chief. Although sanctions are an imperfect tool, it

1:19:59 > 1:20:03is wrong for the UK to continue engagement with Burma with no

1:20:03 > 1:20:09demonstration of censure and his responsibility in particular cannot

1:20:09 > 1:20:14be ignored. The UK must bear some responsibility for seeking to turn

1:20:14 > 1:20:24outrage into action and should focus on regional forums and allies to

1:20:24 > 1:20:28achieve results. The committee recognised, supported and welcomed

1:20:28 > 1:20:32the efforts of my right honourable friend the Minister who I'm glad to

1:20:32 > 1:20:42see in his place on the Treasury bench. The committee knows the sad

1:20:42 > 1:20:56-- suddenness of Aung San Suu Kyi. Not speaking out in the face of such

1:20:56 > 1:21:01crimes suggests acquiesced at some level under failure of leadership at

1:21:01 > 1:21:06every level. She remains a better option the alternatives perhaps, and

1:21:06 > 1:21:11perhaps the only option for the future, but she is now deeply

1:21:11 > 1:21:16compromised. Finally Bangladesh deserves praise and material support

1:21:16 > 1:21:19for accommodating well over half a million new refugees this year and

1:21:19 > 1:21:23the British Government is also deserves credit for its quick and

1:21:23 > 1:21:27generous provision of aid. While return must be the ambition, we

1:21:27 > 1:21:33noted this can only happen when humanitarian access is possible and

1:21:33 > 1:21:38we are also concerned that the camps in Bangladesh should not become

1:21:38 > 1:21:42permanent, leaving people exposed to radicalisation and storing up

1:21:42 > 1:21:46problems for the future. As the committee noted, this crisis was

1:21:46 > 1:21:51sadly predictable and indeed the Foreign Office did predict it. But

1:21:51 > 1:21:55the Foreign Office's own warning system did not raise enough alarm.

1:21:55 > 1:21:59There was too much focus by the UK and others in recent years on

1:21:59 > 1:22:03supporting the democratic transition and not enough on atrocity

1:22:03 > 1:22:08prevention. Indeed as will set out by Lord Haig during his term in

1:22:08 > 1:22:13office. And delivering a tough and unwelcome message to the Burmese

1:22:13 > 1:22:23government about the Rohingya was not made early enough. The United

1:22:23 > 1:22:26Kingdom... Sorry, a minister in his place was incredibly candid about

1:22:26 > 1:22:32the need to reflect and the Foreign Office must now learn lessons on

1:22:32 > 1:22:36atrocity prevention from the crisis to apply not only in Burma but

1:22:36 > 1:22:38elsewhere.

1:22:45 > 1:22:49Kerry McCarthy. I know of your long-standing interest in this issue

1:22:49 > 1:22:52which you demonstrated on the backbenches. I think it's an

1:22:52 > 1:22:56excellent report and I would like to ask the chair of the foreign affairs

1:22:56 > 1:23:00select committee, on the issue of return to Burma, some of the

1:23:00 > 1:23:04refugees may be reluctant to return considering the treatment they have

1:23:04 > 1:23:09received. To what extent of a look at alternatives to be in either

1:23:09 > 1:23:12Burma or Bangladesh and did they feel there was support from within

1:23:12 > 1:23:22the Rohingya community to be moved to somewhere, completely?The

1:23:22 > 1:23:25committee was very focused on the ability to return to Burma because

1:23:25 > 1:23:30we did not seek to allow the Burmese government and opt out by which they

1:23:30 > 1:23:34could permanently displace these people and forced others to take

1:23:34 > 1:23:38responsibility for their brutality. Although the committee was aware

1:23:38 > 1:23:44return could only happen when it was properly supervised, we did not

1:23:44 > 1:23:51emphasise the point on third-party displacement.Would my own marble

1:23:51 > 1:23:56and gallant friend agree that one of the main things that could be done

1:23:56 > 1:24:05would be to send a UN special envoy to Iraq I stayed to help people

1:24:05 > 1:24:09there and get them back who are displaced and does he believe that

1:24:09 > 1:24:19would be a really good move on behalf of the UN?My marble friend

1:24:19 > 1:24:32is right, we do look at that and welcome that suggestion.The

1:24:32 > 1:24:34honourable gentleman is deeply grateful to his honourable friend

1:24:34 > 1:24:43that she promoted him to the status of a military general.Can I pay

1:24:43 > 1:24:48tribute to my honourable friend in the way he has chaired the

1:24:48 > 1:24:51committee, and indeed to the Minister for the candid way in which

1:24:51 > 1:24:54he presented the case of the UK Government when he spoke to give

1:24:54 > 1:24:57evidence to the committee but I wonder if I could ask the chairman

1:24:57 > 1:25:02of the committee if he thinks this again shows the bluntness of the UN

1:25:02 > 1:25:05and shows they don't have enough tools available to them to deal with

1:25:05 > 1:25:14this kind of international crisis? My honourable friend speaks clearly

1:25:14 > 1:25:18and identifies his own views on the UN. This is not a subject we have

1:25:18 > 1:25:21yet looked upon and as I'm responding to a particular report I

1:25:21 > 1:25:26don't think it would be appropriate for me to stray into the structure

1:25:26 > 1:25:30of the United Nations. However I would urge the Minister to work

1:25:30 > 1:25:34through the United Nations system to make sure reports are fully

1:25:34 > 1:25:37implemented, as he will remember from our time in the committee we

1:25:37 > 1:25:48all fully supported.My right honourable friend... The

1:25:48 > 1:25:52humanitarian crisis which was in stark contrast to the letter sent to

1:25:52 > 1:25:56the committee by the Burmese embassy which contradicted all the evidence

1:25:56 > 1:26:02that we talk. But does my right honourable friend agree with me...

1:26:02 > 1:26:05Forgive me, honourable friend, agree with me that the underlying problem

1:26:05 > 1:26:12here is the fact the Burmese authority and Aung San Suu Kyi have

1:26:12 > 1:26:17denied citizenship to the Rohingya and that we should push them to make

1:26:17 > 1:26:25sure the Rohingya are given a right to remain in their homeland?The

1:26:25 > 1:26:35honourable gentleman's cup runneth over!Despite those promotions I

1:26:35 > 1:26:40will address the question my right honourable friend raises. She is of

1:26:40 > 1:26:43course right the refusal of citizenship to this population have

1:26:43 > 1:26:49been a great abuse. Their citizenship was effectively removed

1:26:49 > 1:26:55from them by the 1980s and the commission is very clear that

1:26:55 > 1:26:58citizenship must be restored and that indeed is one of the reasons we

1:26:58 > 1:27:03are so clear, as she will remember from our discussions, in insisting

1:27:03 > 1:27:10the whole of the and on commission is implemented in full. -- the whole

1:27:10 > 1:27:14of the commission.Can I also congratulate the chair of the

1:27:14 > 1:27:16Foreign Affairs Committee, it's been a very interesting committee to

1:27:16 > 1:27:22beyond, thank you for the way he's conducted this inquiry. Can I ask in

1:27:22 > 1:27:34particular about the need to find a way to open access to Rakhine

1:27:34 > 1:27:39province? I think we have to be very concerned about the lack of access

1:27:39 > 1:27:46to scrutiny with the news of arrests of two Reuters journalist believed

1:27:46 > 1:27:51to be attempting to report on the situation there. And the UK

1:27:51 > 1:27:55Government with others in the international community have to find

1:27:55 > 1:28:04a way to ensure their racing engine monitoring and oversight of what is

1:28:04 > 1:28:10happening in Rakhine province.Thank you, may I pay tribute to my right

1:28:10 > 1:28:13honourable friend, as is being evidenced this morning you can see

1:28:13 > 1:28:18why such a pleasure to chair this committee with such experts on it

1:28:18 > 1:28:22and such intelligence and supportive friends. My right honourable friend

1:28:22 > 1:28:28is right then making sure the access is possible is an essential part of

1:28:28 > 1:28:31the Government's duty now and I welcome the efforts of my right

1:28:31 > 1:28:36honourable friend the Minister in seeking that when he's been working

1:28:36 > 1:28:39with other regional organisations. I also welcome the support he is given

1:28:39 > 1:28:43to the United Nations and my right honourable friend will remember

1:28:43 > 1:28:46indeed the discussion we had an committee about making sure the UN

1:28:46 > 1:28:59had that access.I visited the refugee camp near Cox's Bazaar last

1:28:59 > 1:29:04month and it is now equivalent in size to the city of Bristol without

1:29:04 > 1:29:09hospital, inadequate roads and very few schools, and was described by

1:29:09 > 1:29:13the UNHCR is the most congested camp in the last 15 years of their

1:29:13 > 1:29:21experience anywhere in the world. On page 32 of the report, my right

1:29:21 > 1:29:24honourable friend highlights the fact ethnic cleansing has not been

1:29:24 > 1:29:29recognised as an independent crime under international law. Is he, like

1:29:29 > 1:29:34I, surprised and disappointed by that and would he encouraged Her

1:29:34 > 1:29:38Majesty's government to see if she could change that situation?The

1:29:38 > 1:29:40honourable member for Kettering makes an excellent point and I

1:29:40 > 1:29:44welcome his call for ethnic cleansing to be defined as a

1:29:44 > 1:29:52separate crime. The 550 thousand odd people demonstrate this is a crime

1:29:52 > 1:29:55not only in the past but is very much having an effect in the present

1:29:55 > 1:30:00and I welcome the efforts he made and his personal courage in going

1:30:00 > 1:30:08there and being able to report back to this House.

1:30:08 > 1:30:14Can I commend what is an excellent report and every word of it has

1:30:14 > 1:30:23value. The real issue now is the return of refugees to Myanmar. This

1:30:23 > 1:30:26isn't possible under present circumstances. I wonder if the

1:30:26 > 1:30:31honourable gentleman would agree with me the need now is for genuine

1:30:31 > 1:30:41humanitarian assistance which means yes from DFiD but ensuring we are

1:30:41 > 1:30:48treating this with the gravity it deserves.Regional response is an

1:30:48 > 1:30:53essential part of this. The work are majesties government has done in

1:30:53 > 1:30:56putting up money initially will only goes so far because it is

1:30:56 > 1:31:00unreasonable to expect Her Majesty 's government could bear the entire

1:31:00 > 1:31:04burden. The work the Minister is doing regionally should be welcomed

1:31:04 > 1:31:08because he has made sure this is a regional response to what is frankly

1:31:08 > 1:31:15a regional problem.Visiting the camp was an overwhelming and

1:31:15 > 1:31:21heartbreaking experience and all of us have a sense of duty having met

1:31:21 > 1:31:26the refugees who suffered the worst experiences life has got to offer is

1:31:26 > 1:31:31indeed to make sure they don't become invisible. I congratulate the

1:31:31 > 1:31:35chairman and this is very good report. It's realistic, it doesn't

1:31:35 > 1:31:39offer any facile solutions. Can I suggest this is one situation where

1:31:39 > 1:31:48the only long-term answer to their problems is not to continue,

1:31:48 > 1:31:52certainly we need more aid there, it's pitiful at the moment. There is

1:31:52 > 1:31:56a great deal being done. The Emmy long-term solution is for a return

1:31:56 > 1:32:02to their land -- the only long-term solution is for a return to their

1:32:02 > 1:32:07land in Myanmar and the only way to do that is to give a cast-iron

1:32:07 > 1:32:11guarantee of having Armed Forces with them. The British Army have had

1:32:11 > 1:32:18a fine record in operations of this kind.My honourable friend has made

1:32:18 > 1:32:21some very good points and I certainly welcome his call that we

1:32:21 > 1:32:27must support the returning refugees. Our committee make the clear case of

1:32:27 > 1:32:31humanitarian access being essential before any refugees could return. We

1:32:31 > 1:32:36were very cautious to recommend Her Majesty's government should send

1:32:36 > 1:32:40British soldiers over for various historical legacy reasons, and the

1:32:40 > 1:32:43misunderstandings that could cause rise to. We raised with the Minister

1:32:43 > 1:32:47and the Minister was extremely receptive to the idea of regional

1:32:47 > 1:32:55support. Whether that be under the United Nations of having some form

1:32:55 > 1:33:00of alert force or possibly even support falls to be there with the

1:33:00 > 1:33:09refugees as they return.Can I congratulate my plainly honourable

1:33:09 > 1:33:13friend on this excellent report. Whilst Myanmar is not a member of

1:33:13 > 1:33:18the Commonwealth, does he think there is a role for Commonwealth

1:33:18 > 1:33:22countries to be able to advise, help and support so that these instances

1:33:22 > 1:33:26don't happen in the future and we can get over the current tragedy

1:33:26 > 1:33:31sooner?I'm sure my honourable friend joins me in the sadness we

1:33:31 > 1:33:36feel that Burma is not currently able to seek readmittance to the

1:33:36 > 1:33:40Commonwealth because of these tragic events that she has sadly done

1:33:40 > 1:33:44nothing to prevent. Of course there is a role for the Commonwealth in

1:33:44 > 1:33:48the region and the role for Commonwealth more widely and we

1:33:48 > 1:33:54should also welcome the words of Bishop Tutu in condemning the

1:33:54 > 1:33:58silence of the State Council. It is only voices like is that carry a

1:33:58 > 1:34:07weight is equal to hers.Thank you. We welcome the report from the

1:34:07 > 1:34:11foreign affairs select committee and agree with the conclusion that any

1:34:11 > 1:34:14repatriation must be safe and voluntary. Does he agree that in

1:34:14 > 1:34:21order to ensure there is no repatriations which doesn't meet

1:34:21 > 1:34:24these conditions, the United Nations High Commissioner for refugees must

1:34:24 > 1:34:31have access on both sides of the border?The honourable member is

1:34:31 > 1:34:33making an extremely valid point and we called in this report for

1:34:33 > 1:34:44absolute access in various areas and for the special representative of

1:34:44 > 1:34:47the -- the special representative to have access into the capital. It

1:34:47 > 1:34:51needs to go further and she is right that the representatives of the UN

1:34:51 > 1:34:54High Commission for refugees need access on the ground not just with

1:34:54 > 1:34:59the government.I commend the honourable gentleman and his

1:34:59 > 1:35:05committee on this excellent report. I agree that the UK bear significant

1:35:05 > 1:35:08responsibility for the international failure to effectively respond to

1:35:08 > 1:35:13the crisis, considering the UK's roll on the UN Security Council.

1:35:13 > 1:35:17Does he agree with me that the UK Government needs to suspend its

1:35:17 > 1:35:23military assistance programme in the Burnley 's region?I welcome the

1:35:23 > 1:35:33fact that they have already done so. Order. Let me say to the honourable

1:35:33 > 1:35:37gentleman that I think I speak for the House in thanking him and his

1:35:37 > 1:35:44committee very warmly for their ongoing work, for this report, for

1:35:44 > 1:35:49his statement to the House today and for his very courteous and

1:35:49 > 1:35:58comprehensive responses to questions. Thank you.I theorise

1:35:58 > 1:36:01inadvertently misled the House, Mr Speaker, during the business

1:36:01 > 1:36:05question when I suggested that honourable and Right honourable

1:36:05 > 1:36:08members could enjoy the pantomime of Dick Whittington at the Millfield

1:36:08 > 1:36:14Theatre. Indeed that was the last pantomime I saw there. If they wish

1:36:14 > 1:36:20to attend the Millfield Theatre it would be to enjoy Jack and the

1:36:20 > 1:36:26Beanstalk.LAUGHTERI'm grateful to the honourable lady because that is

1:36:26 > 1:36:29an extremely helpful clarification. Moreover in the process of offering

1:36:29 > 1:36:33that clarification to the House the right honourable lady has served

1:36:33 > 1:36:40further to highlight the important work done by and the continued

1:36:40 > 1:36:47pleasure brought about by the theatre which I believe to be in her

1:36:47 > 1:36:58own constituency.Oh no it isn't! LAUGHTERIn my borough, Mr Speaker.

1:36:58 > 1:37:04It serves by constituency.In the honourable lady's borough. We now

1:37:04 > 1:37:09know the important work of this theatre is in the London Borough of

1:37:09 > 1:37:13Enfield for which I think about the theatre and the borough will be

1:37:13 > 1:37:22eternally grateful. Thank you. If there are no further points of order

1:37:22 > 1:37:28we now come to the backbench motion on equality of pension provision for

1:37:28 > 1:37:36women. Theresa May Schmeichel Mr Grahame Morris.Thank you. I would

1:37:36 > 1:37:41like to thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate

1:37:41 > 1:37:50and for the responses who supported me in this application. I'd like to

1:37:50 > 1:37:53thank the Waspi code campaign nationally who are well represented

1:37:53 > 1:37:59in the gallery and are involved in protests and demonstrations outside

1:37:59 > 1:38:08the palace in support of their legitimate campaigns. I'll give way.

1:38:08 > 1:38:11I'm grateful to the honourable gentleman. Can I pay tribute to him

1:38:11 > 1:38:16for the work is done on this issue. He mentions there are a lot of Waspi

1:38:16 > 1:38:21campaign is here today. Is this an opportune time for the Minister to

1:38:21 > 1:38:27apologise for the cross remarks he made in Westminster Hall that they

1:38:27 > 1:38:29could get modern apprenticeships? I'm going to come onto some of the

1:38:29 > 1:38:35Minister's remarks. If he did want to take that opportunity I'm sure

1:38:35 > 1:38:40the Waspi women would certainly welcome such an apology. It's

1:38:40 > 1:38:45simple, what we are asking for, or what the campaign is asking for.

1:38:45 > 1:38:50That is set out in the resolution before the House a non-means tested

1:38:50 > 1:38:55bridging pension to some 38 million women so that they don't have to

1:38:55 > 1:39:01live in poverty, such pension to be paid as a percentage of the full

1:39:01 > 1:39:04state pension and compensation offered over the period between aged

1:39:04 > 1:39:1460 and the new state pension age. I give way.I'm very grateful to the

1:39:14 > 1:39:16honourable gentleman and I congratulate him forgetting this

1:39:16 > 1:39:20debate before Parliament. I think we would all agree that this is an

1:39:20 > 1:39:23injustice that needs to be addressed. Would he agree that we

1:39:23 > 1:39:29have to also look at ways of how it could be funded, and I've discovered

1:39:29 > 1:39:33from the House of Commons library that bringing forward the proposed

1:39:33 > 1:39:40increase in the pension age from 67 to 68 from 2037 to 2036 would in

1:39:40 > 1:39:47itself raise £7.5 billion approximately which would go some

1:39:47 > 1:39:53way to helping these women address the injustice they face.I'm

1:39:53 > 1:39:56grateful to the right honourable gentleman for that intervention and

1:39:56 > 1:40:03I want to come a little later in my remarks to some of the proposals and

1:40:03 > 1:40:13how this injustice may be addressed. I'll give way.Can I congratulate my

1:40:13 > 1:40:16honourable friend in securing this debate and can I say, would he agree

1:40:16 > 1:40:20with me that it is absolutely shocking and unacceptable that the

1:40:20 > 1:40:25Waspi campaigners have had to work so tirelessly to get absolutely no

1:40:25 > 1:40:31response from the government.I completely agree with my right

1:40:31 > 1:40:37honourable friend. We have debated this issue many times. I think maybe

1:40:37 > 1:40:4529 or 30 times in this place and in the Westminster Hall. Indeed, over

1:40:45 > 1:40:54the past few months, we've been incredibly active. EDM 63 has 195

1:40:54 > 1:41:01signatures, and e-petition but was laid before Parliament attracted

1:41:01 > 1:41:06109,000 signatures. That number continues to grow. We had an

1:41:06 > 1:41:08oversubscribed Westminster Hall debate where there were so many

1:41:08 > 1:41:13members present they were sitting on the window ledges... I'll give way

1:41:13 > 1:41:24to my honourable friend.Can I first congratulate my honourable friend

1:41:24 > 1:41:27and securing the debate and the tireless work he puts into the

1:41:27 > 1:41:34cause. I certainly support the fair transitional state pension

1:41:34 > 1:41:38arrangements for all Waspi are winning. They've put forward a

1:41:38 > 1:41:41number of options for potential solutions to provide transitional

1:41:41 > 1:41:44arrangements for the women affected and will he be coming to that point

1:41:44 > 1:41:49later in his speech?Absolutely. I'm grateful for the intervention and

1:41:49 > 1:41:52there are a number of options and there are things the Minister could

1:41:52 > 1:41:56do immediately to mitigate and alleviate the worst hardship that's

1:41:56 > 1:42:01been suffered currently. Indeed it's a matter of concern across the whole

1:42:01 > 1:42:08house and the EDM and the representations that have been made

1:42:08 > 1:42:11from every nation, every region, every political party in this House.

1:42:11 > 1:42:18I'll give way.I'm very grateful to my right honourable friend, and he's

1:42:18 > 1:42:23making a good job of putting the case. Can I put to him the words of

1:42:23 > 1:42:31a retired teacher who says she was born in July 1954 and she says, the

1:42:31 > 1:42:36boy I sat next to in school was born in November 1953. We left school at

1:42:36 > 1:42:41the same time and began to pay our National Insurance and income tax at

1:42:41 > 1:42:45the same time, but he receives his state pension and his 65th birthday.

1:42:45 > 1:42:53I have to wait ten months beyond my 65th birthday, how can that be fair?

1:42:53 > 1:43:00Hasn't she summed it up very well? Absolutely. I'm grateful for the

1:43:00 > 1:43:03intervention and I'm sure every member in this House and all sides

1:43:03 > 1:43:11of the House have got many examples of Waspi women coming to surgeries

1:43:11 > 1:43:18and writing and sending e-mails. Daley, I receive heartbreaking

1:43:18 > 1:43:23letters from my own constituents and from further afield. E-mails from

1:43:23 > 1:43:29women who have been suffering extreme hardship. I'll give way.I'm

1:43:29 > 1:43:34proud to be a signatory of the debate as well. Can I point out

1:43:34 > 1:43:38because so far he's been referring to Waspi. We know there's a lot of

1:43:38 > 1:43:42interest in this whole issue and only some of the groups call

1:43:42 > 1:43:46themselves Waspi. What we are referring to is all those women born

1:43:46 > 1:43:50in the 1950s who are suffering from an injustice disproportionately

1:43:50 > 1:43:54inflicted on them through the changes to the pension qualification

1:43:54 > 1:43:59range.Absolutely and I welcome that intervention and acknowledge the

1:43:59 > 1:44:05conjugation that the honourable gentleman has made to the campaign.

1:44:05 > 1:44:09I do agree. I'm going to give way once more.Thank you forgiving way

1:44:09 > 1:44:15and for all the hard work he has put in on this issue. I'm sure he, like

1:44:15 > 1:44:19myself, has come across a lot of women who are telling me stories

1:44:19 > 1:44:22about how they have based their whole retirement plans and maybe

1:44:22 > 1:44:26their partner has already retired, based on what they were told and

1:44:26 > 1:44:30assumed would be their normal retirement age. Everyone says it's

1:44:30 > 1:44:35just not fair.Absolutely, I completely agree with my honourable

1:44:35 > 1:44:43friend. Many of these women have worked since they were 16.

1:44:43 > 1:44:48They have signed up to a deal, they consider it to be an agreement with

1:44:48 > 1:44:51government and it has been cast aside with little or no regard for

1:44:51 > 1:44:57their financial circumstances. I'll give away to the Gentleman.I

1:44:57 > 1:45:01thinking for giving way and organising this debate. He used the

1:45:01 > 1:45:05word heartbreaking and is genuinely is to listen to women as I have in

1:45:05 > 1:45:11Dudley and the Black Country, who found themselves retiring early to

1:45:11 > 1:45:17care for the relative, in some cases their husband and subsequently found

1:45:17 > 1:45:22themselves or widowed and left with no income coming in at all facing

1:45:22 > 1:45:26the prospect of having to wait much longer for the pension on which they

1:45:26 > 1:45:30planned their whole future. Would you agree with me particular

1:45:30 > 1:45:35attention has got to be given to women in that position?Absolutely

1:45:35 > 1:45:39and there are things the Minister and government can do immediately.

1:45:39 > 1:45:44What we are doing here is creating an unnecessary generation of women,

1:45:44 > 1:45:48many now relying on food banks and some are forced to sell their homes

1:45:48 > 1:45:53and forced to rely on a benefits system. It's degrading for them.

1:45:53 > 1:46:00I'll give away.I thank him for giving way. Does he agree with me

1:46:00 > 1:46:04that the role of the trade union movement in supporting the WASPI

1:46:04 > 1:46:09movement has to be praised? And I can tell you the campaign in Glasgow

1:46:09 > 1:46:14are watching the debate live in the union office, one is my

1:46:14 > 1:46:25constituents, who worked until 50 years and now has to work until 65.

1:46:25 > 1:46:29Absolutely, this is a huge injustice that affects all regions and parts

1:46:29 > 1:46:35of the United Kingdom. These are hard-working decent women who have

1:46:35 > 1:46:38contributed through the national insurance fund and had an

1:46:38 > 1:46:42anticipation of receiving their state pension. I'll give away to my

1:46:42 > 1:46:48friend.I'm very grateful for him to give way and I want to pay tribute

1:46:48 > 1:46:52to him for securing this debate and all the work he does on this issue

1:46:52 > 1:46:57and the WASPI campaign and others as well. Would he agree with me that

1:46:57 > 1:47:02what's happening to a lot of these women is they are being very

1:47:02 > 1:47:05inappropriately dealt with by both the job centre and the benefit

1:47:05 > 1:47:11system? I am sure my friend who wants to know this, I had a Lady in

1:47:11 > 1:47:15my constituency surgery last week who had just been made redundant

1:47:15 > 1:47:19from Walkers crisps factory. She has a full employment and contribution

1:47:19 > 1:47:23record but she is a really fearful about what's going to happen to her

1:47:23 > 1:47:29over the next few years and if she is going to be forced into

1:47:29 > 1:47:33inappropriate work, she doesn't know what benefit she is going to get.

1:47:33 > 1:47:37She is stressed and has had this full record of contributions and

1:47:37 > 1:47:39shouldn't she have proper transitional arrangements and to not

1:47:39 > 1:47:48be treated this way?Absolutely, it's doubly relevant to me, Deputy

1:47:48 > 1:47:52Speaker, Walkers crisps in my constituency are closing this week

1:47:52 > 1:47:56just before Christmas, 400 people losing their jobs, many long serving

1:47:56 > 1:48:03employees have worked hard, some in their late 50s and early 60s with an

1:48:03 > 1:48:07anticipation of receiving their state pension. I'll give way to my

1:48:07 > 1:48:12friend from Hartlepool.I'm grateful to my friend and neighbour for

1:48:12 > 1:48:17giving way and I take great pleasure in praising him for the work he does

1:48:17 > 1:48:21on behalf of the WASPI movement. Would my friend agree with me that

1:48:21 > 1:48:28in the neighbouring towns of Hartlepool, my constituency, 5500

1:48:28 > 1:48:32women have suffered due to lack of action on this matter by the

1:48:32 > 1:48:35government, forcing them to food banks in some cases and feeling

1:48:35 > 1:48:41victimised in all cases?Absolutely, and these women are disadvantaged in

1:48:41 > 1:48:46many ways, often weighs many members don't realise. Issues have been

1:48:46 > 1:48:53raised with me about free bus passes. Living outside of London,

1:48:53 > 1:48:57people from the regions, the north-east and south-west, many of

1:48:57 > 1:49:03these women don't drive. So, without free bus passes... I'll give away to

1:49:03 > 1:49:12the Lady.I appreciate the Gentleman giving way. Could I ask him and

1:49:12 > 1:49:16other members on the seats opposite, how much fasted they make when

1:49:16 > 1:49:25Gordon Brown brought this change in? How much fuss?I think the issue we

1:49:25 > 1:49:30need to address is where we are now. There are two... Well, you've raised

1:49:30 > 1:49:38a suggestion. You've raised a question. Do we think it was wrong?

1:49:38 > 1:49:43And I think that the 1995 changes were incorrect. Please let me answer

1:49:43 > 1:49:49this and I will take your intervention. But what happened in

1:49:49 > 1:49:56the 2011 act, those changes which were originally spread over a longer

1:49:56 > 1:50:02period were expedited. I want to quote the former pensions Minister,

1:50:02 > 1:50:06Stephen Webber who elaborates on this point. I indicated I give away

1:50:06 > 1:50:11to the Gentleman but I want to take as many interventions as I can. Do

1:50:11 > 1:50:16you mind, because I did indicate and then I'll accept the intervention.I

1:50:16 > 1:50:23thank the member and commend him for his speech, just to clarify, B 1995

1:50:23 > 1:50:28pension act was put through by a Tory government and the 2011 pension

1:50:28 > 1:50:33act was put through by a Tory coalition so why she references

1:50:33 > 1:50:41Gordon Brown is a mystery.I'll give away to the Minister.I'm most

1:50:41 > 1:50:46grateful to the Gentleman for letting me intervene, but he will be

1:50:46 > 1:50:52aware that in 2007, after ten years of a Labour government they

1:50:52 > 1:50:57considered all matters on pensions legislation and passed the 2007 act

1:50:57 > 1:51:02and did have all consideration of the matters on this, so had total

1:51:02 > 1:51:06capacity in their 13 years of power to do something they now say it was

1:51:06 > 1:51:09not appropriate to do. With respect, there is a legitimate thing to

1:51:09 > 1:51:15answer on this.I will, but I just want to have an opportunity to

1:51:15 > 1:51:19respond to that. What we need to do is recognise the injustice that

1:51:19 > 1:51:27these women face and there were many missed opportunities. In the 2011

1:51:27 > 1:51:31act, it accelerated the changes no doubt, the former pensions Minister

1:51:31 > 1:51:37Stephen Webber is quoted extensively as indicating that was the case and

1:51:37 > 1:51:43when he was writing out on behalf of the coalition governance, the

1:51:43 > 1:51:47response he received from many WASPI women, his comment was that he was

1:51:47 > 1:51:53not only informing them of a change of one year brought about by the

1:51:53 > 1:51:592011 act, but for the first time about the earlier changes. So in

1:51:59 > 1:52:02fact, their state pension retirement age was being extended by six years

1:52:02 > 1:52:09in some cases. I'll give away to her.I thank him for giving way. As

1:52:09 > 1:52:13someone who was one years old when the 95 act came into effect but is

1:52:13 > 1:52:19sitting here like everyone else, can I say to all members that in this

1:52:19 > 1:52:22debate, can we get past the party political nonsense of whose fault it

1:52:22 > 1:52:27is? The point is this mess has been going on for long enough, this is

1:52:27 > 1:52:31the government in charge just now, the problem has not gone away and it

1:52:31 > 1:52:35is this government that needs to deal with it.Absolutely, and there

1:52:35 > 1:52:39are things the government could do immediately to mitigate for the

1:52:39 > 1:52:44worst cases of hardship. For example, and I'll get you in a

1:52:44 > 1:52:48moment. I know many members want to contribute and place things on

1:52:48 > 1:52:54record. Can I mention also be winter fuel allowance that can be worth up

1:52:54 > 1:52:57to £300 and if the Minister is looking for suggestions, that would

1:52:57 > 1:53:02be a decent staff of government, to give the WASPI women this payment

1:53:02 > 1:53:05each year which would enable them to have some level of comfort during

1:53:05 > 1:53:09this cold winter weather when many have to choose in my region between

1:53:09 > 1:53:14heating...I'm grateful for him and he is right to say the problems date

1:53:14 > 1:53:19all the way from 95 and through three or more governments. But can I

1:53:19 > 1:53:24ask him, does he agree what a lot of my constituents feel, this is as

1:53:24 > 1:53:30much to do with communication as it is to do with policy? Many of my

1:53:30 > 1:53:33women who are affected said if they had known in time and knowing what

1:53:33 > 1:53:37the effects of the changes were, they wouldn't have been able to

1:53:37 > 1:53:42respond -- would have been able. Would he agree?I think that's a

1:53:42 > 1:53:46completely reasonable point the Gentleman makes. I'm sure there is

1:53:46 > 1:53:49common cause on all sides of the House, I am looking at the Minister

1:53:49 > 1:53:54and hoping common sense can prevail. There has to be at knowledge meant

1:53:54 > 1:53:58there was poor communication and I'm sure the Minister is aware there is

1:53:58 > 1:54:04a collective action put forward by the WASPI women, through binding and

1:54:04 > 1:54:11solicitors. And there is a possibility they could be a case of

1:54:11 > 1:54:15maladministration if found in their favour. I'll give way.The

1:54:15 > 1:54:19constituents that have been to see me, and I've been listening

1:54:19 > 1:54:21carefully to what he says and he seems to know what he's talking

1:54:21 > 1:54:28about. Could he give an idea of how much this will cost? Because I

1:54:28 > 1:54:31suspect there is a whole range of different amounts of money but I

1:54:31 > 1:54:35would be curious to know what he thinks would be the right amount of

1:54:35 > 1:54:41money to go some way to putting this right.There are things we could do

1:54:41 > 1:54:43immediately, I think there are things the government and the

1:54:43 > 1:54:48Minister could do immediately. I want to come to those later on and

1:54:48 > 1:54:53have set them out in this sequential way and there are suggestions about

1:54:53 > 1:54:56immediately extending pensions credit to the group. I don't have

1:54:56 > 1:55:04the costings for that. I mentioned extending... 800 million, and my

1:55:04 > 1:55:08front bench informs me from a sedentary position. There are things

1:55:08 > 1:55:12that could be done in relation to winter fuel allowance and bus passes

1:55:12 > 1:55:16that offer immediate help to these women. Can I say, the fundamental

1:55:16 > 1:55:21point of former pensions Minister Stephen Webber said and I alluded to

1:55:21 > 1:55:25some moments ago in response as well to the Minister's intervention, this

1:55:25 > 1:55:33is what he said. "The 2011 act, which he was responsible for as

1:55:33 > 1:55:37Minister didn't add more than 18 months to the People's pensions age,

1:55:37 > 1:55:43typically they added 12 months. But when we did write to people, we

1:55:43 > 1:55:47wrote to them to tell them what changes we had made. This was the

1:55:47 > 1:55:51first time they had heard about the first changes, so instead of me

1:55:51 > 1:55:54writing to them to tell them that was an extra year on the pension

1:55:54 > 1:55:58age, we were effectively turning them they had six extra years added

1:55:58 > 1:56:03to their pension age". Which of course is why they are outraged, and

1:56:03 > 1:56:09we are hopefully having a sensible and constructive, meaningful debate,

1:56:09 > 1:56:13but make no mistake, there is real hardship and outrage out there. I'll

1:56:13 > 1:56:19give away.Thank you, and he is setting out the case beautifully and

1:56:19 > 1:56:24I shall congratulate him on getting this debate organised. Can I say to

1:56:24 > 1:56:28him as someone who represents a retirement town, I have had many

1:56:28 > 1:56:31local constituents making this point, most taking a slightly

1:56:31 > 1:56:36different point of view. They don't object to the principle of

1:56:36 > 1:56:40equalisation of pension paid at all, they think it is just and right, but

1:56:40 > 1:56:43they are upset about not being properly advised and didn't have

1:56:43 > 1:56:47time to plan early enough in their working careers, and that is the

1:56:47 > 1:56:51injustice they are coming to meet with most strongly.Absolutely,

1:56:51 > 1:56:58Madam Deputy Speaker and the Right Honourable Gentleman with typical

1:56:58 > 1:57:03alacrity has hit the nail on the head. Nevertheless, there is an

1:57:03 > 1:57:06injustice that needs to be rectified and the party of government needs to

1:57:06 > 1:57:10do that. I'm going to give away a couple more times and make more

1:57:10 > 1:57:14progress. I'll give away to the Gentleman and then once more.I'm

1:57:14 > 1:57:20grateful for him for giving way and for securing this debate. Is it his

1:57:20 > 1:57:26contention that the changes in 95 were wrong or in 2011 were wrong?

1:57:26 > 1:57:32Many have met me and feel the 2011 changes were just too rapid.I think

1:57:32 > 1:57:39the fundamental point made by on rubble -- members from the

1:57:39 > 1:57:44government side is lack of notice in relation to the 1995 changes and

1:57:44 > 1:57:49failure to give any notice at all in some cases. There is an issue there

1:57:49 > 1:57:56of communication. I do believe that the various groups, and there are a

1:57:56 > 1:58:00number who are campaigning around this issue, I do believe there is a

1:58:00 > 1:58:09general accident is of the need to wear equalised state retirement

1:58:09 > 1:58:13pension age, we are not in disagreement about. But the issue is

1:58:13 > 1:58:16the phasing and acceleration of the phasing of the original changes ROM

1:58:16 > 1:58:241995. I'll give away. -- from 95.I don't want to disagree with his

1:58:24 > 1:58:28speech but wouldn't he agreed the equalisation of pension age for this

1:58:28 > 1:58:33group of women isn't fair? Because in the area they lived, many had to

1:58:33 > 1:58:38be responsible for their children, had to undermine their career with a

1:58:38 > 1:58:41lower wages and didn't make allowances for their pensions and

1:58:41 > 1:58:46have since suffered divorce or break-up. Many coming to me in

1:58:46 > 1:58:49Swansea are literally becoming impoverished because of this

1:58:49 > 1:58:53changed. It's all very well imagine in a utopia where there is equal

1:58:53 > 1:58:58opportunity in the where that would justify an equal pension age but

1:58:58 > 1:59:04that isn't what happened to these women. And it's quite wrong to say

1:59:04 > 1:59:10it's just about telling them. Absolutely, and the issue as well is

1:59:10 > 1:59:17falling off the end of a cliff. The lack of transitional relief to the

1:59:17 > 1:59:22women who were affected and there are many examples. People who have

1:59:22 > 1:59:29retired, made retirement plans at 60 in order to care for elderly

1:59:29 > 1:59:33relatives, women working in very arduous employment, physically

1:59:33 > 1:59:39demanding, who really can't work beyond 60.

1:59:39 > 1:59:45It is a huge injustice affecting 3.8 million women in this country which

1:59:45 > 1:59:49needs to be addressed.My honourable friend is being very generous in

1:59:49 > 1:59:54giving way for that just to support that point I can I quote from a

1:59:54 > 1:59:59woman from Knowsley who was born in June, 1955. She said my elderly

1:59:59 > 2:00:02mother had a stroke and I subsequently became her full-time

2:00:02 > 2:00:06carer for that the last ten years of her life were particularly difficult

2:00:06 > 2:00:11as she needed 24 hour care provided by me. My own health has suffered

2:00:11 > 2:00:16greatly due to the added pressure and I now find myself unable to work

2:00:16 > 2:00:22due to ill-health and, at an age when I should be receiving my state

2:00:22 > 2:00:28pension, and forced to attend regular appointments at the DWP to

2:00:28 > 2:00:33ascertain my entitlement to ESA. This is, she says, soul destroying.

2:00:33 > 2:00:43Absolutely.I make no criticism whatsoever of the honourable

2:00:43 > 2:00:47gentleman for Easington who is making a very genuine speech and has

2:00:47 > 2:00:55a great many points to cover. He has taken a lot of interventions. But I

2:00:55 > 2:01:00do make criticism of people who have made interventions and will not then

2:01:00 > 2:01:05remain for the rest of this debate because the convention is that the

2:01:05 > 2:01:09honourable gentleman introducing the debate should have approximately 15

2:01:09 > 2:01:15minutes. Now, he has so far had a great deal more than that. I'm not

2:01:15 > 2:01:19blaming him. He has been very decent in taking points from other people,

2:01:19 > 2:01:23which is good for the pace of the debate. But the people who are

2:01:23 > 2:01:29making interventions and who will then just leave the chamber are

2:01:29 > 2:01:33preventing some of the 32 people who have indicated to me that they wish

2:01:33 > 2:01:38to speak in this debate from having the chance to do so. I am asking for

2:01:38 > 2:01:41a bit of honour. No more interventions unless it is from

2:01:41 > 2:01:46people who will remain for the whole of the debate. The honourable

2:01:46 > 2:01:49gentleman for Easington ought to bring his remarks to a conclusion

2:01:49 > 2:01:54soon but I'm not going to pressurise him too much because it is not his

2:01:54 > 2:02:03fault, it is other people's fault that he is in this position.I'm

2:02:03 > 2:02:06grateful for your guidance. I will press on. I recognise many members

2:02:06 > 2:02:08wish to speak in the debate. This is a time sensitive issue and the

2:02:08 > 2:02:13Government must understand it. I believe, as my honourable friend has

2:02:13 > 2:02:17indicated, we need to work cross-party to find a solution. If

2:02:17 > 2:02:20the Government is not able to do that, I am afraid you will be

2:02:20 > 2:02:25letting down a whole generation of women who will be denied a fair deal

2:02:25 > 2:02:32in relation to the state pension. In Easington are 4542 women who are

2:02:32 > 2:02:37affected. The campaign is looking for justice and not just warm words.

2:02:37 > 2:02:44The suggestion of early access to a pension credit made by my own front

2:02:44 > 2:02:48bench is a good start and could be done immediately. As a stand-alone

2:02:48 > 2:02:53option, it does not take into account that all the 1950s women

2:02:53 > 2:02:56have suffered maladministration and a loss of income and all deserve

2:02:56 > 2:03:03some recompense. The suggestion put forward by other honourable members

2:03:03 > 2:03:08of an actuarial reduced pension for life asks the women who have been

2:03:08 > 2:03:13discriminated against a bear the cost of putting this mistake right,

2:03:13 > 2:03:18which was not their fault in the first place. It condemns women to

2:03:18 > 2:03:21retirement in pension poverty, with all its problems of greater reliance

2:03:21 > 2:03:28on benefits. Arrangements that only address the additional state pension

2:03:28 > 2:03:34age increases imposed by the 2011 act will start again they are not

2:03:34 > 2:03:40good enough. There are faults with the application of the 1995 act and

2:03:40 > 2:03:44I do think that the maladministration suffered by these

2:03:44 > 2:03:49Waspi women is an issue that the Government will have to address

2:03:49 > 2:03:52sooner or later. They need recompense and they need to take

2:03:52 > 2:03:57into account the solution that will bring relief to all of the women

2:03:57 > 2:04:04affected. The Government has repeatedly stated that it is

2:04:04 > 2:04:08committed to supporting people aged 50 years and over to remain in and

2:04:08 > 2:04:12return to work. There are several policies and initiatives which have

2:04:12 > 2:04:18been put forward to support people to work for longer, such as older

2:04:18 > 2:04:22People's champions in Jobcentres, lifelong learning and apprenticeship

2:04:22 > 2:04:26opportunities for people of all ages. But I do think suggestions

2:04:26 > 2:04:32completely disregard the issues which are at the very heart of the

2:04:32 > 2:04:37Waspi campaign. In reality, they are completely unworkable for the

2:04:37 > 2:04:41majority of Waspi women but such is the case highlighted by my

2:04:41 > 2:04:45honourable friend for the City of Durham. May I also add I was

2:04:45 > 2:04:50incredibly disappointed that the budget didn't offer any form of

2:04:50 > 2:04:55help, any form of relief, to the Waspi women? I do know that some

2:04:55 > 2:04:58other members opposite, in also Sarah tea, made representations to

2:04:58 > 2:05:05Chancellor. I was very disappointed that the Chancellor and the Prime

2:05:05 > 2:05:10Minister did not respond. -- in all sincerity. I am rather in credit

2:05:10 > 2:05:15list is that the Labour Party, Her Majesty's opposition, are attacked

2:05:15 > 2:05:19for being weak on women's issues by the Prime Minister. I am curious to

2:05:19 > 2:05:26find out whether the Prime Minister who I understand is a Waspi woman,

2:05:26 > 2:05:30did actually received notification from the DWP about the change in

2:05:30 > 2:05:35pension arrangements. Quite simply, women born in the 1950s were not

2:05:35 > 2:05:37given sufficient notice by the Government that their state

2:05:37 > 2:05:43retirement age would being greasing. And I do want to leave time for

2:05:43 > 2:05:48other members to make contributions. -- would be increasing. I could go

2:05:48 > 2:05:52on to make more specific examples but I do not intend to do that.

2:05:52 > 2:05:59Thank you very much. I would like to move the motion.The question is, as

2:05:59 > 2:06:03on the order paper. As I indicated there are a great many people who

2:06:03 > 2:06:09wish to speak. We will have to start with a time limit of six minutes.

2:06:09 > 2:06:15Ann Marie Trevelyan.Thank you. I would like to thank my North East

2:06:15 > 2:06:20colleague, the member for Easington, for securing this important debate

2:06:20 > 2:06:22yesterday, in Parliament, we celebrated the centenary of the

2:06:22 > 2:06:26formation of the women's Royal Navy service. We celebrated and

2:06:26 > 2:06:29remembered the service and sacrifice of women who have given so much to

2:06:29 > 2:06:35our nation. Today we are yet again debating the plight of 3.8 million

2:06:35 > 2:06:39women from across the United Kingdom, who have beaten financially

2:06:39 > 2:06:45impacted by the lack of notice of pension increases. -- who have been.

2:06:45 > 2:06:49They have quietly contributed to our nation's economic growth throughout

2:06:49 > 2:06:54their working lives in paid work, alongside providing the bedrock of

2:06:54 > 2:07:00which our families and children depend through unpaid parental

2:07:00 > 2:07:03duties, without question. Women who have created one of the biggest

2:07:03 > 2:07:07campaigns we have witnessed in many years will stop governments of all

2:07:07 > 2:07:11colours, over two decades, have failed them. As a believer in the

2:07:11 > 2:07:14power of people peacefully coming together to campaign for change are

2:07:14 > 2:07:18working together for what they believe is right, I am completely

2:07:18 > 2:07:23supportive of the Waspi women from across our country, many here today,

2:07:23 > 2:07:27including two dedicated and effective campaigners from my own

2:07:27 > 2:07:38constituency who are leading this campaign. They are giving up all

2:07:38 > 2:07:41their time to voice the concerns of my 6200 Berwick-upon-Tweed Waspi

2:07:41 > 2:07:45constituents, the 23,800 Waspi women across Northumberland and the

2:07:45 > 2:07:49thousands across our four nations we need to remember that all the Waspi

2:07:49 > 2:07:54women have served our nation in many different forms and guises. We have

2:07:54 > 2:07:58military service personnel, teachers and the doctors, nurses and

2:07:58 > 2:08:01midwives, accountants, farmers were lawyers, office workers. They are

2:08:01 > 2:08:07just the ones who have come to me from my constituency are many

2:08:07 > 2:08:10others. They have been the backbones of our economy since they started

2:08:10 > 2:08:14work in the 1960s. They have provided the building blocks which

2:08:14 > 2:08:17have taken our country through strong economic times and the hard

2:08:17 > 2:08:22ones. We need to keep them in mind during this debate, not just as one

2:08:22 > 2:08:28big story, but remembering each individual stories of each Waspi

2:08:28 > 2:08:33women who have come into our surgeries with problems of hardship.

2:08:33 > 2:08:39I would like to reflect on some of the problems might Waspi women face

2:08:39 > 2:08:42living in Northumberland for that there is a strong spirit of

2:08:42 > 2:08:49independence and self sufficiently in my patch. I sit come to be with

2:08:49 > 2:08:53my Scottish friend today. A long history of hard work, regardless of

2:08:53 > 2:08:58whether, of which we have much remains the Walmart of rural

2:08:58 > 2:09:01Northumberland this is particularly clear in the strength of the women

2:09:01 > 2:09:05who have been to see me you have raised families alongside a lifetime

2:09:05 > 2:09:09of hard work and have sacrificed to ensure the future generation has a

2:09:09 > 2:09:13better life than the previous one. It is very hard for some women who

2:09:13 > 2:09:19have explained this to me in great detail for ask -- to ask for

2:09:19 > 2:09:23benefits to survive. They were told they would be receiving the state

2:09:23 > 2:09:26pension they had paid into. It has now been altered but without due

2:09:26 > 2:09:34time for them to prepare.I recognise the type of people she is

2:09:34 > 2:09:38referring to. There are genuine cases of hardship and women who

2:09:38 > 2:09:43clearly feel they have been mis-communicated to and, as a

2:09:43 > 2:09:49result, are facing hardship. I would ask her to continue in her cause.I

2:09:49 > 2:09:53thank my honourable friend the that intervention. There may be 3.8

2:09:53 > 2:09:59million of them but these 3.8 individual across our nations. These

2:09:59 > 2:10:03women have worked hard all the lies that there are incredibly difficult

2:10:03 > 2:10:06circumstances where they are struggling to survive on what they

2:10:06 > 2:10:10have full because of a lack of notice to the changes in pensionable

2:10:10 > 2:10:14age, it means financial planning has been thrown entirely out of kilter.

2:10:14 > 2:10:18These dishes are exacerbated by the intrinsic problems one faces inroad

2:10:18 > 2:10:23areas for the job opportunities can be limited and I have met with

2:10:23 > 2:10:26constituents who face age discrimination in trying to get back

2:10:26 > 2:10:29into the workplace because of these changes that these challenges

2:10:29 > 2:10:34compounded by the limited or nonexistent role or public

2:10:34 > 2:10:37transport. Collectivity can be extremely poor for some people who

2:10:37 > 2:10:42live many miles from a bus stop. Those without a car was severely

2:10:42 > 2:10:48restricted. The stories of financial adversity faced by my constituents

2:10:48 > 2:10:52has been beyond frustrating to listen to stop finding the

2:10:52 > 2:10:55Department for Work and Pensions unwilling to engage with those of us

2:10:55 > 2:10:58who have brought together your Parliamentary group for the Waspi

2:10:58 > 2:11:03women to try to build a relationship for the 3.8 million women. Every

2:11:03 > 2:11:07case is unique. Each woman's financial situation is different. We

2:11:07 > 2:11:11need to treat each one on its merits but I would urge the DWP and

2:11:11 > 2:11:17ministers that this needs to be about how we treat these women. Too

2:11:17 > 2:11:22many women have told me about the efficiency and inconsistency in

2:11:22 > 2:11:25treatment by the Department. I would be most grateful for the Pensions

2:11:25 > 2:11:30Minister to tackle the impasse this campaign seems to have reached in

2:11:30 > 2:11:35his comments later today got up I have tried hard to bring all parties

2:11:35 > 2:11:39together for a considered and open discussion in order to bring

2:11:39 > 2:11:44progress to the historic failings. So far I have been unsuccessful. The

2:11:44 > 2:11:47key question to me is, whatever the fading in communication about the

2:11:47 > 2:11:51change to be pensionable ages start late, and regardless of which

2:11:51 > 2:11:54government of whichever colour over the last 20 years has fell to get

2:11:54 > 2:11:59this right, how do we now start to work together, to listen to the

2:11:59 > 2:12:03Parliamentary ombudsman and tackle the failure to deal with complaints

2:12:03 > 2:12:08dealt with by the Waspi women? The Department has set into place

2:12:08 > 2:12:12rigorous processes for future pension age changes, which I yet no

2:12:12 > 2:12:20doubt to come. I want to be certain that we have got, whoever is in

2:12:20 > 2:12:24government, a department that can be absolutely comfortable and know they

2:12:24 > 2:12:29have a robust process so this can never happen again. Women rarely

2:12:29 > 2:12:33push themselves forwards. They want to get on with life and look after

2:12:33 > 2:12:37their families. This situation has driven them to gather together and

2:12:37 > 2:12:42speak as one voice on behalf of each other, as much as for themselves. It

2:12:42 > 2:12:47behoves us as their members of Parliament and the Government asked

2:12:47 > 2:12:51to write historic failings to listen and work with my constituents to

2:12:51 > 2:12:56find a fair and honest solution. I urge the minister to meet with me

2:12:56 > 2:13:00and my Northumbrian Waspi ladies to start that process in the spirit of

2:13:00 > 2:13:10conciliation and understanding.Like many in this chamber, I have taken

2:13:10 > 2:13:14part in about seven debates I can think of over the last two or three

2:13:14 > 2:13:18years and still the Gutman has not actually done anything about it, nor

2:13:18 > 2:13:23have they listened to what has been said. -- the Government. It is not

2:13:23 > 2:13:28my intention today to rehash all the arguments we have put over the last

2:13:28 > 2:13:34seven or eight debates. Can I say right at the start that we have to

2:13:34 > 2:13:40congratulate the tenacity of the Waspi women in staying on course to

2:13:40 > 2:13:45get justice? Can I take the opportunity to congratulate the

2:13:45 > 2:13:48Waspi women from Coventry who have travelled down here today and the

2:13:48 > 2:13:53other women who have come from all parts of the country. They should be

2:13:53 > 2:13:56congratulated on that. Some of them have had to do it at their own

2:13:56 > 2:14:00expense. What I want to do is pick up one or two points that I think

2:14:00 > 2:14:06really should be emphasised. The Government had a golden opportunity

2:14:06 > 2:14:11in the budget to do something about it. They could have made some sort

2:14:11 > 2:14:17of gesture as a halfway house, as it were, to achieving what the Waspi

2:14:17 > 2:14:21women wanted to achieve. The Government totally ignored it. At

2:14:21 > 2:14:24the same time, they tell the public they want to listen to the public

2:14:24 > 2:14:30and the public themselves and a whole range of issues. The

2:14:30 > 2:14:35Government has used austerities in some ways to justify not taking any

2:14:35 > 2:14:40action regarding the help for Waspi women. If they can spend over 50

2:14:40 > 2:14:46billion and 60 billion on high-speed rayal I am sure they can look at

2:14:46 > 2:14:50spending the money to help these women. These women were not given

2:14:50 > 2:14:56time to plan for their retirement. That is the tragedy about it. It is

2:14:56 > 2:15:00important to emphasise this point. Somebody suggested earlier that was

2:15:00 > 2:15:04not the real point. It is the real point, along with a resolution to

2:15:04 > 2:15:10the problem. Those are the two main points. There was suggestion as well

2:15:10 > 2:15:13that Gordon Brown somehow had something to do with this. We all

2:15:13 > 2:15:18know that is not true. We will not dwell too much on that. Suffice to

2:15:18 > 2:15:21say it was a John Major government that introduced this and members

2:15:21 > 2:15:26should bear that in mind. We should also bear in mind that 53% of the

2:15:26 > 2:15:32Waspi women actually rely on their pensions to make ends meet.

2:15:34 > 2:15:42Very often many of them look after elderly parents. Sometimes they've

2:15:42 > 2:15:46got children who actually suffer from disabilities. People tend to

2:15:46 > 2:15:51forget, a lot of these women look after their children who are now

2:15:51 > 2:15:55grown up, probably in their 20s. They have to look after them and

2:15:55 > 2:16:00there is an organisation in Coventry that does that without any help.I

2:16:00 > 2:16:08thank him for giving way, I know that and Potter, my constituent from

2:16:08 > 2:16:14Glasgow and Lanarkshire, who is watching from home, as well as what

2:16:14 > 2:16:19he mentions, many of these women had to fight for equal pay and work

2:16:19 > 2:16:24highly physically demanding work. It's offensive when the government

2:16:24 > 2:16:27on the opposite benches suggests they should take up apprenticeships

2:16:27 > 2:16:33to fill the gap.I was going to come onto that because in the debate last

2:16:33 > 2:16:36week, it was suggested that WASPI women could deal with

2:16:36 > 2:16:41apprenticeships. I remember that suggestion in that debate as I'm

2:16:41 > 2:16:46sure others do and makes you wonder whether the government party really

2:16:46 > 2:16:57takes this seriously. When we look at the general situation that

2:16:57 > 2:17:01affects women, we should remember to broaden this out. For example, this

2:17:01 > 2:17:06is the government that wants to support women, we shouldn't lose

2:17:06 > 2:17:09track of that. Looking at the taxation adjustments, over the last

2:17:09 > 2:17:16couple of budgets, in actual fact with austerity, women generally have

2:17:16 > 2:17:21contributed 14 billion in tax adjustments. Think about that, so

2:17:21 > 2:17:24it's not just the WASPI women I've talked about but women in general

2:17:24 > 2:17:30terms. Yet this government says it supports women and when the chance

2:17:30 > 2:17:34comes to put their money where their mouth is, they don't do that. I have

2:17:34 > 2:17:42spoken to some members recently when some of the banks when women retire,

2:17:42 > 2:17:47the banks would dock their private pension from their state pension.

2:17:47 > 2:17:50Some may have signed a resolution, an early day motion around that and

2:17:50 > 2:17:56it's an issue we are going to pursue. So, to finish, because I

2:17:56 > 2:18:01know a lot of other people want to get in, I'll say this. The classic

2:18:01 > 2:18:07example of this government's meaningless words to women, if you

2:18:07 > 2:18:11look at the women's refuges and the funding that has been cut from them,

2:18:11 > 2:18:18and you know these refugees are very often a haven for women who have

2:18:18 > 2:18:22been abused, assaulted and sometimes raped. The government should think

2:18:22 > 2:18:26about whether it really supports women. Thank you very much, Madam

2:18:26 > 2:18:34Deputy Speaker.Scott Mann.Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker and it's a

2:18:34 > 2:18:38pleasure to follow the Right Honourable member for Coventry South

2:18:38 > 2:18:42and can I congratulate the member for Easington for bringing forward

2:18:42 > 2:18:48this debate today. I speak on behalf of my North Cornwall women who I

2:18:48 > 2:18:52have met numerous times during surgeries and different events in my

2:18:52 > 2:18:56last two and a half years. I presented a petition on their behalf

2:18:56 > 2:19:00last year and many have come to see me at the surgery in my towns and

2:19:00 > 2:19:06villages to express their concern of this challenging times many of these

2:19:06 > 2:19:12people are facing. Other members have alluded to some of those

2:19:12 > 2:19:15challenges today, most coming to see me are those who have worked there

2:19:15 > 2:19:20in tyre life and they might well own their own home and not be in a

2:19:20 > 2:19:24position to make that transition for 18 months. I am a supporter of

2:19:24 > 2:19:30transitional members for our WASPI women and I believe there is a

2:19:30 > 2:19:34practical solution we can reach by reducing the state pension over a

2:19:34 > 2:19:38longer period. My own view that the private providers of pensions

2:19:38 > 2:19:43already allow this through private pensions and that option should be

2:19:43 > 2:19:49given to people who have public pensions as well. My view is the

2:19:49 > 2:19:56changes in 2011 were rushed and wrong and were brought in at speed.

2:19:56 > 2:20:01I believe the equalisation is of pensions made in 1995 was the right

2:20:01 > 2:20:08thing to do but I do accept there are cases for the two months - 18

2:20:08 > 2:20:11months because there are people who have suffered in different ways

2:20:11 > 2:20:17through this and we should acknowledge that. My view is people

2:20:17 > 2:20:24should be able to take their pension late or have the option to wait and

2:20:24 > 2:20:32have the £159 a week as it currently sits. So, I have done some figures

2:20:32 > 2:20:36and my benchmark figures are based on the life expectancy of a woman in

2:20:36 > 2:20:42the UK as being 83, which is currently sits at the moment. And

2:20:42 > 2:20:49the pension age previously in 1995 at 66. At the moment, the state

2:20:49 > 2:20:55pension is £159 a week. Over the 17 years leading up to life expectancy,

2:20:55 > 2:21:00the pension would cost £141,000, just over it. I've done some

2:21:00 > 2:21:09modelling based on £130 a week, £140 a week and £150 a week or a reduced

2:21:09 > 2:21:13pension over a longer period of time. I've also used the baseline to

2:21:13 > 2:21:17measure that against the least affected women, those affected for

2:21:17 > 2:21:22two months and those who have been affected over the 18 month period.

2:21:22 > 2:21:26The conclusions overreached according to the figures is the only

2:21:26 > 2:21:30group that would be affected if these proposals that I've put

2:21:30 > 2:21:34together over the last few days are put into place would be the people

2:21:34 > 2:21:40that are the most affected, those who have the 18 month periods away.

2:21:40 > 2:21:45Even on those proposals, it would only mean the government would have

2:21:45 > 2:21:51to find 2003 and £57 over the lifetime of that particular pension.

2:21:51 > 2:21:55All the other models come out in a positive way to the government. I

2:21:55 > 2:21:59would just say in my own view, I think this is something we should do

2:21:59 > 2:22:02and there is a gesture we should make to the women who have been

2:22:02 > 2:22:07affected. I would ask the Minister to sit down with me and look through

2:22:07 > 2:22:12these figures to see if there is a satisfactory solution to this

2:22:12 > 2:22:16current problem. I'm happy to meet with the ministry if he is happy to

2:22:16 > 2:22:20meet with me. We should consider a sensible way forward. I'm not

2:22:20 > 2:22:27entirely sure I will be here for the windups but I welcome the

2:22:27 > 2:22:31opportunity to meet with the Minister at a later date to discuss

2:22:31 > 2:22:35how we can practically take this solution forward.

2:22:36 > 2:22:42Carolyn Harris.Can I congratulate my honourable friend forces during

2:22:42 > 2:22:49this really important debate. Can I say to the government one more time,

2:22:49 > 2:22:52you really need to stop burying your head is in the sand and do the right

2:22:52 > 2:22:57thing by these women. Because yet again, we have the same point,

2:22:57 > 2:23:01debating the unfairness and injustice to the 1950s women as a

2:23:01 > 2:23:06consequence to the changes to the pension. Without the time to prepare

2:23:06 > 2:23:10and make the necessary alternative arrangements, so many women born in

2:23:10 > 2:23:14the 1950s are left in financial despair. The reality is the women

2:23:14 > 2:23:21are desperate. I have women who are affected: office, write to me,

2:23:21 > 2:23:26e-mail me every day, let me know they have had to sell their

2:23:26 > 2:23:29belongings and are relying on family, friends and food banks just

2:23:29 > 2:23:35exist. Over 2.5 million women have been wronged by this injustice,

2:23:35 > 2:23:39that's 2.5 million voices that will not be ignored and 2.5 million that

2:23:39 > 2:23:48won't go away. The changes to the Pensions Act 2011 gave people in

2:23:48 > 2:23:52sufficient time to prepare for retirement causing hardship for

2:23:52 > 2:23:56certain groups. Those below average age expectancy and those who depend

2:23:56 > 2:24:01more on state pension in retirement, those more likely to suffer from

2:24:01 > 2:24:05health problems or disability, and those who have to care for elderly

2:24:05 > 2:24:09parents, husbands and grandchildren. Limiting their ability to work at

2:24:09 > 2:24:14home and beyond 65. For some of these women, their jobs are

2:24:14 > 2:24:17physically demanding and because of their health, they can no longer do

2:24:17 > 2:24:22the things they were able to do when younger. And our own Minister

2:24:22 > 2:24:28believes apprenticeships and available work is to these women, I

2:24:28 > 2:24:35believe that is a insult. Data for women over 65 believe unemployment

2:24:35 > 2:24:41benefits increased between 2013 and 2017, more so than the total number

2:24:41 > 2:24:45of claimants...Do you not agree with all of that, there are still

2:24:45 > 2:24:50those of inconsistencies such as one-year change of the date of birth

2:24:50 > 2:24:54means three years change for the pension, making it even more logical

2:24:54 > 2:24:59way the government introduced this? My thoughts of that have been put on

2:24:59 > 2:25:03record many times and I agree with Mike Right Honourable friend. Data

2:25:03 > 2:25:10for women aged 60 plus had unemployment benefits between 2013

2:25:10 > 2:25:14and 2017, more so than the total number of claimants for all other

2:25:14 > 2:25:19dangers. The number of women aged 60 plus claiming benefit increased by

2:25:19 > 2:25:27around 9500 as a 115% increase and pension ages changes have played a

2:25:27 > 2:25:32substantial part in that increase. It is crucial that this government

2:25:32 > 2:25:35recognises the need for fair transitional state pension

2:25:35 > 2:25:40arrangements. Yet the government is still not listening, they've

2:25:40 > 2:25:47deceived these women, stolen their security and shattered their dreams.

2:25:47 > 2:25:53In September, myself and the co-chair, the on rubble member for

2:25:53 > 2:26:00East Worthing and Shoreham tackled the subject which will be prepared

2:26:00 > 2:26:07for 2018. The committee launched recently a consultation to gather

2:26:07 > 2:26:10opinions from the women affected and the number of responses to our

2:26:10 > 2:26:14questionnaire within the first few hours was staggering. To date, we

2:26:14 > 2:26:20have nearly 90 responses from groups representing very many thousands of

2:26:20 > 2:26:26women. These women are those who are living with the consequence of the

2:26:26 > 2:26:33pension changes, and these are the women whose voices will be heard. I

2:26:33 > 2:26:37have personally met with many women, both in my constituency and as chair

2:26:37 > 2:26:43of the APG G, I have visited many constituencies around the country to

2:26:43 > 2:26:47speak to these women affected. Most recently, I have been to visit with

2:26:47 > 2:26:53my friend from Rhondda. And my office is currently dealing with

2:26:53 > 2:26:58requests for me to visit 1950s women's groups in Scotland, northern

2:26:58 > 2:27:03England and right across Wales. And wherever I go, the story is always

2:27:03 > 2:27:10the same. These women feel cheated, disrespected and they are angry. And

2:27:10 > 2:27:14every meeting is packed. Not one of these women has any intention of

2:27:14 > 2:27:19giving up until they get the result they have learnt and they deserve.

2:27:19 > 2:27:25-- they have earned. Transitional payments that will allow them to

2:27:25 > 2:27:29enjoy their retirements that they have spent many years working hard

2:27:29 > 2:27:34for. What about those 1950s women but left that this country to work

2:27:34 > 2:27:38in other parts of Europe, not only concerned how their lives will pan

2:27:38 > 2:27:43out after Brexit, but are currently feeling extremely vulnerable and

2:27:43 > 2:27:48left out in the cold when it to their pensions. These women have not

2:27:48 > 2:27:52got an MP to voice their concerns, so they have contacted me and I'm

2:27:52 > 2:27:57sure many in this Chamber to ask what is happening to their pensions?

2:27:57 > 2:28:01When they left this country, they left it believing they could get

2:28:01 > 2:28:06their pension at 60 and they are feeling they have been robbed also.

2:28:06 > 2:28:10But across this House, so many colleagues agree that the changes to

2:28:10 > 2:28:15state pension are unjust and unfair. So, it really is time for the

2:28:15 > 2:28:23government to stop blocking their ears, to start listening, let these

2:28:23 > 2:28:29women have justice and do the right and honourable thing and give these

2:28:29 > 2:28:34WASPI women and all 1950s women what they deserve, transitional payments.

2:28:34 > 2:28:51Peter Aldous.Thank you...CHEERING .They love you, Peter!Me?Just

2:28:51 > 2:28:55before the Gentleman begins his speech, let us make it very clear

2:28:55 > 2:28:58that we don't have cheering and clapping in any part of this

2:28:58 > 2:29:08Chamber. We do have hear, hear, smiles and laughs, but we don't have

2:29:08 > 2:29:17cheering and clapping. Peter Aldous. Thank you, due to my cold, I will

2:29:17 > 2:29:21not be able to speak as passionately and as loudly as the Lady I have

2:29:21 > 2:29:26followed. I congratulate my friend from Easington for securing this

2:29:26 > 2:29:30debate, playing an important role in continuing to highlight the

2:29:30 > 2:29:35difficult situation in which many women born on or after the 6th of

2:29:35 > 2:29:39April 1950 find themselves as a result of the changes to the state

2:29:39 > 2:29:47pension age in the 1995 and 2011 pensions act.

2:29:47 > 2:29:50This is an unfairness that needs to be addressed and we do need to get

2:29:50 > 2:29:55on with finding a solution. I fully support the case for equalising the

2:29:55 > 2:30:00retirement age and the need to raise the pension age. That is required on

2:30:00 > 2:30:05the grounds of increased life expectancy and financial

2:30:05 > 2:30:09sustainability. However, such changes have a profound impact on

2:30:09 > 2:30:15people and the lives that they live will stop they need to be properly

2:30:15 > 2:30:18researched the subject to full consultation, and then introduced in

2:30:18 > 2:30:25a fully transparent way. These steps, Madam Deputy Speaker, have

2:30:25 > 2:30:28not been taken in this instance. Even though the pensions act

2:30:28 > 2:30:36providing for the pensioners aged increase for women from 60 to 65 was

2:30:36 > 2:30:44enacted in 1995, government waited 14 years until April, 2009, before

2:30:44 > 2:30:50they began writing individually to the women affected. This lack of

2:30:50 > 2:30:53notification mentioned they had no time to make all talented

2:30:53 > 2:31:00arrangements to their retirement. At the time of the 2011 act, it was

2:31:00 > 2:31:06clear there was a problem. Women were raising their concerns with me.

2:31:06 > 2:31:11As a result, the Government did make changes to limit the impact on those

2:31:11 > 2:31:15most affected. With hindsight, looking back, it is clear that the

2:31:15 > 2:31:21full scale of the problem was not recognised and legislation should

2:31:21 > 2:31:31have been preceded by a fall impact assessment. Waspis briefing for the

2:31:31 > 2:31:36debate highlights the balance these women face in mitigating the sudden

2:31:36 > 2:31:41change in their circumstances. Many have no other source of income and,

2:31:41 > 2:31:48until the 1990s, many women were not allowed to join company pension

2:31:48 > 2:31:51schemes that many women face difficulties returning to the

2:31:51 > 2:31:57workplace. Many are on the expectation of an earlier

2:31:57 > 2:32:00retirement, have taken on caring responsibilities and some divorce

2:32:00 > 2:32:04settlements were calculated on the assumption that the state pension

2:32:04 > 2:32:13age was going to be received earlier. In 2016, there is a

2:32:13 > 2:32:19compelling case as to why this matter needs to be revisited. The

2:32:19 > 2:32:22message from the wave any constituency and from Suffolk is

2:32:22 > 2:32:26that this is a situation that must be addressed. -- Waveney. When many

2:32:26 > 2:32:32of us presented petitions in this chamber last autumn, I was second

2:32:32 > 2:32:37behind the Honourable member for whole north in terms of the people

2:32:37 > 2:32:45who signed up. 2249 Waveney constituents. Last year,

2:32:45 > 2:32:50Conservative run Waveney District Council unanimously endorsed this

2:32:50 > 2:32:54petition and last week, Conservative run Suffolk County Council

2:32:54 > 2:32:57unanimously backed the campaign for equality of pension provision for

2:32:57 > 2:33:06women. In Suffolk, there has been a tradition of women going out to

2:33:06 > 2:33:12work, whether in factories, agriculture, fishing, and clerical

2:33:12 > 2:33:17posts. Often part-time and on low salaries. These changes are

2:33:17 > 2:33:22disproportionately affecting a lot of them and their families. I will

2:33:22 > 2:33:26give way.I thank the Honourable member for giving way. I hope the

2:33:26 > 2:33:30Honourable member will forgive me and I hope Madam Deputy Speaker will

2:33:30 > 2:33:34forgive me. I just wanted to say you have my full support and the reason

2:33:34 > 2:33:38I am not speaking in this debate is simply because there were so many

2:33:38 > 2:33:44other people speaking. The whole of Suffolk is behind you on this one.I

2:33:44 > 2:33:49am grateful, Madam Deputy Speaker, for that endorsement from Suffolk. I

2:33:49 > 2:33:52acknowledge the challenges the Government faces in finding a way

2:33:52 > 2:33:58forward that is both affordable and complies with equalities

2:33:58 > 2:34:03legislation. However, it is clear that a particular group of people

2:34:03 > 2:34:07have been unfairly penalised. I'd thus support the motion and I urge

2:34:07 > 2:34:13the Government to find a way forward that is there, fully considered, and

2:34:13 > 2:34:20affordable. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.Thank you very much, Madam

2:34:20 > 2:34:32Deputy Speaker. I would like to congratulate my Honourable friend

2:34:32 > 2:34:36for Easington for securing this debate. The manner in which the

2:34:36 > 2:34:40pension change is totally unjust. It is unfair and in my opinion in

2:34:40 > 2:34:47moral. It has short-changed 2.6 million women and cause damage to

2:34:47 > 2:34:51families for them it is extremely important we do acknowledge this is

2:34:51 > 2:34:54impacting on families. Women are moving back in with their children

2:34:54 > 2:34:59and it is leaving to marital breakdowns. There are all. Is linked

2:34:59 > 2:35:04to these financial burdens are women are facing. Previously, during Prime

2:35:04 > 2:35:07Minister's Questions, I mentioned my constituent Diana Kendall. She

2:35:07 > 2:35:12suffered a bleed on the brain in 2012. Have carried on working under

2:35:12 > 2:35:22the assumption she would be able to retire in September of this year.

2:35:22 > 2:35:25She was not told of the changeable. She has had to carry on working

2:35:25 > 2:35:28because she does not have the money in order to retire. When I asked the

2:35:28 > 2:35:31Prime Minister when she would be able to retire, I was told yet again

2:35:31 > 2:35:34she would wait no more than 18 months. She is waiting six years.

2:35:34 > 2:35:39That is the reality of what was wrong with the Prime Minister's

2:35:39 > 2:35:43answer. Diana has carried on running her business, has carried on

2:35:43 > 2:35:49working, won't be able to give up working, but yet the Government

2:35:49 > 2:35:52seemed completely disinterested, even with women who have major

2:35:52 > 2:35:58health issues in terms of helping them be able to retire. Further to

2:35:58 > 2:36:01that, I have constituents with arthritis, heart conditions,

2:36:01 > 2:36:06mobility problems, who have had to deal with the hike in the state

2:36:06 > 2:36:09pension age to stop despite finding it extremely difficult to work, they

2:36:09 > 2:36:13have been forced to work. This is unacceptable on a group of women

2:36:13 > 2:36:22born in a time when employment rights, support for national

2:36:22 > 2:36:26insurance contributions, maternity rights simply did not exist. And it

2:36:26 > 2:36:31is deeply unfair that these women are facing yet another injustice. As

2:36:31 > 2:36:38part of my work as secretary, I have spoken to women in my own

2:36:38 > 2:36:41constituency and women in other constituencies have contacted me

2:36:41 > 2:36:44with countless lists of problems they are facing for the women who

2:36:44 > 2:36:49say they own their own home but they are selling their furniture. How can

2:36:49 > 2:36:53ministers justify these things which are happening to women who have

2:36:53 > 2:36:57worked, in some cases, for 40 years, and they are not to be told they

2:36:57 > 2:37:03cannot retire when are expecting to? The answer is, simply carry on. Only

2:37:03 > 2:37:09wait 18 months. It is not true, Madam Deputy Speaker. Beyond this

2:37:09 > 2:37:13House, it is not just the women campaigning born in the 1950s, there

2:37:13 > 2:37:17is a huge amount of support from the public. There is also support from

2:37:17 > 2:37:23members across the House. No less than 50 government MPs support the

2:37:23 > 2:37:32campaign, as well as colleagues from the DUP and SNP, liberal and Plaid

2:37:32 > 2:37:36colleagues. If there were legislative time to reverse these

2:37:36 > 2:37:39decisions, we would win full so isn't it time the Government stepped

2:37:39 > 2:37:44up, offered support to these women, because there is support across the

2:37:44 > 2:37:49House full support and change to the 1950s women. My honourable friend

2:37:49 > 2:37:55for Swansea East said, I held a meeting for women across my

2:37:55 > 2:37:59constituency, many of whom still not aware of the pension changes that

2:37:59 > 2:38:02are happening to them and have only recently become informed of them

2:38:02 > 2:38:07because the campaign is being led by 1950s women. Over 100 of them turned

2:38:07 > 2:38:12up full top some of them raised new issues. For example, when some were

2:38:12 > 2:38:15deciding to defer their pension, which is their right, they had not

2:38:15 > 2:38:18actually realise they would be entitled to it to match or years

2:38:18 > 2:38:26before. Only when they would come and being gauged in the process that

2:38:26 > 2:38:28they realise they should have had it two years before. Because of no

2:38:28 > 2:38:31information on no letters telling women about the changes they have

2:38:31 > 2:38:36not been aware of the fact they actually had a deferment which was

2:38:36 > 2:38:41forced, whether they want to defer it or not. I believe, truly believe

2:38:41 > 2:38:45that the tide is turning and the pressure on government, I hope, the

2:38:45 > 2:38:49Government ministers are actually listening to what is going on out in

2:38:49 > 2:38:54the country, that these women are actually suffering. We need the

2:38:54 > 2:38:57Government to step up, caving, bringing legislative time to

2:38:57 > 2:39:02actually make changes to support the two and a half million women. I will

2:39:02 > 2:39:06always continue fighting for the women of my constituency affected by

2:39:06 > 2:39:09this and women up and down this country. The Government needs to

2:39:09 > 2:39:15listen. I urge Conservative members to come with us, to get the

2:39:15 > 2:39:20Government to change its mind and to start supporting these 1950s women

2:39:20 > 2:39:29who need our support now.I congratulate the member for

2:39:29 > 2:39:33Easington for bringing this important subject forward. I have

2:39:33 > 2:39:39great pleasure in following the member for Ogmore. Now, I too have

2:39:39 > 2:39:46met with Waspi women and we have heard a lot of in Suffolk, as my

2:39:46 > 2:39:50honourable friend has discussed. It is a real prevalent issue for many

2:39:50 > 2:39:56women. I have also discovered that stories differ. I think it is really

2:39:56 > 2:39:59important to treat people as individuals on their journey through

2:39:59 > 2:40:05life. We do not necessarily serve all our population well, to lump

2:40:05 > 2:40:12everything together as we are discussing this matter. So, I think,

2:40:12 > 2:40:16the primary thing I am understanding is that no matter what the hue of

2:40:16 > 2:40:20government, there needs to be clarity and information as it is

2:40:20 > 2:40:25passed down, about these important issues. There is blame across the

2:40:25 > 2:40:31piste, as far as people not getting the information. In many cases, they

2:40:31 > 2:40:36are saying to me that letters were received. I have no reason to think

2:40:36 > 2:40:39they were received. There is a problem there in ensuring people are

2:40:39 > 2:40:49properly informed. I will give way to my honourable friend from the

2:40:49 > 2:40:56South.I thank my honourable friend for giving way was that would she

2:40:56 > 2:41:00agree with me that it is absolutely important that this generation of

2:41:00 > 2:41:05women who have been affected because these letters, some saw them, some

2:41:05 > 2:41:09did not, some did not receive them, and they have not been able to make

2:41:09 > 2:41:11plans for their retirement. The next generation of women will know

2:41:11 > 2:41:15exactly what is coming. We have done some alterations but the Government

2:41:15 > 2:41:20needs to be more generous than has been for this particular group of

2:41:20 > 2:41:25women.I would agree with my honourable friend that I would also

2:41:25 > 2:41:29say that, for those of us who were in our late 40s when we received

2:41:29 > 2:41:37those letters, because I did receive a letter, proves they do work, in

2:41:37 > 2:41:452011, 2000 12. I took a 10% hit in my working life. I will be working

2:41:45 > 2:41:51too, I think, 67 actually. Granted, but I had a great deal of my life

2:41:51 > 2:41:54looking after children and so on and I am not in any way undermining that

2:41:54 > 2:41:59I have had in my surgery women who have particularly those who have

2:41:59 > 2:42:02been carers, of which I think there is a broader issue across many

2:42:02 > 2:42:10departments and across governments, but also individuals who made life

2:42:10 > 2:42:13decisions prior to 2010. For that, I have lobbied the minister and he has

2:42:13 > 2:42:19discussed with me at length the fact that there are individual women, one

2:42:19 > 2:42:24in particular who was a midwife. She went off and did five years work

2:42:24 > 2:42:30overseas for charity in 2010, predicating her decision on the

2:42:30 > 2:42:35information she went with. OK. Now, when she came back, not only did it

2:42:35 > 2:42:40impact on the fact that she had had those five years serving other

2:42:40 > 2:42:46people but she also found that it affected her burgess of her

2:42:46 > 2:42:49midwifery qualification. When she went to return to work, her

2:42:49 > 2:42:57position, that job she could apply for was compromised. There were

2:42:57 > 2:43:04genuine cases. I move on to the fact that treating everybody in this

2:43:04 > 2:43:07universal way, perhaps, misses some of the importance of what we are

2:43:07 > 2:43:15trying to discuss.I thank my honourable friend for giving way. I

2:43:15 > 2:43:21have lobbied the minister on this as well. I pay tribute to the Waspi

2:43:21 > 2:43:26women who have presented a petition here. Exactly the position around

2:43:26 > 2:43:29caring for that many of these women are unable to correct or because

2:43:29 > 2:43:34they are already taking on a caring responsibility now. It is very much

2:43:34 > 2:43:38impact on what they can do financially.I thank my honourable

2:43:38 > 2:43:44friend the who I know works and stinking lethal carers up and down

2:43:44 > 2:43:48the country for raising that point. I would say this is a broader

2:43:48 > 2:43:59discussion about how we value carers. -- unstintingly for carers.

2:43:59 > 2:44:05I would also thank Goering Davis, who brought up the case that a lot

2:44:05 > 2:44:13of these women work in active. I would gently say those issues are

2:44:13 > 2:44:18issues that women, whether in their 50s, 40s, 30s or 20s, are dealing

2:44:18 > 2:44:23with across the piste. Making a specific case, women tend to bear

2:44:23 > 2:44:27the brunt with these things. There are challenges in Rowell areas, as

2:44:27 > 2:44:31my honourable friend for Berwick-upon-Tweed said. -- rural

2:44:31 > 2:44:37areas. My honourable friend from Waverley brought up the issues with

2:44:37 > 2:44:40financial services and banks not playing their part in being a

2:44:40 > 2:44:47conduit of information for women. -- Waveney. I would just like to say

2:44:47 > 2:44:52that the series of events which led to this situation, and the fact that

2:44:52 > 2:44:57we have all found ourselves learning that communication should be done

2:44:57 > 2:45:03better, at the nub of this is the fact that we have a problem. 24

2:45:03 > 2:45:09letters were sent from the Queen in 1917 to say that women were turning

2:45:09 > 2:45:21100. 24,000 last year. By 2050, 50 6000 people will celebrate.

2:45:21 > 2:45:26The prediction in our county is by 2039, the majority of people in the

2:45:26 > 2:45:30county will be over 65, this is an almost extraordinary change in

2:45:30 > 2:45:34society and we have to accept the costs that come with it.Indeed,

2:45:34 > 2:45:41which moves me on to essentially the nub of the point that I would like

2:45:41 > 2:45:49to make. That is the fact that many of us come to this place as women,

2:45:49 > 2:45:57as carers. My husband and I still have four parents alive, which is

2:45:57 > 2:46:02great. A sign of improved medical care. We have four children who

2:46:02 > 2:46:07arguably will bear the brunt of paying for this. And I recently

2:46:07 > 2:46:14spoke to a woman in one of my surgeries who is affected by the

2:46:14 > 2:46:18pension age, who said, was born in 1956. I have been fortunate to work

2:46:18 > 2:46:23all my life and I do take that point on board. In a variety of careers I

2:46:23 > 2:46:33have enjoyed. Some of these were once that she explained was

2:46:33 > 2:46:37sometimes done out of necessity of circumstance. She was warned that

2:46:37 > 2:46:42her state pension age, in two letters, that it would be changing

2:46:42 > 2:46:48and she will receive her state pension age at 66. 62 next birthday

2:46:48 > 2:46:52and even in receipt pension, she would struggle to stop working and

2:46:52 > 2:46:58she really her current job. This is what I mean about treating it on a

2:46:58 > 2:47:02more individual basis. I appreciate I am fortunate, I have good health,

2:47:02 > 2:47:06something that has been referred to on several occasions. I understand I

2:47:06 > 2:47:09have a supportive husband and three lovely children, but I expect to

2:47:09 > 2:47:13live longer than my parents, but my perception is my children struggle

2:47:13 > 2:47:19more financially than I did at their age. I realise my taxes contributed

2:47:19 > 2:47:25to my parents pension and is my children's taxes will bond mine. I

2:47:25 > 2:47:30find it difficult to accept my financially challenged children will

2:47:30 > 2:47:34contribute to my pension for many more years, it does not seem fair.

2:47:34 > 2:47:38If we do not see through these changes, the burden our children

2:47:38 > 2:47:42will take is really quite astronomical. It isn't fair, but it

2:47:42 > 2:47:48is where we find ourselves. We must ensure that we are proportionate in

2:47:48 > 2:47:56our response. Yes, it is about choices and I would very gently say

2:47:56 > 2:48:01to the member for East Renfrewshire, is it? Paisley and East

2:48:01 > 2:48:05Renfrewshire. But the Scottish National Party do have the ability

2:48:05 > 2:48:13to make this unilateral decision if they wanted to.

2:48:13 > 2:48:21While I would agree, is it not that we should be looking at this for all

2:48:21 > 2:48:25women in the United Kingdom, rather than saying, you can do it there and

2:48:25 > 2:48:32you can do it that? This is a UK wide problem.Order! The honourable

2:48:32 > 2:48:34lady has been very generous in giving into dungeons, but she has

2:48:34 > 2:48:42run out of time.-- interventions. Thank you, Madam Deputy chair.

2:48:42 > 2:48:46Everyone is running out of time so I am reducing the time limits to five

2:48:46 > 2:48:52minutes. Liz twist. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Can

2:48:52 > 2:48:59I declare an interest as one of those 1950s born women directly

2:48:59 > 2:49:06affected by changes to the state pension age? But unlike many of

2:49:06 > 2:49:11them, I am fortunate to be able to raise this issue in this chamber.

2:49:11 > 2:49:16The fact is that many of these 1950s born women have been hit not just

2:49:16 > 2:49:22once, but twice by changes to the state pension age. First, those of

2:49:22 > 2:49:25us born in the 1950s were hit by an equalisation of the state pension

2:49:25 > 2:49:30age to that of men with transitional arrangements in place according to

2:49:30 > 2:49:35date of birth, up to 2020. Sadly, the Government at that time did not

2:49:35 > 2:49:41see fit to tell others, the women affected, about the change. And many

2:49:41 > 2:49:46remained unaware, looking forward to receiving their state pension at 60.

2:49:46 > 2:49:50Until that time approached and they were devastated to find the

2:49:50 > 2:49:53financial ground shifting beneath their feet as they approached 60.

2:49:53 > 2:49:58And in 2011, the Coalition Government sped up the changes so

2:49:58 > 2:50:04state pension age for women reached had -- 65 by 2018 with an increase

2:50:04 > 2:50:12in the state pension age for men and women to 66 by April 2020. Leaving

2:50:12 > 2:50:15many women completely unable to make up that financial gap even if they

2:50:15 > 2:50:21were aware of the earlier changes, which many were not. How ironic that

2:50:21 > 2:50:26measures designed to increase state pension equality should have such a

2:50:26 > 2:50:33discriminatory effect on women in particular. And it has indeed had a

2:50:33 > 2:50:39discriminatory effect, as many 1950s-b on women face real hardship.

2:50:39 > 2:50:43And I want to refer to two women out of the thousands in my constituency

2:50:43 > 2:50:50whose cases struck me. Like Barbara, I knocked on her door during the

2:50:50 > 2:50:53election campaign, she had worked all her life and was working until

2:50:53 > 2:50:59before I knocked on her door. But she had worked for BHS, British home

2:50:59 > 2:51:03stores. Following the collapse of that company, she found herself

2:51:03 > 2:51:07without a state pension and in a classic double whammy without a

2:51:07 > 2:51:13company pension. At that stage. All like the woman who approached me in

2:51:13 > 2:51:19a shopping centre quite unsolicited, who said, we need to do something.

2:51:19 > 2:51:24She says she had retired early to look after her mother. Thinking she

2:51:24 > 2:51:29would get her state pension at 60. Only to find out at the death of her

2:51:29 > 2:51:32mother that she could not get her pension and she had to rely on

2:51:32 > 2:51:38benefits and family support. After working most of her life. These

2:51:38 > 2:51:42cases are not unique. So this issue is not going to go away. And I can

2:51:42 > 2:51:47tell you that many women still contact me to say they have joined

2:51:47 > 2:51:51the campaign, they have registered cases for maladministration with the

2:51:51 > 2:51:58DWP, leading to more of a backlog with the independent complaints

2:51:58 > 2:52:02Examiner considering this issue. So where do we go from here? The

2:52:02 > 2:52:07Government must address this issue as a matter of urgency. I have no

2:52:07 > 2:52:12doubt we'll hear about the measures the Government has in place to help

2:52:12 > 2:52:15people into work or into apprenticeships. That is great. Any

2:52:15 > 2:52:23woman who wants to work, that is fabulous and is able to do so. Many

2:52:23 > 2:52:27women through circumstances are not able to do that. They were not

2:52:27 > 2:52:29expecting these changes and find themselves unable to work having not

2:52:29 > 2:52:36after parents or family. And frankly, in a competitive jobs

2:52:36 > 2:52:43market, it is just not that easy for 1950s-born women to find work.

2:52:43 > 2:52:47On this matter of measures the government has taken Canada she not

2:52:47 > 2:52:52agree with me whatever measures the Government may have taken, they have

2:52:52 > 2:52:55not worked and they have not answered the problem and continuing

2:52:55 > 2:53:00sense of injustice which is still there and that is why we're here

2:53:00 > 2:53:03today?I think the Honourable Members about intervention and yes,

2:53:03 > 2:53:10I most do agree. What I am saying is that I am asking the Government to

2:53:10 > 2:53:15meet the WASPI campaigners, to explore solutions, looking at

2:53:15 > 2:53:19transitional state pension arrangements. And to make resolving

2:53:19 > 2:53:23this issue a priority for the 3.8 million women affected by these

2:53:23 > 2:53:31changes. This is a campaign powered by women. Women who are showing

2:53:31 > 2:53:36determination and courage in the campaign. And I commend all of those

2:53:36 > 2:53:45women who are determined that this cause will be addressed.

2:53:45 > 2:53:49It is a great pleasure to speaking this debate and eight congratulate

2:53:49 > 2:53:55the member for bringing it forward, I have had a considerable amount of

2:53:55 > 2:53:57correspondence on this from ladies in Suffolk affected by it, I don't

2:53:57 > 2:54:02know if they are in the chamber today. As everyone quite rightly is

2:54:02 > 2:54:05focusing on the specific issue of that cohort of women, I wanted to

2:54:05 > 2:54:09look at what is the long-term implications for the state pension

2:54:09 > 2:54:14system of this issue. The question we need to ask is, is it really fit

2:54:14 > 2:54:18for purpose, do we have a state pension system that delivers any

2:54:18 > 2:54:24longer? And the key thing is this, we have a pay-as-you-go system. What

2:54:24 > 2:54:28is the most common admit we hear from ladies who have been affected

2:54:28 > 2:54:33by these changes? It is this, I have paid in my contributions all my

2:54:33 > 2:54:36life, it is my pension pot. They believe they have paid in that many

2:54:36 > 2:54:41so they have a contract of what they should receive in return. The

2:54:41 > 2:54:45problem is this. There is no such part. None of us in the state

2:54:45 > 2:54:49pension system have a pot with our name on it, we have a pay-as-you-go

2:54:49 > 2:54:54system. This month's National Insurance contributions paid this

2:54:54 > 2:54:58month's pension liabilities into the state system and I am afraid that

2:54:58 > 2:55:01system is extremely vulnerable in the face of demographic change.

2:55:01 > 2:55:06Always give way to the honourable lady.Very grateful to my former

2:55:06 > 2:55:10committee colleague! I would like to ask, it is it the same pay-as-you-go

2:55:10 > 2:55:15system for the DUP to remain in power?That is not the function of

2:55:15 > 2:55:19the state pension system and I will resist the bait she tries to get me

2:55:19 > 2:55:24to rise to. In my view, it is important to remember the cost of

2:55:24 > 2:55:33this. The DWP is the largest part of the state pension, 111 billion, the

2:55:33 > 2:55:40biggest part of expenditure, you bring a state pension of £160 a

2:55:40 > 2:55:44week, not exactly a King's ransom. Pensioner poverty would be far

2:55:44 > 2:55:48higher if it was not for the fact we have a generation of pensioners,

2:55:48 > 2:55:52many of whom are fortunate enough to have occupational pensions and good

2:55:52 > 2:55:57luck to them, my parents from that generation, and many owned property

2:55:57 > 2:56:04and equity people over 65 in housing is about £1.5 trillion. Net

2:56:04 > 2:56:07generation had been cautioned and of course by the actions of this

2:56:07 > 2:56:12Government, and protecting pension benefits and bringing in the

2:56:12 > 2:56:19triple-lock, all of which has protected expenditure on the state

2:56:19 > 2:56:25pension from necessary savings in other departments. I will give way.

2:56:25 > 2:56:28I beg the honourable member, but would he not agree with me that

2:56:28 > 2:56:32regardless of the figures he quoted, the people paying the price for this

2:56:32 > 2:56:37women born in the 1950s?My point was going to be that everyone will

2:56:37 > 2:56:42end up paying the price. Of course this debate is about a specific

2:56:42 > 2:56:45cohort that have been hit quite directly under that a specific

2:56:45 > 2:56:49period of time, there is the issue of notification. But young people

2:56:49 > 2:56:53going to work know about the retirement age changing, they have

2:56:53 > 2:56:56got notification, it does not mean they can save adequately for their

2:56:56 > 2:56:59pension or they can afford one or get a foot on the housing ladder and

2:56:59 > 2:57:03there will probably not have an occupational pension. We cannot look

2:57:03 > 2:57:07at this in isolation, we need to look at the entire system.One more

2:57:07 > 2:57:12intervention. Would he agree with me that we must get away from the

2:57:12 > 2:57:15language of talking about the women born in the 1950s as though they

2:57:15 > 2:57:20some kind of burden on society? These women are only asking for what

2:57:20 > 2:57:23they were promised and what they themselves have paid for, they are

2:57:23 > 2:57:28not a burden, they are people looking for justice.No one is

2:57:28 > 2:57:32saying that. And my point is that precisely what the honourable

2:57:32 > 2:57:36lady... When they say they have paid it, it isn't just a mathematical

2:57:36 > 2:57:43fact. The system is not designed for this ageing population and the

2:57:43 > 2:57:47demographic change we have and the duty on us in government is to be

2:57:47 > 2:57:50open and honest and try and come up with reforms to address it. In my

2:57:50 > 2:57:55view, and it is a big deal, we should try and move to a funded

2:57:55 > 2:57:58pension system. Let's be honest, that is not a minor detail. If the

2:57:58 > 2:58:03Minister went to his officials and said, what do you think of that?

2:58:03 > 2:58:06They would say, sit down, put a wet flannel on your head, have a go with

2:58:06 > 2:58:10tea and move onto the next issue. It is not a minor deal. The only

2:58:10 > 2:58:15government that has ever moved from a pay-as-you-go system to a funded

2:58:15 > 2:58:21one is Pinochet in Chile and he did not have to worry about rebellions!

2:58:21 > 2:58:25It is extremely difficult because you have to pay twice. A generation

2:58:25 > 2:58:29has to pay twice. I believe it can be done. There are two proposals on

2:58:29 > 2:58:35this. In 1997, our party in the general election proposed Basic

2:58:35 > 2:58:38pension plus, Peter Lilley came up with a system moving from the

2:58:38 > 2:58:43current state pension to a funded one. It would have been fully in

2:58:43 > 2:58:47place by 2040. 23 years from now, the liability of the state pension

2:58:47 > 2:58:52would have fallen dramatically. If you look at the OBR, the forecast 50

2:58:52 > 2:58:59years from today for public spending at current prices is an extra 156

2:58:59 > 2:59:02billion. Now, that is mainly because of demographic change and higher

2:59:02 > 2:59:06costs of health care, more complex health needs. That is an

2:59:06 > 2:59:10extraordinary position to be in and as they say, that is not remotely

2:59:10 > 2:59:15sustainable. The option we have heard from my honourable friend the

2:59:15 > 2:59:18member for Weston-Super-Mare, any funded state pension is effectively

2:59:18 > 2:59:25a sovereign wealth fund, a welly of taking the money we pay into

2:59:25 > 2:59:28unproductive state pension system and investing into the country's

2:59:28 > 2:59:31productive knees, boosting productivity and investment and

2:59:31 > 2:59:35giving a greater return and greater ownership to people in an age when I

2:59:35 > 2:59:38think the ownership in the capitalist system is something under

2:59:38 > 2:59:43threat. So there are huge benefits to be had. The savings ratio is

2:59:43 > 2:59:46extremely low and this is one of the most worrying thing is in the budget

2:59:46 > 2:59:51we have just heard. What we do know is that if you have a system which

2:59:51 > 2:59:54effectively forces people to save from a younger age, it is very

2:59:54 > 2:59:58effective, that is what we have had with the new system that has come

2:59:58 > 3:00:02out. So yes, there are specific issues to look at the ladies

3:00:02 > 3:00:05affected by this change, but if we really want to resolve it, we have

3:00:05 > 3:00:09to take the long-term lessons and we owe it to those affected to say, how

3:00:09 > 3:00:14can we stop future generations being affected by it? Because if you own

3:00:14 > 3:00:18your pension, this sort of change, arbitrarily impacted by the state,

3:00:18 > 3:00:22put in place by the state, cannot happen. And it will take many years

3:00:22 > 3:00:26to put in place, but there would be immediate short-term benefit as we

3:00:26 > 3:00:29would move to an economy that would create more confidence in investment

3:00:29 > 3:00:35and we would move away from a boom and bust higher consumer debt model

3:00:35 > 3:00:44which is why I think my honourable friend has got it spot on.

3:00:44 > 3:00:47We will need cross-party consensus and we will need to be radical and

3:00:47 > 3:00:52look to the future and not focus entirely on the short-term issues.

3:00:52 > 3:00:59Aye I had to reduce the time it to four minutes.First of all, may I

3:00:59 > 3:01:02take this opportunity to not just congratulate that commend the member

3:01:02 > 3:01:13for Easington for bringing this very, very important debate? I must

3:01:13 > 3:01:15reiterate, we must recognise the injustice these women have been

3:01:15 > 3:01:20dealt. It is not a case of simply saying, we hear the issues that have

3:01:20 > 3:01:26been raised about by constituents, we need to listen. I know the member

3:01:26 > 3:01:30for Bury St Edmunds talked about proportionality and cost and there

3:01:30 > 3:01:34are actions, such as early drawdown, that the garment can take now. This

3:01:34 > 3:01:42action, which would be cost neutral, could have a beneficial impact. --

3:01:42 > 3:01:45the Government was I don't understand what prevents the

3:01:45 > 3:01:51Government from introducing across mutual measure of an early drawdown

3:01:51 > 3:01:57for women who wish to pursue this option. To do nothing is not only

3:01:57 > 3:02:02inadequate, it is unfair and unjust. In my constituency of pita bread, I

3:02:02 > 3:02:07have been contacted by a number of constituents, and that is on the

3:02:07 > 3:02:12issue of looking at proportionality. -- of Peter borough. We cannot say

3:02:12 > 3:02:16there may be one or two women who have come to our attention and we

3:02:16 > 3:02:21feel we need to look at individuals, this is a massive issue for number

3:02:21 > 3:02:26of women, which the Waspi women plight covers and brings to our

3:02:26 > 3:02:30attention. We must do something. It is not enough to say we are here. We

3:02:30 > 3:02:35need to listen and take action. I believe that whilst I understand

3:02:35 > 3:02:41that the pension age has to go up the rate of the increase has been

3:02:41 > 3:02:45very rapid, with very little warning more time to prepare for it. Many

3:02:45 > 3:02:49members will have heard the phrase that says, to forewarn is to four

3:02:49 > 3:02:54arm. Where was the forewarning some of these women? We cannot sit back

3:02:54 > 3:02:59and say, we're very sorry you didn't get letter, or even compare young

3:02:59 > 3:03:03people much like myself saying, in years to come, we will have to deal

3:03:03 > 3:03:07with differences in the pension being paid to us or state pensions

3:03:07 > 3:03:13we could be eligible for, this is a very specific plight of the 1950s

3:03:13 > 3:03:19women, who have been dealt a very unjust blow. For us to sit back and

3:03:19 > 3:03:24say, there were letters and everyone has to suffer. At some point someone

3:03:24 > 3:03:27will come across this. Younger people will have this effect. This

3:03:27 > 3:03:33is not acceptable.Thank you for giving Waigel to visit not

3:03:33 > 3:03:37particularly galling a disproportionate number of Waspi

3:03:37 > 3:03:41women do not have access to pension schemes? It is all the more galling

3:03:41 > 3:03:48for them as a result.I absolutely agree with my honourable friend.

3:03:48 > 3:03:52That is correct. With regards to the state pension, we need to understand

3:03:52 > 3:03:57this is not a welfare benefit. We are not saying that some of you have

3:03:57 > 3:04:01paid in and, sorry about this, we cannot do what we promised you. If

3:04:01 > 3:04:06you are going along and paying in she were 15, paying into a system

3:04:06 > 3:04:10that you believed would pay you back in your time of need, that you could

3:04:10 > 3:04:15rely on that and it was taken me and you do not have a pension in your

3:04:15 > 3:04:19workplace or you did not get booked into that type of pension,

3:04:19 > 3:04:23absolutely it has dire consequences and very negative impacts on our

3:04:23 > 3:04:27lives. In my constituency I was contacted by number of women, one of

3:04:27 > 3:04:32which was Wendy Hopkins that she advised me she had been working

3:04:32 > 3:04:35since 15 and paid all of her national insurance contributions,

3:04:35 > 3:04:40thinking she could retire at 60. Two years before retirement age could

3:04:40 > 3:04:46she was told this had been increased to 63. Within 18 months of this age

3:04:46 > 3:04:52now has to wait till she turns 66. As members can imagine, this did not

3:04:52 > 3:04:55afford sufficient time in which she could make arrangements to make up

3:04:55 > 3:05:00her financial loss. So, in that case can she had to rely on her husband,

3:05:00 > 3:05:07who has now had to work his 67, and is taking up a part-time job to

3:05:07 > 3:05:12cover the financial loss they have suffered. It is very important and

3:05:12 > 3:05:15prudent to acknowledge that there are some women who did receive the

3:05:15 > 3:05:23letter about the 2011 pension act and advised them the pensionable age

3:05:23 > 3:05:27would be increased by another 15 months. Due to personal

3:05:27 > 3:05:32circumstances, which seems to be overlooked by some contributions in

3:05:32 > 3:05:37this House, not everyone is in a position to take up an

3:05:37 > 3:05:41apprenticeship or work, or they may have caring needs of partners or

3:05:41 > 3:05:44children. It is not a fact they should have to turn around and say,

3:05:44 > 3:05:49yes, I will continue to work. This is something they were promised me

3:05:49 > 3:05:54need to respect that. I feel, I will draw my comments to conclusion now,

3:05:54 > 3:05:59that we need to take action we need to act now. There are cost neutral

3:05:59 > 3:06:06things we could do and we need to do it.Another day, another debate on

3:06:06 > 3:06:14pension for women is born -- born in the 1950s. We have had more debates

3:06:14 > 3:06:23on the subject and Liz Taylor had husbands. This situation will not go

3:06:23 > 3:06:28away. I'm proud to be the co-chairman of the party group and

3:06:28 > 3:06:33please do have co-sponsored this debate here today. I want to

3:06:33 > 3:06:38reiterate the point that Waspi is not just those groups calling

3:06:38 > 3:06:41themselves Waspi, it is the hundreds and thousands and millions of women

3:06:41 > 3:06:45who find themselves in this position. I welcome the survey we

3:06:45 > 3:06:50have put out. I hope you will get some concrete data and I hope you

3:06:50 > 3:06:55will be supporting the bill when it comes to this House in April. To

3:06:55 > 3:06:58reiterate, there are three main problems. Nobody is complaining

3:06:58 > 3:07:03about equalising the pension age. It is the process and mechanism of

3:07:03 > 3:07:11getting there which is at fault. It is the disproportionate impact on a

3:07:11 > 3:07:14specific explicit group of people, more than 3 million now, and

3:07:14 > 3:07:19particularly where those women, it is calculated that 33% of men, a

3:07:19 > 3:07:25third of men, will retire were just the state pension to rely on but for

3:07:25 > 3:07:32women the figure is 53%. Much more important to women. Secondary it is

3:07:32 > 3:07:36the arbitrary cut-off date that many of these women have had to suffer. A

3:07:36 > 3:07:42women born in 1953 on the 2nd of May, her pension age will now be

3:07:42 > 3:07:47November 2000 and 16. A loss of some 2000 what she might originally have

3:07:47 > 3:07:55expected. -- 2016. Someone born six months later, her pension age will

3:07:55 > 3:08:01be 2020. A huge difference for the sake of 12 months.Would my

3:08:01 > 3:08:07honourable friend agree that before the changes which came in in 2011,

3:08:07 > 3:08:10some analysis should have been carried out to address the problems

3:08:10 > 3:08:18he has now identified?That is right. We have heard time and again

3:08:18 > 3:08:22there was transition money given in 2011. Half that money went to men to

3:08:22 > 3:08:26make up for the transition differences they were getting. Women

3:08:26 > 3:08:33did not benefit disproportionately from the additional money. Secondly,

3:08:33 > 3:08:38thirdly, Madame de de Speaker, the whole issue about the lack of

3:08:38 > 3:08:41notice, for many of those women, even if they had got the notice,

3:08:41 > 3:08:45they were not in a position to make preparations to order their

3:08:45 > 3:08:50lifestyle to enable them to be able to survive through their 60s. --

3:08:50 > 3:08:56Madam Deputy Speaker. They have had caring son 's abilities, depleted

3:08:56 > 3:09:04savings and disabilities themselves. -- caring responsibilities. Women's

3:09:04 > 3:09:12pension savings are 66% less than men's the 1960s. Women were often

3:09:12 > 3:09:16ineligible to join employers pension schemes are often passed over for

3:09:16 > 3:09:18promotion in favour of male colleagues. That is the legacy those

3:09:18 > 3:09:23women are bringing with them now. Also, there are other disadvantages.

3:09:23 > 3:09:28The 2001 changes to the widow 's pension meant those widowed prior to

3:09:28 > 3:09:31their SBA no longer receive a full widow 's pension until they reach

3:09:31 > 3:09:38their full FPA which has now been delayed. We need to find a solution,

3:09:38 > 3:09:42the Government needs to listen and get around the table and discuss.

3:09:42 > 3:09:46There are many different transition arrangements we could bring in.

3:09:46 > 3:09:49Scaremongering that it will cost tens of billions of pounds is really

3:09:49 > 3:09:53not helpful. We can do things around the bus passes and winter allowance

3:09:53 > 3:09:58as well that would make a meaningful effect too many women but we need to

3:09:58 > 3:10:02help those who are in most need at the moment and they are suffering

3:10:02 > 3:10:09now it is important to say this is not a benefit, it is an entitlement.

3:10:09 > 3:10:14Some of these women could have paid national insurance contributions. I

3:10:14 > 3:10:18appreciate it is not directly linked to a pension, for as long as 50

3:10:18 > 3:10:21years by the time they retire. It is reasonable for them to expect they

3:10:21 > 3:10:26would start to benefit at the time they contracted to, when they

3:10:26 > 3:10:30started working, and paid their employment use to the Treasury. I

3:10:30 > 3:10:36also want to echo the points by my co-chair from the group about women

3:10:36 > 3:10:43overseas as well. Madam Deputy Speaker, we have a duty of care to

3:10:43 > 3:10:48these women a specific set of women that won't be affected in the future

3:10:48 > 3:10:53because we have changed the law. That duty of care needs to be

3:10:53 > 3:10:58honoured before more women suffer, or worse still, come to the end of

3:10:58 > 3:11:03their lives. As my co-chair said that they are feeling cheated,

3:11:03 > 3:11:07disrespected and angry. The Prime Minister said last year, I want a

3:11:07 > 3:11:10country built on furnace where everyone plays by the same rules.

3:11:10 > 3:11:16Let's start by showing it and writing this injustice now. --

3:11:16 > 3:11:21fairness.I completely agree with the member for East Worthing and

3:11:21 > 3:11:26Shoreham pulled this is an entitlement for women. And I also

3:11:26 > 3:11:30commend the member for Easington who has a real determination to ensure

3:11:30 > 3:11:34that women get justice. I am so proud of women. Women across the

3:11:34 > 3:11:39country you are standing up for their rights. We will back them. My

3:11:39 > 3:11:44question is this. Why is it always women that have to experience so

3:11:44 > 3:11:51much financial hardship and poverty in later life? We know the

3:11:51 > 3:11:56structures of employment drive women into poverty. 36% of women working

3:11:56 > 3:12:02part-time compared to 22% of men. Women earning a third less. Women

3:12:02 > 3:12:07part-time earning a third less than full-time men. Women who are

3:12:07 > 3:12:10responsible, take on responsibilities for

3:12:10 > 3:12:14intergenerational care. A quarter of women not returning to work after

3:12:14 > 3:12:21having a child. 17% I have to say through pregnancy discrimination.

3:12:21 > 3:12:25Therefore, already, economically disadvantaged. We know in the pay

3:12:25 > 3:12:29structures, vertical job segregation means women earn, on average, around

3:12:29 > 3:12:37£25,000 compared to men, £30,000. Women in the north and on average

3:12:37 > 3:12:42less than women in the south. We know that women tend to be

3:12:42 > 3:12:47predicated in those low-paid jobs. And, of course, the jobs as we have

3:12:47 > 3:12:51heard followed the seas. Childcare, catering, cashiers, cleaning and

3:12:51 > 3:12:56clerical work. It means it is hard for women to work in later life.

3:12:56 > 3:13:03That must be recognised. But I have to say that when we hear those

3:13:03 > 3:13:07stories of women who come into our surgeries who have five jobs, as I

3:13:07 > 3:13:13did in my surgery on Friday. 30 our jobs and two part-time jobs. We know

3:13:13 > 3:13:17it is tough for women that many cannot get employment at all in

3:13:17 > 3:13:21later life. Of course we know that the occupational pension that women

3:13:21 > 3:13:30have saved up for is far less than men. They only on average get 2500

3:13:30 > 3:13:34years of an occupational pension and then, if you think, have further

3:13:34 > 3:13:39injustice in not being able to receive their state pension either

3:13:39 > 3:13:42after they have made those contributions. It is a complete

3:13:42 > 3:13:48disgrace. I am fed up that it is always women that have to pay the

3:13:48 > 3:13:52price. If we look at other countries, they take our lifelong

3:13:52 > 3:13:55approach to pensions. If they are bringing in changes, people are

3:13:55 > 3:14:03aware of it the decades ahead. And here, even though the Turner

3:14:03 > 3:14:05commission said 15 years, here women are not getting such rights

3:14:05 > 3:14:10honoured. Therefore, what we have to look at is particularly women in

3:14:10 > 3:14:15poverty and the experience they have at the moment. I have been reading,

3:14:15 > 3:14:19obviously, at a time when we have heard that 1.9 million people in our

3:14:19 > 3:14:23country are living in poverty and we know that 40,000 people died last

3:14:23 > 3:14:27winter because they could not even afford to heat their own homes. We

3:14:27 > 3:14:32have to address the issue of women of pension age in poverty. We

3:14:32 > 3:14:40certainly know that the Waspi women, pension poverty has increased from

3:14:40 > 3:14:4512% to 21%. So, a real issue to be addressed.

3:14:45 > 3:14:51It was not women who failed but it is women who have been bailed. Women

3:14:51 > 3:14:57have always had to pay, always discriminated, to the point poverty.

3:14:57 > 3:15:00It was government that made these changes, it was government that

3:15:00 > 3:15:05failed to notify these women and we must rectify this gross injustice to

3:15:05 > 3:15:09end poverty for women in later life. Let's have real dignity for women in

3:15:09 > 3:15:14the and let's honour what they paid into, thank you.

3:15:14 > 3:15:18What they paid into, thank you. What they paid into, thank you. What they

3:15:18 > 3:15:23paid into, thank you. This? I was happy to add my signature to the

3:15:23 > 3:15:28application to ensure it got through to the backbench of the committee.

3:15:28 > 3:15:36Can I pay tribute to local WASPI campaigners. Several Scottish

3:15:36 > 3:15:40members today to sate my members are watching at home. I have a local

3:15:40 > 3:15:45WASPI campaigner from Moray today, one of whom is Jennifer Matheson,

3:15:45 > 3:15:51who is fresh from abseiling from a building recently to raise funds and

3:15:51 > 3:15:55resplendent in her WASPI colours to show her the continued support for

3:15:55 > 3:16:00this campaign. And can I put on record my support for Shula Forbes

3:16:00 > 3:16:04who leads the Moray WASPI campaign. I have spoken in debates previously

3:16:04 > 3:16:08and today I want to focus on local case studies to ensure the effects

3:16:08 > 3:16:14of mark rate to women recorded in the official report because they are

3:16:14 > 3:16:18testimony which is important. One woman who looks after three

3:16:18 > 3:16:21generations as well as holding down a full-time job but because of the

3:16:21 > 3:16:28stress caused by her concerns over her pension age, she is now off sick

3:16:28 > 3:16:34to do with that. Another lady who is close to me in the chamber says she

3:16:34 > 3:16:39is 64, four years without her pension. She has worked since she

3:16:39 > 3:16:44was 16 and has 43 years of National Insurance contributions. To echo the

3:16:44 > 3:16:48comments made by other members today, this constituent had two

3:16:48 > 3:16:53schoolmate born in the same year, 1958, one in February and one in

3:16:53 > 3:16:58July and some already have their pensions, some nine years -- nine

3:16:58 > 3:17:02months apart can mean two years difference in state pension

3:17:02 > 3:17:06pay-outs. Another resigned at 61 from a very stressful job and she

3:17:06 > 3:17:10could live from her savings until she got the pension age at 62, to

3:17:10 > 3:17:16find out it had changed to 66. She had a double whammy of trying to

3:17:16 > 3:17:19claim her occupational pension but was advised if she took it, she

3:17:19 > 3:17:24would lose 5% each year before state retirement age of 66. A constituent

3:17:24 > 3:17:30of mine who has a double whammy. In the short term, I want to finish on

3:17:30 > 3:17:34another story from Moray, a carer for her husband who got a stroke

3:17:34 > 3:17:37five years ago and they were going to use some state pension money to

3:17:37 > 3:17:41buy specialist equipment is not available on the NHS. That is

3:17:41 > 3:17:45harrowing, but the key point was she never received a letter informing

3:17:45 > 3:17:48her she would not be getting her pension at 60.I will quickly give

3:17:48 > 3:17:56way. He hits the nail on head, there are a lot of women who on caring

3:17:56 > 3:17:59responsibilities with partners with life changing health conditions and

3:17:59 > 3:18:02it is really important the Minister takes this into account looking at

3:18:02 > 3:18:06the impact on these women and pension imprecations.I am very

3:18:06 > 3:18:10grateful, and we have heard from both sides of the chamber that

3:18:10 > 3:18:12message and I am hopeful the Minister will take that on board.

3:18:12 > 3:18:17The final point about this constituent, she had lived at the

3:18:17 > 3:18:21same address for 27 years, she had not moved House, the same address

3:18:21 > 3:18:27for 27 years and she never received a single letter from the DWP about

3:18:27 > 3:18:29these changes, this is the inadequacy. I would like to share

3:18:29 > 3:18:35the comments, she has sadly left the chamber, but the honourable lady for

3:18:35 > 3:18:39Swansea East and my honourable friend for East Worthing, who was

3:18:39 > 3:18:42speaking about the study into this, it is something I'd fully support

3:18:42 > 3:18:45and I was at the launch and Westminster Hall recently. There

3:18:45 > 3:18:49have been 90 submissions so far and we need more, this is an opportunity

3:18:49 > 3:18:54for WASPI across the country to get involved in this study to ensure

3:18:54 > 3:18:59that we have a process to go through to offer something to the Minister

3:18:59 > 3:19:03and the Government. We want to identify a solution and it is

3:19:03 > 3:19:06important that women affected by these changes are involved in that.

3:19:06 > 3:19:14To conclude, all 3.8 women, WASPI women agree with equalisation, we

3:19:14 > 3:19:20heard that today across the chamber. -- 3.8 million women. Does he shared

3:19:20 > 3:19:25concerns many here have that those doing physical and maybe mean all

3:19:25 > 3:19:31work are unable to work for another two more years because of the

3:19:31 > 3:19:33position, does he agree government should consider those who are

3:19:33 > 3:19:38physically unable to work and cope with the extra two years and should

3:19:38 > 3:19:43action be taken to help them?I could only raise some of the

3:19:43 > 3:19:49testimonies I had from Moray WASPI women and I would have included

3:19:49 > 3:19:53those women who are continuing with difficult jobs who have worked in

3:19:53 > 3:19:58these sectors for so long, sectors where they perceive gender

3:19:58 > 3:20:00inequality during their working life. They suffered when they were

3:20:00 > 3:20:04working and they thought they were come into retirement age and they

3:20:04 > 3:20:06have continued strenuous work into a period they felt they would have

3:20:06 > 3:20:11been retired. There have been hard-working, conscientious

3:20:11 > 3:20:14employees for so long and they deserve our support. I would hope

3:20:14 > 3:20:20the many here with us today and around the country watching this

3:20:20 > 3:20:23debate will feel there is support around this chamber and across the

3:20:23 > 3:20:31parties. My key issue is the lack of notification. I think it is

3:20:31 > 3:20:35indefensible of any government, and this is not just this current

3:20:35 > 3:20:38government, it is not just decisions made by this Conservative

3:20:38 > 3:20:42government, it is across the green benches. The Mets have let these

3:20:42 > 3:20:46women down by not ensuring they have the notification required to make

3:20:46 > 3:20:50plans for the future -- governments. They were faced with a cliff edge

3:20:50 > 3:20:56with no prior notice. That is wrong and that is why I support the WASPI

3:20:56 > 3:21:01women. I also support the very positive contribution we have had

3:21:01 > 3:21:04earlier, we are fighting for an entitlement. This is something these

3:21:04 > 3:21:08ladies have paid into their entire life and we are fighting for an

3:21:08 > 3:21:11entitlement, not something they should have to fight for, they

3:21:11 > 3:21:15should be given that. That is why I believe that the end of their

3:21:15 > 3:21:17contract, they entered into a contract with the Government that's

3:21:17 > 3:21:21it at the end, you would receive this pension, at this age, and that

3:21:21 > 3:21:25is an entitlement and that is why I support them in fighting for that

3:21:25 > 3:21:34and I support the Moray WASPI women, all the back row -- one in the

3:21:34 > 3:21:39chamber and all those WASPI women watching at home.I would like to

3:21:39 > 3:21:44pay to Bute as well to my honourable friend from Easington for the

3:21:44 > 3:21:50tireless work you has done on this issue. There are many people in this

3:21:50 > 3:21:54House on both sides of the chamber who do not see pensions as a burden.

3:21:54 > 3:22:00Rather, an expression of collective solidarity amongst generations. We

3:22:00 > 3:22:05are proud pensions, it is part of a clue of a civilised society and we

3:22:05 > 3:22:10will always defend them and we speak up for the WASPI women. I am

3:22:10 > 3:22:13representing many of my constituents who are among the millions of women,

3:22:13 > 3:22:18half of whom are rock letter Day, who have suffered as a result of

3:22:18 > 3:22:23government policy on pensions. -- they are up there today. Many of the

3:22:23 > 3:22:29cases members raised to date will tell fundamentally the same story.

3:22:29 > 3:22:39It is important they get told because this is not just the brazen

3:22:39 > 3:22:43wrongness of the injustice, but the scale. 3.8 million women being

3:22:43 > 3:22:48robbed of that which they were promised. This is a huge scandal.

3:22:48 > 3:22:52And it must be faced up to big government and as soon as possible.

3:22:52 > 3:22:56While I do have case studies to tell, constituents perhaps one of

3:22:56 > 3:23:01the most chilling of them, it is I have been asked by my local 1950s

3:23:01 > 3:23:06women's groups to make them anonymous to not reveal their

3:23:06 > 3:23:11identities because some of the women have been reduced to the poverty and

3:23:11 > 3:23:15embarrassment, and that is shocking. Women who have spent their whole

3:23:15 > 3:23:19lives either working or caring for others. Women in their 60s who

3:23:19 > 3:23:22entire life plans were based on the knowledge that they would be

3:23:22 > 3:23:26receiving pensions in a given year have been tossed casually onto the

3:23:26 > 3:23:31benefits system with its attendant humiliations. And in the case of my

3:23:31 > 3:23:34constituent, forced to go out and get cleaning jobs on the Minimum

3:23:34 > 3:23:41Wage. Almost as bad as the financial robbery is the humiliation and the

3:23:41 > 3:23:46insult. Another now forced to sell her home because she is unable to

3:23:46 > 3:23:49qualify for benefits, to sell the only asset she had acquired in a

3:23:49 > 3:23:57lifetime of work and service. I have mentioned the numbers of those

3:23:57 > 3:24:01affected. There is another element that makes the scandal a terrible

3:24:01 > 3:24:06stain on all others in this place, and that is the perpetrator of the

3:24:06 > 3:24:10injustice. It has not been carried out by some faceless corporate

3:24:10 > 3:24:16financial mega business in Panama or some fly by night we were dealer,

3:24:16 > 3:24:22but by Her Majesty's government. I am chair of the APPG on their

3:24:22 > 3:24:25banking and we have found alarming evidence of malpractice and fraud in

3:24:25 > 3:24:31our financial sector that is truly disgraceful. And trust and faith in

3:24:31 > 3:24:36our financial sector is no shockingly low. Why should we be

3:24:36 > 3:24:39surprised by what is happening in the private sector if the Government

3:24:39 > 3:24:42itself, the same government which is supposed to regulate and keep the

3:24:42 > 3:24:48system there, is so ready to casually rip off millions of women?

3:24:48 > 3:24:52Trust, as we know it, is hard won and easily lost. And yet without it,

3:24:52 > 3:24:57the entire basis of consent under which democratic government operates

3:24:57 > 3:25:03is lost. If we allow this injustice to persist, we will be doing our

3:25:03 > 3:25:06entire country a great disservice. I call on the Government to bring

3:25:06 > 3:25:11forward a pair and reasonable plan to solve this without delay.-- if

3:25:11 > 3:25:17there. It is a great pleasure to follow my friend from Norwich South

3:25:17 > 3:25:22who so eloquently described the problems in his area. I would like

3:25:22 > 3:25:25to extend my congratulations to the member for Easington for securing

3:25:25 > 3:25:32this debate. And especially the WASPI women in the UK who continue

3:25:32 > 3:25:38despite four Justice and continue their fight to be heard. This debate

3:25:38 > 3:25:42has rightly discussed on many occasions and link the

3:25:42 > 3:25:47technicalities of why we are in the position we are here today. It boils

3:25:47 > 3:25:54down to poor notice, poor care and an apathy for many years. It is time

3:25:54 > 3:25:59that finished. There has been maladministration and it is time we

3:25:59 > 3:26:03stand up and admit that, face the consequences and across this House

3:26:03 > 3:26:09and across the United Kingdom, find a way to successfully ended. I would

3:26:09 > 3:26:14like to take this opportunity to raise two cases from East Lothian,

3:26:14 > 3:26:19constituents would just over 6,000 women affected by this. Diana was

3:26:19 > 3:26:26born in 1952, she worked full-time and in 1969 was told that she had to

3:26:26 > 3:26:29pay the full National Insurance contribution to make sure that she

3:26:29 > 3:26:36would get her full pension at 60. This, she did. Having started work

3:26:36 > 3:26:39at 16 and attended evening classes and worked through day release to

3:26:39 > 3:26:43carry on with her job, unable to attend college because her parents

3:26:43 > 3:26:48could not afford it, she worked her entire working life. Going

3:26:48 > 3:26:53part-time, when her children arrived to look after them. She has paid in

3:26:53 > 3:27:00for 44 years. Today, you need to only contribute 30 years to

3:27:00 > 3:27:05guarantee a full pension, she has contributed 14 years longer than

3:27:05 > 3:27:09that. She was not informed her pension age was changing from 60,

3:27:09 > 3:27:12she was not informed she was going to get a reduced pension and she

3:27:12 > 3:27:20rightly feels she genuinely rightly feels that she has been let down by

3:27:20 > 3:27:26her country. The second case I would like to raise is Lorna. Born in

3:27:26 > 3:27:311954, she started one month before his 16th birthday, she now has two

3:27:31 > 3:27:35grandchildren raised by her and her husband and both of them have paid

3:27:35 > 3:27:39their way their entire lives and provided for their family. She

3:27:39 > 3:27:43always believed she would receive her state pension on her 60th

3:27:43 > 3:27:48birthday date, but it did not occur. His sister, born in 1953, received

3:27:48 > 3:27:56her pension at 63. And she has to wait until she is 66. Her husband

3:27:56 > 3:28:00works full-time, 12 hour shifts. Lorna is not well, she has huge

3:28:00 > 3:28:05mobility problems and significant other problems. Her husband will not

3:28:05 > 3:28:11receive his pension until 2022, he is two years younger than she is,

3:28:11 > 3:28:16they still have a mortgage to pay and still have the contribute to

3:28:16 > 3:28:19that. If she had received her pension at 60, she would be able to

3:28:19 > 3:28:24live a life that shows some -- some respects, this has been removed from

3:28:24 > 3:28:30her and so many women we have heard about today, so many who are here in

3:28:30 > 3:28:35the gallery, so many women around the country. Now is the time for

3:28:35 > 3:28:39this Government to listen. We have heard cross bench support for

3:28:39 > 3:28:43proposals that would rectify this. Now is the time we give justice to

3:28:43 > 3:28:50the WASPI women. I congratulate my honourable friend

3:28:50 > 3:28:55from Easington to secure this debate. I speak in support of this

3:28:55 > 3:29:01motion. I will fight for the right of 1950s women to obtain what they

3:29:01 > 3:29:06are entitled to. The way these women have been treated by this Government

3:29:06 > 3:29:09is disgusting and downright disrespectful, it is totally

3:29:09 > 3:29:14unacceptable that women born in the 1950s are suffering from financial

3:29:14 > 3:29:16hardship because the Government failed to communicate state pension

3:29:16 > 3:29:20rights with them effectively. My honourable friend from Swansea East

3:29:20 > 3:29:26to travels widely across the country to fight for 1950s women will also

3:29:26 > 3:29:34attend an event in

3:29:35 > 3:29:39Some women were only given one year 's notice and others got five years

3:29:39 > 3:29:43warning. We, on these benches, recognise the injustice these women

3:29:43 > 3:29:53have been doubtful. These policies policies prompt legal action. Our

3:29:53 > 3:29:56policies are tangible. The action at the Goodman could take note women in

3:29:56 > 3:30:02their 60s are not facing homelessness through the broken

3:30:02 > 3:30:10system of Universal Credit. -- the Government. When discussing this

3:30:10 > 3:30:14inequality, it is important to note that these are women's lives that

3:30:14 > 3:30:19are affected. Indeed there are many nineteen fifties Waspi women in my

3:30:19 > 3:30:24constituency with harrowing stories that illustrate the personal impact

3:30:24 > 3:30:29pension inequality has. My constituent's mother was born in

3:30:29 > 3:30:32April 1953 footer she was an extremely hard work and work all

3:30:32 > 3:30:38alive. She split from her husband 20 years ago and was working full-time,

3:30:38 > 3:30:42raising a child as a single mother. But though she loved to work and she

3:30:42 > 3:30:47was looking forward to a much deserved retirement at the age of

3:30:47 > 3:30:5260. After 60 her attitude changed. She would say things like, I would

3:30:52 > 3:30:56not know what to do if I retired. During this time she was still

3:30:56 > 3:31:01travelling and working five or six days a week at a garden centre.

3:31:01 > 3:31:09After she turned 60, she decided to take a job out of the blue closer to

3:31:09 > 3:31:12home at another garden centre and she said it was not so difficult to

3:31:12 > 3:31:15get to it. Her family would keep going on to her about retiring but

3:31:15 > 3:31:18she said you did not really want to. Changes in the state pension act

3:31:18 > 3:31:26would mean instead of retiring in 2013 she would have to wait till

3:31:26 > 3:31:312016 foot like many Waspi women she was given very little notice her

3:31:31 > 3:31:35retirement age would change. Sadly she passed away of pneumonia in

3:31:35 > 3:31:422015. She refused to slow down. It was ultimately what led to her

3:31:42 > 3:31:46death. It was only after her death and dealing with the state that the

3:31:46 > 3:31:50family realised it was not because she did not want to retire but she

3:31:50 > 3:31:57felt she could not retire. Despite best efforts to convince her mother

3:31:57 > 3:31:59otherwise, she did not want to tell them because you did not want them

3:31:59 > 3:32:06to worry. This has caused so much distress to have family who feel

3:32:06 > 3:32:10that when she retired, if she had retired when she originally planned

3:32:10 > 3:32:15that she would have lived longer even with her COPD. My constituent

3:32:15 > 3:32:19and many like her, after a lifetime of work, should not be put through

3:32:19 > 3:32:27such an ordeal. This would mean state pension equalisation would

3:32:27 > 3:32:34have fared transitional arrangements for women born on or after six of

3:32:34 > 3:32:38April 19 50. Myself, along with honourable friends on these benches,

3:32:38 > 3:32:41would continue to fight and work with the 1950s women to right the

3:32:41 > 3:32:49wrong they have been dealt.Thank you. I want to start by paying

3:32:49 > 3:32:52tribute and dedicating a speech to my good friend and sister, Mary

3:32:52 > 3:32:59Moore will stop as I speak, her family will be attending her burial

3:32:59 > 3:33:03service with the knowledge that Mary will be the first to ask me to speak

3:33:03 > 3:33:09out and stand up for her generation of women, the Waspi women. Want to

3:33:09 > 3:33:12thank my honourable friend for Easington who is a tireless champion

3:33:12 > 3:33:17of working people and for the Waspi women in this House. We have come to

3:33:17 > 3:33:22debate and issue of fairness and decency and what is right and what

3:33:22 > 3:33:30is wrong. The Waspi women in Glasgow and Lanarkshire are watching this

3:33:30 > 3:33:39live in Glasgow today. Banks making that possible. The Waspi women are

3:33:39 > 3:33:43watching, the Waspi women are listening and they deserve action,

3:33:43 > 3:33:50honesty, decency and equality and I say to them, I am with you and I

3:33:50 > 3:33:55know this side of the House is with you as well. Like many members of

3:33:55 > 3:34:01the House I have campaigned with, welcomed to my surgery, cried with a

3:34:01 > 3:34:06listened to the Waspi women and their stories. Take Helen, for

3:34:06 > 3:34:10examples that she lives in my constituency for such was born in

3:34:10 > 3:34:151954. On January the 18th she will be celebrating her 64th birthday.

3:34:15 > 3:34:20Helen has spent her adult life working was about job comes to an

3:34:20 > 3:34:24end in April. If we were to follow the advice of the minister, the

3:34:24 > 3:34:27member for Hexham. Either she applies for jobseeker's allowance or

3:34:27 > 3:34:34she applies for an apprenticeship. Yes, you didn't hear me, an

3:34:34 > 3:34:38apprenticeship at 64. Well, I think she should be able to claim her

3:34:38 > 3:34:42pension, enjoy her dignity and respect. Helen, and women like her,

3:34:42 > 3:34:50should not be singing their favourite song, will you still need

3:34:50 > 3:34:56me, will you still feed me when I am 64? Yes, Helen, we do still need you

3:34:56 > 3:35:01and yes, Helen, we will still feeding. Madam Speaker, I would like

3:35:01 > 3:35:05the minister to know why the meeting was refuelled with the Waspi

3:35:05 > 3:35:10campaign. I know I requested to meet the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of

3:35:10 > 3:35:12State for financial inclusion and has been turned down several times.

3:35:12 > 3:35:19I would like to know why. The Government has a duty to bring the

3:35:19 > 3:35:23country to its people together and I want to know why they have not and

3:35:23 > 3:35:29will not. A few short weeks ago, I was very pleased to be able to lead

3:35:29 > 3:35:32my first Westminster Hall debate. There was a state pension age. It

3:35:32 > 3:35:37was a good debate and I was very grateful for the people who joined

3:35:37 > 3:35:45us. I stood up for the constituents on our side. Madam Speaker, there

3:35:45 > 3:35:49were only two interventions from the Tory backbenches. They had an

3:35:49 > 3:35:55opportunity to speak up and they never took it. In winding up, this

3:35:55 > 3:36:01House must stand up for working people. There needs to be a voice in

3:36:01 > 3:36:06this chamber for decent working people. I have had so many e-mails

3:36:06 > 3:36:10and letters from Waspi women. It has been an honour to receive every one

3:36:10 > 3:36:15of them. I say to this government don't mess with the Waspi women. I

3:36:15 > 3:36:21say to them and I say to the women in the gallery, and the woman back

3:36:21 > 3:36:25home in Glasgow, until justice is done, I will be fighting with you.

3:36:25 > 3:36:32Thank you, Madam Speaker.Thank you. During the many questions and

3:36:32 > 3:36:36debates on pensions for women, we have heard the facts, the figures

3:36:36 > 3:36:40and the dates that the 3.8 million women affected. I am not going to

3:36:40 > 3:36:43quote figures and I am not going to talk about dates was instead I'm

3:36:43 > 3:36:47going to talk to you about a woman I met a few weeks ago I'm going to

3:36:47 > 3:36:52referred to as Mary full she came to see me during a particularly wet and

3:36:52 > 3:36:57cold morning surgery. When she arrived she was visibly shaking and

3:36:57 > 3:37:03upset because she had slipped over on the wet leaves walking into the

3:37:03 > 3:37:06room. I offered to meet her another time that she was so insistent she

3:37:06 > 3:37:09wanted to speak to me that morning and she apologised for being late

3:37:09 > 3:37:14and explained it was because she was so tired it was making her clumsy. I

3:37:14 > 3:37:18asked how I could help her and she Tomic was currently on bereavement

3:37:18 > 3:37:25leave. Her son had died in July and despite support from work are Greece

3:37:25 > 3:37:30made it impossible for her to return to work in the local supermarket. --

3:37:30 > 3:37:35her grief. She also cared for her husband who had a degenerative

3:37:35 > 3:37:38condition. His health had declined to a point where he could not get

3:37:38 > 3:37:43out of his chair and needed constant care, which is why she did not want

3:37:43 > 3:37:46to rearrange she was adamant she needed me to hear her stories and

3:37:46 > 3:37:52she told me she did not find out she would have to work till 65 until

3:37:52 > 3:38:002013. She said the memory with vivid in her mind and she had been told by

3:38:00 > 3:38:03a work colleague. She said she did not believe it at first. She went

3:38:03 > 3:38:08home and found the pension line and was in shock. We know she is not the

3:38:08 > 3:38:12only one. The Department for Work and Pensions fell to record how many

3:38:12 > 3:38:15letters were returned and delivered and no further action was taken to

3:38:15 > 3:38:20trace women who had not received letters. A few years previously,

3:38:20 > 3:38:24Mary Posner mother had become ill. She had to make the choice either to

3:38:24 > 3:38:29go part-time at work and give up a management position to care for her

3:38:29 > 3:38:33mum or she continued to work and sort carers for her. Mary believed

3:38:33 > 3:38:41she only had few years until she had a pension. She made the decision to

3:38:41 > 3:38:44go part time and care for her mum in the past two years of her life. Her

3:38:44 > 3:38:48decision to care for her mum go part time, her work pension is sparsely

3:38:48 > 3:38:53reduced. She is so broken by grief at the moment that she cannot work.

3:38:53 > 3:38:57She is watching her husband 's decline and she faces her retirement

3:38:57 > 3:39:02as a widow. Knowing that her pension was changing at an early date would

3:39:02 > 3:39:06not have stopped what happened to her son, or her husbands or her

3:39:06 > 3:39:12mother, but it would have enabled her to have made an informed choice

3:39:12 > 3:39:15about whether to have continued in full-time employment or not but

3:39:15 > 3:39:17which could have resulted in her wasting her retirement as a widow in

3:39:17 > 3:39:21a much more comfortable situation than the one she now faces. Millions

3:39:21 > 3:39:25of women across the country are living in financial difficulty

3:39:25 > 3:39:30because of the mismanagement of these changes. Having made important

3:39:30 > 3:39:33life decisions in the expectation that they would receive their

3:39:33 > 3:39:40pension at the age of 16. Madam Deputy Speaker, I accept that even a

3:39:40 > 3:39:44Labour government cannot change what happened to Mary. But I do strongly

3:39:44 > 3:39:48believe that it is the job of every government but no, a job of every

3:39:48 > 3:39:53person to reach out a hand to help people back up when they have been

3:39:53 > 3:39:56knocked down by life. This government can address this up in

3:39:56 > 3:40:03anyway they like but we all know there has been an injustice done to

3:40:03 > 3:40:08the 1950s women, like Mary. Now they must right that wrong by introducing

3:40:08 > 3:40:15transitional arrangements for all of the women affected.First off, I

3:40:15 > 3:40:21would like to pay tribute to our honourable colleague, the Member of

3:40:21 > 3:40:24Parliament for Easington for securing the debate. Thank you for

3:40:24 > 3:40:30that. Also one of the honourable member's he, salient points all the

3:40:30 > 3:40:36way through his debate was the complete failure of governments to

3:40:36 > 3:40:42actually communicate the changes. They were initially the Pensions Act

3:40:42 > 3:40:48of 1995, which we all know and then a Labour government and the

3:40:48 > 3:40:54coalition after that. I have flagged in the House before that all the

3:40:54 > 3:40:59political parties have let women down. If you think about it, from

3:40:59 > 3:41:051995 to 2009 was no communication at all from the DWP to all these women

3:41:05 > 3:41:11were some of whom were up there. That is 14 years when governments

3:41:11 > 3:41:14could have informed people, could have informed these women exactly

3:41:14 > 3:41:18what was happening. At least that way there would have been time for

3:41:18 > 3:41:24them to prepare. That did not happen. That is why so many women

3:41:24 > 3:41:29feel justifiably so frustrated, angry and hurt. What I would like to

3:41:29 > 3:41:34do while the minister is here is tied to make some specific proposals

3:41:34 > 3:41:39that the Government can do. This current government is in charge.

3:41:39 > 3:41:45They have the responsibility. First off, I think, as my honourable

3:41:45 > 3:41:50friend, the MP for Easington, has already flagged, there should be an

3:41:50 > 3:41:54opportunity for early access to pensions credit. I think the

3:41:54 > 3:42:01Government should consider using a proper act for real research where

3:42:01 > 3:42:05the Waspi pensioners from the 50s may be able to take their pension is

3:42:05 > 3:42:09earlier, even if it is a lower amount, and then getting up to the

3:42:09 > 3:42:14higher amount by the time they get to 66. There has to be a financial

3:42:14 > 3:42:18cost benefit on it, not least because a lot of the Waspi women are

3:42:18 > 3:42:23in a position where financially they are facing some real challenges.

3:42:23 > 3:42:26Thirdly, I think the Government should consider very seriously

3:42:26 > 3:42:31whatever a flat sum of transition money. I have a proposal how they

3:42:31 > 3:42:39could do this. This government is absolutely insistent that they are

3:42:39 > 3:42:44the party of aspiration. Sometimes they are and sometimes they are not.

3:42:44 > 3:42:50What I would also say is that Theresa May, when she took over from

3:42:50 > 3:42:56David Cameron after the referendum, said she wanted to help people who

3:42:56 > 3:42:59would just about managing full she wanted to be there for the common

3:42:59 > 3:43:03man or woman forced one of the things the Government is continuing

3:43:03 > 3:43:08to do, and it happened in the recent budget, if they are continuing to

3:43:08 > 3:43:12cut corporation tax. I have a proposal for the Government was a

3:43:12 > 3:43:20lot of businesses would accept this. Why not disarray one year, 12

3:43:20 > 3:43:26months, of corporation tax cut, take that money to ensure that the Waspi

3:43:26 > 3:43:31women actually have a sufficient amount for a transition payment that

3:43:31 > 3:43:37makes it a little less difficult? I have a suggestion I think will fly

3:43:37 > 3:43:41across parties and out there. I think a lot of corporations will

3:43:41 > 3:43:46say, fine but we will do it. We appreciate that Waspi women have

3:43:46 > 3:43:50been short-changed because for over a decade they were not informed. We

3:43:50 > 3:43:55will accept that. It is just an idea. I will save to the minister,

3:43:55 > 3:43:59it is time for this government seriously not just to allow all

3:43:59 > 3:44:02these debates backbench or otherwise but to actually have a debate where

3:44:02 > 3:44:08there is a vote. My final question is directly to the minister. Listen

3:44:08 > 3:44:13to people across the House. Give us a proper vote of this issue. I

3:44:13 > 3:44:18believe a lot of your backbenchers will support us.It takes a

3:44:18 > 3:44:27particular talent to transform the changing of an injustice into a

3:44:27 > 3:44:32justice. In other words, bringing in equality for men and women in

3:44:32 > 3:44:35pensions into a massive injustice for all the women we are talking

3:44:35 > 3:44:40about from the 1950s. And that is what has happened. The writing of a

3:44:40 > 3:44:46wrong has been turned into a new wrong. What we, everybody in this

3:44:46 > 3:44:49House is saying, apart from a few people who want to be desperately

3:44:49 > 3:44:54loyal to the Government in their hour of need, is that this really,

3:44:54 > 3:44:58really does need resolving. The injustice is twofold. It is not just

3:44:58 > 3:45:07that the process was speeded up suddenly.

3:45:07 > 3:45:11I contacted 3,000 women we thought might have been affected and I was

3:45:11 > 3:45:14amazed that people came to a meeting and they said, the first time I

3:45:14 > 3:45:19realised I was going to be affected was when I got a letter from the!

3:45:19 > 3:45:25For heaven 's sake, the Government knows when they are going to retire,

3:45:25 > 3:45:29they have the information, they should have got in touch. This is

3:45:29 > 3:45:33not a partisan point, this is as true of the Labour government as it

3:45:33 > 3:45:38has been of the Coalition and the present government. Nobody did the

3:45:38 > 3:45:41due diligence of making sure all the women who are going to be affected

3:45:41 > 3:45:46knew about it. And as I say the great Western Railway every time

3:45:46 > 3:45:50they forget to give as information about the train that has been

3:45:50 > 3:45:54delayed, you can just make one announcement, you can just send one

3:45:54 > 3:45:59letter. These are complicated matters and The Post gets mixed up

3:45:59 > 3:46:02with something else or it gets delivered to the wrong place. You

3:46:02 > 3:46:06have to make sure, it was the Government's job to make sure

3:46:06 > 3:46:10everybody knew what was going to happen. It is one thing to be told

3:46:10 > 3:46:14in 30 years' time or 15 years your pension is not going to be what you

3:46:14 > 3:46:19thought it was going to be. It is quite another suddenly to discover,

3:46:19 > 3:46:25with moments to spare, that you going to have to work extra years.

3:46:25 > 3:46:29In my experience, in my constituency, it is women who have

3:46:29 > 3:46:38been beautiful. They have slaved their way through their life. They

3:46:38 > 3:46:42have worked from the age of 15, some of them, doing tough jobs for

3:46:42 > 3:46:49minimal pay and physically demanding jobs often. The word often used is,

3:46:49 > 3:46:55frankly, I am clapped-out! I have no more energy to go on it -- an

3:46:55 > 3:46:58apprenticeship scheme to do something else. I would if I could,

3:46:58 > 3:47:03that is in my nature, but there is nothing left in me. So that feels

3:47:03 > 3:47:09like a terrible injustice. But there is another thing here, and I see

3:47:09 > 3:47:16this in the Rhondda Valley. If you do a map of deprivation across the

3:47:16 > 3:47:21country, this is not something we're proud of, it is a fact that people

3:47:21 > 3:47:25have less money, they probably will end up working many more hours to

3:47:25 > 3:47:32put food on the table. And it in a community such as mine, this makes a

3:47:32 > 3:47:36great difference. This in justice is very toughly felt. Because they

3:47:36 > 3:47:42don't have savings to fall back on. They have not got lots of extra

3:47:42 > 3:47:47money, family members to turn to. And often now, this generation of

3:47:47 > 3:47:50women looking after elderly relatives in their '80s and 90s as

3:47:50 > 3:47:56well. This is impacting on my entire community. One final thing, I pay

3:47:56 > 3:48:01enormous tribute to a woman in my constituent see running the campaign

3:48:01 > 3:48:05in the Rhondda. I know you are a decent man, the Government Minister,

3:48:05 > 3:48:09but just trying to top this out for years and years and years and hope

3:48:09 > 3:48:15it will go away, it just is not going to work. The Rhondda women

3:48:15 > 3:48:22want justice and by heaven, they will get it!Can I start by thanking

3:48:22 > 3:48:27my honourable friend for Islington for his excellent work on this

3:48:27 > 3:48:32issue? This is a very important and serious issue the women of our

3:48:32 > 3:48:39country are facing who were born in 1950. The 5,500 women in Bedford are

3:48:39 > 3:48:42are affected by the pension changes drawn up with little or no notice

3:48:42 > 3:48:49and with no time to make alternative plans for such a large event. I was

3:48:49 > 3:48:53very pleased to hear last week that Bedford Borough Council voted to

3:48:53 > 3:48:58support those women through the WASPI campaign. Depriving people of

3:48:58 > 3:49:06the money they have worked for and have been entitled is one of the

3:49:06 > 3:49:10greatest injustices imposed on a large section of our society. But it

3:49:10 > 3:49:18is not just about the injustice. The women I have spoken to from the

3:49:18 > 3:49:23brilliant Bedford WASPI group told me they have been robbed of their

3:49:23 > 3:49:29money. Their independence, pride, future and even their homes. Some of

3:49:29 > 3:49:39those women are here today. Many women are destitute. I know of one

3:49:39 > 3:49:42woman now living in sheltered accommodation with her mother

3:49:42 > 3:49:49because especially women on their own do not have the safety net of

3:49:49 > 3:49:55partners and could not replan their lives with less than five or

3:49:55 > 3:49:59sometimes less than two years notice. The women I spoke to said

3:49:59 > 3:50:03they were not opposed to the pension age going up, but the way it was

3:50:03 > 3:50:08handled. The first shift in the pension age was bad, but the second

3:50:08 > 3:50:15time the goalposts were moved under the Coalition Government was the

3:50:15 > 3:50:18straw that broke the camel's back. One woman told me that she tries to

3:50:18 > 3:50:23carry on working, but health problems got the better of her and

3:50:23 > 3:50:29she could not carry on. She said after decades of work and looking

3:50:29 > 3:50:34after an elderly parent, she was left with nothing more to give. His

3:50:34 > 3:50:39story is common. Which is why on hearing the Government telling women

3:50:39 > 3:50:43in their 60s who have worked all their lives to get on their bike and

3:50:43 > 3:50:50get another job was yet another insult. One woman told me she was

3:50:50 > 3:50:55particularly upset that WASPI women were part -- were pitted against the

3:50:55 > 3:51:00younger generation and made to feel greedy or scroungers for fighting

3:51:00 > 3:51:06for the money they had saved for when young people cannot even afford

3:51:06 > 3:51:12a home. But she said her grandchildren were right behind the

3:51:12 > 3:51:15WASPI campaign because they knew that fighting for her rights was

3:51:15 > 3:51:19also fighting for their own rights in the future. Dividing and ruling

3:51:19 > 3:51:24is not working on this issue and the Government need to understand young

3:51:24 > 3:51:29people feel very strongly about this on behalf of their grandparents.

3:51:29 > 3:51:35Another woman said the experience had left her feeling less of a human

3:51:35 > 3:51:40being and was only the support of the WASPI movement is knowing that

3:51:40 > 3:51:44their millions of women who feel the same way that has helped her to cope

3:51:44 > 3:51:57with this. The Government has yet to come up with one good reason. And

3:51:57 > 3:52:02for those who have already reached their pension. The WASPI women

3:52:02 > 3:52:07asking for less than they are due and it is about time they were given

3:52:07 > 3:52:14it, thank you.I would like to thank the member for Easington for

3:52:14 > 3:52:21bringing this motion into the House. The Government's handling of this

3:52:21 > 3:52:26issue has been shambolic and the rightful source of much frustration

3:52:26 > 3:52:31and anger. From women born in the 1950s. As previously stated on all

3:52:31 > 3:52:36sides of the House, the lack of communication from previous

3:52:36 > 3:52:40governments has meant that those born in the 1950s were receiving

3:52:40 > 3:52:45letters stating that their pension age had increased by six years. And

3:52:45 > 3:52:50a large proportion of these women only received this letter when they

3:52:50 > 3:52:55were 59 and therefore within a year of their expected retirement age of

3:52:55 > 3:52:5860. And from the stories I have heard, these were the lucky ones.

3:52:58 > 3:53:05These were the lucky women that had received no communication at all. If

3:53:05 > 3:53:10these women had been adequately informed, sufficient measures could

3:53:10 > 3:53:16have been put in place. Madam Deputy Speaker, it is these women that I

3:53:16 > 3:53:21would like to speak on behalf of the day. I have heard first-hand from

3:53:21 > 3:53:26one woman in my constituency who has a disabled husband and has therefore

3:53:26 > 3:53:32been the breadwinner, despite being in a low paid, physically demanding

3:53:32 > 3:53:39job. At 63, she still has to work every single weekend, despite being

3:53:39 > 3:53:44in very poor health herself. She works weekends instead of resting

3:53:44 > 3:53:47and during the week, she helps care for her grandchildren who have quite

3:53:47 > 3:53:53a distance away, in order to help her own son and daughter-in-law with

3:53:53 > 3:53:59the cost of childcare. This woman never rests. And she is terrified of

3:53:59 > 3:54:05going off sick in case she loses her job. These stories and many others

3:54:05 > 3:54:08like this are common throughout the country and especially in places

3:54:08 > 3:54:13like Leigh well of paid local work unfortunately is commonplace. Had

3:54:13 > 3:54:17these women been able to plan for irate retirement or received

3:54:17 > 3:54:22adequate support during their time of crisis, they may have been able

3:54:22 > 3:54:28to retain their independence. The Government have treated these women

3:54:28 > 3:54:31with total disregard, failing to show any sympathy to those planning

3:54:31 > 3:54:35their entire lives around their state pension age, before the

3:54:35 > 3:54:41Government to the goalposts. This total communication failure has

3:54:41 > 3:54:44resulted in an understandable amount of stress and anxiety amongst

3:54:44 > 3:54:49certain groups in particular. And the effects this will have on their

3:54:49 > 3:54:54livelihoods and family and health has already begun to take effect.

3:54:54 > 3:54:58Fortunately for us in Leigh, our women born in the 1950s have become

3:54:58 > 3:55:03a support group. For other women affected. It is constituted and

3:55:03 > 3:55:08become a support organisation, they can talk and help one another and

3:55:08 > 3:55:12plan for their future is with those in the exact situation they find

3:55:12 > 3:55:18themselves in. I therefore wish to pay particular credit to the Leigh

3:55:18 > 3:55:20pension group, who I know we'll be watching this debate with great

3:55:20 > 3:55:25interest. They are an inspirational group to be around and I am sure the

3:55:25 > 3:55:29House would join me in thanking them for writing such fantastic support

3:55:29 > 3:55:34to those women affected. And generally the 19th, Manchester will

3:55:34 > 3:55:39be following the bigger sample of Leigh in lighting up the Town Hall

3:55:39 > 3:55:46in purple in support of WASPI women. -- on January the 19. It is

3:55:46 > 3:55:49important our community show solidarity and sensate clear message

3:55:49 > 3:55:54to those affected that we stand with you and you will not be alone. --

3:55:54 > 3:56:01sends a clear message. I think the honourable member for

3:56:01 > 3:56:05Islington for prompting this debate. Before I start, I would like to

3:56:05 > 3:56:09declare an interest in this issue, as I am one of the women affected by

3:56:09 > 3:56:17these changes, born in the 1950s. Surprisingly and unbelievably! But I

3:56:17 > 3:56:22am not standing here today speaking in this debate just for myself. I am

3:56:22 > 3:56:29speaking for the 7,000 women in my constituency of Conan Valley

3:56:29 > 3:56:33affected by the shambolic changes the government has brought in

3:56:33 > 3:56:40without warning or notice. -- macro two. We have heard that those on the

3:56:40 > 3:56:44Government benches care about 90 fifties WASPI women and they make

3:56:44 > 3:56:47impassioned speeches about the issue. And then they advise them to

3:56:47 > 3:56:53take an apprenticeship. Madam Deputy Speaker, I do not want to spend time

3:56:53 > 3:56:56focusing on the Government benches and I will focus on the issue before

3:56:56 > 3:57:01us. We all know the way the Government chose to role that these

3:57:01 > 3:57:06changes was wrong. Just plain wrong. We need only to look back through

3:57:06 > 3:57:10the official records to see how often Honourable Members and right

3:57:10 > 3:57:15honourable members have spoken on the issue. Today, I would like to

3:57:15 > 3:57:20add my voice. I would like to tell you about a constituent of mine,

3:57:20 > 3:57:24Susan, who lives in the Colne Valley. When Susan was 49, she

3:57:24 > 3:57:27injured herself at work and she tried to work for several years, but

3:57:27 > 3:57:32had to leave, she could not manage. Susan was meant to get her pension

3:57:32 > 3:57:40at 60, then it was moved to 62. Now it is 65. She gets 500 a month from

3:57:40 > 3:57:48a private pension. She is also a carer for her mother and she earns

3:57:48 > 3:57:54£62 a week, 436 hours of care. Susan has £800 per month live on. And in

3:57:54 > 3:58:00£14 of that pays council tax. £80 goes towards her boss there to see

3:58:00 > 3:58:06her mother. After her expenses are taken out, Susan has £50 to live on

3:58:06 > 3:58:11per week. She usually eats Weetabix for her evening meal when she gets

3:58:11 > 3:58:15home because that is all she can afford. She does not get a bus pass

3:58:15 > 3:58:20and heating allowance. Susan is on her own so it does not -- so does

3:58:20 > 3:58:24not have the support from a partner. Can the Minister really tell me that

3:58:24 > 3:58:28these changes are not having a detrimental impact on Susan's

3:58:28 > 3:58:35quality-of-life? Let's all for just a moment but ourselves in Susan's

3:58:35 > 3:58:41shoes. Someone who, through no fault of their own, is unable to work,

3:58:41 > 3:58:44with no disposable income at the end of the month and was providing a

3:58:44 > 3:58:48vital service for being a carer for her mother. Poverty for those

3:58:48 > 3:58:54affected by the state pension changes is a reality. No one in the

3:58:54 > 3:59:00UK should be facing a choice between heating or eating because of the

3:59:00 > 3:59:05change this Government has made to the legislation. Don't ignore the

3:59:05 > 3:59:10voices of we 1950s women because we are not going away. Pay us what we

3:59:10 > 3:59:18are due!I am pleased to follow my honourable friend for Colne Valley

3:59:18 > 3:59:24who spoke beautifully. I am also a 1950s woman. But I am speaking in

3:59:24 > 3:59:32this debate because there are 6300 of my constituents affected by this.

3:59:32 > 3:59:36We are all in favour of equalisation, but we need a proper

3:59:36 > 3:59:40transitional period and that is what these women have not been given.

3:59:40 > 3:59:47That is why it is on there. They had no time to prepare, no time to save,

3:59:47 > 3:59:51their legitimate expectations have not been met and some have lost

3:59:51 > 3:59:55significant amounts of money. Even though they had been paying National

3:59:55 > 4:00:01Insurance contributions for many, many years.

4:00:01 > 4:00:10Ministers say it is because life expectancy is rising. It is of no

4:00:10 > 4:00:14reassurance to people knowing a baby born our live till 83. When they

4:00:14 > 4:00:18were born the average life expectancy was 72. That's a look at

4:00:18 > 4:00:22the differences in different parts of the country but even in my

4:00:22 > 4:00:26constituency, in the most well off Ward, the healthy life expectancy is

4:00:26 > 4:00:3771. But it -- the healthy life expectancy in another ward is 65

4:00:37 > 4:00:42when I started work in 1979I expected to retire next year, aged

4:00:42 > 4:00:5260. Now I have to work till 2024. The big difference between me and my

4:00:52 > 4:00:57constituents is that I've started work aged 21, having stayed on at

4:00:57 > 4:01:02school, and been a university. Many of my constituents started work on

4:01:02 > 4:01:11leaving school aged 15. Take ruse. She started aged 15 and she worked

4:01:11 > 4:01:15in local government and health. She has three children and six

4:01:15 > 4:01:19grandchildren. She thought she was retiring at 60 in order to look

4:01:19 > 4:01:25after her dear old mum. Now she has to go back to work to sustain her

4:01:25 > 4:01:29husband, her children, her mother. She says physically, emotionally,

4:01:29 > 4:01:38financially, where is the time, help and energy going to come from? She

4:01:38 > 4:01:48is in the same situation. She has had three jobs to help her family.

4:01:48 > 4:01:54Pamela left her job on Friday went to work on Monday. Jane, working for

4:01:54 > 4:01:5970 hours a week from the age of 15 she finished at 54 with a

4:01:59 > 4:02:05disability. And Jane and Pamela, exemplified those people who are now

4:02:05 > 4:02:11being moved on to employment support allowance. They are using up their

4:02:11 > 4:02:18savings, which they have put by all their retirement. They are not

4:02:18 > 4:02:24exceptional, they are not unusual, the number of women aged over 60 has

4:02:24 > 4:02:33shot up four fold.I am very grateful. She has made some very

4:02:33 > 4:02:39powerful points. Especially with regard to women, especially in the

4:02:39 > 4:02:44North East. A number of us from, the Wales and other industrial

4:02:44 > 4:02:47heartlands for the women have worked for almost 50 years and will be in

4:02:47 > 4:02:51the position of maybe then having a very short life expectancy after

4:02:51 > 4:02:58they retire. It is just unfair. Would she agree with me about that

4:02:58 > 4:03:04unfairness?I do. My overall message to ministers that they should stop

4:03:04 > 4:03:07looking at the actuarial tables and start to listen to the way lives are

4:03:07 > 4:03:13lived. Because, I have more examples. Chris wanted to stay on at

4:03:13 > 4:03:18school and get more education but her father made her go out to work

4:03:18 > 4:03:24aged 15. Sue, Jane, Diane, Judith and Jane, they all say the same

4:03:24 > 4:03:29thing could Jane has lost £40,000 through this. Dop says, quite

4:03:29 > 4:03:36simply, I am so tired. --.. I think we need to be honest about this and

4:03:36 > 4:03:41look at this in a radical wave my honourable friend on the front bench

4:03:41 > 4:03:44has made many sensible suggestions for how did my honourable friend

4:03:44 > 4:03:48from Easington. I think we need to think in terms of the pension system

4:03:48 > 4:03:54which takes account of when you started work. It is obviously the

4:03:54 > 4:03:59case that a person who started work at 15 should not have to work ten

4:03:59 > 4:04:05years longer to get their pension, as a person who probably has better

4:04:05 > 4:04:12health, probably has an easier job than a person who carried on with

4:04:12 > 4:04:17their education into their mid-20s. I would like to thank my honourable

4:04:17 > 4:04:21friend for bringing this to be forward. Was thinking about what to

4:04:21 > 4:04:32say today that I had spoken in every single Waspi debate since I was

4:04:32 > 4:04:39elected. The Government is treating them like they were dealing with a

4:04:39 > 4:04:43dodgy comic used-car salesman. I have to say, I thought I'd what I

4:04:43 > 4:04:47will do, I will talk about the injustice of the Government already

4:04:47 > 4:04:52knows about the injustice. The Government will say, it will trot

4:04:52 > 4:04:57out the old arguments about people living longer. That is no longer

4:04:57 > 4:05:05true. Life expectancy is in decline now. He will also stand up and talk

4:05:05 > 4:05:12to us about... Can I just say, Madam Deputy Speaker, whether we are

4:05:12 > 4:05:19living to 80 or 150, that is not the point at issue today? The point is

4:05:19 > 4:05:22that the Waspi women were not given proper notice. That is the issue

4:05:22 > 4:05:28today and as what I would like the minister to focus on. -- and that

4:05:28 > 4:05:32was what. I would like to talk about the hardship. The Government has

4:05:32 > 4:05:36heard it time and again. Was also going to talk about the cruelty of

4:05:36 > 4:05:40moving someone proper pension age further and further away every time

4:05:40 > 4:05:45they approach it. The minister knows that as well. He has heard it a

4:05:45 > 4:05:50dozen times. I could also talk about the caring responsibilities these

4:05:50 > 4:05:52women have taken on. The minister knows about that as well as

4:05:52 > 4:05:58everybody else in this chamber. What I will talk about briefly is the

4:05:58 > 4:06:02social contact. People in the chamber have talked about what this

4:06:02 > 4:06:06will cost and whether we can afford it. I would suggest to the minister

4:06:06 > 4:06:11we cannot afford not to address this matter. It goes to the heart of the

4:06:11 > 4:06:14social contract between those who govern, those who govern us, and

4:06:14 > 4:06:20those who are governed by us. If people can not have faith in the

4:06:20 > 4:06:25contracts they have with those they elected to represent them, where can

4:06:25 > 4:06:29they find justice? Where can they find support? The fact is the social

4:06:29 > 4:06:34contract has been ripped up by this government Crawley and callously.

4:06:34 > 4:06:39The honourable lady from Bury St Edmunds has talked about Waspi women

4:06:39 > 4:06:44as though they were a burden on the state. Nothing can be further from

4:06:44 > 4:06:49the trees. The minister and others from the past have spoken about

4:06:49 > 4:06:54apprenticeships. -- the trees. There might be some Waspi women who are

4:06:54 > 4:06:58terribly excited about the prospect of a £3.50 apprenticeship. I have

4:06:58 > 4:07:06not met them. Waspi women are not interested in whether one not to get

4:07:06 > 4:07:09a telegram from the Queen. The fact is that does not pay the bills will

4:07:09 > 4:07:16put food on the table. As far as I am aware, unless the card is edible

4:07:16 > 4:07:22it is not much use these women have been let down. They are living in

4:07:22 > 4:07:27hardship through no fault of their own. It really is time that the

4:07:27 > 4:07:31Government recognised in contrast to their impassive, stubborn, and I'm

4:07:31 > 4:07:36feeling lack of response, we have the dignity and fortitude of these

4:07:36 > 4:07:39Waspi women and everyone who is watching this debate can see the

4:07:39 > 4:07:44difference between these two camps. I would urge the minister to get a

4:07:44 > 4:07:48grip, do the right thing, and give these women the money they are

4:07:48 > 4:07:59entitled to.Before I call Luke pollard, I am sure our Right

4:07:59 > 4:08:02Honourable members will be very pleased to hear that the Speaker of

4:08:02 > 4:08:11the Kosovo parliament is with us. Welcome this evening.Thank you. I

4:08:11 > 4:08:15would like to thank the member for Easington, not only for calling this

4:08:15 > 4:08:20debate that join my Facebook life last night taking questions from

4:08:20 > 4:08:25Waspi women in Plymouth. I would like to declare an interest, I am a

4:08:25 > 4:08:30son of a Waspi women and very proud to be saved. Instead of being

4:08:30 > 4:08:33treated with dignity, these women are struggling to make ends meet.

4:08:33 > 4:08:37Without enough money to spend on food or heat their homes where they

4:08:37 > 4:08:42have worked hard all their lives were paid their taxes, raise

4:08:42 > 4:08:45children got contributed to society, cared for their loved ones and

4:08:45 > 4:08:48believed when they are tired the state would honour the obligations

4:08:48 > 4:08:52set out to support them for that this has not happened and it is a

4:08:52 > 4:08:56disgrace. There are 78,010, and women who deserve pension justice in

4:08:56 > 4:09:05Devon. In Plymouth, there are 8000 Waspi women. The only Plymouth MP to

4:09:05 > 4:09:10be here today, I speak but only for the 5703 Waspi women but for all of

4:09:10 > 4:09:13them put all these women deserve justice for their pensions which

4:09:13 > 4:09:18have been stolen by this government. Since I became a Member of

4:09:18 > 4:09:22Parliament, I have found the Waspi campaigners to be decent, honourable

4:09:22 > 4:09:26women who are passionate and determined to get justice. To

4:09:26 > 4:09:31Jackie, Morticia and others, I say they are an inspiration. I would say

4:09:31 > 4:09:36to my Oracle friend for Gower, there are many Waspi women not here for

4:09:36 > 4:09:43the debate. They have lost their battles and are no longer here. They

4:09:43 > 4:09:49have been denied pension justice. Many of these women were not active

4:09:49 > 4:09:53campaigners or political activists beforehand. It is so important to

4:09:53 > 4:09:57stress these incredible campaigners did not choose from all wanted out

4:09:57 > 4:10:01the life of an activist, like many of us in this place have chosen.

4:10:01 > 4:10:04Many of them would have enjoyed a quiet life in their retirement with

4:10:04 > 4:10:08a pension, embarking on the plans many have taken years to prepare.

4:10:08 > 4:10:17The injustice they face has been sprang upon them and has forced them

4:10:17 > 4:10:20to stand up and campaign on this issue. These women of the same

4:10:20 > 4:10:22generation that fought for equality, fought against poverty, and now they

4:10:22 > 4:10:25are fighting for the very justice they return in retirement, a decent

4:10:25 > 4:10:32pension. I have spoken to many brave women, Waspi women, Waspi

4:10:32 > 4:10:35campaigners, like Bernice, like vile, like Jackie, who have wanted

4:10:35 > 4:10:42to share their stories, so they can be heard. -- valve. So many women

4:10:42 > 4:10:46have hoped for dignity in retirement are now facing poverty and

4:10:46 > 4:10:51humiliation. It is a point that has been raised by many people will stop

4:10:51 > 4:10:56these Waspi are proud. They wanted to do the right thing and thought

4:10:56 > 4:11:01they had been doing the right thing can only to find at the last moment

4:11:01 > 4:11:06that them doing the right thing was in fact not right because the

4:11:06 > 4:11:09Government has failed to communicate to them. They are proud women who

4:11:09 > 4:11:15have worked hard and they deserve a decent pension.Will my honourable

4:11:15 > 4:11:21friend give way?I will not. I apologise. These Waspi women have

4:11:21 > 4:11:26been betrayed. They have been robbed of their dignity. When they needed

4:11:26 > 4:11:30help from the Government they were insulted. The minister's comments,

4:11:30 > 4:11:33and I believe him to be a good man who has taken a lot of stick on

4:11:33 > 4:11:38this. He is in the perfect position to give these Waspi women hope. I

4:11:38 > 4:11:46say that the trust about apprenticeships, it has not built

4:11:46 > 4:11:52trust in the Government. Let's have a decent settlement for women. The

4:11:52 > 4:11:55minister and the Government is on the wrong side of history that these

4:11:55 > 4:12:00temp Awomen are not going away for that they will fight on. -- these

4:12:00 > 4:12:08Waspi women. As the son of a Waspi women, neither will I.I stand to

4:12:08 > 4:12:13speak again on behalf of the 6500 women affected. I would like to page

4:12:13 > 4:12:18to the campaign is up and down the United Kingdom including my local

4:12:18 > 4:12:23Waspi group. I compared the different world the Tories living

4:12:23 > 4:12:28compared to the real world and right on cue up popped the honourable

4:12:28 > 4:12:33member for Redditch arguing that women aged 65 should be able to get

4:12:33 > 4:12:37apprenticeships. It beggars belief that they think this is a credible

4:12:37 > 4:12:43option. Apprentices over the age of 19 are only entitled to a minimum

4:12:43 > 4:12:53wage of £3.50 an hour. Bus passes at an earlier age no way makes up for

4:12:53 > 4:12:58this injustice. I would point out that in Scotland the SNP government

4:12:58 > 4:13:02gives a bus pass at the age of 60. That means we are doing nothing for

4:13:02 > 4:13:05the women in Scotland. Whilst thinking about these things

4:13:05 > 4:13:09yesterday, I got an e-mail from my honourable member for looking to

4:13:09 > 4:13:14raise funds to bring back the Royal yacht Britannia for that you cannot

4:13:14 > 4:13:19raise that that is never make that up that that is considered to be an

4:13:19 > 4:13:27actual campaign while all these injustices are going on. -- you

4:13:27 > 4:13:32cannot make that up. In the real world we have the British medical

4:13:32 > 4:13:36Journal reporting which estimates 120,000 deaths are triggered a ball

4:13:36 > 4:13:43to Tory austerities measures. Also, in this free world, there are Waspi

4:13:43 > 4:13:47women suffering from cancer who will lose their houses and husbands are

4:13:47 > 4:13:52stressed at having to work longer to try to keep the house of going.

4:13:52 > 4:14:01Meanwhile, her MP, the honourable member has confirmed to another

4:14:01 > 4:14:06Waspi woman, in government difficult decisions have to be made. Nobody in

4:14:06 > 4:14:12here is promising that. We want justice for these women. They should

4:14:12 > 4:14:19get the money they are untitled two. It is also said that successive

4:14:19 > 4:14:25governments have taken adequate steps. That is effectively saying it

4:14:25 > 4:14:30is these women's fault they did not know about it. No one can credibly

4:14:30 > 4:14:34say that successive governments have not informed the women properly. The

4:14:34 > 4:14:40Tory government mitigated on the pensions act. That is like saying

4:14:40 > 4:14:45the school bully demanded £3 of view and only took £2 and therefore there

4:14:45 > 4:14:51is a £1 mitigation measure. That is not medication at all. In the wider

4:14:51 > 4:14:54world, the Scottish Tories argue about a technicality and the

4:14:54 > 4:14:58Scottish cup and have the powers to do something about it. The Scottish

4:14:58 > 4:15:03Government does not have a problem to deal with pensions. At the same

4:15:03 > 4:15:07time, the budget has been cut between £2.5 billion and is also

4:15:07 > 4:15:14having to mitigate other cuts like the bedroom tax and the council tax.

4:15:14 > 4:15:17It is this minister that refused to devolve pensions and vote autonomy

4:15:17 > 4:15:22in Scotland.

4:15:22 > 4:15:28There has been arguments how much mitigation measures may cost and in

4:15:28 > 4:15:33the last debate, the Government managed £370 billion for good

4:15:33 > 4:15:39measure in terms of the reversal of the 1995 pensions act although we

4:15:39 > 4:15:45did not call for that. I have updated figures from the House of

4:15:45 > 4:15:49Commons library about corporation tax, inheritance tax, savings

4:15:49 > 4:15:55concession and higher tax threshold and for the year 2025, this will

4:15:55 > 4:16:03cost £63 billion, corporation tax will cost £50 billion. The solution

4:16:03 > 4:16:06is staring you in the face, that is the choices that people have to

4:16:06 > 4:16:13make.Thank you, the honourable member for Easington for securing

4:16:13 > 4:16:19this debate. To put on record being part of a generation, my mother is a

4:16:19 > 4:16:22WASPI was B, the daughter of a WASPI woman, what is worse than the

4:16:22 > 4:16:29so-called burden on my generation or younger generations is seeing your

4:16:29 > 4:16:33mother not getting what she deserves and the consequences of that. So I

4:16:33 > 4:16:36definitely do not see that as a burden. There is an overwhelming

4:16:36 > 4:16:42case to reach a compensatory arrangement for women who through no

4:16:42 > 4:16:47fault of their own have been robbed of a decent retirement. Despite this

4:16:47 > 4:16:50long debate, I am sure those women do not feel as though their voices

4:16:50 > 4:16:54will be heard by this Government, but we will see when the Minister

4:16:54 > 4:16:58rises. If the hardship was really hurt, the Government would take

4:16:58 > 4:17:03action. When I asked women to share their experiences, they were stopped

4:17:03 > 4:17:08and heartbreaking. And contrary to the individualised nature of the

4:17:08 > 4:17:12comments opposite, there were patterns, it was a collective

4:17:12 > 4:17:18experience. And some of those are these. They have been left without

4:17:18 > 4:17:23information by the DWP, that is clear and undisputed. The word they

4:17:23 > 4:17:28used repeatedly was cheated, in relation to how they felt. The lack

4:17:28 > 4:17:30of notification has consequences, that is clear and call up the

4:17:30 > 4:17:36disputed. Those women often started work at 15 and suddenly have to rip

4:17:36 > 4:17:39up their retirement plans and scratch around to make a living.

4:17:39 > 4:17:48Because of new and sudden realities they have been forced into often

4:17:48 > 4:17:51backbreaking zero hours work without job satisfaction just to make it

4:17:51 > 4:17:55through their retirement age. Dullness has made them desperate and

4:17:55 > 4:17:59trapped and searching for ways to make ends meet which is frightening

4:17:59 > 4:18:04in this new financial environment. Financial insecurity and poverty

4:18:04 > 4:18:09have led to many experiencing acute mental health problems. Caring

4:18:09 > 4:18:12responsibilities have left them exhausted and with gaps in their

4:18:12 > 4:18:16pension through no fault of their own. These women who have worked all

4:18:16 > 4:18:22of their lives and have not had the advantages of many in this place and

4:18:22 > 4:18:27for many for whom life has been a struggle have got utterly let down

4:18:27 > 4:18:31by the DWP and their representatives in this House and government. What

4:18:31 > 4:18:35happens in this place has massive consequences. Listen to this

4:18:35 > 4:18:38one-woman's reality, she is living from hand to mouth, it is whether

4:18:38 > 4:18:42she can heat or eat. She is not in the best of health and cannot go to

4:18:42 > 4:18:47work if sick and does not get paid, she should not be in this position,

4:18:47 > 4:18:50she says, she says, she should have been informed years ago of the

4:18:50 > 4:18:53massive increase to her state pension. Additional six years to

4:18:53 > 4:18:58work is on there. The best part of a decade and that means a lot in your

4:18:58 > 4:19:0260s. She feels hopeless amber straight. She says, what will my

4:19:02 > 4:19:08help elect inability that in another four years, will I ever get to enjoy

4:19:08 > 4:19:10my route retirement? Truly heartbreaking. There are thousands

4:19:10 > 4:19:15of these women in my constituency of North West Durham who want to know

4:19:15 > 4:19:19where their money is. They want to know how this contractual

4:19:19 > 4:19:25relationship with the state can be ripped up. How there are no

4:19:25 > 4:19:28consequences to the administrative inadequacies of the state. They know

4:19:28 > 4:19:33that where there is a will, there is a way. Please give these women the

4:19:33 > 4:19:37future that is rightfully theirs. And when they do win, they will not

4:19:37 > 4:19:45be grateful, but they will be glad they did not give up.

4:19:45 > 4:19:51I also woke up this morning and also taught, what am I going to say?

4:19:51 > 4:19:54Because I have said everything multiple times and there is only so

4:19:54 > 4:19:58many different ways you can state the same facts. I got an e-mail from

4:19:58 > 4:20:04a lady called Hazel. She said out of curiosity that she wanted to go

4:20:04 > 4:20:08looking for these old TV adverts of this multi-million pound campaign

4:20:08 > 4:20:13that apparently happened from the Government. Since we have focused so

4:20:13 > 4:20:17much on communication today, this is a very valid point. She showed me

4:20:17 > 4:20:20these videos, these different adverts. There were three we could

4:20:20 > 4:20:28find. In the archives. The first version is presumably for women. It

4:20:28 > 4:20:32is very patronising, as is the one aimed at guys. And it is two dogs

4:20:32 > 4:20:38talking to each other through a field and one says how it is so

4:20:38 > 4:20:42confused by pensions because there is that many different types. The

4:20:42 > 4:20:45other dog says, well, the government has this great new handy book that

4:20:45 > 4:20:50you can request to be sent and the punch line is, is that you are a

4:20:50 > 4:20:56Guide Dog now? The banter is very good! That is not an adequate advert

4:20:56 > 4:21:02in the slightest to get across these grave changes that happened. But my

4:21:02 > 4:21:07favourite one was the third advert, just ten seconds and half of the

4:21:07 > 4:21:12video is a dog chasing its tail with no dialogue whatsoever. And it sums

4:21:12 > 4:21:17up the Government's reactions to this entire saga. They are the

4:21:17 > 4:21:21spinning in one circle, refusing to acknowledge the fact is people are

4:21:21 > 4:21:28pointing out. I raise this for two reasons. One is because it is the

4:21:28 > 4:21:33only new thing I have got to add. Two, because the onus is still on

4:21:33 > 4:21:36the women to request information. The onus is still on them to find

4:21:36 > 4:21:39out what the Government might or might not be up to with their

4:21:39 > 4:21:45pensions. It is incredible that we are still having to have this debate

4:21:45 > 4:21:49because as far as I am aware, this is my 13th debate since I was

4:21:49 > 4:21:53elected and I know there were debates before this. The key point

4:21:53 > 4:21:57coming through is at no point are these changes explicitly mentioned

4:21:57 > 4:22:01and at no point have these been communicated to the women affected.

4:22:01 > 4:22:06I like to think everyone until my honourable member's speech, I

4:22:06 > 4:22:09thought everybody in here was an agreement that there was pure

4:22:09 > 4:22:18communication for many years. I think that still stands. It is a

4:22:18 > 4:22:21case it was both Labour and Conservative government that ignored

4:22:21 > 4:22:24this problem and there still is a huge communication problem we have

4:22:24 > 4:22:29to look at. But from that fact and admission that there is a

4:22:29 > 4:22:34communication problem, we can safely draw two conclusions. First is the

4:22:34 > 4:22:38most important, which that these women are utterly blameless in this

4:22:38 > 4:22:44entire thing. Second, it is an admission of guilt on the part of

4:22:44 > 4:22:50the Government. It is a recognition that the institution of government

4:22:50 > 4:22:57has failed these same women again and again and again. The member for

4:22:57 > 4:23:01North Cornwall earlier said the 2011 act was rushed, I agree with that,

4:23:01 > 4:23:06it was shoved in at the last minute and all of a sudden, we said, wait a

4:23:06 > 4:23:10second, there is a 1995 act, this has kicked off! Instead of doing the

4:23:10 > 4:23:16sensible thing and going, let's step back and see what we can do to solve

4:23:16 > 4:23:19this, the government has decided to run ahead with it anyway. So can we

4:23:19 > 4:23:24do with the fact that the job of President governments is to fix the

4:23:24 > 4:23:28mistakes of previous governments? -- current governments. That is

4:23:28 > 4:23:32literally why we're here, the move society forward and it is not going

4:23:32 > 4:23:36to get anywhere the response is always, yes, it was rubbish, but

4:23:36 > 4:23:41let's move on. That is all we are getting from the government. We can

4:23:41 > 4:23:45shout about whose fault it is until we are a Tory shade of blue in the

4:23:45 > 4:23:51face, it will not fix. I recognise this Government has made slight

4:23:51 > 4:23:56compressions to the 2011 act and gave some women extra months, but it

4:23:56 > 4:24:02was an inadequate response because it neglected the chaos started back

4:24:02 > 4:24:06in 1995 -- it was not an adequate response. So can we focus more on

4:24:06 > 4:24:09how we fix it now rather than getting drawn into this blame game

4:24:09 > 4:24:19of whose fault it is all is not? The SNP produced a report, doing the

4:24:19 > 4:24:24Government's job for it, saying the £8 billion spent across five years

4:24:24 > 4:24:28could effectively revert back to the original timetable of the 1995 act,

4:24:28 > 4:24:32allowing for it lot of breathing space for a lot of women, especially

4:24:32 > 4:24:38those worst affected. The National Insurance fund is £23 billion.

4:24:38 > 4:24:42People can disagree with that all they want and I am happy to talk

4:24:42 > 4:24:44after and I will come to the honourable gentleman specifically

4:24:44 > 4:24:52from South Suffolk. He mentioned about the problems the pension

4:24:52 > 4:24:56system faces. I have to say, the spirit of his speech I completely

4:24:56 > 4:25:01agreed with. I understand when Gordon Brown was mentioned, it was

4:25:01 > 4:25:05because he had a field day with the pensions pot and made things a lot

4:25:05 > 4:25:09more complicated for everybody. I accept that as a reality and it is

4:25:09 > 4:25:14an historical fact. It is because I agree with the honourable member

4:25:14 > 4:25:17about these grave concerns, it is why we need to fix this problem.

4:25:17 > 4:25:22Because we always say this ultimate of it is on there to put onto the

4:25:22 > 4:25:26younger generations because they will be footing the bill at this

4:25:26 > 4:25:30pay-as-you-go system as you referred to. Well, I am from that generation

4:25:30 > 4:25:33and I look at this problem and I say, these women have done nothing

4:25:33 > 4:25:39wrong. The Government is still able to afford all these things that I

4:25:39 > 4:25:44don't think that important. They are really saying they will not act

4:25:44 > 4:25:49because the me? Wait, why should I pay National Insurance if at the

4:25:49 > 4:25:52last hurdle, the government could just change the rules and move the

4:25:52 > 4:25:56goalposts? Why is my generation going to take anything the

4:25:56 > 4:25:59government says seriously? That is why we have to be grown-up about

4:25:59 > 4:26:04this. I cannot believe I have to say that in here, this is a problem that

4:26:04 > 4:26:09we need to fix and address, it is above the party politics. So let's

4:26:09 > 4:26:14be practical. And this is where I recognise that me and the honourable

4:26:14 > 4:26:17gentleman will disagree, I say that this comes down to top political

4:26:17 > 4:26:22choices. We have a deal with the DUP to maintain power, we have got

4:26:22 > 4:26:26billions of pounds being spent on Trident, refurbishment for this

4:26:26 > 4:26:30place, we have heard the ridiculous campaigns of Royal yachts and

4:26:30 > 4:26:36things. I am sorry, that is just not a priority right now. This was a

4:26:36 > 4:26:38contract that these women entered, National Insurance is a contract, it

4:26:38 > 4:26:44is a basic fundamental of our state is it functions, of our welfare

4:26:44 > 4:26:48state. And we cannot undermine that, and that is all this Government is

4:26:48 > 4:26:51doing. If this was a private company they would rightly be getting

4:26:51 > 4:26:54dragged through the courts right now. I really think the Government

4:26:54 > 4:27:03should reflect. On my last point. The honourable member for Bury St

4:27:03 > 4:27:06Edmunds, I don't know if I said that right! She said section 28 of the

4:27:06 > 4:27:12Scotland Act 2016 gives the Scottish Parliament the power to mitigate

4:27:12 > 4:27:19these changes. I have got a real problem with this. Section 28 of the

4:27:19 > 4:27:24Scotland Act 2016 states, we cannot give pensioner systems or assistance

4:27:24 > 4:27:30by reason of old age. We are not allowed to do it. Pensions are

4:27:30 > 4:27:35completely reserved. When we campaigned to get pensions devolved,

4:27:35 > 4:27:42we were told, no. Like I said in my last speech, sorry?I am grateful

4:27:42 > 4:27:46for giving way. Would she also agree that her SNP government Minister did

4:27:46 > 4:27:52say in a letter to the UK Government I accept that old age is not defined

4:27:52 > 4:27:56in the legislation and that most people would not regard this age

4:27:56 > 4:28:00group, WASPI women, as old? And when she speaks about pensions, which she

4:28:00 > 4:28:04also agree that these women are not pensioners because they have not

4:28:04 > 4:28:08received their state pension and so there may be an opportunity to use

4:28:08 > 4:28:11that?An opportunity, that is all I ask. I appreciate that, but the

4:28:11 > 4:28:17reason these WASPI women are not receiving their pension is because

4:28:17 > 4:28:21this UK Government will not give it to them! That is a ridiculous

4:28:21 > 4:28:24motion. I want to commend the honourable member because he did

4:28:24 > 4:28:27supporters on the opposition and that is a commendable and brave

4:28:27 > 4:28:32think to do so fair play to the guy. This is just a totally British Chris

4:28:32 > 4:28:40point of view. I'm going to explain exactly why. I am coming to my

4:28:40 > 4:28:44concluding remarks, I disagree with Labour on constitutional basis. That

4:28:44 > 4:28:47is because I want to cut out the middleman, this is the perfect

4:28:47 > 4:28:52example of why I supported independence, we paying taxes to

4:28:52 > 4:28:54come to London to be told by a Conservative government what we can

4:28:54 > 4:29:00spend the money on and the irony is when these policies start to take

4:29:00 > 4:29:03effect, the Government turned round and goes, we want the Scottish

4:29:03 > 4:29:07Government to fix it! I don't think so, if you want to devolve pensions,

4:29:07 > 4:29:11great, until then, this is a UK problem, a conserved the problem,

4:29:11 > 4:29:15and it is not going away and it has to be fixed and it hacks to be fixed

4:29:15 > 4:29:22soon, do the right thing!-- it has to be fixed. I would like to

4:29:22 > 4:29:26congratulate my honourable friend the member for Easington on securing

4:29:26 > 4:29:29this important debate and I am absolutely delighted to be able to

4:29:29 > 4:29:37speak in support of his motion.

4:29:37 > 4:29:39Some fantastic contributions and I would like to thank each and every

4:29:39 > 4:29:46one of you. I think on the whole it has been a cross party wreck rising

4:29:46 > 4:29:49that the real injustice that women born in the ranking 50s have been

4:29:49 > 4:29:57dealt. -- 1950s. There can be no doubt that women have borne the

4:29:57 > 4:30:01brunt of this governments cuts over the years. Particularly women born

4:30:01 > 4:30:07in the 1950s have been dealt a real injustice in regards to the

4:30:07 > 4:30:14accelerated increase in women's pension age. Very briefly.Does she

4:30:14 > 4:30:19agree with me that it is no surprise that 1950s women like my

4:30:19 > 4:30:24constituents feel robbed because they work hard for 45 years, they

4:30:24 > 4:30:27save their bodies are giving up and they can't get the pensions that

4:30:27 > 4:30:33they paid for?There are so many different cases and I will touch on

4:30:33 > 4:30:39a couple if I may in relation to that. These women have had their

4:30:39 > 4:30:44state pension age quietly pushed back for many without any notice.

4:30:44 > 4:30:47Expecting to retire at 60 only to find that they have three or more

4:30:47 > 4:30:54years to wait. Madam Deputy Speaker and despite these appalling stories

4:30:54 > 4:30:57of the dire circumstances these women are facing the Government has

4:30:57 > 4:31:01still refused to provide a transitional support. During our

4:31:01 > 4:31:06national pension store which my honourable friend started the

4:31:06 > 4:31:09summer, we heard from many women who are not just struggling near facing

4:31:09 > 4:31:14destitution. A couple of cases I will mention free briefly. All

4:31:14 > 4:31:19anonymous. I have been paying international insurance for 43 years

4:31:19 > 4:31:22but have no private pension or anything else for that matter. I

4:31:22 > 4:31:26have supported to children on my own salary as a divorced single parent.

4:31:26 > 4:31:34I had notification in the 1995 that but if you break 20, I was told my

4:31:34 > 4:31:38retirement date was made to 2019. I will be so defied in four months. I

4:31:38 > 4:31:45have worked, have extra convocations and had good jobs. At 603I am

4:31:45 > 4:31:49unemployed. I have little savings. I've applied for over 40 jobs since

4:31:49 > 4:31:56September I am at my wits end. The second one if I can briefly

4:31:56 > 4:31:59mentioned this I don't remember I ever got a letter saying my pension

4:31:59 > 4:32:04may just change. I'm disabled and it had a lot of stress of things going

4:32:04 > 4:32:11on in the past two years. Worrying about... The news that the DLA is

4:32:11 > 4:32:15changing. The changes state pension age just sort of crept in there and

4:32:15 > 4:32:23keep to my attention when WASPI had... I heard that not only would I

4:32:23 > 4:32:28get my state pension when I was 16 but I would... I'm tired of not

4:32:28 > 4:32:34mattering. Madam Deputy Speaker these women deserve more than this.

4:32:34 > 4:32:39As he afforded many have had to rely on the wider Social Security system

4:32:39 > 4:32:44beyond the state pension to survive. This means if they are claiming

4:32:44 > 4:32:47jobseeker's allowance or Universal Credit they are expected to

4:32:47 > 4:32:52undertake 35 hours a week of job search activity or to be sanctioned.

4:32:52 > 4:32:55I would be great for the Minister would comment on the recommendation

4:32:55 > 4:33:01in the final report into the state pension age would suggest that older

4:33:01 > 4:33:06job-seekers should only be required to find part-time work. Does the

4:33:06 > 4:33:11Government support district second Asian? Madam Deputy Speaker won the

4:33:11 > 4:33:17plight of women born in the 1950s was first raised toward tension by

4:33:17 > 4:33:25WASPI. They said 8 million women were affected either changes. -- 8

4:33:25 > 4:33:33million women were affected by changes. Only hundred 50,000 have

4:33:33 > 4:33:41reached their revise estate pension age to date. By 2026 they will all

4:33:41 > 4:33:45retire. There is palpable and justifiable anger from these women.

4:33:45 > 4:33:49As they have said they have done the right thing, worked all their lives

4:33:49 > 4:33:52and paid into the system for decades, cared for their children,

4:33:52 > 4:33:57care for their parents only for the goalposts to be moved. Many are

4:33:57 > 4:34:00seeking these overdressed against the Government. They need action now

4:34:00 > 4:34:06about ten or 20 years' time. Labour has presented two options that the

4:34:06 > 4:34:10Government could take forward now. The first, which was included in our

4:34:10 > 4:34:13manifesto, is the extension of pension credit to those most badly

4:34:13 > 4:34:18affected by the increase of the age. Enabling them to get additional

4:34:18 > 4:34:24support based on the 19 95 timetable. This will provide problem

4:34:24 > 4:34:28-- approximate half a million women on the lowest incomes up to £159 a

4:34:28 > 4:34:32week. We have repeatedly called on the Government to take these

4:34:32 > 4:34:40measures. Sadly they have refused to act. Our manifesto commitments that

4:34:40 > 4:34:44we would look at other options as well. And as such at conference I

4:34:44 > 4:34:48set out an additional option which would give the women the opportunity

4:34:48 > 4:34:53to retire up to two years earlier, 64 rather than is expected in the

4:34:53 > 4:34:57governments plans. Given that the Government has so far refused to set

4:34:57 > 4:35:03aside any additional expenditure we thought it wasn't paired of 2% for

4:35:03 > 4:35:06bozos that were cost neutral. So there was no excuse to rule this

4:35:06 > 4:35:12option out. Under this option women born in the 1950s with see a small

4:35:12 > 4:35:15reduction of 6% in their weekly state pension entitlement for each

4:35:15 > 4:35:20year that they retired early. So based on a state pension today, a

4:35:20 > 4:35:32woman retiring a year early but received £49 a week -- 100 £49 a

4:35:32 > 4:35:38week so hundred 55. However as I said then and I want to reiterate

4:35:38 > 4:35:46now it is a starter. It is to complement additional action all --

4:35:46 > 4:35:49actual positional protection. These women need action now. These are two

4:35:49 > 4:35:52options this government could introduce now. We want to continue

4:35:52 > 4:35:59working with the women to look at and certainly not to preclude any

4:35:59 > 4:36:05compensation that they should be given. We want to make sure we write

4:36:05 > 4:36:10the wrong that they have been dealt. This option was developed after

4:36:10 > 4:36:13listening to women and men as part of the national state pension into

4:36:13 > 4:36:17discussing the future of our state engine system. We also met with the

4:36:17 > 4:36:22various 1950s were made lovely groups at the Minister so profoundly

4:36:22 > 4:36:26was the urgency for many women. They need something now and can't wait

4:36:26 > 4:36:32six months let alone three, four or five years. As a all-knowing the

4:36:32 > 4:36:36next few years most women will have retired by then. I reiterate

4:36:36 > 4:36:41something needs to happen now. But Madam Deputy Speaker of this

4:36:41 > 4:36:45government has ignored their pleas for help. He had ignored the

4:36:45 > 4:36:48tangible measures that they could take. There approaches not only

4:36:48 > 4:36:51morally bankrupt but it shows that government has no commitment to

4:36:51 > 4:36:57tackling burning injustices and given the prospect of a lengthy and

4:36:57 > 4:37:00costly court battle as women seek compensation for the years they have

4:37:00 > 4:37:06lost, is extremely foolhardy. Last week my honourable friend challenge

4:37:06 > 4:37:13the Government about a could choose -- contingency plan. The Minister

4:37:13 > 4:37:16said that the Government believed that they were on firm ground but

4:37:16 > 4:37:20history is littered with court and other decisions when in justice has

4:37:20 > 4:37:25been proved and governments have had to pay up. It is clear that this

4:37:25 > 4:37:28government has even less support for its position regarding 1950s women

4:37:28 > 4:37:32in the House than it does for a meaningful vote on the negotiated

4:37:32 > 4:37:38settlement with the EU. So to say -- I say to the Minister work with us,

4:37:38 > 4:37:41work with these women, auto comprehensive set of bridging

4:37:41 > 4:37:49arrangements now.Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to

4:37:49 > 4:37:58actually my good friend the honourable member for securing...

4:37:58 > 4:38:02The decisions of Debbie Speaker, concerning the rise of state pension

4:38:02 > 4:38:09age by successive governments were reached by equality legislation,

4:38:09 > 4:38:13increased life expectancy and sustainability of the state tension.

4:38:13 > 4:38:17Since World War II, we have seen huge changes in life expectancy.

4:38:17 > 4:38:23Thanks to a better national health service, changes in the job -- job

4:38:23 > 4:38:26market and improvements in medicine postop improvements for men and

4:38:26 > 4:38:28women such that they are living longer, staying healthier for longer

4:38:28 > 4:38:33and leading far more act of lifestyles regardless of our age.

4:38:33 > 4:38:37People living and staying healthier for longer is to be welcomed. But we

4:38:37 > 4:38:42mustn't as a government ignored that also brings in them is precious both

4:38:42 > 4:38:46financially and demographically. The key choice, Madam Debbie Speaker

4:38:46 > 4:38:50commented that the Government faces with seeking to control is whether

4:38:50 > 4:38:56to eat increased state pension age or pay lower pensions. The only

4:38:56 > 4:39:00alternative is to ask the working generation to pay an ever larger

4:39:00 > 4:39:07share of their income to support pensioners. In July of this year the

4:39:07 > 4:39:11Government publishes the first review of the state pension age

4:39:11 > 4:39:19sitting on a coherent strategy for sustaining... In a moment. The UK

4:39:19 > 4:39:27system for many decades to come. As suggested that -- it takes the

4:39:27 > 4:39:33recommendation to increase the state pension age and the review is clear

4:39:33 > 4:39:37about increasing life expectancy and the challenges that it poses. People

4:39:37 > 4:39:44are living longer. In 2015 on people turned, looked away a second, as

4:39:44 > 4:39:49compared to 3000 people are reached 100 years and 2002. In 2035 there

4:39:49 > 4:39:55were more than twice as many people did to the honourable Judge.I

4:39:55 > 4:40:02appreciate the Mr giving away. One I ask of the Government give us a

4:40:02 > 4:40:05meaningful vote to this because I know there is a lot of support on

4:40:05 > 4:40:12the opposition and just behind the Minister and secondly one year

4:40:12 > 4:40:15corporation tax rather than take that back to business I think

4:40:15 > 4:40:22business be happy to give that to WASPI women.The honourable

4:40:22 > 4:40:25gentleman and I were both in the House of Commons in 2011 when he was

4:40:25 > 4:40:31five foot for the 2011 Mac to increase the state pension -- to

4:40:31 > 4:40:42increase the state pension. He and I and the SMP and the Government would

4:40:42 > 4:40:47have if her nephews on taxation whether for example their support

4:40:47 > 4:40:50for tried and not support for Trident but with respect of the

4:40:50 > 4:40:54reduction in tax that you are poses that will be a reduction on the job

4:40:54 > 4:40:57grading powers on the businesses that we rely upon for the jobs and

4:40:57 > 4:41:02the Outlook services that we also wish to support I give way to the

4:41:02 > 4:41:06honourable lady.I'm grateful to the Minister. Will the Minister

4:41:06 > 4:41:12acknowledged that two days before the report was released the data

4:41:12 > 4:41:17showed that actually life expectancy at 60 is actually going down and

4:41:17 > 4:41:21that life except in the ad earth is flat miming. The only developing

4:41:21 > 4:41:28country where this happen. -- developed country.I'm grateful she

4:41:28 > 4:41:38has raised that specific one. I believe she is scaremongering. On

4:41:38 > 4:41:41the issue of life expectancy, on the issue of life expectancy Madam

4:41:41 > 4:41:47Deputy Speaker there are two fundamental sources. The first is

4:41:47 > 4:41:50the OMS will have repeatedly made clear that the life expectancy is

4:41:50 > 4:41:57rising across the board and the situation is that we must not get

4:41:57 > 4:42:01away from the fact that the alloy Nasa recently reported only this

4:42:01 > 4:42:07month that life expectancy continues to rise and the Labour Party

4:42:07 > 4:42:12manifesto seeks to have an independent review of state and all

4:42:12 > 4:42:15aspects of that, while the Government did that, it was the

4:42:15 > 4:42:20report and the report makes it clear that life expectancy has increased

4:42:20 > 4:42:28and not there is absolutely no question that life expectancy at or

4:42:28 > 4:42:34for example in 2016 was 91 years for females and I89 years for males and

4:42:34 > 4:42:40in 50 years' time by 2066 by legacy of birth the predicted to rise to 98

4:42:40 > 4:42:45years. As for healthy life except to say this is also been increasing

4:42:45 > 4:42:51over recent decades. Healthy life except in CA 65, as a proportion of

4:42:51 > 4:42:55life except in C, has been relatively stable since the year

4:42:55 > 4:43:002000. And in relation to Scotland, how the life expectancy at 65

4:43:00 > 4:43:03according to the latest that this cake has been increasing in Scotland

4:43:03 > 4:43:09in recent years as his ability free life expectancy. And I was latest

4:43:09 > 4:43:20point, in relation to specific areas of Scotland, the long of it as I do

4:43:20 > 4:43:22not have specific constituency life expectancy as if they've ask for in

4:43:22 > 4:43:27the past and and has been raised. For example in the Glasgow city area

4:43:27 > 4:43:35life expectancy at birth in December of 2017 has increased by over four

4:43:35 > 4:43:40years for man and life expectancy at 65 in Glasgow city is 15 years for

4:43:40 > 4:43:48men and 18 years for women. This has been increased since 2001. This

4:43:48 > 4:43:55session is made that I am using the raw data. The data I'm using is the

4:43:55 > 4:44:00Office of National Statistics and the report. I'm conscious of your

4:44:00 > 4:44:04restrictions on the amount of time that I can take. I will come back to

4:44:04 > 4:44:08the honourable lady in a second if she allows me to go on. The state

4:44:08 > 4:44:17tension was initially addressed in 1995 when it was legislated in the

4:44:17 > 4:44:211995 act this rose out of life expectancy changes and increase in

4:44:21 > 4:44:25the number of pensioners in the years to come. The Labour government

4:44:25 > 4:44:29as I have indicated earlier introduced the 2007 pensions act was

4:44:29 > 4:44:35again increased state pension age. I should point of the Labour Party has

4:44:35 > 4:44:38now seek to argue that the Blair and Brown reforms are wrong. The

4:44:38 > 4:44:45Government listen to concerns voiced in the passage of the 2011 Mac is

4:44:45 > 4:44:48indicated down her budget and the proposed two-year acceleration was

4:44:48 > 4:44:53reduced to 18 months benefiting over a quarter of a million women in the

4:44:53 > 4:44:59process

4:44:59 > 4:45:13Going as far as some campaigners have argued, indeed the gentleman

4:45:13 > 4:45:16described as full compensation, wood ) -- represent a cost of over £70

4:45:16 > 4:45:18million to the public purse. The requirements those changes would

4:45:18 > 4:45:20make taken into account the difference between men and women,

4:45:20 > 4:45:24would require new legislation meaning there would have to be

4:45:24 > 4:45:32inequality potentially being created between men and women.Perhaps he

4:45:32 > 4:45:35could offer some assistance, he talks about life expectancy

4:45:35 > 4:45:41increasing. I don't want to argue the toss, what I'm curious about is

4:45:41 > 4:45:46just because people are living longer, I don't understand why this

4:45:46 > 4:45:50particular generation of women should pay the price when they are

4:45:50 > 4:45:55expected to receive their pensions at 60. The arguments about life

4:45:55 > 4:46:00expectancy may be an argument about reforming pensions in the future but

4:46:00 > 4:46:07these women feel cheated they haven't got their pension at 60.I'm

4:46:07 > 4:46:11conscious for the desire for me to end speedily, I will write to the

4:46:11 > 4:46:15honourable lady with a detailed reply to her points just raised. I

4:46:15 > 4:46:21would make the point, I have barely had a chance to address the argument

4:46:21 > 4:46:25made by my friend from Scotland, whether it is the point raised

4:46:25 > 4:46:35eloquently by my honourable friend from Murray,... Indicated they have

4:46:35 > 4:46:45the power under the Scotland act and I make the point strongly there is

4:46:45 > 4:46:48no question there is the power because this is not dealing with

4:46:48 > 4:46:51pensioners as such because the provisions in relation to this is we

4:46:51 > 4:46:56are dealing with people of working age according to the law so I rely

4:46:56 > 4:47:00strongly on the words frankly not of this Government, of the Scottish

4:47:00 > 4:47:05Government as set out in the 22nd letter. The issue of notification

4:47:05 > 4:47:11was raised and I can answer the points very briefly, that there was

4:47:11 > 4:47:16clearly massive parliamentary debate on repeated occasions in 1995 and

4:47:16 > 4:47:20thereafter, multiple articles in the press and media, distribution of

4:47:20 > 4:47:26huge numbers of media, a campaign in 2004 to educate people about their

4:47:26 > 4:47:30state pensions, adverts in a variety of ways, then of course

4:47:30 > 4:47:35correspondence in two different ways both prior to 2010 and after 2011,

4:47:35 > 4:47:41and state pension forecasts were sent to 19 million people over the

4:47:41 > 4:47:49last 17 years. To conclude, modern deck beauty speaker -- Madam Deputy

4:47:49 > 4:47:57Speaker, I would make a couple of points - we recognise some people

4:47:57 > 4:48:01cannot work. The Government is committed to supporting the

4:48:01 > 4:48:05vulnerable and spends around £50 billion per year each on benefits to

4:48:05 > 4:48:10support disabled people and those with health conditions and carers,

4:48:10 > 4:48:14as my honourable friend for Eastleigh raised. This equates to 6%

4:48:14 > 4:48:19of all government spending and with increased financial pressures, we

4:48:19 > 4:48:22cannot change a policy that was implemented over 20 years ago and

4:48:22 > 4:48:28supported by all three political parties. In relation to life

4:48:28 > 4:48:31expectancy, the honourable gentleman for Easington and I are good example

4:48:31 > 4:48:43of that, we have both

4:48:43 > 4:48:46suffered from cancer, I'm delighted to see he has made the recovery from

4:48:46 > 4:48:49lymphatic cancer, I have made a recovery from a brain tumour. Those

4:48:49 > 4:48:51illnesses would have killed us boasts 40 years ago and there's no

4:48:51 > 4:48:54doubt life expectancy changes. With increased financial pressures it

4:48:54 > 4:48:58would be unaffordable and not right in the light of the changes we have

4:48:58 > 4:49:05had to place an unfair financial burden on future generations.I

4:49:05 > 4:49:11would like to thank all the members who have participated, over 30

4:49:11 > 4:49:16members, directly on contributions and numerous interventions. I do

4:49:16 > 4:49:22hope that the Minister has taken note of what's been said. I am an

4:49:22 > 4:49:27eternal optimist, perhaps formed by experiences. I think all sides will

4:49:27 > 4:49:31build momentum and bring this campaign to a successful conclusion.

4:49:31 > 4:49:36I want to point out to the Minister with all due respect that if the

4:49:36 > 4:49:39maladministration cases are found against the Government, we could be

4:49:39 > 4:49:44looking at a huge settlements so it may well be in the Government's

4:49:44 > 4:49:53interests to find a solution to seek a Parliamentary solution. These

4:49:53 > 4:49:56women deserve justice and we're here to try to deliver that today so I

4:49:56 > 4:50:01hope the parliament will speak with one voice and support the motion on

4:50:01 > 4:50:06the audit paper. Thank you.The question is as on the order paper.

4:50:06 > 4:50:21As many are of that opinion say aye... No...? The ayes have it. We

4:50:21 > 4:50:27now come onto Sir Mike Penning.

4:50:30 > 4:50:39I think we all, as constituency MPs, hoped perhaps that this debate was

4:50:39 > 4:50:45unnecessary. We all hoped that the inquiry, and I used the word in

4:50:45 > 4:50:50brackets, inquiry, that the Government in good faith constituted

4:50:50 > 4:50:57would have given confidence to the families and loved ones of

4:50:57 > 4:51:04thousands. Shall I pause while the lady stops laughing. Thank you. I

4:51:04 > 4:51:08think thousands of families who in good faith, many of them went to see

4:51:08 > 4:51:13their GP to see whether they thought, because they thought they

4:51:13 > 4:51:21might be pregnant. Probably one of the most important times in any

4:51:21 > 4:51:24woman's life, and certainly as a father of two gorgeous girls the

4:51:24 > 4:51:28most important time in my life when my wife told me she was expecting

4:51:28 > 4:51:36our children. This was something so important to them, they very often

4:51:36 > 4:51:43went to their GP, a natural thing to do, so an NHS patient going to an

4:51:43 > 4:51:48NHS surgery to see an NHS doctor for advice about whether they were

4:51:48 > 4:51:53pregnant. I look at the dates as to when these mothers to be possibly

4:51:53 > 4:52:02went to see their GP. Between 1953, Madam Deputy Speaker, and 1975.

4:52:02 > 4:52:06Quite a span of time. Actually my mother could have gone to the GP

4:52:06 > 4:52:13because I was born in 1957. It could have easily been in many ways me

4:52:13 > 4:52:20that was a victim of this, God forbid, and my mother a victim as

4:52:20 > 4:52:24well. That's one of the reasons I am so passionate about getting to the

4:52:24 > 4:52:32bottom of this, I think, disaster that came to these ladies who went

4:52:32 > 4:52:40to the GPs. Not only do they go to GP, NHS GP, NHS surgery, as an NHS

4:52:40 > 4:52:48patient... Very often that GP would open the draw and give two tablets

4:52:48 > 4:52:54sometimes with no prescription, no advice, no concern about the

4:52:54 > 4:52:58consequences or side-effects of that drug, and they handed those tablets

4:52:58 > 4:53:04over to the lady, many of them took them directly in the surgery, and

4:53:04 > 4:53:08they simply said to them if your period starts tomorrow you are not

4:53:08 > 4:53:17pregnant. If your period doesn't start you are. And in good faith,

4:53:17 > 4:53:24they followed that advice. Even though the Department of Health and

4:53:24 > 4:53:29drug companies knew there was issues to do with this drug. I'm going to

4:53:29 > 4:53:36use a tiny bit of privilege because every look around to do with this

4:53:36 > 4:53:39debate, including in the House of Commons papers, hormone pregnancy

4:53:39 > 4:53:58tests, the report into the commission on human medicines, the

4:53:59 > 4:54:06drug was primodos. Other companies in the world knew about issues and

4:54:06 > 4:54:11I'm not going to go into all of the evidence given in the so-called

4:54:11 > 4:54:19review, but lets touch on some of the bits asked for by the Minister

4:54:19 > 4:54:24when this group was set up. The first point, the Government should

4:54:24 > 4:54:30set up an expert working panel inquiry. No such inquiry took place.

4:54:30 > 4:54:34At the third meeting, the barrister I understand to be inquiry advised

4:54:34 > 4:54:40to inquiry to change the word inquiry into review. Under what

4:54:40 > 4:54:47authority? When a minister has set up an inquiry, is it not an inquiry?

4:54:47 > 4:54:52Perhaps they didn't want one, who cares? They should have gone back to

4:54:52 > 4:54:55the victims and more importantly the Minister and said my advice is this

4:54:55 > 4:55:00and the Minister could have made that decision. People might just

4:55:00 > 4:55:04think it is semantics, it's not, it's vitally important if you are

4:55:04 > 4:55:10getting to the truth as to what that group could do. Even when the report

4:55:10 > 4:55:14- not the original report, Madam Deputy Speaker - the original report

4:55:14 > 4:55:21was removed, changed and I know others will come onto that. When it

4:55:21 > 4:55:25came out yet again it didn't say review because it's not a review.

4:55:25 > 4:55:33There should be full disclosure and a review of all the evidence. That

4:55:33 > 4:55:37review says they did that. They didn't. The Royal College of GPs

4:55:37 > 4:55:42just one example, the Royal College of GPs had informed the Department

4:55:42 > 4:55:49and the drug company that they had concerns way back in the 1960s. That

4:55:49 > 4:55:55evidence was never sought. If you read the report, no evidence at all

4:55:55 > 4:55:59was given to this inquiry, which is what it should have been, review,

4:55:59 > 4:56:03from the Royal College of GPs. I will give way but I'm only going to

4:56:03 > 4:56:10give way a couple of times because I'm conscious of time.Is my

4:56:10 > 4:56:14honourable friend where the BMJ reported that most of the scientific

4:56:14 > 4:56:18evidence considered by the working group was from the 1960s, 70s and

4:56:18 > 4:56:25early 80s and one expert in the field told the BMJ they were not

4:56:25 > 4:56:28actually that many scientific studies available? And would he

4:56:28 > 4:56:32agree the Government should fund new research with the aim of enabling a

4:56:32 > 4:56:37definitive conclusion to be reached on the matter?Yes, and I will come

4:56:37 > 4:56:42onto that point in the summing up. It is vitally important we have

4:56:42 > 4:56:45proper evidence, not some of the historic evidence used by the

4:56:45 > 4:56:50report, even though they rejected some more modern evidence because it

4:56:50 > 4:56:53hadn't yet been peer reviewed. The whole point of having all of the

4:56:53 > 4:56:56evidence in front of them is one of the reasons the motion... Bear with

4:56:56 > 4:57:02me, the motion today which I hope will be passed unanimously actually

4:57:02 > 4:57:06says it should be a judge-led inquiry. I will give way and then

4:57:06 > 4:57:14I'm going to make some progress.I must acknowledge my constituents

4:57:14 > 4:57:19Charlotte and her family on behalf of Stephen, her brother, who's been

4:57:19 > 4:57:24affected so much by this drug. One of the biggest issues is the handing

4:57:24 > 4:57:29out with absolutely no talking through about any risks and once

4:57:29 > 4:57:34again I heard today about Jackie who lost her baby Louisa 19 years later

4:57:34 > 4:57:42in 1977 when that product had been on the market for two years with

4:57:42 > 4:57:45warnings and GPs not pointing this out so there's a lot of evidence

4:57:45 > 4:57:50here and why is it not in that report, I ask my honourable friend.

4:57:50 > 4:57:54I completely agree and one of the things which has surprised me is

4:57:54 > 4:57:58that even though on average every single constituency MP in this House

4:57:58 > 4:58:05will have a victim of primodos in their constituency, so many Britons

4:58:05 > 4:58:10say that it was their fault, that they are on their own. The fantastic

4:58:10 > 4:58:23report done by Sky where people came forward and said I was affected by

4:58:23 > 4:58:28this but I thought I was the only one. The inquiry should be conducted

4:58:28 > 4:58:33fairly and independently, they will give people a few seconds to think

4:58:33 > 4:58:42about that before I take my final intervention - independently.I'm

4:58:42 > 4:58:45grateful to the honourable gentleman, who is making a very

4:58:45 > 4:58:51powerful case. Given that the inquiry/ review has now been very

4:58:51 > 4:58:56much discredited and certainly rejected by all of those who have

4:58:56 > 4:59:02suffered as a result of this, would he agree with me that - I'm sure he

4:59:02 > 4:59:06will - the terms of his motion which calls for a statutory inquiry under

4:59:06 > 4:59:11the inquiry is act 2005 to review the evidence of a possible

4:59:11 > 4:59:15association between hormone pregnancy tests and pregnancies, and

4:59:15 > 4:59:20to consider the regulatory failures of the committee of safety of

4:59:20 > 4:59:26medicines is the way forward?I do, and I take praise actually, the

4:59:26 > 4:59:31clerk has helped me draft it in a way because I was so angry after

4:59:31 > 4:59:36reading this report, to get it into some kind of Parliamentary language.

4:59:36 > 4:59:40It has to be independent and judge-led and it has to be able to

4:59:40 > 4:59:44Sabena and summons people before it on oath so that we can get to the

4:59:44 > 4:59:50truth.

4:59:50 > 4:59:54That was in place at the time. It is I'm afraid the Department of Health

4:59:54 > 4:59:58cannot hide behind this report. To me that is so vitally important. The

4:59:58 > 5:00:03third point again fair and independent. One of the ways that it

5:00:03 > 5:00:07could be done independently is to have an expert witness who wasn't

5:00:07 > 5:00:15part of the campaign but actually everybody massively respected. For

5:00:15 > 5:00:18those involved in the thalidomide campaign over the years when they

5:00:18 > 5:00:22heard Nick brick was going to put forward I thought it was going to be

5:00:22 > 5:00:28a positive thing. Interestingly enough Nick was there as expert

5:00:28 > 5:00:32witness. Assayed part of the conclusions in any shape or form. He

5:00:32 > 5:00:40was actually has to leave the room. When in good faith the Minister and

5:00:40 > 5:00:50Prime Minister they said that Nick Dobrik had fully endorse and he was

5:00:50 > 5:00:57gob smacked when he heard that he was mentioned as endorsing their

5:00:57 > 5:01:01report. He did interview with sky today that he categorically does not

5:01:01 > 5:01:04endorse the conclusions of this report and it was fundamentally

5:01:04 > 5:01:08wrong for anybody to advise the Prime Minister or the anyone that he

5:01:08 > 5:01:14did. He does not win the Prime Minister and I don't. I don't

5:01:14 > 5:01:18Minister the side of the bench you take advice from your officials

5:01:18 > 5:01:25you're told the situation and in good faith you take the... Nick

5:01:25 > 5:01:29cannot defend himself in this chamber but on behalf of him I would

5:01:29 > 5:01:35like whoever gave that advice to the Ministers to formally apologise to

5:01:35 > 5:01:41Nick Dobrik because he is a fantastic campaign are not only for

5:01:41 > 5:01:47all of buffer all injustices in the pharmaceutical. The third point

5:01:47 > 5:01:52conducted independently. The victims not feel that at all. The victims

5:01:52 > 5:01:56should have trust and confidence is part and parcel of what is there.

5:01:56 > 5:02:00That is the fourth point. I probably the most important thing I think

5:02:00 > 5:02:05amongst many other things, the inquiry should find a possible

5:02:05 > 5:02:14association. A possible association not causal. When I questioned the

5:02:14 > 5:02:25experts on the panel why they changed causal face it is a

5:02:25 > 5:02:31difficult to prove. They were supposed to follow their remit not

5:02:31 > 5:02:35science. This is a do as they told. But they thought they could not do

5:02:35 > 5:02:38because of the evidence of Pergamum, fine. Come back to Minister,

5:02:38 > 5:02:43comebacks of the victims and explained that. A set of that they

5:02:43 > 5:02:45had an absolute farcical situation where they were looking for

5:02:45 > 5:02:50something which they knew full well, and it is clearly their documents,

5:02:50 > 5:02:54but it could not come to the conclusion there was a causal. This

5:02:54 > 5:02:58could not come to the conclusion that there wasn't either because the

5:02:58 > 5:03:03evidence was not there for either conclusion. So to me, and as I sat

5:03:03 > 5:03:13on the floor of the House, there as an in justice taking place here that

5:03:13 > 5:03:16natural justice, why we were sent here to defend our constituents on

5:03:16 > 5:03:20the system has come down against him and caused such horrific, horrible

5:03:20 > 5:03:24things to them we need to actually address it. I will give way once

5:03:24 > 5:03:33more.I'm exceptionally great no -- exceptionally grateful. To

5:03:33 > 5:03:35constituents contacted me saying they believe they lost their

5:03:35 > 5:03:44children due to the struck. One said they lost several children. This is

5:03:44 > 5:03:52a fundamental issue of trust. Trusting the GP, NHS, inquiry. The

5:03:52 > 5:03:55two constituents who been in touch with me saying over and over again

5:03:55 > 5:03:58we no longer have any faith in the system. They believe it is a

5:03:58 > 5:04:02whitewash which is why agree with him that there should be a full

5:04:02 > 5:04:07inquiry.I think honourable gentleman for his support. That

5:04:07 > 5:04:14support for the victims. There is only one constituency in -- there is

5:04:14 > 5:04:21no constituency in this country does not have someone who lost their

5:04:21 > 5:04:23child or was stillborn. Or lives were transformed for those of

5:04:23 > 5:04:27survive. And many, who we don't have the figures, who were don't have the

5:04:27 > 5:04:32figures, where five so take... There are reports starting to come through

5:04:32 > 5:04:36which the inquiry was not allowed to look at, I fully endorse the fact we

5:04:36 > 5:04:41need to look at the fact we need the money up there to have some modern

5:04:41 > 5:04:44reports because the methodology used back then would never allow today

5:04:44 > 5:04:49but we also need to see the missing reports. We need to find the stuff

5:04:49 > 5:04:53has gone missing in Germany. And whether the drug company knew there

5:04:53 > 5:04:58were here. We need to know why the drug companies settled in America

5:04:58 > 5:05:02using a different name for the product, why they settled in

5:05:02 > 5:05:07America. What evidence put before the legal system in America where

5:05:07 > 5:05:12they settled as fast as they could and then gagged everything kept it

5:05:12 > 5:05:17quiet. We have a duty in this House, to call into question when things go

5:05:17 > 5:05:24wrong. This started going wrong many, before I was born. And I know

5:05:24 > 5:05:29the Ministers and I have been a Minister, have to say I need to

5:05:29 > 5:05:33support my... But one of the roles of a Minister is to question the

5:05:33 > 5:05:37advice that they got. I know that is what the Prime Minister will do now

5:05:37 > 5:05:42and I hope that this House will support the Vic Ohm's said that they

5:05:42 > 5:05:47can have some confidence in the system and in the NHS once again.

5:05:47 > 5:05:50Can I suggest they will want to get him and we have limited time. Six

5:05:50 > 5:06:00men speeches full stop --.Six years ago I met my constituent who shared

5:06:00 > 5:06:04with me her struggle with her health over her lifetime. Her mother had

5:06:04 > 5:06:10been prescribed Primodos. Is that despite today carried out my

5:06:10 > 5:06:16research. Searching through thousands of pages of documents. One

5:06:16 > 5:06:22document from 1969 found that when women used this homone pregnancy

5:06:22 > 5:06:26test there was a higher incidence of malformed babies, miscarriages,

5:06:26 > 5:06:31stillbirth and infant death. He found the finding are so alarming he

5:06:31 > 5:06:38wrote the manufacturers asking them to withdraw Primodos. It would be

5:06:38 > 5:06:42another eight years before was taken away from the market unlike Norway

5:06:42 > 5:06:47and Sweden to active racist. In the last six years I have exchanged

5:06:47 > 5:06:57countless letters with... Work with Sky News who have been exposing

5:06:57 > 5:07:03this. And the victims Association. I have raised this matter on the floor

5:07:03 > 5:07:08many times. And with the Prime Minister several weeks ago. And her

5:07:08 > 5:07:12predecessor to discuss successful. But in 2014, after a debate here in

5:07:12 > 5:07:18this chamber, women were informed -- we were formed by a Minister that an

5:07:18 > 5:07:23inquiry would be carried out how we were very excited about that. We

5:07:23 > 5:07:26were promised that inquiry would be fair and transparent. He would have

5:07:26 > 5:07:29the trust and confidence of all victims and it would look at all of

5:07:29 > 5:07:33the evidence. And said he found that some of the experts on the panel had

5:07:33 > 5:07:37in fact conflict of interests and close ties with the manufacturing

5:07:37 > 5:07:46company which is now called Bayer. Those invited to give evidence root

5:07:46 > 5:07:49giving after a short period of time to tell what happened to them and

5:07:49 > 5:07:57treated appallingly. One was pointed out that the duct she cannot raise

5:07:57 > 5:08:00any of the concerns that she had with any of us with how the inquiry

5:08:00 > 5:08:06was going. Yes of course.I thank the honourable Lady for giving way

5:08:06 > 5:08:12and mentioning that the interest are Prime Minister has shown meeting

5:08:12 > 5:08:18that the she is indeed but what they point out like to reiterate on

5:08:18 > 5:08:22behalf of my constituents and many other MPs is the treatment of the

5:08:22 > 5:08:29campaigners. Ring this process, on acceptable, timescales which are

5:08:29 > 5:08:34some people working for very ill children. So I absolutely think the

5:08:34 > 5:08:39treatment of the campaigners at the very least needs an apology.Thank

5:08:39 > 5:08:42you. I entirely agree with the honourable Lady on this matter. Now

5:08:42 > 5:08:47the inquiry was to look at the possible association and not

5:08:47 > 5:08:53causally. On that is very important for. Because it is afraid different

5:08:53 > 5:09:01burden of proof looking for a causal link. No one knows who gave the

5:09:01 > 5:09:10authorisation to change it. There are thousands of documents from

5:09:10 > 5:09:16archives show that deformities are links to the struck. There also were

5:09:16 > 5:09:19Department of medicine action looking at these documents and not

5:09:19 > 5:09:22to do anything with it. I was that that was back when the report came

5:09:22 > 5:09:26out the initial draft said that it was not possible to reach a

5:09:26 > 5:09:31definitive conclusion am however, the final document was changed at

5:09:31 > 5:09:35said they could reach that conclusion. And when the chair of

5:09:35 > 5:09:43the inquiry was asked about this I myself and others as to why this

5:09:43 > 5:09:48changed, she said that the Commissioner of medicine looked at

5:09:48 > 5:09:50the document, looking very thoroughly and they told us that we

5:09:50 > 5:09:56should strengthen the wording and put... It is acceptable for that

5:09:56 > 5:09:59commission to have asked the panel to do that and change their

5:09:59 > 5:10:03conclusion. As is are to be mentioned when I asked the Prime

5:10:03 > 5:10:08Minister this question recently one of the reason that I Minister said

5:10:08 > 5:10:15there was confidence and support was that Nick Dobrik said he endorse

5:10:15 > 5:10:20this report. But he says he's very angry when he is tied to this

5:10:20 > 5:10:25report. He I would ask the Minister is he aware of that the working

5:10:25 > 5:10:30group refused to look at the most up to date study of Primodos conducted

5:10:30 > 5:10:37this year. They said it had not been peer-reviewed yet they looked at 44

5:10:37 > 5:10:39other nonparent you do studies and some of the matter should produced

5:10:39 > 5:10:46at the manufacturers themselves. The doctor has found that it did

5:10:46 > 5:10:49deformed fish embryos and is given high doses actually killed them as

5:10:49 > 5:11:01well. There also was a study box to them that his findings were just

5:11:01 > 5:11:04informed the Royal College of General tagged shooters about this

5:11:04 > 5:11:08and that study has also been ignored and in fact there is no record of it

5:11:08 > 5:11:11at all. And the only reason that we know it exists is because of a

5:11:11 > 5:11:17letter which was found which showed that he had discussed this matter,

5:11:17 > 5:11:21had told all the parties concerned as to what was going on, and again

5:11:21 > 5:11:25nothing had happened. The man in charge of the communication of

5:11:25 > 5:11:32safety in medicine, also conducted a study and in fact found that there

5:11:32 > 5:11:35were adverse reactions and what did he do? Instead of dealing with this

5:11:35 > 5:11:41issue he actually contacted the manufacturers and told them quote

5:11:41 > 5:11:47take measures to avoid medical, legal challenges and then he eat

5:11:47 > 5:11:55later shows that he... That all the documents were later point to be

5:11:55 > 5:12:00destroyed that he saw. There was a doctor who also carried out that

5:12:00 > 5:12:08there were significant, twofold increases and people having

5:12:08 > 5:12:15malformed children who use the struck. In 1977 newest old which is

5:12:15 > 5:12:21stopping given. That could industry of medicine then said the

5:12:21 > 5:12:25association is confirmed between Primodos and deformities, confirmed,

5:12:25 > 5:12:32unequivocal. One that was in 1977. So why is it the expert working

5:12:32 > 5:12:35group seem to have disregarded all of these studies, have not bothered

5:12:35 > 5:12:40to take any interest in what was happening, have failed to look at

5:12:40 > 5:12:45the regulatory failures? Further scientific research should be

5:12:45 > 5:12:49carried out for one reason, apart from establishing an association,

5:12:49 > 5:12:55but also because interestingly enough the AWG report actually says

5:12:55 > 5:13:02that the actual component part of Primodos are safe to be used

5:13:02 > 5:13:05currently. That is very worrying because it is being used in a

5:13:05 > 5:13:11contraceptive pills. I think independent research needs to be

5:13:11 > 5:13:16carried out on this because we might find that actually even though these

5:13:16 > 5:13:20components are being used in May be harmful to women. Adweek could

5:13:20 > 5:13:23prevent further problems from occurring. I'm asking for an

5:13:23 > 5:13:28independent inquiry as is bent alluded to. The most of the families

5:13:28 > 5:13:37first.Thank you very much. I thank my right arm will front for securing

5:13:37 > 5:13:43this extremely important debate this afternoon. Throw the UK there have

5:13:43 > 5:13:51been many constituents who have been devastated by the recently published

5:13:51 > 5:13:53outcome of the review, the commission of health medicine

5:13:53 > 5:14:01working group. It included the scientific evidence did not ask --

5:14:01 > 5:14:07support a causal association between promote Agassiz tests and that the

5:14:07 > 5:14:13dot from 1953 to the early 1970s. Between the use of hormone pregnancy

5:14:13 > 5:14:19tests such as Primodos and the connection of the map and

5:14:19 > 5:14:24miscarriages or perform the fax. Our birth defects ranging from brain

5:14:24 > 5:14:31damage, heart abnormalities and transpose internal organs. Of

5:14:31 > 5:14:34particular concern to my constituents as the apparent

5:14:34 > 5:14:37nonavailability of a general practitioner records for that

5:14:37 > 5:14:42relevant period of time when she was prescribed Primodos. Or better put

5:14:42 > 5:14:56simply even murderous as part for pregnancy test.

5:14:56 > 5:15:05Yes, certainly.My constituent finds herself in precisely the situation

5:15:05 > 5:15:10he describes. At the time in 1969 when she gave birth to her son, she

5:15:10 > 5:15:15attended a medical practice in Crawley but many of the GP notes

5:15:15 > 5:15:19were handwritten, they appear to have been lost. Her previous

5:15:19 > 5:15:25practice in Gloucestershire tried to get those records and found she

5:15:25 > 5:15:33ceased to exist for 12 years, it is very worrying is it not.It

5:15:33 > 5:15:40corroborates the concerns of my constituents. As I understand it,

5:15:40 > 5:15:43such records normally required to be retained for the duration of that

5:15:43 > 5:15:55patient's lifetime. It will be interesting to recover the notes to

5:15:55 > 5:16:02see if there is a pattern. Only months after being prescribed with

5:16:02 > 5:16:06Primodos in January of 1975, a warning was added to the packaging

5:16:06 > 5:16:10that the drug was not to be given to pregnant women, should not be given

5:16:10 > 5:16:16to pregnant women to repeat it. It was conceived by my constituent this

5:16:16 > 5:16:22was a response to the situation that risk had been identified. My

5:16:22 > 5:16:28constituent's child was born in August of 1975 with serious birth

5:16:28 > 5:16:33defects requiring major surgery. And still today that child in adult

5:16:33 > 5:16:37horde has to contend with associated medical complications. However,

5:16:37 > 5:16:43credit to both mother and child, despite the trauma and hardship they

5:16:43 > 5:16:46have endured, they contribute positively to society and indeed

5:16:46 > 5:16:52champion the care of others. One has to ask if Primodos is not meant to

5:16:52 > 5:16:59the birth deformities of children whose mothers took the drug, what is

5:16:59 > 5:17:04the common denominator for the tragic outcome of these pregnancies?

5:17:04 > 5:17:11It has been mooted such women should undertake genetic test. In other

5:17:11 > 5:17:26words is the suggestion that this could be considered

5:17:29 > 5:17:33coincidental. My constituent does not consider she has received

5:17:33 > 5:17:37justice for herself and more importantly in her eyes justice for

5:17:37 > 5:17:42her child. In conclusion, my constituent feels let down at the

5:17:42 > 5:17:46outcome and the process followed by the expert working groups because

5:17:46 > 5:17:50she had high hopes for the outcome, as it brings nowhere nearer the

5:17:50 > 5:17:55truth nor nearer to justice, for those who may have fallen foul of

5:17:55 > 5:18:01drugs that may not have been fit for purpose at the time of prescribing

5:18:01 > 5:18:06or simply given to the patients. For the families involved, I would

5:18:06 > 5:18:10welcome a broad-based and independent inquiry. To review the

5:18:10 > 5:18:18evidence of which there is much evidence, in a long journey and a

5:18:18 > 5:18:23big jigsaw with many pieces of the jigsaw missing. These pieces of the

5:18:23 > 5:18:28jigsaw should be secured for that independent inquiry to find the

5:18:28 > 5:18:33truth. It may be a regulatory failure, we need to find out. It's

5:18:33 > 5:18:38been a devastating outcome for people subjected to hormone

5:18:38 > 5:18:46pregnancy testing from 1953 to 1975. The families deserve truth and

5:18:46 > 5:18:49justice and I think it is the role of parliamentarians to pursue

5:18:49 > 5:18:59relentlessly the truth of Primodos and other such drugs.I raise this

5:18:59 > 5:19:06important issue on behalf of my constituents and other and affected

5:19:06 > 5:19:10constituents but also because this is about a national scandal, about

5:19:10 > 5:19:16the tragedy of babies either stillborn or born with severe feet a

5:19:16 > 5:19:23lot their mothers were given the hormone Primodos as a pregnancy test

5:19:23 > 5:19:27between 1953 and 1975. Primodos was in many cases handed out in the GP

5:19:27 > 5:19:33surgery. There has been a double failure, inadequate regulation and

5:19:33 > 5:19:37the failure of successive governments to investigate what

5:19:37 > 5:19:40happened in an open, comprehensive and acceptable weights. Honourable

5:19:40 > 5:19:44members have highlighted the flaws in the findings of the expert

5:19:44 > 5:19:49working group set up by the commission on human medicine that

5:19:49 > 5:19:52reported in November this year. Those concerns include the

5:19:52 > 5:19:57unexplained change in the groups terms of reference from assessing

5:19:57 > 5:20:02the possible association between Primodos and foetal abnormalities to

5:20:02 > 5:20:08establish that much harder to prove causal link. It includes the

5:20:08 > 5:20:11questions raised by its selective use of research and the limited

5:20:11 > 5:20:17evidence it considered. And the categorical denial of the

5:20:17 > 5:20:26Government's claim that as a trustee of the thalidomide trust have

5:20:26 > 5:20:31approved the report damages confidence in the whole process. The

5:20:31 > 5:20:35significant changes between the inquiry's draft report and its final

5:20:35 > 5:20:39conclusion undermines trust in its findings. Indeed the draft

5:20:39 > 5:20:44conclusions stated that due to scarce evidence, it was not possible

5:20:44 > 5:20:50to reach a definitive conclusion. In contrast, the final published

5:20:50 > 5:20:55conclusion was that the evidence did not support a causal association

5:20:55 > 5:21:01between the use of Primodos and birth defects or miscarriages. In

5:21:01 > 5:21:07short there is no confidence in the working group's findings. What is

5:21:07 > 5:21:11required now? First, admission that the current situation is

5:21:11 > 5:21:16unacceptable and that the working group's report is inadequate, and

5:21:16 > 5:21:21above all there must now be a public inquiry judge-led to consider all of

5:21:21 > 5:21:27the available evidence. This was first called for by the late

5:21:27 > 5:21:36lamented Jack Ashley MP as far back as the 28th of May 19 78. And this

5:21:36 > 5:21:41inquiry must secure the confidence of the people affected, involving

5:21:41 > 5:21:48them from the very beginning in setting up its terms of reference,

5:21:48 > 5:21:52and they must be involved continually as the inquiry

5:21:52 > 5:21:56progresses. That is the only way that a report will be produced that

5:21:56 > 5:22:01has the confidence of the people most affected. The wide range of

5:22:01 > 5:22:06witnesses should be called under oath. All research, whether

5:22:06 > 5:22:12conducted here in the UK, in Europe or indeed internationally, should be

5:22:12 > 5:22:17considered. More research may be required but this should not unduly

5:22:17 > 5:22:23delay the findings and conclusion of the inquiry. And regulatory failure

5:22:23 > 5:22:29should be part of the investigation. All research must be considered and

5:22:29 > 5:22:34evidence must be collected and assessed from a wide range of

5:22:34 > 5:22:42sources. There must be no cover ups. This is the only way forward. The

5:22:42 > 5:22:44women and families affected by Primodos are still suffering from

5:22:44 > 5:22:52their loss. They are still grieving. They will not give up. They and all

5:22:52 > 5:23:01of us deserve no less than the truth.Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker,

5:23:01 > 5:23:06and I congratulate my right honourable friend in securing this

5:23:06 > 5:23:11debate. This was one of the very first issues that was brought to me

5:23:11 > 5:23:15by a constituent following my election as the Member for North

5:23:15 > 5:23:19Devon two and a half years ago now and I really want to raise her case

5:23:19 > 5:23:25against because my point is that the people who have been affected by

5:23:25 > 5:23:28this, their families, their children, mothers and babies, they

5:23:28 > 5:23:33should be at the very centre of our thinking and I think it's really

5:23:33 > 5:23:39important therefore to use if I may one example. I was contacted by my

5:23:39 > 5:23:42constituent Diane sermon from Barnstaple. She gave birth to

5:23:42 > 5:23:50daughter Helen on the 29th of November 1974. She wrote to me to

5:23:50 > 5:23:56say she was given the drug Primodos on the 10th of April that year. She

5:23:56 > 5:23:59remembers the date all too clearly, while she was pregnant. She was

5:23:59 > 5:24:07given the hormone pregnancy test, and Helen was eventually born in the

5:24:07 > 5:24:11Royal Gwent Hospital in Newport. However the baby was born with a

5:24:11 > 5:24:18number of conditions. Hydrocephalus with a very rare disease, brain

5:24:18 > 5:24:23haemorrhage at 12 weeks old, Helen suffered. Her seizures then started.

5:24:23 > 5:24:28She was treated at the Heath Hospital in Cardiff and at a later

5:24:28 > 5:24:31date at great Ormond Street Hospital. Diane has a letter from a

5:24:31 > 5:24:35consultant neurologist at the time that states in his opinion it was

5:24:35 > 5:24:40the drug Primodos which caused the difficulties to her baby. Diane told

5:24:40 > 5:24:45me that Helen has a quality of life, she can walk albeit short distances,

5:24:45 > 5:24:50she needs a wheelchair for longer distances or when she goes shopping

5:24:50 > 5:25:00or goes out with friends. She is able to feed herself and help with

5:25:00 > 5:25:02her daily needs is required but she will always need 24-hour care

5:25:02 > 5:25:07because of her seizures. The point I seek to make is that's just one

5:25:07 > 5:25:11example of the extraordinary impact that this has had on one family, on

5:25:11 > 5:25:16one individual on one mother. But this can be multiplied so many times

5:25:16 > 5:25:20and that is why it is absolutely right that my right honourable

5:25:20 > 5:25:24friend and others on all sides of this House, and this isn't a party

5:25:24 > 5:25:28political issue, others are all side of this House seek to ensure this is

5:25:28 > 5:25:34kept in the spotlight and it's quite right that it is. Mrs sermon is one

5:25:34 > 5:25:38of many people, there are many others. I do want to say though

5:25:38 > 5:25:43there have been over the years many attempts by governments of all

5:25:43 > 5:25:46colours to get to the bottom of this and I want to say I know the

5:25:46 > 5:25:50Minister is sincere in his view in trying to do that and find a way

5:25:50 > 5:25:55forward that will help us get to the bottom of what has happened. There

5:25:55 > 5:26:01have also been a range of studies, the difficulties in all of those

5:26:01 > 5:26:06studies that we have had over the years, there's so much

5:26:06 > 5:26:11contradiction. There is no agreement yet. The honourable lady for Bolton

5:26:11 > 5:26:17South East and a good speech made absolutely rightly, the point that

5:26:17 > 5:26:22in the 1970s there was a report that showed apparently clearly evidence

5:26:22 > 5:26:28of a causal link. Then you look forward and we had in 2016 the

5:26:28 > 5:26:31report from the commission on human medicines which said there was no

5:26:31 > 5:26:37such evidence. And now we've had this report from the expert working

5:26:37 > 5:26:43group which has now come up with a similar - I will give way - come up

5:26:43 > 5:26:48with a similar finding. My problem is we have so many contradictions,

5:26:48 > 5:26:57so many differences of opinion, how do we get to the bottom of it?You

5:26:57 > 5:27:01referred to the report by the commission on human medicines. That

5:27:01 > 5:27:12was as a result of a letter I wrote to the RH -- NHRA who looked up

5:27:12 > 5:27:16documents in existence and did a review and came up with an opinion,

5:27:16 > 5:27:23it wasn't actually a study, I just wanted to clarify that.Thank you

5:27:23 > 5:27:26for that clarification. A lot of the studies have been into the

5:27:26 > 5:27:32historical evidence and historical paperwork. She is right to make that

5:27:32 > 5:27:38point but when you look at what was said in the 1970s and 2016, 2017,

5:27:38 > 5:27:42there are still differences of opinion and this is the difficulty

5:27:42 > 5:27:47with what we have to deal with. I've asked the House of Commons library

5:27:47 > 5:27:52for a lot of background information I was going to try to get into but I

5:27:52 > 5:27:56cannot do too much. What I would say though is having read the latest

5:27:56 > 5:28:01report, the report of the expert working group, there is clearly a

5:28:01 > 5:28:05concern which has been highlighted clearly by my right honourable

5:28:05 > 5:28:08friend and others of this contradiction in what it was asked

5:28:08 > 5:28:13to do and what it then actually found out. This contradiction

5:28:13 > 5:28:17between whether you have a causal link or an association and I do

5:28:17 > 5:28:21think that is something we need to explore. Whether the terms of

5:28:21 > 5:28:26reference of this expert working group were followed in the way it is

5:28:26 > 5:28:31carried out its investigation, and on that I absolutely agree we need

5:28:31 > 5:28:38to look further into what exactly has been done here.

5:28:38 > 5:28:42Now I understand there is further evidence due to be published in the

5:28:42 > 5:28:47new year, that will be important, yes.It is not coming from the

5:28:47 > 5:28:52working group, it is coming from the professor that they rejected,

5:28:52 > 5:28:55because it had not been peer reviewed but will be the next few

5:28:55 > 5:28:58days of.Thank you for that complication, but what does there is

5:28:58 > 5:29:04more to come and more information for the -- it is important to keep

5:29:04 > 5:29:07looking for this information, it is important that we gather everything

5:29:07 > 5:29:11we have -- we can to look at how we can help people who have been

5:29:11 > 5:29:17affected by this. There are many other honourable right honourable

5:29:17 > 5:29:20members who will want to speak so I shall continue for too long, simply

5:29:20 > 5:29:25to say a final thought, this government in previous of

5:29:25 > 5:29:29ministrations, have consistently tried to look for answers to this.

5:29:29 > 5:29:34And I know that my right honourable friend, the Minister is absolutely

5:29:34 > 5:29:37sincere in seeking to do this, and seeking to take this forward. And

5:29:37 > 5:29:40what I would like to do is to support him and to support the

5:29:40 > 5:29:45Government most evolved to support those people who have been affected

5:29:45 > 5:29:51by this in trying to work together to find a way forward and find the

5:29:51 > 5:29:57answer that they seek. Let this get together, everyone, experts

5:29:57 > 5:30:01Department of Health and crucially the families affected on all sides,

5:30:01 > 5:30:05of this. And the MPs, all of us from all sides of the chamber who

5:30:05 > 5:30:11represent them to try and to get the answers. And I want to and by

5:30:11 > 5:30:14referring back to my constituent Diane, because as I say at the

5:30:14 > 5:30:18centre of this, it must be those affected and a further letter to me,

5:30:18 > 5:30:23she says this. In my heart, I feel positive it was the drug primodos

5:30:23 > 5:30:28was caused headed's injuries. After I took the tablets I was in and out

5:30:28 > 5:30:33of hospital, I carried lots of food which I have been told is a sign of

5:30:33 > 5:30:39abnormal foetus. I have had two normal pregnancies before heading.

5:30:39 > 5:30:43And she ends with these words which are extraordinarily powerful, I feel

5:30:43 > 5:30:49very angry and I feel that we were used as guinea pigs. Now for the

5:30:49 > 5:30:54sake of Diane, and for the others who we represent on all sides of

5:30:54 > 5:30:59this House, let us focus on the effect that this truck has had on

5:30:59 > 5:31:03them and their families. And it is all work together, and I know the

5:31:03 > 5:31:06Minister is sincerely wishing to do that, but this all work together to

5:31:06 > 5:31:10find the answers that they seek. Keeping them and their suffering at

5:31:10 > 5:31:17the centre of this at all times. Memes we will have to drop a 25 ad

5:31:17 > 5:31:21will go lower, just.Thank you Deputy Speaker, can I start by

5:31:21 > 5:31:23paying tribute to the right honourable member and my little

5:31:23 > 5:31:29friend, that's honourable friend, both securing this debate and also

5:31:29 > 5:31:36for their work on this issue over years and other members who had

5:31:36 > 5:31:40pursued justice for the victims of primodos over time. I can relatively

5:31:40 > 5:31:45relate to the issue, but one thing is clear to me, as my honourable

5:31:45 > 5:31:53friend, says the lesson we have to learn from previous scandals, is

5:31:53 > 5:31:57that any inquiry must have the confidence of the victims and their

5:31:57 > 5:32:02review report of the expert working group has already failed that test.

5:32:02 > 5:32:05I'm speaking today because constituents of mine have been

5:32:05 > 5:32:10affected by the tragic set of events related to the task, and have

5:32:10 > 5:32:13contacted me saying they have no confidence in the process or

5:32:13 > 5:32:20conclusions of the report. The peers and McLendon family have had their

5:32:20 > 5:32:24lives changed by the drug, there can visit their family issues are a

5:32:24 > 5:32:31direct result of primodos use. My constituent and his daughter has

5:32:31 > 5:32:39suffered life changing multiple health issues. This is just to many

5:32:39 > 5:32:43of thousands who need to seek justice, for the harm caused by the

5:32:43 > 5:32:47drug and the announcement over the review gave them some see hope, but

5:32:47 > 5:32:52sadly have not been contacted in the recent weeks, and they shared their

5:32:52 > 5:32:55disappointment and anger experienced by many following the publication of

5:32:55 > 5:33:01the report. Mr Deputy Speaker, there are too many question marks over the

5:33:01 > 5:33:05process and conclusions of the report. The review report itself

5:33:05 > 5:33:12talks about the difficulty via route finding a robust conclusion. It did

5:33:12 > 5:33:17miss the available evidence was very limited, it then concludes that the

5:33:17 > 5:33:20body of evidence did not unbalanced, keyword, support an association

5:33:20 > 5:33:27between use of HP keys and congenital anomalies. We need more

5:33:27 > 5:33:31explanation of how what is meant by those words on balance in the like

5:33:31 > 5:33:37of such limited evidence. As we have heard, in 1977 the medical regulator

5:33:37 > 5:33:41wrote that there was an association between these tests and birth

5:33:41 > 5:33:45defects. So we much asked, what new study and evidence is available to

5:33:45 > 5:33:50dispute that conclusion and without new research, trying to establish a

5:33:50 > 5:33:54new body of evidence is not possible to disarm and whether primodos is or

5:33:54 > 5:34:01not safe. So a suggestion I agree with if they can create a fund to

5:34:01 > 5:34:05enable these studies, perhaps using imaging and molecular study to try

5:34:05 > 5:34:09to get to the truth. Even the studies are unlikely to resolve the

5:34:09 > 5:34:15issue definitively. It is likely to come down to a judgement on behalf

5:34:15 > 5:34:18of government on where responsibility lies, but it would at

5:34:18 > 5:34:22least give comfort to the victims of the whole process has been carried

5:34:22 > 5:34:26out thoroughly. There are as we have heard, questions about regular Tory

5:34:26 > 5:34:29regime, surrounding, common pregnancy test, and I do not have

5:34:29 > 5:34:33time to get into the details, but the biggest question is whether the

5:34:33 > 5:34:35product should've been allowed on the market at all, without proper

5:34:35 > 5:34:42texting. That's testing.I would like to thank my honourable friend

5:34:42 > 5:34:46for giving way and making an excellent speech I would also like

5:34:46 > 5:34:51to commend the right honourable member from Hempstead bring forth

5:34:51 > 5:34:55the motion and indeed other members in particular, the honourable member

5:34:55 > 5:34:59for Bolton South East, for all of her work over the years. I think my

5:34:59 > 5:35:02honourable friend will be aware that countries such as Finland, Sweden,

5:35:02 > 5:35:09Holland and Norway and the use of hormone pregnancy tests, between

5:35:09 > 5:35:121970 and 1971, does he not agree with me that the warning signs were

5:35:12 > 5:35:15kiddie indicated at the time and therefore should have been taken at

5:35:15 > 5:35:23that time to prevent foetal malformations and heartache?He's

5:35:23 > 5:35:27right that makes a good point, we should ask why it this a little

5:35:27 > 5:35:32regulation for so long to that it is possible to regulate up on a per

5:35:32 > 5:35:36cautionary basis, and whether there is a government liability under

5:35:36 > 5:35:38General product lot, which is meant to protect citizens. These are

5:35:38 > 5:35:43questions that need to be considered, in detail. Finally there

5:35:43 > 5:35:47are the questions we heard about the transparency of the report. We have

5:35:47 > 5:35:51heard that the published report is not the original report first

5:35:51 > 5:35:55presented, and a number of inaccuracies were reported including

5:35:55 > 5:36:00the were definitive that was removed to do so is this a definitive report

5:36:00 > 5:36:06and if not think really we need a new inquiry. I'm running out of time

5:36:06 > 5:36:11so will not talk in great detail about the other issues of

5:36:11 > 5:36:15transparency because other people covered it, but Mr Deputy -- Deputy

5:36:15 > 5:36:18Speaker there are too many question marks over this issue, in order to

5:36:18 > 5:36:23regain trust, we -- government must commit to just let public inquiry to

5:36:23 > 5:36:30look again at the issue. The inquiry must have powers needed to bring to

5:36:30 > 5:36:34light all available evidence relating to the scandal including

5:36:34 > 5:36:38the ability to compel witnesses to give all evidence. The inquiry must

5:36:38 > 5:36:42be broad enough to look at the scientific and legal issues in the

5:36:42 > 5:36:46case. Including allegations of a liability. And finally, the victims

5:36:46 > 5:36:49and the families must be involved in the design and implementation of the

5:36:49 > 5:36:52inquiry, following the hills for inquiries families of first

5:36:52 > 5:36:58approach. As we heard, there are concerts across the House, on the

5:36:58 > 5:37:01issue this is not a political issue, something is not right here. And we

5:37:01 > 5:37:07need to get to the truth, we owe it to the victims and we owe it to

5:37:07 > 5:37:12people who may still be taking products related to this drugs. It

5:37:12 > 5:37:18is time, the only way we can do that is to have a judge let inquiry to

5:37:18 > 5:37:23get to the truth. Melo thank you Deputy Speaker, and my

5:37:23 > 5:37:28congratulations to the right honourable member for bringing forth

5:37:28 > 5:37:34this debate and may I add my weight and support to this called for

5:37:34 > 5:37:39statutory inquiry over the scandal of the supply of primodos, as a

5:37:39 > 5:37:43pregnancy test. He drew attention over the years to the product use

5:37:43 > 5:37:47and like him I am a product of 1957 and could've easily have been my

5:37:47 > 5:37:51mother who took the drug. In the same way, and members across the

5:37:51 > 5:37:55chamber, have referred to their constituents and the contact with a

5:37:55 > 5:38:02constituent of mine that has brought me to contribute to today's debate,

5:38:02 > 5:38:04and the president Ken Pasini, contacted me on many occasions, is

5:38:04 > 5:38:14Irene, who lives in my constituency, and I over something of an apology.

5:38:14 > 5:38:17Because on the first point of contact, I'm afraid I gave her

5:38:17 > 5:38:22rather standard reply and did not really know her or understand enough

5:38:22 > 5:38:28about the issues that were affecting her and she continued to write to me

5:38:28 > 5:38:33and draw my attention to the issue and we eventually met in June 20 14.

5:38:33 > 5:38:42And then again in August 2015, when she brought along her daughter

5:38:42 > 5:38:49Camaro. Kammerer was born in February 1973, she is now 44 years

5:38:49 > 5:38:56old, and like the member of the constituency, she was very able to

5:38:56 > 5:38:59come me the date on which she was first given primodos, which was on

5:38:59 > 5:39:05the 19th of June 1972 when she understood that she was at

5:39:05 > 5:39:10approximately 7-8 weeks pregnant. She gave birth to her daughter with

5:39:10 > 5:39:14brain damage and that has led to many other debilitating issues such

5:39:14 > 5:39:21as learning difficulties and epilepsy. At our meeting, she asked

5:39:21 > 5:39:28me to meet with Marie who runs the Association for children that is why

5:39:28 > 5:39:32hormone pregnancy test, and I think we should pay tribute to them Mr

5:39:32 > 5:39:36Deputy Speaker for their work that they have done intron people's

5:39:36 > 5:39:40attention to this particular issue and making sure that the Dutch

5:39:40 > 5:39:46members are hearing and informed and know exactly what has happened. The

5:39:46 > 5:39:50other key point that she told me about was that there was no advice

5:39:50 > 5:39:55whatsoever given to her. About any possible side effects of taking this

5:39:55 > 5:40:01particular drug. She drew my attention to the many meetings that

5:40:01 > 5:40:04the party group at, and I know the member of Bolton South East has put

5:40:04 > 5:40:08tremendous work in it, and bringing the party group together and adding

5:40:08 > 5:40:13to the lobby in this particular case. The most recent contact I had

5:40:13 > 5:40:18on the issue was from her daughter, who wrote letter to me telling me

5:40:18 > 5:40:24that she herself is a victim of a primodos, as she wrote to me on the

5:40:24 > 5:40:3028th of November, telling me about the inadequate nature of the report

5:40:30 > 5:40:36of the expert working group, as she set out for me the case which the

5:40:36 > 5:40:41honourable member made, why that is completely inadequate and why there

5:40:41 > 5:40:45needs to be a further look at this issue in exactly the same way as

5:40:45 > 5:40:51many members across the chamber have requested. I agree with a dusty

5:40:51 > 5:40:55member from Hamilton said, this is an issue or badly need to get to

5:40:55 > 5:40:58truth and all the members in the chamber, very much looking forward

5:40:58 > 5:41:07to whatever positive remarks the Minister may be able to make today.

5:41:07 > 5:41:12Thank you Mr Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to Marie, whose

5:41:12 > 5:41:16charities Association, she's a mother of a child despite primodos

5:41:16 > 5:41:22and my constituent. The families pin their hopes are true, families let

5:41:22 > 5:41:28down by their doctors and regulators and now the left -- but the

5:41:28 > 5:41:33motherboard. They deserve a transparency process that is now

5:41:33 > 5:41:37shrouded in secrecy, the Observer was about by confidentiality order

5:41:37 > 5:41:40that there is, and I'm not just talking about one constituent that I

5:41:40 > 5:41:45have, I have nine in a relatively small geographic area, who have

5:41:45 > 5:41:49children born with defects, and I do not know how many miscarriages or

5:41:49 > 5:41:52stillbirths there were, what women were given the struck him up by

5:41:52 > 5:41:56believe we should try to get those figures and I would like to also

5:41:56 > 5:41:59know if as it is claimed, if this is a naturally occurring event, whether

5:41:59 > 5:42:03nine babies in the similar timescale with similar defects aboard to women

5:42:03 > 5:42:08in my area who did not take primodos. Often as we have heard,

5:42:08 > 5:42:11the women were not given a prescription there were given a pail

5:42:11 > 5:42:15with a joke saying we don't have to kill the rabbit now this is the new

5:42:15 > 5:42:18way, so we may never know the true figures. But to return to the

5:42:18 > 5:42:22inquiry, first major failing we believe there was no agreement to

5:42:22 > 5:42:26look at the possible link not cause a link and that is not the

5:42:26 > 5:42:31semantics, it actually lowers the burden of proof. Secondly, there

5:42:31 > 5:42:34were conflicts of interest rates by Marie at the time, and many of the

5:42:34 > 5:42:38experts who worked for the companies at the time, the victims who were

5:42:38 > 5:42:42invited to give evidence were treated appallingly and there was a

5:42:42 > 5:42:47selective use of studies, the majority favour the link, and there

5:42:47 > 5:42:50was the speedy withdrawal of the draft report which took two years to

5:42:50 > 5:42:56come to its conclusion, and yet all the press and reports advice for

5:42:56 > 5:43:03counsel were quickly after Marie Lyons went and gave a presentation.

5:43:03 > 5:43:07The first draft she saw stated it was not possible to reach definitive

5:43:07 > 5:43:11conclusions and have many inconsistencies. The Forks later,

5:43:11 > 5:43:16the final report came out, and a final report removed that paragraph

5:43:16 > 5:43:21which contains upgrades, it also removed many of the inconsistencies

5:43:21 > 5:43:25she's highlighted. Now I have read the report, and I am not a

5:43:25 > 5:43:28scientist, but if ever there was a report that reads at the conclusion

5:43:28 > 5:43:32was written for us, and the data was later date than this report takes

5:43:32 > 5:43:40all the Bosco. -- boxes. I'm particularly incensed by the other

5:43:40 > 5:43:43genetic testing, briefly talking about when my constituents who came

5:43:43 > 5:43:48to me and she is a severely disabled son, she had taken primodos and went

5:43:48 > 5:43:52to the doctors for analysis and she wanted a big family. She said she

5:43:52 > 5:43:56had a lot of love to get, as she was told it was probably her fault so

5:43:56 > 5:44:00she would never -- so she never had any more children. So to have the

5:44:00 > 5:44:04suggested again in the report is beyond devastating for her. It

5:44:04 > 5:44:10relies on a lot of old studies which I believe should be research finds a

5:44:10 > 5:44:13reinforced, for the new studies and we need to check whether the current

5:44:13 > 5:44:17regulators are fit for purpose. We cannot allow our children and

5:44:17 > 5:44:21grandchildren to be put in this position again. We cannot go back

5:44:21 > 5:44:25and make things right for these families. But we what we can do is

5:44:25 > 5:44:30give them answers about what went wrong and how it went wrong right a

5:44:30 > 5:44:35fully independent Outlook inquiry and that means full disclosure of

5:44:35 > 5:44:40all documents. Through a process managed by the victims and I can

5:44:40 > 5:44:44assure everybody here at that Marie is quite capable of managing the

5:44:44 > 5:44:49process.

5:44:49 > 5:44:52They need the opportunity to scrutinise written and oral

5:44:52 > 5:44:58evidence. It has to be wide and broad, it has to investigate not

5:44:58 > 5:45:02just a possible association but why the regulatory bodies failed to

5:45:02 > 5:45:06withdraw the drug despite being aware of the dangers. The warnings

5:45:06 > 5:45:12were first given in 1958 but the medical profession wasn't alerted

5:45:12 > 5:45:18until 1975, and even in 1977 it was still being prescribed. We must look

5:45:18 > 5:45:22into the allegations of criminal conduct, why there was no

5:45:22 > 5:45:33intervention by government bodies and why the risks

5:45:34 > 5:45:37were hidden from the victims and the role of the manufacturer in this.

5:45:37 > 5:45:39And most importantly families have to be centre of this inquiry. They

5:45:39 > 5:45:42must have a role in deciding the terms of reference and they have to

5:45:42 > 5:45:45see a true light being shone on what has been a very dark period, and

5:45:45 > 5:45:48there should be some compensation. Nothing can compensate for the 40

5:45:48 > 5:45:52years of injustice but financial security would ease some of their

5:45:52 > 5:45:57worries. This won't go away, the families won't go away and as they

5:45:57 > 5:46:01age their need for answers grows more urgent. I urge the Government

5:46:01 > 5:46:11to act upon this motion speedily to give the families some peace and

5:46:11 > 5:46:18restore their trust in justice.Like many other members in this place, I

5:46:18 > 5:46:22represent families who strongly believe their lives were forever

5:46:22 > 5:46:35changed true to -- due to the drug Primodos. Today I speak on behalf of

5:46:35 > 5:46:40the Gooch family. Their criticisms of the expert working group 's

5:46:40 > 5:46:44report on why they will continue their fight for justice and layout

5:46:44 > 5:46:50with us today. In June 1970 Chris Gooch was described Primodos by her

5:46:50 > 5:46:55GP to find out whether or not she was pregnant. She trusted the words

5:46:55 > 5:47:00of her GP and had no idea the drug might Beyonce 's or that it had been

5:47:00 > 5:47:06linked to deformities. It was only when her daughter Emma was born in

5:47:06 > 5:47:11January 1971 that she was found to have deformities in her hands and

5:47:11 > 5:47:15feet with both sets of fingers foreshortened and her toes webbed

5:47:15 > 5:47:21and foreshortened. Her mother told me about how Emma had struggled to

5:47:21 > 5:47:27live with these deformities for her entire life. Chris said, "There are

5:47:27 > 5:47:31many things Emma would have liked to have done like playing the piano,

5:47:31 > 5:47:35but she has been unable to do so because of limited mobility in her

5:47:35 > 5:47:40hands. This also came to impact her education and at secondary school

5:47:40 > 5:47:44she became school phobic and was physically sick every morning before

5:47:44 > 5:47:48going to school. Emma has always suffered from severe back problems

5:47:48 > 5:47:55and has had to live in intense pain all the time. She has sought

5:47:55 > 5:47:58treatment and scams have confirmed she has spinal deterioration for

5:47:58 > 5:48:02which she was offered a spinal fusion. This only had a limited

5:48:02 > 5:48:06chance of success and risked making her condition worse. Emma refused

5:48:06 > 5:48:11this and is trying to come to terms with her long-term prognosis. She

5:48:11 > 5:48:15can't work full-time, she has to pay for all her medications and has even

5:48:15 > 5:48:20been refused a blue badge despite having to use a stick to walk and

5:48:20 > 5:48:25having no proper fingers or toes. Emma will be 47 next month and can

5:48:25 > 5:48:39only manage to work for three days a week and even in

5:48:44 > 5:48:46this she finds extremely draining. She's worried about her ability to

5:48:46 > 5:48:48keep working in the future and the implications this has for her

5:48:48 > 5:48:51financially and socially." Mr Deputy Speaker, I met with Emma and she

5:48:51 > 5:48:53told me "Myself and many others have to live with the devastating results

5:48:53 > 5:48:55of mothers being given hormone pregnancy tests like Primodos. While

5:48:55 > 5:48:59the effects on me were much less severe than another that since I was

5:48:59 > 5:49:03born with specific deformities which I've only seen shared by other

5:49:03 > 5:49:09Primodos victims so in my mind this can be the only possible cause."

5:49:09 > 5:49:15Would the lady agree there are others not so severely affected, who

5:49:15 > 5:49:24are similarly affected and feel great pain.I absolutely agree. It

5:49:24 > 5:49:27was said across this chamber today that we are giving examples but

5:49:27 > 5:49:31there are many victims with different levels of disability,

5:49:31 > 5:49:36illness and deformity due to this drug. When I asked Chris and Emma

5:49:36 > 5:49:41what they thought about the expert working group's report and how the

5:49:41 > 5:49:45inquiry process was handled over the last three years, their criticisms

5:49:45 > 5:49:50could not have been clearer. Chris told me "I feel angry they treated

5:49:50 > 5:49:56us like idiots, we have been treated appallingly. The group produced a

5:49:56 > 5:50:00report in October and then followed a meeting with our chair. They

5:50:00 > 5:50:04removed some material and reissued it a month later. They said it was

5:50:04 > 5:50:18to make it more readable. They found no causal

5:50:32 > 5:50:35link which they weren't even request to look for. They only gave Dave's

5:50:35 > 5:50:38notice to organise a visit to hear the findings of the report and I'm

5:50:38 > 5:50:40sure that's because they hoped no one would turn up to hear them. Now

5:50:40 > 5:50:43nearly 50 years on our children, the ones who are still alive, are still

5:50:43 > 5:50:46suffering. I'm angry that for Emma and many other members of the

5:50:46 > 5:50:48association, the children damaged by hormone pregnancy tests, life is a

5:50:48 > 5:50:50constant struggle and we still haven't really been heard." Emma

5:50:50 > 5:50:53herself told me she cannot help but feel angry that for decades we have

5:50:53 > 5:50:55waited for an independent and unbiased inquiry that the expert

5:50:55 > 5:50:57working group is obviously flawed report feels like an attempt to

5:50:57 > 5:51:07discredit us and protect the people at fault. I have been reminded of

5:51:07 > 5:51:15the thalidomide and contaminated blood scandals. I am reminded of the

5:51:15 > 5:51:18fact it took decades of tireless campaigning until the truth and

5:51:18 > 5:51:22natural justice was reached. The inquiry has been accused of failing

5:51:22 > 5:51:26to consider all of the evidence fairly, failing to have the trust

5:51:26 > 5:51:30and confidence of the victims for who it was set up and failing to be

5:51:30 > 5:51:35transparent and open in its due process. The inquiry failed to

5:51:35 > 5:51:38consider any evidence regarding systematic regulatory failures of

5:51:38 > 5:51:45government bodies at the time. Campaigners have widely dismissed

5:51:45 > 5:51:49the inquiry is seriously flawed. I joined the calls for a public

5:51:49 > 5:51:53inquiry into the use of Primodos and its connection to deformities and

5:51:53 > 5:51:58other birth defects. I want to end by once again quoting the words of

5:51:58 > 5:52:02my constituents, and the Gooch. As I believe her determination will be

5:52:02 > 5:52:10shared by other members from all sides of the House - Emma Gooch. She

5:52:10 > 5:52:14said the victims and parents still deserve justice and we will continue

5:52:14 > 5:52:23to fight for it.Can I join in thanks to the honourable friend for

5:52:23 > 5:52:28Hamill and Alton Southeast that actually perhaps even more than

5:52:28 > 5:52:33them, they will forgive me for this, it is the people who have been

5:52:33 > 5:52:36campaigning, some for many decades to get justice, and to have the

5:52:36 > 5:52:41truth revealed about what Primodos was all about. I am very strong

5:52:41 > 5:52:44listening to the Honourable members, the consistency of the stories but

5:52:44 > 5:52:50there is one detail, and I don't think the Minister will be able to

5:52:50 > 5:52:55help and that's not a challenge to him, we will probably never know how

5:52:55 > 5:52:58many women were given Primodos, we will probably never know and nor

5:52:58 > 5:53:03will the victims of Primodos always have been in a position to know they

5:53:03 > 5:53:08were victims because even amongst my own constituents, one constituent of

5:53:08 > 5:53:13mine who took Primodos has a pregnancy test those years back, she

5:53:13 > 5:53:23lost a child a month after he was born with a blocked oesophagus and

5:53:23 > 5:53:30other physical difficulties. She has spent a life not knowing the child

5:53:30 > 5:53:34she was brought up with. One of my constituents who was born with only

5:53:34 > 5:53:40one finger on each hand, reduced films and only eight toes, has spent

5:53:40 > 5:53:44a life as somebody with disabilities, trying to live a full

5:53:44 > 5:53:48life. She's a mother of a healthy child, she works and all those

5:53:48 > 5:53:54things we would applaud in her, but she only begun to that Primodos

5:53:54 > 5:53:59might have been the cause of her disabilities when in casual

5:53:59 > 5:54:03conversation with her mother before her mother died she told her about

5:54:03 > 5:54:08the tests she'd had those years back before she was born, and then a bit

5:54:08 > 5:54:12later on linking up her own disabilities as being remarkably

5:54:12 > 5:54:17similar to those who were Primodos victims elsewhere and having found

5:54:17 > 5:54:22nobody else with similar kinds of disabilities. Mr Deputy Speaker,

5:54:22 > 5:54:29that's why I say we may never properly know the number of victims.

5:54:29 > 5:54:33Our society ought to be able to establish the real truth in this

5:54:33 > 5:54:43issue. It matters because there is a strange that vested interests have

5:54:43 > 5:54:49for many decades, for 40 years, been able to obscure and simply

5:54:49 > 5:54:53deliberately to prevent the truth coming out. Of course there are

5:54:53 > 5:55:00consequences if the truth does come out, if we can establish exact may

5:55:00 > 5:55:02be scientifically provable causalities is actually difficult

5:55:02 > 5:55:06over this period of time because of course this is a drug that is no

5:55:06 > 5:55:10longer going to be used for the purpose it was originally inflicted

5:55:10 > 5:55:16on women for. So the kind of scientific veracity may be difficult

5:55:16 > 5:55:21test in a way that would let scientists insist that the causal

5:55:21 > 5:55:28link is proven. It doesn't mean to the consistency, if you want, even

5:55:28 > 5:55:33the statistical consistency of victims relative to the use of this

5:55:33 > 5:55:41drug isn't one that should give us a genuine belief that there is enough

5:55:41 > 5:55:45correlation to allow us to draw our own conclusions. That's important

5:55:45 > 5:55:49because this in the end for the victims, yes of course they want the

5:55:49 > 5:55:56truth, they want the scientific community, the medical community, to

5:55:56 > 5:56:01accept and own up to the faults. We have got to say never again can we

5:56:01 > 5:56:12have this kind of... Can no longer have a medical community driven by

5:56:12 > 5:56:16money but where money actually says they are willing to let the light

5:56:16 > 5:56:20shine into their practice. We can't have that regime any more so

5:56:20 > 5:56:24Primodos matters to the victims and it matters because of what it means

5:56:24 > 5:56:29even more so. If I can conclude by simply saying this, of course

5:56:29 > 5:56:34victims do look if we can move this debate forward, if we can have this

5:56:34 > 5:56:39judge-led inquiry, if we can have some credibility of those final

5:56:39 > 5:56:43reports. Of course that will lead, and I understand why governments can

5:56:43 > 5:56:48be reluctant on this, to the demand of compensation. But as my

5:56:48 > 5:56:53constituents says at the moment she is leading a very full life despite

5:56:53 > 5:56:57her disabilities but she's 51 now. She says she can feel the future

5:56:57 > 5:57:01beginning to impose on her. She would like to believe that as she

5:57:01 > 5:57:07reaches an older age, when she finds it even more difficult to carry her

5:57:07 > 5:57:10shopping, that there is some recognition and where appropriate

5:57:10 > 5:57:17compensation.I am here because of my constituent Sue Illsley who took

5:57:17 > 5:57:22this drug when she was a teenager and her daughter has suffered

5:57:22 > 5:57:26disabilities as a result, and it's obviously affected her whole life. I

5:57:26 > 5:57:32want to pay tribute to the honourable member for Hamill instead

5:57:32 > 5:57:35and Bolton South East and hope the Minister will reread speeches of my

5:57:35 > 5:57:41Honourable friends because they made some powerful points about the

5:57:41 > 5:57:49evidence. I want to use some evidence given to me by Jason

5:57:49 > 5:57:56Farrell, the investigative news reporter from Sky, who has done a

5:57:56 > 5:57:59fantastic job over the years to bring this to light and refer to

5:57:59 > 5:58:03some documents he found in the Berlin Wall National Archives.

5:58:03 > 5:58:07Minutes of meetings between the company Shearing chemicals Limited

5:58:07 > 5:58:13and their lawyer and one scientific adviser. I'm going to read expats

5:58:13 > 5:58:19from the minutes of a meeting held in 1977 at Goldsmith building Temple

5:58:19 > 5:58:30London, when Shearing were getting legal advice. There are few extracts

5:58:30 > 5:58:35which show this has been a whole cover-up over years and it has to

5:58:35 > 5:58:40stop here today. We have to pass this motion and the Government have

5:58:40 > 5:58:45to have no more cover-ups.

5:58:45 > 5:58:50He then went on to write a letter addressing many doctors and 9068,

5:58:50 > 5:58:55requesting that it was important to something more must be done. He went

5:58:55 > 5:58:59into the letter in detail, and suggested it would be dynamite in

5:58:59 > 5:59:08the hands of the claimant. Another member from them was raised, in the

5:59:08 > 5:59:11memo and it was a sum of event stating that they should abandon the

5:59:11 > 5:59:16product for the use of pregnancy testing. He wanted to know what had

5:59:16 > 5:59:22been done on their side in response to this and there was no answer. I

5:59:22 > 5:59:26go on, he thought that if this case was tried to the end by a judge that

5:59:26 > 5:59:28the chances were that the company would be found in neglect of its

5:59:28 > 5:59:35duty. He stated that it would seem to be a 5-1 chance that if there was

5:59:35 > 5:59:38a malformation of the child and the mother to primodos while pregnant it

5:59:38 > 5:59:50was the fault of the drug. Pages seven, he said it was open to us

5:59:50 > 5:59:54talking to Sharon, while establishing a voluntary scheme

5:59:54 > 5:59:57justifying a claim given proposition without proof of liability simply

5:59:57 > 6:00:04accepting worse possibility, and the other was a take it to court. The

6:00:04 > 6:00:06doctor from Shearing said that he was hesitant in establishing a

6:00:06 > 6:00:11scheme as the product is marked worldwide and if we introduce it in

6:00:11 > 6:00:13one country than it should be introduced in other countries and

6:00:13 > 6:00:17are trying to escape back in 1977 their moral responsibility Mr Deputy

6:00:17 > 6:00:25Speaker. There are other prime issues from this particular letter,

6:00:25 > 6:00:28but because of time Mr Deputy Speaker I shall go on to the other

6:00:28 > 6:00:32minute, this is a minute of reported meeting between a professor who was

6:00:32 > 6:00:38a scientist turns Paris, and it took place in Berlin on the 16th of

6:00:38 > 6:00:43February and it was in 1978, and this is admitted to the next day of

6:00:43 > 6:00:5017th of February, and the meeting was in Berlin to determine the

6:00:50 > 6:00:52opinion of the validity and quality of work carried out on primodos.

6:00:52 > 6:01:00First question, that was posted, did we as a company carry out all the

6:01:00 > 6:01:04studies were supposed to? In his opinion, we should have done a much

6:01:04 > 6:01:10more. He expressed a view that after discovering that a certain dose was

6:01:10 > 6:01:14embryo lethal in rabbits and rats, we should've carried out terror

6:01:14 > 6:01:19tossed her studies in primates and 9068. Mr Deputy Speaker this is a

6:01:19 > 6:01:26scandal. They knew. Their lawyers were telling them they would be

6:01:26 > 6:01:30liable if found guilty in a court and would have to pay. Why does this

6:01:30 > 6:01:36continue on? We have heard from all honourable gentlemen and ladies

6:01:36 > 6:01:39today, of the cases of constituents up and down our country whose lives

6:01:39 > 6:01:45have been blighted by this. Why continue any more? I say to the

6:01:45 > 6:01:50Minister, he has to stand up to the official briefings he's getting. He

6:01:50 > 6:01:54has to stand up to the nonsense of that continued continued, continued

6:01:54 > 6:02:02obfuscation of cover. Surely, he must now get on the box later in the

6:02:02 > 6:02:06debate to say he will support the motion as well as and the Government

6:02:06 > 6:02:12will set up a judicial inquiry as soon as possible.Of treatment is

6:02:12 > 6:02:18each.Thank you are much it is an honour to be in this debate and

6:02:18 > 6:02:22humbling and moving and I want to commend all members who have been

6:02:22 > 6:02:24contributing particular the right honourable member from Hamill had

6:02:24 > 6:02:29said, and Clark's Houthi paid tribute to who drafted the motion,

6:02:29 > 6:02:36also the honourable lady, she has fought tooth and nail for the

6:02:36 > 6:02:39victims of primodos. As has Merry light, who to me is a modern-day

6:02:39 > 6:02:44hero as far as I'm concerned, and like other members, this is one of

6:02:44 > 6:02:47the first case of the came to me was when I was first elected, in 2015,

6:02:47 > 6:02:56and my constituents who took primodos in 1970 is legality along

6:02:56 > 6:03:01with her daughter, she was born with birth defects, cerebral palsy and

6:03:01 > 6:03:07deafness and an underactive thyroid and diagnosis 11. Her mobility is

6:03:07 > 6:03:09getting worse, I want to briefly say that some of the comments they have

6:03:09 > 6:03:14given to me, are now describing what life is the mic and she says our

6:03:14 > 6:03:19lives have been turned upside down. Are we going to see Justice for our

6:03:19 > 6:03:24kids it is now because everyday we see the difference and it is real

6:03:24 > 6:03:30these people need to be taken care. The option has been taken away from

6:03:30 > 6:03:39them... Passed on, as she said I don't see why there was a cover-up

6:03:39 > 6:03:44in the first place they should cover it -- fix it and we cannot see this

6:03:44 > 6:03:49enough, we are in agreement it is best, and that is what we have had a

6:03:49 > 6:03:51close party agreement and the strength of feeling I hope and I am

6:03:51 > 6:03:55sure the Minister is very aware of, it is also at best when we represent

6:03:55 > 6:04:00to speak for our constituents as so many Everwood here has done, and

6:04:00 > 6:04:04another lady contacted me this week, and she did not want to be named,

6:04:04 > 6:04:07but she said I was wondering if I could count on your support on

6:04:07 > 6:04:10Thursday, my God -- daughter died at birth after to the drug, she was

6:04:10 > 6:04:16born with out the top of curb brain is called this week would have been

6:04:16 > 6:04:20her birthday and I would have been yesterday. To me that his herring

6:04:20 > 6:04:22and some of the deformities and disabilities that honourable members

6:04:22 > 6:04:31have spoken of, in some of the comments I have to job that struck

6:04:31 > 6:04:34me, the honourable member from North Devon talked about constituents

6:04:34 > 6:04:36being treated as guinea pigs and that essentially what there is

6:04:36 > 6:04:42treated as was human giving is because it is not forget, this I was

6:04:42 > 6:04:47on the market on regulated and untested for five years. Before any

6:04:47 > 6:04:51proper research was done into it and I just think, you know, the routable

6:04:51 > 6:04:56member spoke about the research and information that came from Germany

6:04:56 > 6:05:01and some of the vast number of documents that were not looked at by

6:05:01 > 6:05:04the expert working group, mambo friend from Klesko cannot be here

6:05:04 > 6:05:08today, but he spoke about his constituent who has been affected

6:05:08 > 6:05:12and wanted to share his experience, rustles the youngest of four

6:05:12 > 6:05:16children, the other two were all born healthy, and his mother was

6:05:16 > 6:05:22prescribed a similar drug. And was left with significant disabilities.

6:05:22 > 6:05:31Which has been devastating. Now, since the release of the report, our

6:05:31 > 6:05:35constituents have been for the let down because I was there as I know

6:05:35 > 6:05:38other members were as well, my right honourable friend the member from

6:05:38 > 6:05:43Bolton South East and I wear walked out of the press conference when it

6:05:43 > 6:05:46was taking place, and some of the women who took primodos told me that

6:05:46 > 6:05:50the launch of the report, that they had been told they should not be

6:05:50 > 6:05:53happy and take comfort knowing that it was not taking primodos that

6:05:53 > 6:05:58cause their babies to be born with defects or malformations, how

6:05:58 > 6:06:02offensive and insulting to say something like that to victims who

6:06:02 > 6:06:09have experienced so much trauma? None of these women are happy or

6:06:09 > 6:06:11comforted, and many of them were absolutely shocked a particularly

6:06:11 > 6:06:16that they didn't even want to watch the sky documentary that we have

6:06:16 > 6:06:20spoken about, which seems utterly terrible because they said they did

6:06:20 > 6:06:26not want to be prejudice. And as we have found the report, was changed

6:06:26 > 6:06:31between the draft and final report, in terms of process Mr Deputy

6:06:31 > 6:06:34Speaker, in terms of public money that has been committed to this

6:06:34 > 6:06:38process, I think it is quite shocking but that was a situation

6:06:38 > 6:06:41that has now been uncovered and I hope the Government will reflect on

6:06:41 > 6:06:47everything that has been asked on the inquiry moving forward. But

6:06:47 > 6:06:52also, just how a process can fall down and become so bad, you know, we

6:06:52 > 6:06:57know that merry lien, as we have mentioned by the right honourable

6:06:57 > 6:07:03lady, was held under the most serious and difficult circumstances

6:07:03 > 6:07:10by the legal document that she had to sign. Marie line wanted to help

6:07:10 > 6:07:13she wanted to make the process better and she had the information

6:07:13 > 6:07:19that she could have passed on, but she wasn't able to do that. And

6:07:19 > 6:07:23because of the document she had to sign, she wasn't at the lily able to

6:07:23 > 6:07:27do the job she wanted to do, and I think that the Minister considers

6:07:27 > 6:07:35that as well. I was deeply concerning that what was described

6:07:35 > 6:07:39as a side of the process by the expert working group was not in

6:07:39 > 6:07:42actual fact about science, because many of the members here have told

6:07:42 > 6:07:50us about the concerns that recently when the doctor when she asked by

6:07:50 > 6:07:53the drug not being up to reject inclusion to the final report which

6:07:53 > 6:07:59could reach Cusa, she said that the commission on human medicines

6:07:59 > 6:08:01buckling collectively saying it should be more conclusive, when it

6:08:01 > 6:08:04was put to her as a follow-up question that we are not factors,

6:08:04 > 6:08:10she said yes they are, but the point is that these people do not sit

6:08:10 > 6:08:13through the group and months ago to the information, so how could they

6:08:13 > 6:08:20possibly have backed information? And in conclusion Mr Deputy Speaker

6:08:20 > 6:08:24I know we are pressed for time, I want to put my constituent once

6:08:24 > 6:08:29again she says we need help now, and not five or six years' time, she

6:08:29 > 6:08:32doesn't want public inquiry she wants him to compensate for what has

6:08:32 > 6:08:38happened to her and her daughter and she wants her daughter to have a

6:08:38 > 6:08:41life and no one is prepared to give her that when he trusted people

6:08:41 > 6:08:45governing us, we look back all these years and what is happening now,

6:08:45 > 6:08:48there is no failing us, then the drugs go out and should not go out

6:08:48 > 6:08:52and they were negligent, the same people are not around, so why can't

6:08:52 > 6:08:59someone just do the right thing and say that we were wrong?Thank you

6:08:59 > 6:09:08Deputy Speaker, I want to stop by and congratulate the honourable

6:09:08 > 6:09:12member who brought this to us today, and my honourable friend the Member

6:09:12 > 6:09:16for Bolton South East, who has been a strident campaigner for over six

6:09:16 > 6:09:20years, and knew all about this before it even reached my

6:09:20 > 6:09:25consciousness, and for the accident if rather too short speech, that she

6:09:25 > 6:09:31was giving today. I would also like to think other members for the

6:09:31 > 6:09:34passionate and thoughtful contributions and please forgive me

6:09:34 > 6:09:38if due to time restraints I do not name you all, but ultimately thank

6:09:38 > 6:09:45you must go to Marie line, the chair of the Association of children

6:09:45 > 6:09:48damaged by hormone pregnancy test, I am sure that I speak for all of us

6:09:48 > 6:09:52in the House today when I say she is the utmost respect and admiration of

6:09:52 > 6:09:57members from across the House. And my contribution this afternoon, I

6:09:57 > 6:10:00wanted to touch upon the science used to come to the reviews

6:10:00 > 6:10:03conclusions. But also what is missing and what should be in

6:10:03 > 6:10:08considering what -- before any conclusions were drawn. I will than

6:10:08 > 6:10:11highlight why this is a matter of injustice and why it is important

6:10:11 > 6:10:17that answers are found. So we can finally conclude this sad chapter.

6:10:17 > 6:10:21The main sticking point of the reviews conclusion is that the

6:10:21 > 6:10:26expert working group found the signs did not support a causal association

6:10:26 > 6:10:31between HP keys during pregnancy and adverse outcomes. My focus would be

6:10:31 > 6:10:34on the science used in the historical documentations we are

6:10:34 > 6:10:39aware of, and which seems to have not been considered some of which

6:10:39 > 6:10:42were heard in the excellent speech from honourable member for Kingston.

6:10:42 > 6:10:47So I would not deviate into the important argument around a possible

6:10:47 > 6:10:53and causal, as this case was made quite copperheads of you by other

6:10:53 > 6:10:58honourable members including the member from Hammel Hampstead. From

6:10:58 > 6:11:02the onset, I must make your that I am no scientist and I'm sure you're

6:11:02 > 6:11:07all aware that, and my speech is not a critique of the integrity and

6:11:07 > 6:11:12expertise of those specialists involved. However, the conclusions

6:11:12 > 6:11:15arrived at in the report and the conversations I have had with many

6:11:15 > 6:11:20who have had -- been involved in the campaign to show a need to be

6:11:20 > 6:11:26critical of what has been concluded by the expert working group. And

6:11:26 > 6:11:30this is our duty as members of Parliament, especially on such an

6:11:30 > 6:11:33important matter for so many women and their families, but also because

6:11:33 > 6:11:38of the great deal of public funds that were invested into this review

6:11:38 > 6:11:42over the past few years. In the report, consideration of the

6:11:42 > 6:11:46scientific detail regarding -- regarding expertise it is argued

6:11:46 > 6:11:50that there inconsistencies in the conclusions drawn, from the evidence

6:11:50 > 6:11:54used. Take for example the fact that it the 15 studies that looked at

6:11:54 > 6:11:59heart defects, 11 of them favoured a link and five studies into limber

6:11:59 > 6:12:02reduction, all found a link. Yet the studies were deemed to show

6:12:02 > 6:12:10insufficient evidence. Of the drug's hard. Even information I requested

6:12:10 > 6:12:14recently and just got this week from the NHRA and the lead up to this

6:12:14 > 6:12:18debate, they're at odds with the conclusions of the review including

6:12:18 > 6:12:23graphs which plot birth defects against the availability of HBP, and

6:12:23 > 6:12:30I think even to my untrained eye, they do show a possible link. In one

6:12:30 > 6:12:35graph, it is shown that birth defects increased during the period

6:12:35 > 6:12:40that HBP was on the market in shortly afterwards, and then began

6:12:40 > 6:12:44to decrease after they were taken off the market. Further in the

6:12:44 > 6:12:48briefing I received, the NHRA said that for every 100 babies born in

6:12:48 > 6:12:53the general population, around 2-4 are expected to have a birth defect

6:12:53 > 6:12:57which would mean that a total of 14,000 babies a year would be

6:12:57 > 6:13:03expected to be born with a birth defect. Anyway, just generally. And

6:13:03 > 6:13:09upon using the figures, they concluded that over 1 million women

6:13:09 > 6:13:12who took HBP, as many as 19,000 babies would be born with a birth

6:13:12 > 6:13:20defect irrespective of additional risks from HBP. Yet compare primodos

6:13:20 > 6:13:28to thalidomide for but -- it says, was a 600 children affected UK with

6:13:28 > 6:13:30over 30 million prescriptions of thalidomide, that is the percentage

6:13:30 > 6:13:40and I got help with these numbers of .002%, and primodos which sold 1.2

6:13:40 > 6:13:44million prescriptions, and has 800 children affected with a percentage

6:13:44 > 6:13:51of .06%. This shows a much much higher prevalence caused by primodos

6:13:51 > 6:13:56compared to thalidomide. This shows how little meaningful a comparison

6:13:56 > 6:14:02of the HPT adverse reactions is against today prevalence of birth

6:14:02 > 6:14:06defects, and the general population, and it is hardly a defence of

6:14:06 > 6:14:11disproving a link. As I have said, I am no scientific professional, but

6:14:11 > 6:14:15the red flags that arise when reading with the evidence says, it

6:14:15 > 6:14:20was the conclusions were drawn from them, are not once I believe only an

6:14:20 > 6:14:26expert in this field would see. This reflects the arguments raised by

6:14:26 > 6:14:32Doctor Neil Leslie, that the report does not provide definitive evidence

6:14:32 > 6:14:35it was safe and others who said that the only conclusion that can be John

6:14:35 > 6:14:41is that a link cannot be ruled out. This leads me onto my next point

6:14:41 > 6:14:46which is to briefly touch upon the historic perspective and cover-up of

6:14:46 > 6:14:50the evidence. You have to use that word that is only one we can use as

6:14:50 > 6:14:52this is something that should have been considered by the expert

6:14:52 > 6:14:57working group.

6:14:57 > 6:15:04One example was when the regulator knew of a potential 5-1 risk the

6:15:04 > 6:15:08drug could cause deformities but the evidence was apparently later

6:15:08 > 6:15:12destroyed. This was a running theme and I haven't got time to go into it

6:15:12 > 6:15:17but it is a running theme through the chronology of this scandal,

6:15:17 > 6:15:21where we see multiple examples of suppressed information regarding the

6:15:21 > 6:15:26adverse effects and delayed notification of these effects to

6:15:26 > 6:15:30medical professionals who administer the drugs. It's also deeply

6:15:30 > 6:15:34concerning this drug came onto the market in 1958 with no studies on

6:15:34 > 6:15:45its effects at all until 1963, so that was five years before it even

6:15:45 > 6:15:53underwent testing and was still officially in circulation until

6:15:53 > 6:15:591975. But we are aware of cases that exist of its use up until 1978. All

6:15:59 > 6:16:03of the evidence uncovered should have been considered as part of the

6:16:03 > 6:16:10review and the question that arises is why was it not? It is important

6:16:10 > 6:16:15that those affected have the trust and confidence of any review or

6:16:15 > 6:16:19inquiry undertaken. In this instance this has not been the case. The

6:16:19 > 6:16:24victims feel this review has muddied the waters even more than before it

6:16:24 > 6:16:29was conducted and their views have been ignored. I have been told many

6:16:29 > 6:16:33harrowing stories, lots of which we have heard today and how time and

6:16:33 > 6:16:38again they have been ignored. These women did not ask for hormonal

6:16:38 > 6:16:42pregnancy tests and were not aware of the effects on their unborn baby.

6:16:42 > 6:16:51There was just given them, sometimes out of the supply from a drawer in

6:16:51 > 6:16:54the Doctor's desk. A great injustice has been inflicted on these women

6:16:54 > 6:16:58and it's up to this House to put pressure on the Government of the

6:16:58 > 6:17:03day here and now in a fully cross-party nonpartisan way to make

6:17:03 > 6:17:09things right. It is paramount that the judgment public inquiry is

6:17:09 > 6:17:15conducted, one which is independent and can fully examine all of the

6:17:15 > 6:17:18materials and documentation is available and insist all information

6:17:18 > 6:17:22is made public including that which has been withheld so far. I hope

6:17:22 > 6:17:31this debate helps us take us one step further to achieving that. And

6:17:31 > 6:17:38I quote the Member for Mid Norfolk, when he stated in October 2014 and

6:17:38 > 6:17:42instigated this review that the review would "Shed light on the

6:17:42 > 6:17:55issue and bring all of important closure in an era of transparency. "

6:17:55 > 6:18:01Let's make sure what he promised is actually achieved.Thank you, and

6:18:01 > 6:18:06let me start by saying this debate has been carried out with I think

6:18:06 > 6:18:12the tone and a style which does this House and families who have

6:18:12 > 6:18:22campaigned for so long great credit. Let me congratulate my right

6:18:22 > 6:18:31honourable friend and -- in securing a further debate on this issue, a

6:18:31 > 6:18:35tribute to the members of this House who continue to campaigned

6:18:35 > 6:18:39tirelessly on the half of those who were given a hormonal pregnancy

6:18:39 > 6:18:44test. I was struck by the lady for Liverpool Riverside who mentioned

6:18:44 > 6:18:50this was first raised in the House in 1978 when I was for years old. I

6:18:50 > 6:18:57hope we can achieve closure before it's that long again. Let me be

6:18:57 > 6:19:05crystal clear, the Government's priority is and always will be, and

6:19:05 > 6:19:08the Secretary of State has done more than most, the safety of NHS

6:19:08 > 6:19:13patients. I have listened to patients, their families,

6:19:13 > 6:19:18parliamentarians on the matter of hormonal pregnancy tests over many

6:19:18 > 6:19:22years and will continue to do this over the coming weeks and months.

6:19:22 > 6:19:31Time and again during today's debate the Manchester -- member for

6:19:31 > 6:19:35Manchester Withington said we have heard about a lack of trust and

6:19:35 > 6:19:43faith in this process, contrary to the words from my honourable friend

6:19:43 > 6:19:47from Mid Norfolk. That troubles me sullenly be clear, we have ruled out

6:19:47 > 6:19:55no options at this time. The report of the group published on the 15th

6:19:55 > 6:20:01of November I think represents the culmination of rigorous piece of

6:20:01 > 6:20:05scientific work by a group of experts, all well respected in their

6:20:05 > 6:20:10field, and it is the most exhaustive investigation of the issue

6:20:10 > 6:20:15undertaken to date. However it is clear to me that many members and

6:20:15 > 6:20:19families they speak for have concerns about this issue. We are as

6:20:19 > 6:20:24I said committed to listening to that and acting upon that. While we

6:20:24 > 6:20:27differ on many points, there are surely a couple of things on which

6:20:27 > 6:20:32we can agree at the outset. The first is the safety of mothers and

6:20:32 > 6:20:38unborn children is to be paramount. The second is standards in science

6:20:38 > 6:20:41and regulation have changed beyond all recognition in the last 50

6:20:41 > 6:20:54years. My honourable friend and the lady who speaks the Liverpool

6:20:54 > 6:20:58Riverside mentioned about drugs being handed out through the desk

6:20:58 > 6:21:07drawer of GPs and it says that on page seven at the start of the

6:21:07 > 6:21:12report and the footnote says today there are strict requirements of the

6:21:12 > 6:21:21supply of free samples of medicines. That's why I say medicine science

6:21:21 > 6:21:25and regulation and prescribing has changed hugely in the last 50 years.

6:21:25 > 6:21:31It is imperative to me we continue to seek improvement in this area,

6:21:31 > 6:21:41that's why we have tasked the HRA with implementation. These are

6:21:41 > 6:21:47valuable initiatives that should permanently benefit the millions of

6:21:47 > 6:21:55women who use medicines in pregnancy. My right honourable

6:21:55 > 6:22:03friend from Hemel Hempstead mentioned Mr Debrett. I apologise if

6:22:03 > 6:22:08he feels his name has been used inappropriately. He was invited as

6:22:08 > 6:22:13an advocate for families and made a strong contribution throughout so

6:22:13 > 6:22:19let me be clear we thank him for his contribution. His campaign with wide

6:22:19 > 6:22:22respect across our country and the world under that will continue to be

6:22:22 > 6:22:27the case, I know. The right honourable gentleman who introduced

6:22:27 > 6:22:34the debate spoke about the name of the inquiry. I'm told the group were

6:22:34 > 6:22:38reminded from the start they have not been set up as a statutory

6:22:38 > 6:22:46inquiry as an expert group of commission on human medicines. It

6:22:46 > 6:22:51was important to be clear on this at the start as formal inquiries have a

6:22:51 > 6:22:55different structure and statutory powers. I don't think there was an

6:22:55 > 6:23:00inconsistency there but we can continue that debate. Almost all

6:23:00 > 6:23:05speakers have spoken about the terms of reference set out, the causal

6:23:05 > 6:23:09versus the possible. The terms of reference set out the scope of the

6:23:09 > 6:23:15review and I don't believe they changed. It was endorsed in December

6:23:15 > 6:23:192014, a few weeks after the last debate and confirmed by the Member

6:23:19 > 6:23:25for Mid Norfolk. In the same letter the all-party group was informed,

6:23:25 > 6:23:29and I quote, it is important to review the scientific evidence to

6:23:29 > 6:23:35establish if there is any causal association between the use of HPTs

6:23:35 > 6:23:42and subsequent birth defects in the child. It is explicit and integral

6:23:42 > 6:23:46to see whether the medicine is actually responsible for causing the

6:23:46 > 6:23:51harm rather than simply being associated with it. The Member for

6:23:51 > 6:23:55Manchester Withington and others mention changes to the expert group

6:23:55 > 6:23:59report. I know many members are concerned about differences in the

6:23:59 > 6:24:03draft and final report especially the removal of the sentence which

6:24:03 > 6:24:07said limitations of the methodology at the time and relative scarcity of

6:24:07 > 6:24:11the evidence means it's not possible to reach a definitive conclusion.

6:24:11 > 6:24:15This sentence was followed immediately by the group's overall

6:24:15 > 6:24:21finding that the available scientific evidence does not support

6:24:21 > 6:24:25a causal association between the use of HPTs such as Primodos and adverse

6:24:25 > 6:24:30outcomes. The ChM rightly considered the two sentences together to be

6:24:30 > 6:24:37misleading and advise the report be revised. The scientific conclusion

6:24:37 > 6:24:45is set out in the report. The Member for Manchester Withington and others

6:24:45 > 6:24:51spoke about historic actions. Ministers always being clear, Mr

6:24:51 > 6:24:55Deputy Speaker, the issues of historic process were outside the

6:24:55 > 6:24:58scope of this review because their first needed to be clarity on

6:24:58 > 6:25:03whether there might be a link between HPTs and birth defects. This

6:25:03 > 6:25:10point was made by the much mentioned member for Mid Norfolk when he said

6:25:10 > 6:25:15the review will include a chronology of events but the expert working

6:25:15 > 6:25:19group will not be asked for its advice on systemic or regulatory

6:25:19 > 6:25:29failures. Other members have said that should be different, and as I

6:25:29 > 6:25:33have said I am listening, but the reporter that my desk inherited this

6:25:33 > 6:25:42summer hard that is its guidance and that's what I inherited. -- had

6:25:42 > 6:25:48that. It wasn't set up to look at most historical actions and whether

6:25:48 > 6:25:53it should or not is a matter for debate. The lady for maker field

6:25:53 > 6:26:00mentioned the transparency issue and the gagging order. I said this

6:26:00 > 6:26:06during the urgent question, I can assure the House that being asked to

6:26:06 > 6:26:11sign a confidentiality undertaking, Mrs Lynam who is here today, was not

6:26:11 > 6:26:15in anyway treated differently to other panel members. This is

6:26:15 > 6:26:19standard procedure so discussions can be held freely without running

6:26:19 > 6:26:23commentary on God forbid the media. Despite being an observer throughout

6:26:23 > 6:26:31the view, Mrs Lynam was invited to speak after every agenda item. The

6:26:31 > 6:26:36lady for Bolton South East mentioned evidence from Doctor Dean and the

6:26:36 > 6:26:39Royal College of General practitioners that was ignored, the

6:26:39 > 6:26:42interaction between Doctor Dean and the RCGP are fully described in the

6:26:42 > 6:26:48annex to the report and I will come onto that in a second before I

6:26:48 > 6:26:53close. My honourable friend the Member for Eastleigh and the Member

6:26:53 > 6:26:59for Livingston mentioned the way the interaction of the family. I was

6:26:59 > 6:27:02clear last time I was at the dispatch box on the subject that

6:27:02 > 6:27:06families were not treated with the respect and dignity I would expect

6:27:06 > 6:27:10as the Minister for a body I am responsible for. I have made it very

6:27:10 > 6:27:13clear to them and asked them to report back to me as to how they

6:27:13 > 6:27:20will do it better next time, and I look forward to seeing that. I

6:27:20 > 6:27:24mentioned about the transparency issue. Minutes to the meetings and

6:27:24 > 6:27:29declarations of interest were published last week. Annexes to the

6:27:29 > 6:27:45report and all studies by Shearing have been published today. I'm going

6:27:45 > 6:27:50to close there and give the sponsor of the debate chance to close. I

6:27:50 > 6:27:53thank members for their contributions, nothing is off the

6:27:53 > 6:27:58table and I am listening.And I thank everybody for giving up

6:27:58 > 6:28:03Thursday in their constituencies to be here. I have been praised

6:28:03 > 6:28:10extensively for starting this debate but could have -- not have done it

6:28:10 > 6:28:13without the all Parliamentary group. Can I say on behalf of my

6:28:13 > 6:28:17constituents whose lives were changed, blighted, completely

6:28:17 > 6:28:24wrecked by Primodos, as we've heard across the House today, I have heard

6:28:24 > 6:28:28the Minister say nothing is ruled out and I'm willing to listen, and

6:28:28 > 6:28:32I'm pleased because he will have to listen an awful lot. If this

6:28:32 > 6:28:36document is still on his desk and being used as a way to go forward,

6:28:36 > 6:28:41I'm afraid that is an insult to the victims. It was described to me in a

6:28:41 > 6:28:47way which I cannot repeat in the House today, but a better way of

6:28:47 > 6:28:52describing it was crap. It was fundamentally flawed and doesn't do

6:28:52 > 6:28:55what it says on the tin when the Minister asked for it to be done.

6:28:55 > 6:29:01The department can move on and talk and move on. There has to be an

6:29:01 > 6:29:04independent public inquiry and if that inquiry decides it needs

6:29:04 > 6:29:09further evidence, it needs to have the financed to do that, and they

6:29:09 > 6:29:11will be evidence coming forward in the next couple of days, because the

6:29:11 > 6:29:17victims are the most important people in what we have been

6:29:17 > 6:29:22discussing today. If we forget that, we forget why we are here, why the

6:29:22 > 6:29:29NHS has the greatest reputation in the world, Shearing's is a great

6:29:29 > 6:29:34brand but their reputation has been damaged.In order, the debate stands

6:29:34 > 6:29:46adjourned.

6:29:46 > 6:29:55I'm ready when you are.Thank you very much Deputy Speaker for

6:29:55 > 6:30:01granting me this time and imported adjournment.I know this government

6:30:01 > 6:30:05despite although warm words and up but did you do not care for the NHS,

6:30:05 > 6:30:10the very principle and assets of a simple it is not sit well with the

6:30:10 > 6:30:15ideologically driven privatisation agenda. We should judge the

6:30:15 > 6:30:18Government cut them into NHS by their actions. The shambolic

6:30:18 > 6:30:25top-down regularization that began in 2012, has been followed by

6:30:25 > 6:30:30increasing competition increased privatisation, and now the

6:30:30 > 6:30:33introduction of sustainability and transformation plans and accountable

6:30:33 > 6:30:39K organisations, that are heralding the end of our NHS. Mr Deputy

6:30:39 > 6:30:44Speaker, that does not tie what works,. The Government starts NHS

6:30:44 > 6:30:51and refuses to it have collaborative structures to, but a long-term

6:30:51 > 6:30:57sustainable plan for properly financing our NHS. The event will

6:30:57 > 6:31:01force areas in England to come up with plans for deficiencies to

6:31:01 > 6:31:07compensate for the governments own neglectful incompetence. As a local

6:31:07 > 6:31:10areas grapple with these cuts, services are inevitably transferred

6:31:10 > 6:31:18from one hospital to another. The received in hospital cannot cope

6:31:18 > 6:31:24they buckle under strain and close and private health care takes over.

6:31:24 > 6:31:26In the South Shields, the sustainability and transformation

6:31:26 > 6:31:31plans have been brought in under the guise of a path to excellence. And

6:31:31 > 6:31:40we been placed into an arbitrary created boundary footprint area. By

6:31:40 > 6:31:452021, the health or social care system and a footprint area, is

6:31:45 > 6:31:50projected to be £960 million short of the funds it needs to balance its

6:31:50 > 6:31:55books, while maintaining the same level of care for patients. Make no

6:31:55 > 6:32:00mistake, these plans are about cuts. They are nothing to do with

6:32:00 > 6:32:04transforming our NHS for the better, the NHS has been set and an

6:32:04 > 6:32:07impossible task by the Government and the endgame is to see it in

6:32:07 > 6:32:14private hands. Over a year ago, stop the tie-dye hospital trust

6:32:14 > 6:32:19management team merged. And work began in earnest formulating the

6:32:19 > 6:32:23Government led to plans by local clinical commission groups. Would

6:32:23 > 6:32:26look after all of the health services in our area, along with the

6:32:26 > 6:32:32hospital trust. The plans are scrutinised by a joint scrutiny

6:32:32 > 6:32:37committee of South Tyneside and a Sunderland Council as well as the

6:32:37 > 6:32:40clinical commission group of being accountable to the respective local

6:32:40 > 6:32:45authorities health and well-being boards. The plans are officially

6:32:45 > 6:32:49supposed to be targeted and improving health care. By reality,

6:32:49 > 6:32:53people in Shields and right across England are discovering that these

6:32:53 > 6:32:57plants are actually about the biggest programme ever from any

6:32:57 > 6:33:02government to shut down the NHS and for once and for all. Alongside

6:33:02 > 6:33:07supposedly improving health and care, Health Secretary is endorsing

6:33:07 > 6:33:12plans for cuts of up to 5 billion in the NHS, this is a man who wrote

6:33:12 > 6:33:15about how to achieve full privatisation of the NHS who got the

6:33:15 > 6:33:20Chancellor and the last budget to give to put £6 billion to help embed

6:33:20 > 6:33:24the sustainability and transformation plans. In other

6:33:24 > 6:33:27words, using government and taxpayer money to close down a local

6:33:27 > 6:33:33hospitals. I have remained firm in my view, despite many people

6:33:33 > 6:33:38denouncing me and other campaigners, and scaremongering and from the day

6:33:38 > 6:33:42the two teams merged, the plough was to downgrade South the tie-dye

6:33:42 > 6:33:48hospital and move all of our services to Sunderland. I take no

6:33:48 > 6:33:52pleasure here being right, when the first days of the consultation was

6:33:52 > 6:33:57launched, we were advised that the preferred option of the clinical

6:33:57 > 6:34:02teams was to move them to Sunderland. Not only does have a

6:34:02 > 6:34:07preferred option fly in the face of them, it confirmed for auto of us

6:34:07 > 6:34:10what we expected, when in October last year without any public

6:34:10 > 6:34:15consultation at all, our unit was closed and moved to Sunderland with

6:34:15 > 6:34:20a promise that this was a temporary measure due to staff challenges.

6:34:20 > 6:34:23There currently no options on the table for that unit to come back

6:34:23 > 6:34:30South Tyneside. In relation to maternity and a women's analogical

6:34:30 > 6:34:35services and children and young people urgent, and emergency

6:34:35 > 6:34:40paediatrics, all of the options presented between drastic reduction

6:34:40 > 6:34:45in provision in particular over a two services for South Tyneside.

6:34:45 > 6:34:49Yet, and October, our accident and emergency inclusive of paediatrics,

6:34:49 > 6:34:54was found to be the second-best in the country, and one of the few

6:34:54 > 6:34:59hospitals which has achieved the four-hour waiting time target. I

6:34:59 > 6:35:03have been consistent in rejecting this consultation. I refuse to

6:35:03 > 6:35:08accept that a consultation predicated on a massive cut agenda

6:35:08 > 6:35:12against a backdrop of additional cuts to social care, and other

6:35:12 > 6:35:15services that will do anything at talk to improve the health and care

6:35:15 > 6:35:19that people and care that people in South Tyneside received. In fact, it

6:35:19 > 6:35:25would do quite the opposite. But I am not alone in this view. The trust

6:35:25 > 6:35:29and the clinical commissioning group are stating the proposals before us,

6:35:29 > 6:35:32where formulated by and are supported by clinicians and staff at

6:35:32 > 6:35:37our hospital. Yet, many of these clinicians and staff have contacted

6:35:37 > 6:35:41me and provided me with evidence to show that they have in fact been

6:35:41 > 6:35:46actively blocked out of formulating his proposals. How on earth can the

6:35:46 > 6:35:51public be expected to trust a consultation that raises such a

6:35:51 > 6:35:55serious questions around transparency and due process and has

6:35:55 > 6:36:02lacked integrity from the outset? I have been trying to get my local

6:36:02 > 6:36:05authority to revert this whole shambolic consultation to the

6:36:05 > 6:36:08Secretary of State so the smoke screen can be looked at and

6:36:08 > 6:36:14conductor properly with due process. So far, to the abject disappointment

6:36:14 > 6:36:18of the my constituents, this has not happened. The constituents of also

6:36:18 > 6:36:26raised with me, their concerns over potential conflicts of interest. Our

6:36:26 > 6:36:29Council leader has appeared nonexecutive director of the trust

6:36:29 > 6:36:32and chairs of the health and well-being board, the chair of this

6:36:32 > 6:36:36ECG is the vice chair of the health and well-being board in a practise

6:36:36 > 6:36:42in GP. On the 30th of November, a press release was issued advising

6:36:42 > 6:36:49that the special care baby unit was closing with immediate effect. A

6:36:49 > 6:36:52closure that coincidentally sits neatly with all of the proposed

6:36:52 > 6:36:58options are put forward from the CCT and the trust. The reason given was

6:36:58 > 6:37:01staffing issues. The safety and well-being of babies and parents

6:37:01 > 6:37:06should of course be a priority, but he that followed indicate that this

6:37:06 > 6:37:10is yet another cynical development of the managed decline of South

6:37:10 > 6:37:15Tyneside hospital. On the 3rd of December, after the local media had

6:37:15 > 6:37:19been advised staff from the maternity unit were invited to a

6:37:19 > 6:37:23meeting to be told that from 8am the following morning the maternity unit

6:37:23 > 6:37:29will be closing due to staffing issues. This was after the trust has

6:37:29 > 6:37:31discussed matters with regional groups and not local was and not

6:37:31 > 6:37:38staff. We have now restate states -- states where normal babies are being

6:37:38 > 6:37:43born at a South Tyneside, yet the maternity unit has a full couple met

6:37:43 > 6:37:48the staff present as it has been wedded with fully SAP operational.

6:37:48 > 6:37:52The staff present at the trust with a working system to keep the unit

6:37:52 > 6:37:57delivering so there is no reason to why the closure is continuing. Right

6:37:57 > 6:38:00now, these trained professional and dedicated midwives is that

6:38:00 > 6:38:04delivering babies, are doing admin, transferring mums to neighbouring

6:38:04 > 6:38:11hospitals. I have already been advised of expectant mothers to be

6:38:11 > 6:38:15having to find on average £40 for each round-trip journey to other

6:38:15 > 6:38:19hospitals in the region. When they thought they were due to deliver.

6:38:19 > 6:38:24One woman was sent home after being told she was not the labour by a

6:38:24 > 6:38:28neighbouring hospital, once home and I very much in labour, she ended up

6:38:28 > 6:38:31having a home birth as she simply could not afford another taxi when

6:38:31 > 6:38:37the ambulance waiting times were too long. The situation is completely

6:38:37 > 6:38:41dangerous and unsustainable for my constituents. And it takes away a

6:38:41 > 6:38:47woman's right on how to choose where she has birth. From day one of this

6:38:47 > 6:38:50process, there is one version of events from the trust and clinical

6:38:50 > 6:38:53commissioning group, but then their evidence and facts from the

6:38:53 > 6:38:57clinicians and other staff at the hospital to tell otherwise.

6:38:57 > 6:39:00Clinicians and staff who are dedicating hard work and

6:39:00 > 6:39:05professionalism are being denigrated and more out produced under revealed

6:39:05 > 6:39:11threat that if they speak with her -- meet the risk losing jobs. They

6:39:11 > 6:39:14remained multitude of unanswered questions, questions that are

6:39:14 > 6:39:20critical to the whole process and have been repeatedly asked. What

6:39:20 > 6:39:23capacity do Sunderland hospital habit to take the extra patience and

6:39:23 > 6:39:27from South Tyneside? What is going to happen to the staff at South

6:39:27 > 6:39:32Tyneside? What transport arrangement will be put in place bearing in mind

6:39:32 > 6:39:38we are one of the lowest areas of car ownership in the entire country?

6:39:38 > 6:39:42Does the Northeast Ambulance Service have the additional capacity to

6:39:42 > 6:39:47respond to the increased emergency demand created by these options? And

6:39:47 > 6:39:50what are the proposals for the imminent next faces of the

6:39:50 > 6:39:56consultation? Because Mr Deputy Speaker, this is only phase one of a

6:39:56 > 6:40:01consultation that has another to basis to go. We cannot continue in a

6:40:01 > 6:40:05situation where those tasks with providing the very best health care

6:40:05 > 6:40:11scenario for my constituents, are acting out of that and not promoting

6:40:11 > 6:40:16good faith equitable health care. We cannot continue in a situation where

6:40:16 > 6:40:20Joyce has been removed from my constituents. Where their health

6:40:20 > 6:40:23needs in fact their lives are deemed secondary to that of others in the

6:40:23 > 6:40:29region. I am asking here today that the Minister support the taking of

6:40:29 > 6:40:34serious steps, and that NHS England a step in and investigate and if

6:40:34 > 6:40:39necessary remove the clinical commissioning groups powers. And

6:40:39 > 6:40:45that NHS improvement to investigative action against trust.

6:40:45 > 6:40:48Mr Deputy Speaker, things have become very nefarious and chills.

6:40:48 > 6:40:52Peace all -- people have misunderstood me representing Mike

6:40:52 > 6:40:56assiduous and relaying their use and length accept as personal attack. I

6:40:56 > 6:41:00would like to remind those who have tried to silence me and stated

6:41:00 > 6:41:05publicly that I am a liar and I put myself forward for public office not

6:41:05 > 6:41:12to cause and not to bow those to power but to represent the people as

6:41:12 > 6:41:16shields no matter how uncomfortable for some that may be. Because an

6:41:16 > 6:41:20amount of bytes or bullying will stop me from doing the job that I

6:41:20 > 6:41:26was elected and entrusted to do. I want to and by paying tribute to the

6:41:26 > 6:41:31amazing staff and our hospital, and those in South Tyneside who have

6:41:31 > 6:41:37wholeheartedly join the fight to save our hospital. But in

6:41:37 > 6:41:40particular, Roger and Gemma who have worked tirelessly eating the safe to

6:41:40 > 6:41:46say the campaign, and Art crowdfunding to raise money for

6:41:46 > 6:41:52potential judicial review. Please, if anyone is listening, donate and

6:41:52 > 6:41:56help us, because this process does not begin and end with our hospital.

6:41:56 > 6:42:05This government is coming for our entire NHS.Thank you very much

6:42:05 > 6:42:07Deputy Speaker, I would like to start by congratulating the

6:42:07 > 6:42:15honourable lady on securing this debate. On the topic of the future

6:42:15 > 6:42:24of South Tyneside hospital, and I pay tribute to her emotion in which

6:42:24 > 6:42:28she showed standing up for her constituents. Although I have to say

6:42:28 > 6:42:31I was disappointed by the tone that she adopted particularly at the

6:42:31 > 6:42:38start of her remarks, and frankly conspiracy that she is alleging

6:42:38 > 6:42:48exists. To endeavour to use the case of South Tyneside to progress with a

6:42:48 > 6:42:50scaremongering, which will undoubtedly unlined local residents

6:42:50 > 6:42:58in her area by trying to paint this as some sort of plot towards the

6:42:58 > 6:43:01privatisation of the health service which there is not a shred of

6:43:01 > 6:43:07evidence at all. And I think that rather undermined the force of her

6:43:07 > 6:43:11quite proper consent for her constituents and I'm sorry that she

6:43:11 > 6:43:16chose to characterize it in that way. But I do welcome her support

6:43:16 > 6:43:25for the staff in her hospital, and I joined her in congratulating them

6:43:25 > 6:43:31for the work that are doing, because despite significant precious, South

6:43:31 > 6:43:36Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust, is performing very well for the vast

6:43:36 > 6:43:43majority of patients under their care. And she pointed out their

6:43:43 > 6:43:46performance and a and E, which is above the one of the pew trusts and

6:43:46 > 6:43:53the country to be performing at the above for our waking time, but that

6:43:53 > 6:43:57is not the only area where the trust is performing well. There are also

6:43:57 > 6:44:02one of the few trusts meeting all of the cancer targets across the

6:44:02 > 6:44:07country, the eight targets, and meeting the referral to treatment

6:44:07 > 6:44:14waiting times which again, is unusual. At the moment. And meeting

6:44:14 > 6:44:18diagnostic targets so it is one of the best-performing trusts in the

6:44:18 > 6:44:24country. And for that, she and I are on the

6:44:24 > 6:44:32, it is the case that the trust and its neighbouring trust, the City

6:44:32 > 6:44:34Hospital Sunderland and NHS Foundation Trust formed an alliance

6:44:34 > 6:44:39with recently of the South Tyneside and Sunderland health care group. It

6:44:39 > 6:44:44is for this reason that the group is looking at reconfiguration of

6:44:44 > 6:44:50services across the two trusts to remove unnecessary duplication and

6:44:50 > 6:44:58to improve the sustainability of the services to ensure that the local

6:44:58 > 6:45:01population's health care needs are well looked after. Across the range

6:45:01 > 6:45:05of activities. It is quick to make a bit of progress and then I will give

6:45:05 > 6:45:12way. Ultimately, as if she knows, any services changes outside of

6:45:12 > 6:45:15Tyneside tenement at a South Tyneside Hospital will be for local

6:45:15 > 6:45:18health care authorities. All proposed changes should be based on

6:45:18 > 6:45:23clear evidence that they would provide better outcomes for

6:45:23 > 6:45:27patients. They should meet the four tested for service change the vision

6:45:27 > 6:45:31of support from GB commissioners, be based on clinical evidence,

6:45:31 > 6:45:33demonstrate public and patient engagement and consider patient

6:45:33 > 6:45:39choice. And, in addition, NHS England have introduced this year a

6:45:39 > 6:45:44test on the future use of beds, which requires commissioners to

6:45:44 > 6:45:48assure NHS England that any proposed reduction is sustainable over the

6:45:48 > 6:45:51longer-term and that keep risks, such as a staff levels, have

6:45:51 > 6:45:58addressed.I think that Minister for giving way. A few moments ago, he

6:45:58 > 6:46:03commented on how both hospitals are working together to create safe

6:46:03 > 6:46:07health care for both populations, however, how does it become the

6:46:07 > 6:46:10maternity unit and a special carriage units with hardly no notice

6:46:10 > 6:46:13et al created that environment? Surely they are feeling at a task

6:46:13 > 6:46:20they have been handed. -- failing as of the task.I will explain to the

6:46:20 > 6:46:26honourable Lady right now the persisted a fact about why was an

6:46:26 > 6:46:30emergency shutdown on that facility and I think that the

6:46:30 > 6:46:34characterisation that she has isn't quite representative of what

6:46:34 > 6:46:39actually happened and I wanted to go into some detail to reinsure -- to

6:46:39 > 6:46:43try and wish root -- to reassure her her constituents that they're some

6:46:43 > 6:46:54closer, hopefully temporary and closer. The hospital suspended...

6:46:54 > 6:46:58High risk of birth due to stopping pressure. A number of urgency to

6:46:58 > 6:47:05protocols were picked in place to complement the very slow number of

6:47:05 > 6:47:07high-risk deliveries of the weekend of the second and 3rd of December.

6:47:07 > 6:47:11Since the 4th of December, all maternity services have been

6:47:11 > 6:47:15temporarily suspended in South Tyneside Hospital on patient safety

6:47:15 > 6:47:19grounds. And in taking this decision, be trusted to do so on

6:47:19 > 6:47:25it's own initiative. It sought advice from the northern and

6:47:25 > 6:47:28neonatal network and the heads of... Network for the northeast of

6:47:28 > 6:47:33England. The unanimous clinical view, with all the evidence

6:47:33 > 6:47:37available to them at that time, was that the press should be temporarily

6:47:37 > 6:47:44suspended in the interest of the city of mothers and babies. -- in

6:47:44 > 6:47:48the interests of mothers and babies. The hospital has staff were been

6:47:48 > 6:47:51affected to a bin has to report for duty as normal. The staff are

6:47:51 > 6:47:58working with the trust to help the women affected to assure safe

6:47:58 > 6:48:02alternative arrangements are made. The trust has been in close contact

6:48:02 > 6:48:06with other neighbouring units and had overwhelming support from NHS

6:48:06 > 6:48:11partners across the system. Women have been choosing to deliver in

6:48:11 > 6:48:14Sunderland, Gateshead and in Newcastle, with the number of women

6:48:14 > 6:48:20opted for a home birth. The trust is working closely to ensure there is

6:48:20 > 6:48:22an individual plan for each patient and that there is clear

6:48:22 > 6:48:26communication between the health care professionals involved within

6:48:26 > 6:48:31their care. The trust aims to reopen special baby carriage units for low

6:48:31 > 6:48:35risk of births on a safe staffing level has been established and I

6:48:35 > 6:48:40would like to dwell now, for a few moments, on the specific stopping

6:48:40 > 6:48:47challenges that have precipitated this action. The challenging facing

6:48:47 > 6:48:51South Tyneside NHS Foundation Trust, in terms of safely staffing the

6:48:51 > 6:48:54special care baby unit or something in which the trust has been

6:48:54 > 6:49:00contending with for many years. This hasn't just crept up on that. When

6:49:00 > 6:49:12the... Visited in 2015, and raided the trust's includes ad court...

6:49:12 > 6:49:15Sensitiveness and 15, there have been a relentless efforts on behalf

6:49:15 > 6:49:22of the trust or by the trust to mitigate these issues. Regular quirk

6:49:22 > 6:49:27Richmond has taken place for permanent vacancies in special care

6:49:27 > 6:49:30unit and paediatric emergency care over the past two years, with the

6:49:30 > 6:49:37latest round taking place only this month. Contrary to the honourable

6:49:37 > 6:49:43lady's obligations of some long-standing conspiracy to compel

6:49:43 > 6:49:47the unit to close, I wanted to give you the facts as I understand that

6:49:47 > 6:49:53in relation to that unit. In recent months, chronic staff sickness has

6:49:53 > 6:49:59reduced the six full-time equivalent specialist neonatal workforce in the

6:49:59 > 6:50:06special care units into just four full-time staff. This has resulted

6:50:06 > 6:50:09in an unsustainable situation with the remaining nurses working at many

6:50:09 > 6:50:15extra hours each week in order to ensure there was a safe staffing on

6:50:15 > 6:50:20the unit and one of the four remaining nurses has that become

6:50:20 > 6:50:25ill, exacerbated by the work pressures. That has led to

6:50:25 > 6:50:30unsustainable staffing levels to keep the unit open. It has not been

6:50:30 > 6:50:33possible for the trust, however hard it has tried, over the last two and

6:50:33 > 6:50:39half years, to Phil B Rhoda and it has not been -- to fill the

6:50:39 > 6:50:45rotation. Given the specialised skills required by neonatal nurses

6:50:45 > 6:50:51in the special care baby units. This decision, although difficult, was

6:50:51 > 6:50:54driven by the very clear clinical advice that to put first and

6:50:54 > 6:50:58foremost, the safety of others and babies, but also the health and

6:50:58 > 6:51:04well-being of hospital staff to whom the trust also owes a duty of care.

6:51:04 > 6:51:09Now, the honourable lady referred to the consultation that has taken

6:51:09 > 6:51:15place in recent months over the past.I think the Minister very much

6:51:15 > 6:51:20for giving way again. I am really disappointed. I could see he has the

6:51:20 > 6:51:25official wines from the trust, but did he not listen to what I said? It

6:51:25 > 6:51:30was a regional, not the local groups that made this decision. The unit is

6:51:30 > 6:51:34now at its full staff complement to that it has been historically. In

6:51:34 > 6:51:37short, there is no staffing the problem there by now. Midwives are

6:51:37 > 6:51:42sitting to doing admin work when they could be delivering babies.I

6:51:42 > 6:51:48was referring to the special care baby unit. Where, my understanding,

6:51:48 > 6:51:54the neonatal unit is at staffing levels where I just described. If

6:51:54 > 6:51:58she has other information, I will happily go back to the trusted

6:51:58 > 6:52:02tomorrow and ask them whether they have managed to fill those slots

6:52:02 > 6:52:10because there is no intent to keep the suspension of the maternity

6:52:10 > 6:52:15unit, for more normal births, suspended for any longer than is

6:52:15 > 6:52:18necessary. Id. Just going to touch him one of the other areas that she

6:52:18 > 6:52:26didn't mention specifically, but the stroke services because a similar

6:52:26 > 6:52:28thing has occurred in terms of stroke. I would put that into

6:52:28 > 6:52:32context for her to help her understand why that decision was

6:52:32 > 6:52:40taken. Since December last year, 2016, any patient requiring acute

6:52:40 > 6:52:45care for a stroke has been taken to Sunderland and this decision was

6:52:45 > 6:52:50taken to ensure patient safety because South Tyneside also had a

6:52:50 > 6:52:55significant staffing challenge in its stroke unit. In fact, it had

6:52:55 > 6:53:01only one part time position, single-handedly, to assess and treat

6:53:01 > 6:53:06incoming stroke patients. The stroke unit faced significant pressures in

6:53:06 > 6:53:11maintaining a sufficiently staffed nursing the rotation to support that

6:53:11 > 6:53:15clinician to maintain the safety required for stroke patients. The

6:53:15 > 6:53:21benefits of centralising a high acuity stroke care have been shown

6:53:21 > 6:53:25in Manchester and in London and in other parts of the country where

6:53:25 > 6:53:29reduced mortality in a more efficient use of resources in a

6:53:29 > 6:53:32better care for patients. Most other parts of the country have either

6:53:32 > 6:53:37implemented similar changes or have plans to do so. Centralising stroke

6:53:37 > 6:53:41care to a smaller number of larger units provides opportunities to

6:53:41 > 6:53:45ensure that there are always the specialist nurses and doctors

6:53:45 > 6:53:52available to manage patients at all times and provide access to imaging

6:53:52 > 6:53:56and other investigatory facilities immediately as they are required.

6:53:56 > 6:53:59So, to give an illustration to what that means for patients who are at

6:53:59 > 6:54:06the heart of this, across the NHS in England, 84% of stroke patients,

6:54:06 > 6:54:09patients now spend the majority of the hospital stay in a specialist

6:54:09 > 6:54:16stroke units compared to 60% in 2010. This has led it to excellent

6:54:16 > 6:54:20progress in the treatment of stroke over recent years. Over 92% of

6:54:20 > 6:54:25stroke patients across England now receive a brain scan which in --

6:54:25 > 6:54:30within 12 hours of arriving at hospital and almost 50% are screened

6:54:30 > 6:54:34within one hour. This is a huge increment on 2010 when 70% of

6:54:34 > 6:54:43patients waited up to 24 hours for a scan. The concentration of stroke

6:54:43 > 6:54:46units a specialist has helped save lives. The workforce challenges

6:54:46 > 6:54:50experienced by South Tyneside are being proactively addressed in the

6:54:50 > 6:54:55long-term do the path to excellence programme that she referred to. This

6:54:55 > 6:54:58is a five-year transformation programme with health care services

6:54:58 > 6:55:00in South Tyneside and the Sunderland. Localise responsive to

6:55:00 > 6:55:07the North... Of which was so critical. The public conversation

6:55:07 > 6:55:14for the passage of prop Chris -- passage progress programme ran...

6:55:14 > 6:55:18The areas of service under the consultation were maternity in

6:55:18 > 6:55:20women's health care services, including the special baby care

6:55:20 > 6:55:29unit. Stroke care services and... Before the CCD to make the decision,

6:55:29 > 6:55:33they will consider all the feedback gathered during the consultation

6:55:33 > 6:55:36from all stakeholders, including herself and other members of

6:55:36 > 6:55:44Parliament. closet... I was strongly encourage her to participate in

6:55:44 > 6:55:55that. The CCGs governing body will be held. For the two CCGs to make

6:55:55 > 6:55:59their decision. They refer to the same South Tyneside Hospital group

6:55:59 > 6:56:03and am aware this is active in campaigning against any

6:56:03 > 6:56:05reconfiguration of health care services between the two hospitals.

6:56:05 > 6:56:10I hope I have helped to clarify to the honourable lady that no

6:56:10 > 6:56:13decisions will be made on reconfiguration matters until the

6:56:13 > 6:56:19responses to the path to excellence has been thoroughly analysed.I

6:56:19 > 6:56:25think the Minister for giving away, but his analysis of the save the

6:56:25 > 6:56:29South Tyneside Hospital campaign is incorrect. We want safe and decent

6:56:29 > 6:56:33health care for people in South Tyneside. That is what we are

6:56:33 > 6:56:37camping for. Or equitable safe health care.Indeed, I'm sure that

6:56:37 > 6:56:42is the objective and that's also the objective of the trusted to ensure

6:56:42 > 6:56:46that there is sustainable, high quality services available to the of

6:56:46 > 6:56:54both areas served by both hospitals. The trusted now faces a challenging

6:56:54 > 6:57:03task in ensuring that two hospitals trusts do, to this process, the path

6:57:03 > 6:57:07to excellence, remove any dedication which is unnecessary between the two

6:57:07 > 6:57:13sides. And in proof sustainability as a set. It is important that the

6:57:13 > 6:57:17trust work well together and with the local community and with her

6:57:17 > 6:57:20commissioning groups to ensure that any plans that they have a community

6:57:20 > 6:57:27-- are communicated clearly to local populations. The honourable lady

6:57:27 > 6:57:33says it is not happening, but... It is important to engage the

6:57:33 > 6:57:35communities centre that will be watching the debate and I'm sure

6:57:35 > 6:57:40there will be taking note of the Commons about she is making it am

6:57:40 > 6:57:45making and there should be public engagement and hopefully that will

6:57:45 > 6:57:50continue up until the decision of the CCGs in February. I will

6:57:50 > 6:57:54conclude by saying, Mr Deputy Speaker, that it is incumbent on all

6:57:54 > 6:57:58of us who represent our local communities to get engaged, as she

6:57:58 > 6:58:03is doing with her campaign group. But to get engaged with the people

6:58:03 > 6:58:07who are responsible for making these decisions who are the local NHS in

6:58:07 > 6:58:11her area. She indicates she is engaged with them and I am pleased

6:58:11 > 6:58:15to hear it and I would encourage her to encourage all other MPs to get

6:58:15 > 6:58:20engaged in a constructive way, to try and find the best solution for

6:58:20 > 6:58:26the local residents and one in which abuts safety at the top of the list.

6:58:26 > 6:58:33This is adjourned. The ayes have it. Order, order.