15/03/2018 House of Commons

struggles to meet their own energy

bills. Monday the 26th of March

would be an ideal question to raise

them at DWP questions.

Statement,

the Secretary of State for housing

communities and local Government.

Secretary Sajid Javid.

Thank you, Mr

Speaker. With permission, I wish to

make a statement on issues arising

from the Metropolitan Police

investigation into the Grenfell

Tower tragedy. This investigation

has involved a thorough examination

of every aspect of the tower,

including from stores to flats on

the property. These stores include a

glazed fire door, manufactured

around five years ago. -- these

doors. Initial indications indicates

the door is designed to resist

Firefox 30 minutes, but when tested

by the Metropolitan Police, failed

after approximately 15 minutes. --

resist fire for 30 minutes. This

test result might have wider

invitations for public safety, and

the police alerted my department.

The Government immediately sought

advice from the Independent expert

panel to test the findings to see

whether any action was required as a

result. This expert panel is made up

of a range of building and fire

safety experts, and chaired by the

former London Fire Commissioner and

former Government 's chief fire and

rescue adviser. The panel consulted

with letters incidents from the net

and police, the Government's chief

scientific advisers, and the

National Fire chiefs Council. -- the

Metropolitan Police. Following this,

the expert panel has advised that

risks to public safety remain low.

There is no change to fire safety

advice that the public should

follow. I nevertheless fully

appreciate that this news will be

troubling for many people, not least

all those affected by the Grenfell

tragedy. That is why, based on

expert advice, we have begun the

process of conducting further tests

and will continue to consult with

the expert panel to consider the

invocations of these further tests.

I made it clear that the necessary

tests and assessments must be

carried out thoroughly, but that

pace. There is no evidence that this

is a systemic issue. Data between

2009 and 2017 shows that fire does

not generally spread beyond the room

of origin. I'll also clear that my

department and the Metropolitan

Police will ensure the believed and

survivors are kept informed of

progress, and commits to updating

the House when further information

is available, and no later than the

end of April. I should stress that,

in carrying out these tests,

conclusions should not be drawn

about the nature of the cause of the

Grenfell tragedy. That is a matter

for a separate police investigation,

and it must be allowed to run its

course. Honourable members will be

aware that an independent review is

being undertaken of building

regulations and fire safety to

ensure that the regulatory system is

sufficiently robust. They have been

made aware of this wood these latest

findings. Having accepted the

initial recommendations that were

set out in her interim report in

December, we look forward to the

final report. Nine months ago, we

faced a loss of life and suffering

on an unimaginable scale at

Grenfell. Since then, significant

efforts have been made by the

Government and others to support

survivors, to find them new homes,

and to help keep people safe.

However, I know that the matter

raised today will of course raise

questions, and I want to reiterate

that on the basis of expert advice,

my department has received, there is

no evidence that risks to the public

have changed. I want to reassure

honourable members that all possible

steps are being taken to properly

investigate the issues, and to take

action where needed. Public safety

is paramount, and our position is

clear. The events of the 14th of

June 2017 must never be allowed to

happen again. I commend this

statement to the House.

Can I begin

by thanking the Secretary of State

for his statement? Grenfell nine

months on, the human tragedy of

Grenfell still lives with others

all, and the realisation that we saw

the systemic failure of our system

of building checks and building

controls, and we must keep that in

mind, because as the Secretary of

State said, and I will always

endorses words, public safety has to

be paramount. But that means

transparency, it means

accountability, and it means a

driving sense of urgency. I have to

say, I welcome his transparency in

bringing forward this statement at

the earliest possible stage, it is

right and proper for this to be in

the public domain, so thank you for

that. But I think you would also

agree with me that it can never be

open to the charge of physical

point-scoring for the opposition to

demand that accountability, to

demand the Government is to

demonstrate its sense of urgency. --

political point scoring. But if I

can say, I was a little supply is in

his statement at one particular

point. -- a little surprised. My

thanks to the Metropolitan Police

for the work they have done. The

secretary told us that this test

result might have wider implications

for public safety, and consequently

alerted his department. The

Secretary of State and then went on,

and this is where I am surprised,

but there is no evidence that this

is a systemic issue. He then said,

and I was astounded by this, data

between 2009 and 2017 shows fire

does not generally spread beyond the

rim of origin. That may be true, but

all we know that of course in the

case of Grenfell Tower, that is

exactly what did happen. -- the room

of origin. The fire spread and

spread, so we cannot see this with

any sense of complacency. If this is

not systemic, what assessment has

been made of how many buildings are

potentially affected by this? How

many individual flats? How many

people have fire doors which simply

do not do the job? What steps is he

taking to make that kind of

determination? Because that's the at

which the words, this is not

systemic, begin to ring a little

incredible. There may be a systemic

problem, and got to begin to

recognise that if this is wide

scale, we have just that systemic

problem. I then say to the Secretary

of State, we need a real sense of

urgency in this, as in other areas

of building control, tower block

residents are up and down the

country are entitled to know what

the scale of this issue is. And that

sense of urgency, must say to be

Secretary of State, has not always

been apparent in all the

Government's actions. We saw earlier

this week, and I think he was

themselves a little embarrassed when

he was not able to answer the

question put during question time,

as to how many tower blocks are

unsafe. Grenfell. He was not able to

say particularly how many private

tower blocks of the same aluminium

composite cladding that was used in

Grenfell up and down the country. We

now need some urgency to get those

answers. I hope the Secretary of

State can tell us when he will have

that information when we can begin

to give a sense of reassurance for

people. I would also say to him that

any recent was in answer to my right

honourable friend the Shadow housing

secretary, the department confirmed

that no funding had yet been

provided to any one of the local

authorities who had contacted his

department. We were told at question

time that no funding requested had

been refused, but it is not quite

the full truth if they are reality

is that no funding requests had

actually been ceded to. Perhaps he

can update is and tells when local

authorities, who really do want to

get on with this work, will seek the

assistance from the central

Government that he committed to now

nearly nine months ago.

The upshot is that nine months on,

only seven of more than 300 tower

blocks that had been identified as

having dangerous cladding have had

that cladding removed and replaced

with something more acceptable. This

is simply not good enough.

Mr

Speaker, I thank the honourable

gentleman for his comments and I am

happy to answer the point is the

honourable gentleman has made. First

of all, we all agree that public

safety is the number-one issue here.

It is paramount. He will know that

since the tragedy, as well as the

police investigation and the work

being done through the public

inquiry, there are lessons for

public safety and the honourable

gentleman will remember that right

from the start, the expert panel was

convened in the days with the

emergency advice that was necessary,

that went out widely through owners

of private buildings. The initial

sample testing and that the

large-scale testing was set up and

also the independent review that is

now being done. I wanted to see an

interim report with some of the

early lessons we can act on and to

remind the honourable gentleman that

with that interim report, there are

a number of recommendations that

were made by Dame Judith Hackett

which we have accepted and start

implementing each one of those. Dame

Judith Hackett is now working on her

final report, which is due for the

spring, to reflect the sense of

urgency. What I have come to the

House with today, and I think it is

correct that once the expert panel

and the police were comfortable that

this information can be publicly

shared, it is right to be

transparent as quickly as possible

and this is correct to create that

public trust that is necessary so

that there is no undue distress

caused to anyone. With this

information, it is correct that we

are led throughout the process by

the expert panel and the industry

advisers that have been put in

place, as well as the work that has

been done by the police. To give the

honourable gentleman more

information, as well as consulting

the expert panel, the government has

consulted the fire chiefs Council,

the scientific advisers, the police

and the London Fire Brigade. As a

result of all this, the expert panel

has concluded that risk to public

safety remained low, that there is

no change to fire safety advice,

that a programme with additional

testing has to be commissioned to

determine the cause of the failed

test. It is essential that

additional testing is required. It

is going on and it has to be

thorough and at pace, but I think

the honourable gentleman would agree

that we shouldn't rush it so that we

get inappropriate results. It should

be done properly, led by the experts

and on their advice. That is why I

said in mice that month earlier that

there is no evidence of a systemic

problem. That is their advice so far

and are taking their advice while we

continue with further tests. The

honourable gentleman also seemed to

suggest that work was not being done

urgently. I would refute that. At

every step of the way, whether it is

today's information or other

information that has come to light

since the fire, we have worked as

urgently as possible. That includes

the remediation of existing

buildings with ASEAN cladding, and

301 buildings have so far been

identified. Almost 60% have begun

the remediation work and seven have

completed as he said. But in every

single case, because public safety

is paramount, interim measures were

put in place immediately with expert

advice, often from the local fire

brigade. And those remain in place.

That is why people can be

comfortable that every measure is

being taken to make sure that they

remain safe.

I think the House will

support my right honourable friend

on the causes and waiting to get the

determination of those

investigating. We know about the

liabilities and risks. You give us

has mentioned the private

leaseholders in private blocks. We

have had the first tribunal decision

in Croydon this week and cityscape,

which is owned by a group of

interests where ordinary taxpaying

residents are being asked to pay

thousands of pounds. The same thing

is happening in Greenwich and

Liverpool, and I could name the

other 129 blocks. Can I put it to my

right honourable friend that he

ought to get William Waldorf Astor's

Abacus interests in together with

the builders, together with the

leaseholders and are represented to

us, to have a Round Table in the

open to say instead of waiting two

years until an inquiry, it is time

to get these people together and say

to them perhaps a simple deal to go

to the builders put up a third, the

freeholders put up a third and the

government/ tenants put up a third

and get the cladding removed and

replaced?

I am firstly aware of the

legal judgment he referred to and we

are considering carefully its

implications. But I have said a

number of times in this House that

whatever the legal situation might

be, the private owners of buildings

should take their lead from the

public sector and should take

responsibility for the additional

costs. They might want to look at

insurance claims, warranties and

legal action they might be able to

take themselves. I also want to make

sure that leaseholders get the

advice they need. That is why we

have increased funding for the

leasehold advisory service. With new

concerns emerging nine months after

Grenfell, it is no surprise that

residents in high-rise buildings

remain extremely concerned. One of

the areas of possible reassurance

for them was the possibility of

retrofitting of sprinklers. My local

authority, Westminster, has advised

that they are concerned about

proceeding with retrofitting because

they have no right of access to the

one in three properties that are in

private ownership in social housing

blocks. This isn't a matter of

regulation, it's a matter of

ensuring access. Will the Secretary

of State advise how we can take this

forward as a matter of urgency

separate councils that do wish to

proceed with retrofitting are able

to do so? Where I agree with the

honourable lady is that in light of

the information that has come about

since the tragedy, whatever action

local authorities need to take to

keep residents safe in high-rise

buildings is exactly what is

expected of them and they have our

support in doing so. When it comes

to sprinklers, if that is the

determination of the local

authority, that is their decision to

be made and they will get the

financial flexibility to support

them. If there are other issues that

are getting in the way, we will be

happy to look at them. A number of

local authorities have approached us

and we will help them all in every

way. A number of high-rise office

blocks in Barnet are being converted

to residential use using permitted

development rights without the need

for planning permission, leading

some to fear design standards will

be compromised because of the

absence of a planning process.

Will

the government take action to ensure

that fire safety standards are not

compromised in the event of these

kind of conversions?

I can reassure

my right honourable friend that even

when building work is done under

permitted regulations, it still

requires that work to be subject to

building regulations including all

the regulations around safety. There

is no way any builder can avoid

that. So I hope that is some

reassurance to her residence. The

regulations are still in place, even

when it is a permitted development

right.

The Grenfell Tower fire laid

bare profound injustice is at the

heart of the UK housing system and

every revelation from the

investigation makes that picture

starker and clearer. So far, the

government has not made available a

single penny of new government money

for works which are essential to

respond to mitigate the risks

revealed as a consequence of

Grenfell. Unless the government does

so, it is simply meeting out further

injustice to leaseholders who will

face very large bills and tenants

who will see much needed major works

provide. Will the Secretary of State

take the opportunity of this latest

revelation to commit new government

resources to address the impact of

the Grenfell Tower fire for fire

safety across the country and right

the wrongs of the heart of the UK

housing system?

Two things. Firstly,

with the work being done by local

authorities, we have made it clear

that we will provide them with the

financial flexibility if they needed

to do any necessary work for fire

safety. That has been clear from the

start. On the wider issue of social

housing and the wider lessons to be

learned, that is why we have the

green paper and that is why we will

publish the green paper in due

course after proper consultation.

I

commend my right honourable friend

for not only his statement today,

but keeping the House updated with

progress on this tragedy. Dame

Judith Kit is at building

regulations -- Dame Judi Dench it.

We have asked as a select committee

for her to look at part P of those

relations. At the moment, there

seems to be a lack of clarity over

the use of combustible materials

within high-rise buildings. Can my

right honourable friend commit to

thoroughly reviewing building

regulations, in particular taking

into account the evidence that has

emerged today? The reality is that

whilst fires may be retained within

a room normally, this was not normal

circumstances, but could happen

again because it was an explosion

caused by an electrical fire, which

could then be replicated once again.

My honourable friend is right to

raise this. He will know that Dame

Judith Hackitt's work is

independent. But I know she takes

the issue my honourable friend has

raised very seriously and my

honourable friend me know that in

her interim report, she recommended

a review of work to be done to

clarify and that work has already

begun within the department and we

hope to consult on that in the

summer.

This is obviously a worrying

development, reinforcing Dame Judith

Hackitt's interim findings of

cultural change needed across the

board referred to by the Secretary

of State. We look forward to her

conclusions, hopefully including the

updating of the gathered in document

B. What assistance cover Secretary

of State offer leaseholders now

facing bills of thousands of pounds

for fire marshals, replacement

cladding and now possibly for new

fire doors, when they have no

responsibility for the predicament

in which they find themselves? The

honourable gentleman asked the

question. The Secretary of State's

exhortations on property management

companies and freeholders are

falling on deaf ears. Leaseholders

are having to pick up the tab.

I

thank the honourable gentleman for

welcoming the work that Dame Judith

Hackitt is doing. On the issue of

leaseholders, the government

understands the situation they are

in. It is obviously distressing for

many people. I don't accept that

what I have said about the moral

duty of owners is falling on deaf

ears. There have been a number of

instances where we have got involved

and some of the private owners have

listened. They do not wish to be

public about it, but at least they

have helped and listened. I am

keeping the issue under review and

looking to see what more we can do.

I know we have all been deeply moved

by the dignity of the survivors, the

bereaved and the volunteers when it

comes to the Grenfell Tower

disaster. Many of us have also had

casework and individuals come to us

with concerns about where they live.

Can my right honourable friend

commit to continuing to do

everything in his power to ensure

that they get the help, the support

and the justice that they deserve?

I

am happy to make that commitment.

The work continues each day in my

department and across government

with the ministerial group that has

been set up to help the survivors of

the Grenfell disaster. I am happy to

reemphasise that commitment to my

honourable friend.

And I know the Minister to be a very

good communicator. I felt very good

at keeping the House informed. Any

criticism I now make, please bear

that in mind. But I do find that the

guidance he has given on a couple of

questions I have asked, I just don't

understand them. The fact is many

thousands of people in our country

have a black cloud hanging over

them. They may be a leaseholder,

they may be a freeholder, but they

can't get out of their minds because

they don't how much they are going

to be responsible for, and I have

begged him to say get these three

together. The Government should put

something in because they have

changed the standard. Let's get this

sorted, please.

With respect to the

honourable gentleman, this issue

around leaseholders and what can and

cannot be done, it is fast changing.

He may know that there was a legal

case waiting to be hurt, which are

making to conclusion a couple of

days ago. As I said earlier, we are

studying that outcome. But on the

point he has made about getting

people together, one thing we are in

the process of setting up as a Round

Table, with a number of interested

parties, including those

representing leaseholders, which I

think will help.

I commend my right

honourable friend forcefully

updating the House. Many citizens

are deeply concerned about fire

risk, and I am afraid about

Government of any colour. Could my

honourable friend please remind the

House that the strength of the panel

he has advising him?

I am happy to

do that. The expert panel I refer to

as chaired by the former London Fire

Commissioner and also the

Government's former Chief Fire and

rescue adviser. Also on the panel is

the chief executive of the building

research Establishment, the chair of

the national Fire Chiefs Council,

and the global director of a leading

construction company and also under

construction leadership Council.

The

expert panel 's recommendation that

no change in safety advice is

necessary will come as a surprise to

many people, so will the Government

insist that Damon Judith Hackett's

review into the fire regulation

assessments will make sure that

every high-rise building's

assessment will be published and

made of the Oval in an accessibility

form for the public, so that they

can get perhaps the reassurance from

that that I fear they want have got

from this report? -- want have got.

-- will not have got.

I hope the

public will be very reassured by the

advice of the expert panel, not just

because of the expertise that

presented on that panel, but also,

this is worth emphasising this, the

fact that they are working closely

with the National Fire Chief

Counsel, the Metropolitan Police and

the Government scientific officers.

I hope that gives more confidence to

the public and the honourable lady.

. May I thank the Secretary of State

for his statement. It is absolutely

vital that the victims of the

Grenfell Tower tragedy gets justice.

Does my honourable friend agree that

the only way to do this is to let

the police and the end independent

enquiry get on with their jobs?

All

in this House want to see justice

received for the victims of the

Grenfell Tower did it. That is why

there is an ongoing police

investigation. -- Grenfell Tower

tragedy. The investigation has the

full support of the Government.

I do

not find the Secretary of State's

statement reassuring. Nine months

on, he has come to the House to say

we have just discovered the fire

doors were defective, and only

lasted 15 minutes in the case of a

fire, not 30 minutes. My

constituents were told to stay put

on the basis that those doors give

the Fire Service time to come and

rescue people in tower blocks. He

says that this is not a systemic

problem, but what does that mean?

Were these defective doors fitted

knowing that will lasted 15 minutes?

Is the to blame? How widespread is

this? Is the manufacturer to blame?

Can we have another Secretary of

State to update as with the real

facts of what the situation is?

First I would say to the honourable

gentleman, there is a life police

investigation going on. He should

appreciate that it is an independent

investigation, a criminal

investigation taking place by the

police, and it would not be

appropriate for me to talk about

certain things publicly unless the

honourable gentleman is suggesting

we should jeopardise a life police

investigation. He is rightly asking

me about the investigation itself.

I'm happy to give him more

information. Not the police

investigation, but the work now

being led by the expert panel. There

is a documentary investigation into

the fire doors which is being led by

the police to see where these fire

doors, if it is a whole set of

doors, or a batch of doors, where

they might be in the country. There

is a fire testing investigation

being led by my department testing

after doors to see how widespread

the problem may be. There is also a

visual inspection and

declassification investigation going

on into the materials. I hope the

honourable gentleman appreciates

there is a lot of work to do, and it

is right that we do this thoroughly

and take the time to get it right.

I

thank the Secretary of State for

providing the assurances he has

done, which will be gratefully

received by my constituents. As you

will know, being my neighbouring MP,

he will know that the people of

Worcestershire have been deeply

touched by this tragedy. It has

affected people up and down the

country. Can you please give

assurances, are there any actions

that my local council meets today in

light of these latest findings? --

needs to take.

Immediately, soon

after this terrible tragedy, my

department conducted every council

in the country, and informed them of

what we knew at the time, and also

any immediate measures that we must

take. Since that time, councils have

been kept updated as we learn more

information, including the

information we have talked about

today.

Leaseholders in Liverpool are

already facing bills of £18,000 each

for the replacement cladding, and

who knows what this new announcement

might mean for them and other people

around the country. The original

development company was dissolved

four years ago. The current owner is

based in Guernsey. It is still not

known whether an insurance policy

apparently taken out by the original

developers will raise any funds are

told to meet these costs.

Leaseholders are told they will get

an answer, but they have not won

yet. The Secretary of State keeps

expressing some kind of sympathy for

leaseholders caught in this

situation, but what else can he do

to help my constituents in

Liverpool?

I think what the

honourable lady has highlighted as

the complexity of some of these

situations. I'm sure she appreciates

that, but despite that, we must do

as she suggests. Whatever can be

done to help individuals concerned

in these very difficult

circumstances, that is why we are

looking closely at the recent legal

judgment. I believe it is the first

time a tribunal has looked at that

kind of case. That is why we have

provided more funding for the

leasehold advisory service so that

leaseholders can get more instant

support, and also we are looking at

what more can be done and keeping

the situation in review.

I had the

privilege to complete the two Europe

Parliamentary fire safety scheme. I

have had a small introduction to the

horrors of fire and the bravery

displayed by our firefighters every

day. In that regard, fire doors are

absolutely crucial. What surprises

me about this enquiry is, who

certifies that these doors are meant

to last 30 minutes? -- what puzzles

me. If it has been demonstrated that

those last half that time, for those

behind those doors, 15 minutes may

not seem very long to ours now, but

for people can see fire through the

glass, it is crucial. Some question

is, who certifies 30 minutes?

My

honourable friend speaks with some

experience, and he is absolutely

right to ask that question. The

answer is, the door in question in

this case, because it is a 30 minute

resistance, or that is what it

should have been, the standard in

Britain must be tested against. Each

of those testing centres must be

accredited by the UK accreditation

service. I don't want to make any

judgments on what happened in this

case, because as I said, it is the

subject of a life police

investigation. The police say they

are getting full cooperation from

the manufacturer. I want to reassure

my honourable friend but, first of

all, the police are clearly doing

their work with that particular door

and doors of that type, and we are

doing the much wider testing this is

necessary.

Last night, one of my

parliamentary staff went on the

Grenfell Tower March, and talked to

some after which has been running in

a hotel room for nine months.

Despite the Government's promised to

rehouse these people, nine months

later, the figures show that 60 of

208 households are permanent homes.

I would like to know, with the

Secretary of State advice on what

was in the House when the Government

will properly rehouse these people?

Some sort of a timescale, because we

are hearing reassuring noises, but

these people are saying they are not

seen the action on the ground. Will

these people be rehoused in the

summer, autumn, Christmas, can we

have a timescale please?

I'm happy

to update the honourable lady. There

were 151 homes lost to the fire, but

209 households to find new homes

for. I think she knows why the

number might be higher. So far, 184

have moved out of the emergency

accommodation into either temporary

or permanent accommodation. That

leaves 25 households that have still

not accepted temporary or permanent

accommodation. I hope the honourable

lady can appreciate that whilst it

is absolutely right that we work at

pace and help those families to move

into permanent or temporary

accommodation as they choose as

quickly as possible, and by the way

they are now over 300 homes

available on the lettering system,

more than are required, but no

family can be pushed and told that

they must make a decision and that

they have no choice. It must be done

at their pace. I cannot go into the

details, but the 25 households that

are yet to accept temporary or

permanent accommodation, there are

quite contemplated factors some of

them. It would be inappropriate from

what I know to make those families

to make a decision if they are not

ready.

I very recently, and continue

to be, dealing with concerns

regarding the construction of a

tower block in my constituency. The

concerns are that the cladding meets

the building regulations, but it is

not fire safe. So when it has been

tested, it is deemed not to be fire

safe. When are we going to get

around to sorting out the building

regulations to make sure all about

our blocks are safe, and that the

body can feel safe in their homes?

-- everybody can feel safe.

I'm not

aware of the particular tower block,

but the honourable lady wants to

give me more on it, I and happy to

take a closer look. I'm not aware of

any case where the cladding has

passed building regulation tests but

the tower block is not deemed safe.

In every case that I have referred

to other, the number of buildings

that need the cladding removed, it

is our view that none of that

cladding meets building regulations.

That is exactly why it needs to be

moved.

The Secretary of State is

well aware of the messy and as yet

unsolved situation with leaseholders

in Greenwich. Last week, the

community found out about another

development in Greenwich that has

dangerous cladding on some of the

towers. I do not intend to go into

the details, but my question to the

Secretary of State is this. How on

earth, nine months on, can we still

be finding out about additional

freehold developments that have

lethal material around some of the

blocks on?

In August last year, I

wrote to every single local

authority and asked them to carry

out the work of finding all the

local private sector buildings in

the area and providing support for

them. In fact, we just give

additional funding to with that. Any

of them have taken with the right

urgency, and working at pace. --

many of them. Some of them are still

discovering buildings because partly

it requires the cooperation of the

private sector. We have spoken to

many private sector institutions,

and I think it would be wrong to

blame local authorities for this. It

is right that we work with them and

give them only support what is

necessary to find these buildings.

After Grenfell, the three bar MPs

were to the Secretary of State

asking for help to retrofit

sprinklers in more than 170 tower

blocks in the borough. That was a

clear request for financial support.

It is simply disingenuous to claim

no request has been turned down. The

department dismissively said it

would assess the council's means of

doing the works itself. Nine months

on, how is that assessment coming

along? Has it been designed? When

will it be published and when Will

Southwark Council be given the

resources to complete the works?

We

have made it clear that all local

authorities including Southwark

Council shall determine for

themselves what work is required for

fire safety. That is the number one

issue. And if they need financial

flexibility to help pay for that,

that will not be turned down. We

have more than 40 local authorities

that we are in discussion with.

There is not one local authority

that has wanted to discuss this

where we have turned out that

discussion. We want to give them the

financial flexibility they need.

As

a west London near neighbour,

residents in the London borough of

Ealing can see Grenfell, the charred

coffin in the sky was bypassed by it

yesterday and my constituent John

Metcalfe was at the silent march

last night. He says that there were

massive numbers and the sense of

injustice was overwhelming. The

minister has repeatedly said public

safety is paramount. What is he

doing to instil public confidence

into the inquiry and the aftermath?

Identikit was ever there. -- I don't

think it was that.

The honourable

lady is right to raise the issue of

building more public confidence with

the local community, not just the

former residence of Grenfell Tower,

but the immediate community. Much

work has been done both by the

Council, as well as residents

themselves, with government support,

for example the group that has been

set up by the victims of the

tragedy, Grenfell United. We have

worked with them and given them

support and we will continue to do

that. But I think she will

appreciate it may take years to

build the right level of confidence.

Part of that process is also making

sure the community is listened to at

every step of the way and they are

treated respectfully. For example,

the news that I have shared with the

house today, I determined it was a

very important that the bereaved

were told last night in advance of

them not hearing at first in

Parliament. That is the way we

continue to work with the community

and help in every way we can.

I

would like to say about the

Secretary of State's commence on

housing survivors do not equate with

my experience. We have many

households still waiting for any

kind of offer that is suitable for

them. But my question goes back to

the fire door situation. I had a

message this morning from an elderly

architect friend of mine. He was

active and worked as part of the

team on the Grenfell Tower and

estate. From his experience, the

architects of the time were

specifying fire doors of one hour.

Architects knew what they were doing

in those days and they designed the

building and signed off at the end

of it. They were responsible from

beginning to end. In the 1970s, fire

doors were supposed to last for one

hour. What are now down to 30

minutes. Can we please reconsider

whether or not, in buildings of that

size, half an hour is enough?

First

of all, let me reiterate the latest

figures I have of the 209 households

from Grenfell Tower that need to be

rehoused. 184 have accepted offers

of temporary or permanent

accommodation. It leaves 25 that

have not accepted either offer us

back. There are now over 300 units

available of different sizes and

types in different locations, and

the family liaison officers and key

workers are working with each

family. As I said earlier, we will

not rush this. It will be done at

the pace that the survivors want.

She asked me about the fire doors

and whether one hour is correct

versus half an hour. This is exactly

one of the reasons why I have set up

the independent building regulation

fire safety inquiry, the work being

done by Dame Judith Hackitt. I know

this is an issue she will be looking

at.

We now, to a ministerial

statement. It is on the Burma

update. Minister of State. Mark

Field.

Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you

for the opportunity to update the

House on the desperate plight of

Burma's Rohingya. In the week that

the UN fact-finding mission on Burma

has reported the human rights

Council with its interim findings.

The insert the community has

repeatedly called upon the Burmese

authorities to allow that

fact-finding mission to enter Burma.

Regrettably, Burma continues to

refuse access. Despite this, through

interviewing Rohingya refugees in

both Bangladesh and Malaysia, the

interim report revealed credible

evidence of widespread and

systematic abuse, rape and murder of

Rohingya people and the destruction

of their homes and villages,

primarily by the Burmese military.

This is not only a human tragedy, it

is a humanitarian catastrophe. Since

August 2017, nearly 680,000 Rohingya

refugees have sought shelter in

Bangladesh. There have been some

suggestions, including by the

Foreign Affairs Committee, that the

UK failed to see this crisis coming.

With respect, I disagree. Let us be

clear what led to this situation.

The Rohingya have suffered

persecution in Rakhine for decades.

Such rights as they have had have

been progressively diminished under

successive military governments.

They have been victims of systematic

violence before, most recently in

2012 and late in 2016. On these more

recent occasions, Rohingya fled

their homes, some to internally

displaced persons camps elsewhere in

Rakhine, some to other nations over

land or sea. So the outbreak of

vicious hostility these past six

months is only the latest episode in

a long-lasting cycle of violence. We

have been urging the Burmese

civilian government to take action

to stop that situation deteriorating

since it came into power two years

ago. What was unprecedented and

unforeseen about this most recent

violence was its scale and

intensity. A recent report by the

international crisis group rightly

noted that there can be no military

solution alone. The August the 25th

attack by the Salvation Army

militants from Burmese security

forces was clearly an unacceptable

and deliberate provocation, but the

Burmese military's relentless

response since has been utterly

appalling and entirely inexcusable.

Its operations only last week on the

Burma border with Bangladesh were

supposedly directed against another

wave of militants. Whether or not

that explanation is to be believed,

the impact of the Burmese military's

actions was to terrorise thousands

of Rohingya living in the area and

to encourage ever more civilians to

cross over into Bangladesh. I once

again commend the generosity of the

government and people of Bangladesh

for opening their doors to these

desperate refugees. The UK remains

one of the largest bilateral aid

donors to the crisis. We have

committed some £59 million in the

past six months to help ensure the

refugees' well-being. This includes

5 million of matched funding for the

generous public donations from

British citizens to the Disasters

Emergency Committee appeal. My right

honourable friend, the International

Development Secretary, visited

Bangladesh last November and

announced the latest UK package of

support including four survivors of

sexual and other violence. We

anticipate the multi-agency plan for

the next phase of humanitarian

support from March till the end of

the year to be published imminently.

As the International Development

Secretary herself has confirmed

during her Bangladesh visit, the UK

remains and will remain committed to

the Rohingya now and, I suspect, for

many years to come. At the end of

last year, the UK Government

deployed British doctors, nurses and

firefighters from our emergency

medical teams to Bangladesh to

tackle an outbreak of deadly

diphtheria in the refugee camps. In

northern Rakhine, where humanitarian

access remains restricted, the UK is

providing £2 million support via the

World Food Programme and a further

million via the Red Cross, one of

the few international organisations

that has access to that part of

Burma. We stand ready to do more as

soon as we are permitted full

access. We continue to work in

cooperation with international

partners to find a solution to this

crisis, focusing international

pressure on the Burmese authorities

and security forces. At the UN

Security Council, the UK has since

the final week of August repeatedly

raised this crisis as an issue for

debate, most recently on the 13th of

February this year. The existence of

the UN fact-finding mission is in no

small part due to British diplomacy,

and I have personally engaged and

will continue to do so with its

members. Last November, the UK was

instrumental in securing the first

UN Security Council presidential

statement on Burma for a decade,

which delivered a clear message that

the Burmese authorities should

protect all civilians within Burma,

create the conditions for refugees

to return and to allow for

humanitarian access in Rakhine

state. Late last month, I was

privileged to attend the EU foreign

affairs Council in Brussels, where a

programme of sanctions against

senior Burmese military figures was

outlined. This was approved

unanimously and we hope to bring

this work soon to the attention of

the UN Security Council. Many

honourable members in this House

remained committed to helping

resolve the appalling situation

faced by the Rohingya community and

I welcome that continued engagement.

I visited both countries myself in

September and returned to Burma in

November. During these visits, I met

displaced Rohingya, but also Hindu

and Buddhist communities in Rakhine

and heard harrowing accounts of

human rights violations and abuses.

It was clear that these communities

remain deeply divided and there is a

palpable sense of mutual fear and

distrust. I also met State

Counsellor & Sukhi, the Ministry of

Defence and the deputy Foreign

Minister to reiterate the need to

take action to end the violence and

to allow a path towards the safe

return of the refugees. During his

visit to Burma last month, my Rthe

Foreign Secretary also pressed in a

personal meeting with Aung San Suu

Kyi that the necessary steps be

taken to create the conditions

conducive for the return of

refugees. He flew over Rakhine and

saw for himself the scale of the

destruction of land and property

that has taken place. He also

visited Bangladesh, where he met

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and

Foreign Minister Ali and visited the

camps in Cox's Bazar, hearing

distressing accounts from survivors

as well as their heartfelt hopes for

a better future and their desire to

return safely to Burma. I think our

visits have reinforced our

determination to help resolve this

appalling crisis. I recognise that

this House remains committed to

ensuring that the human rights of

refugees across the world and

particularly of the Rohingya are

protected and we welcome the

resolution of the House as recently

as the 24th of January 20 -- 2080.

We believe there are four

priorities. First, we must continue

to address humanitarian needs,

especially the needs of victims of

sexual violence in both northern

Rakhine and in Bangladesh. This

includes assisting the humanitarian

agencies working in the vicinity of

Cox's Bazar to help prepare for the

approaching monsoon and cyclone

season, which commences potentially

in a matter of weeks. We shall

continue to work with international

humanitarian agencies delivering aid

in Rakhine state and to support

Baghdad addition in its efforts to

help those fleeing the violence.

Secondly, we must continue the

patient work towards achieving a

safe, voluntary and dignified return

of refugees. We shall press for the

UNHCR to oversee this process and

ensure full verification of any

returns on both sides of the border.

As the globally mandated body, the

UNHCR remains best equipped to

oversee this process. Thirdly, we

must continue international progress

towards bringing to justice the

perpetrators of human rights

violence including sexual violence

in Rakhine. The international

community has agreed to make the

case to the Burmese authorities for

a credible, transparent inquiry, and

United into national pressure is

essential to achieve this aim. The

UN fact-finding mission is just the

first, but an important step in what

is likely to be a long road ahead.

It produced its interim report on

Monday, reflecting the violent

military led actions against the

Rohingya and other minorities in

Burma. We shall continue to support

its important work, including urging

Burma to allow the mission and

restricted access. We shall also

continue to provide support to build

the capacity of the Bangladesh

national human rights commission to

properly investigate and document

sexual violence amongst Rohingya

refugees. As Canada's special envoy

to Burma has said, and I saw him at

the Foreign Office a few weeks ago,

those responsible for breaches of

international law and crimes against

humanity must be brought to justice.

This applies, in my view, to all

involved, state and non-state

actors, senior military personnel

and all individuals in authority.

The UN special reporter for human

rights in Burma recently stated in

the conflict has all the hallmarks

of genocide. However I must tell the

House that the only path to

prosecution for genocide or crimes

against humanity is via the

International Criminal Court, it is

a legal process. Burma is not a

party to the Rome Statute and must

either prefer itself to the court or

be referred by the UN Security

Council. Neither eventuality is

likely I fear in the short term.

That should not stop us from

supporting those who are continuing

to collate and collect evidence for

use in such a future prosecution.

Finally, to achieve a long-term

resolution to the crisis in Burma, I

believe that even in these desperate

circumstances, the UK should play a

leading role in trying to support

democratic transition and the

promotion of freedom, tolerance and

diversity. We will continue to

engage attempts to peacefully

resolve many of Burma's on internal

conflicts and to bring all parts of

the state apparatus under democratic

civilian control. We stand ready to

lead the international community in

ensuring implementation of Kofi

Anand's recliner advisory committee

report. This is designed to deliver

the relevant for the people of Kainz

date including the Rohingya and

address the underlying causes of the

crisis. --

making progress on ensuring

citizenship for the Rohingya who are

otherwise regarded by many as

stateless and giving confidence that

they have a future as fully fledged

citizens of Burma. Furthermore the

situation in Burma serves as the

clearest possible example of why our

government will continue to uphold

its commitments to early warning and

preventing the risk of atrocity

crimes. In the context of broader

conflict protection and peace

building work. The lessons from this

human tragedy must be used to

prevent similar situations

developing in the future and I stand

ready to work with members across

the House and NGOs with a real

passion in this area to get a

framework in place for the feature.

The UK Government intends to remain

the vanguard of international action

to support a full range of

humanitarian, political and

diplomatic efforts to help resolve

this appalling situation. We shall

continue to press Burma to

facilitate safe, voluntary and

dignified return to the winger

Muslims under the oversight and

properly, fully to address the

underlying causes of this violence.

-- Rohingya Muslims. We must not

lose sight of the fact that the

Rohingya community have suffered for

generations and will need continued

support to live their lives they

choose. Nor will we fail to take

account of the wider picture in

Burma and the potential that

sustained motion has towards an

open, democratic society with the

opportunities it would offer all its

people. We shall push forward with

persistence, focus and energy. It is

our international and our moral duty

to do so.

Let me thank the Minister

for that clear and comprehensive

update of the situation of the

Rohingya and for giving me a advance

sight of his statement no one can

doubt the effort and commitment that

he and his officials personally and

any Foreign Office and on the ground

are putting into resolving this

issue. Can I welcome several

specific aspects of his update?

First, the interim report of the UN

fact-finding mission which both in

its level of detail about the

atrocities suffered by the Rohingya

and the unflinching language it uses

to describe those genocidal acts is

it vital first step in building a

case against the individuals

responsible. Second, I welcome the

public 's generosity and the

government 's continued commitment

to providing humanitarian relief to

the Rohingya refugees trapped. I

applaud the tireless work of British

medical professionals seeking to

stop the spread of disease in the

camps. Third, I welcome the Minister

of State's words concerning the role

of UNHCR in ensuring the safe,

dignified and voluntary return and

sustainable future for those

refugees, and the pressure the

international community must

continue to put on the government of

Myanmar, to allow the UNHCR to

dictate when and how it will be

appropriate to begin that

repatriation process. I welcome the

Minister of State 's continued

support for the Kofi Anand reports

and invite all, long-term reforms

set out in that report to give full

rights and lasting protection duty

wrecking the community in Myanmar.

We all know the Democratic and civil

society development have not

improved as we had hoped two years

ago. Only this week I was hearing

about 100,000 displaced people in

another state as well. Fifth, I

would like to welcome the progress

he mentioned in terms of agreeing EU

wide sanctions against leading

Myanmar generals. Only two weeks

ago, Foreign Office ministers were

avoiding a debate and then voting

down our amendments, so I was

pleased that the Prime Minister

expressed a change of heart

yesterday, not least because we

noticed that the United States had

used these magnets keep provisions

in order to sanction one of the

generals. Can I also ask the

Ministry of State if you specific

questions? First, he talked about

the importance of providing support

for victims of sexual violence and

documenting the abuse they have

suffered with a view to bringing

prosecutions at some future date

against those responsible. But he

will know that it is a concern

across the House that when we last

received an update on Myanmar, it

was confirmed that only two of the

70 sexual violence experts employed

as part of the governments of ending

sexual violence initiative in 2012

have been deployed, had been

deployed, to work on these cases.

Can I ask the Minister of states,

have more of those staff now been

deployed to the refugee camps? Are

the two experts still there? What

are the numbers of people now

working to support victims and

document their evidence. What

percentage of the victims of sexual

violence does he estimate have now

received support and have their

cases documented, whether by UK

experts or other agencies working on

this issue. Secondly, he noted the

impending monsoon season, and we are

all aware of the risk those heavy

rains could turn the existing

humanitarian crisis in the refugee

camps into something even more

catastrophic. Especially in terms of

the spread of waterborne disease.

So, can I ask the Ministry of State

what assessment he is and his

officials have made, both in the

shortfall in funding to support

refugees and the expected shortfall

if the monsoon season makes the

crisis worse? If those numbers are

as high as many of us fear, what

emergency action is the government

taking with our international

partners to try and plug those gaps?

Third and finally, we must return to

the issue of how we can best ensure

the safe, voluntary and we dignified

repatriations -- dignified

repatriation of Rohingya refugees

and how we can ensure those

responsible for the atrocities

against them are brought to justice.

On both issues, while I appreciate

what the Minister has said about the

pressure the UK has exerted behind

the scenes at the UN, in terms of

setting up the fact-finding mission

and obtaining the Security Council

presidential statement, he will

understand the long-standing view on

this side of the House that it is

time to go further and be more

public in using the UK's formal role

as pen holder on Myanmar in the UN

Security Council. To table

resolutions on these vital issues.

First, to table a resolution setting

down the terms under which

repatriation process should proceed,

and the future rights and

protections that must be accorded to

the Rohingya refugees, and

obligingly Myanmar authorities to

exceed these terms. Secondly, at the

appropriate time, to table a

resolution referring Myanmar to the

International Criminal Court, so

that the generals who this week 's

endlessly dismissed the UN's claims

of ethnic cleansing and genocide and

said instead that the Rohingya had

burned down their own houses, so

that they could be brought to

account. The Minister of State spoke

with candour on the second point,

admitting that such a resolution

would be difficult to get past the

security council. I would like to

ask him to expand on this issue.

What steps has the government taken

to engage with Myanmar's near

neighbour, China, and did the Prime

Minister raise this issue with the

Chinese on her recent trip? Many of

us fear that if we do not act

quickly to break this stalemate,

especially with the monsoon season

coming, we will be having these

types of updates for too many months

to come, and the humanitarian crisis

the Minister has described it will

only get worse.

Can I give a bit of

advice to both benches? It's meant

to be ten and five, I think one was

16 and the other was seven, so in

future if you could keep to that, I

didn't want to stop because it's an

important subject but just for the

record.

Thank you, Mr Deputy

Speaker. The Speaker's office was

made aware we wanted a slightly

longer statement on this, I

appreciate the kind words of the

Honourable Lady. In support of

broadly what we are trying to do,

and I am keen we try as far as we

can to work together and I

appreciate inevitably these issues

can be partisan as well but I think

there is a way in which this House

can expressed its strong views not

least given our pen holder status.

Let me touch on a view of the

broader issues she mentioned. In

relation to sexual violence, I will

come back with some details about

how many civilian experts we have on

the ground and what their ongoing

situation is and the work being

done. We are confident that

significant progress has been made,

Rohingya women and children remained

very vulnerable to gender-based

violence and sexual exploitation. A

range of organisations, even if they

are not necessarily from the UK

authorities, are working very

closely with other organisations who

have specialties in this field to

provide that specialist help

survivors of sexual violence. This

includes some 30 child friendly

spaces to support children with

protective services and

psychological and physiological

support, 25 women's centres offering

a safe space and support to the

activities of women and girls, and a

lot of case management for the 2190

survivors of sexual and gender based

violence. We are also working on the

ground with some 3000 women being

provided with midwifery care. We are

also having to fund the provision of

medical services, counselling and

psychological support. I will come

back to the Honourable Lady in

writing with some further details of

the issues she raised on that point.

As to the impending cyclone and

monsoon season, this is obviously a

matter of grave concern. Working

with international partners, the UK

has done huge amounts already to

ensure some course of a million

people continue to have access to

safe drinking water throughout the

rainy season, we have support in

Kolarov, measles campaigns. More

space will be cleared for further

camps if existing plans become

uninhabitable. I should also say

immediately after this statement I

am hoping to meet along with my

colleague in the House of Lords, to

meet the Bangladeshi Foreign

Secretary, the most senior civil

servant with foreign affairs

responsibilities, I have met him on

some occasions before, both here and

abroad. I undertake that I will be

discussing the concerns, urgent

concerns about cyclone related

issues.

Let me say a little bit about

returns and first of all confirm

that at her meeting in February in

China, the Prime Minister made it

very clear in a private session with

counterparts the concerns we felt

about this issue and trying to get

through the UN process. I am hopeful

that continued pressure...

Unfortunately, DeVito, it is not

just China, Russia as well --

DeVito. I hope we can put pressure,

not least with the interim support

being finalised, as the situation

remains high profile, a sad

situation, I had hoped to come to

the House on Monday, but other

business, this was the first

available opportunity to speak to

the House. One of the biggest fears

all of us have had and the

Bangladeshi authorities is that the

eyes of the world move away to other

issues. I believe it may return, not

least because if things go as Disney

as they might do in relation to the

cyclone season. -- dismally. We will

work towards a UN Security Council

resolution to call the Burmese

authorities to account. She touches

on the Magnitsky issue, she is

right, it provides an opportunity.

Unlike many former Russian citizens

in this country, it is probably fair

to say many of the Burmese senior

figures do not have huge financial

interests, either in assets, wanting

to arrive here for visas, having

children in schools, it is not

somehow a silver bullet, if the

Magnitsky arrangements are passed

into law, that this will make a

massive difference as far as

sanctions against senior Burmese

folk are concerned, but we will

continue to work on that. Finally,

just to touch on, others may wish to

raise this as well, on the issue of

the returns process, she will be a

one the government limit of

Bangladesh and Burma signed an

agreement, but as it stands, to be

honest, it is not just the UK,

everybody there would assess that

Northern Rakhine is simply not safe

for returns. I spoke at great length

with the Lord on the advisory

commission and we had a meeting in

the Foreign Office last week and he

had seen on the ground and spoken to

people, it is clear we are still, I

fear, quite a considerable way from

there being any possibility of safe

voluntary or dignified returns to

Rakhine State.

We should not forget

the plight of the Christian

community to whom we owe a

particular debt of honour,

dispossessed by violence and

prevented from returning by mining

interests, and a sinister link

between the two.

My right honourable

friend makes an entirely fair point,

it was alluded to by the honourable

lady, that the issues around

minority communities are not

restricted to Rohingya, this is the

largest community treated in an

appalling way by the Burmese

authorities, but there are other

minorities in the country and

Christian minorities being

persecuted and we will continue to

keep the pressure on the Burmese

authority.

Thank you. I would like

to also thank the Minister for

advance sight of the statement. It

goes without saying in this House,

the humanitarian tragedy has reached

an unthinkable scale. I visited with

the international development

committee last week in mega camp in

Bangladesh, the enormity of what you

see when you have almost 1 million

people and three, four square miles,

it is quite unbelievable, lost for

words to explain just how big the

humanitarian emergency years. There

are 500 people still coming across

every week, across the border, from

Burma to Bangladesh, stories of

atrocities and loss, murder, rape

and the rest. Right now we're facing

an imminent challenge, as we heard

earlier, weeks away, running out of

time, the monsoon pending, potential

cyclone. I want to hear more from

the Minister on what specifically

has been done on this, flooding and

imminent landslides, it could lead

to further devastating loss of lives

and subsequent waterborne diseases.

The UK Government plans to work

towards returning refugees to Burma,

slow and considered. We share the

view of the UN in the SNP and aid

groups that this could cross the

refugees back into danger and lasts

week we heard from the Bangladesh

minister it is unsafe for the

Rohingya to return. We welcome the

report by the UN fact-finding

mission which adds to the

overwhelming evidence that what has

taken place in Burma is human rights

violations of the most serious kind,

like amounting to crimes under

international law. We hope the UN

special Rapoport said it had the

hallmarks of genocide. My own city

of Dundee is considering the

withdrawal of the freedom of the

city given to Aung San Suu Kyi for

human rights and democracy and for

upholding international law and for

my constituents, it is profoundly

important. The Minister has said he

does not agree with the conclusion

of the Foreign Affairs Select

Committee inquiry that the UK failed

to see the crisis coming. This

conclusion was backed by

overwhelming evidence. The unchecked

hate speech, lack of government

control over security forces,

non-state and pseudo- non-state

groups, no growing nationalist

support the military and increased

incidences of identity -based

attack, serious indicators of

escalating violence against the

Rohingya. It would help to predict

incidents of violence, mass

atrocities and institutional

violence... May I urge the work on

the index starts immediately and may

I urge the Minister to announce

today he will begin the work to get

the index and away? Could he say

what lessons have been learned

regarding atrocity prevention and

how they will be applied in Burma

and elsewhere in the future?

I think

the spokesman for the SNP for his

kind words about our work that we

are trying to do across Parliament,

together. On the Cyclone

preparedness, the UK is working with

a number of partners in Bangladesh

to work on strengthening

infrastructure and ensuring at risk

households are provided with shelter

materials, part and parcel of the

process is to try to persuade the

Bangladeshi authorities, and I will

do that in this meeting this

afternoon, and we will express the

strength of feeling that we need to

open up more space in order that the

confinement that the refugees are

under which potentially could be

calamitous if a cyclone hits in that

area, that the confinement is

restricted as far as possible. Let

me say, I did not... I did not wish

to be critical of what the Foreign

Affairs Committee had concluded, not

least with the chairman sitting in

the benches behind me, the issue was

really this has been an issue on

Burma that we have not been quiet

for the fact that the Rohingya were

continually going to be under

pressure, the notion it came out of

the blue sky is one that we would

contend is not the case. I have to

say, being candid, everyone had a

sense of wishful thinking, speaking

earlier on, the right honourable

gentleman for New Forest West who

had a Dfid role and was Minister at

that time, not blaming him, the

whole international community was so

hopeful that after decades of

military rule in Burma, going back

to 1962, the creation of the state

in 1947, 48, arguably, suddenly, we

would have a big surge towards

democracy. The constitution that we

were all party in the international

community to seeing set up and I'm

afraid, it provided a massive

difficulty from day one once Aung

San Suu Kyi became the state

councillor. The power still in the

hands of the military meant we

overlooked, for example, the

Rohingya, their rights, they were

not included in the census, they

were not allowed to vote. We

recognise in hindsight that gave

succour to the Burmese military to

think they could get away with what

they have got away with. There was a

lot of wishful thinking. Some of the

best motivations in the world, we

wanted some progress, and after

decades of the darkness in a

military dictatorship, almost a

close state, we looked upon any

advancement as being something we

should grasp hold of and it is a

lesson for the future. I want to

work with many NGOs, the approach as

a good example of a group to try to

work to wards having a set of

policies together that we can look

at conflict prevention for the

future. Whilst many hundreds of

thousands of lives have been

blighted, tens of thousands have

been ended by this dreadful event,

and we know that this is still

ongoing. The best legacy we can pay

to the Rohingya is not just to try

to get a better life for them, to

ensure they have citizenship, a

stake in the longer term in Burmese

society, but to ensure their

sacrifices, their hardship they have

gone through, that it can be used as

an example for the rest of the world

to ensure we have those changes.

That is ultimately partly an

academic and practical exercise and

we need to work again within the

international community to bring

that to pass.

The in October, I

believe I'm right in saying, one of

the largest and most congested

refugee camps in the whole world,

equivalent to the city the size of

Bristol, yet it has no hospital,

inadequate schooling facilities,

very few roads. It would seem to me

the biggest risk to the Rohingyas is

of an outbreak of disease in this

massive refugee camp and it would

seem to me that the number

humanitarian priority is that this

can't be broken up, extra space be

found, so that if the worst comes to

the worst, an outbreak, but it can

be contained -- the number one

humanitarian priority is that this

camp be broken up.

I agree. It is an

issue that the international

community will have to work together

with the Bangladeshi government

towards, but it is an issue we know

we are very much focusing on. In

disease prevention, I think we have

had a good track record, we can be

proud of the work we did to nip the

diphtheria outbreak in the bud, but

I am by no means complacent we will

not have similar diseases being

quite prominent, cholera, as well as

diphtheria, in the months to come.

Can I thank the Minister for his

complaints of statement today? I go

his words in describing this as

humanitarian catastrophe. Can I

reinforce what the honourable

gentleman from Kettering has just

said? The sheer scale of the camp,

ten times the size of the refugee

camp in Jordan. I welcome the fact

the Minister is meeting the Foreign

Minister from Bangladesh this

afternoon but can I pressed him that

really we need to say to Bangladesh

at the most senior level that more

needs to be done to prepare for the

rainy season, sightings and

monsoons? Can I urge that our Prime