07/03/2017 Lords Questions

I beg leave to ask the question standing in my name on the order

paper. My Lords, according to the latest data from the office for

national statistics, income inequality in the UK is at its

lowest level since 1986. The key to economic success and to reducing

inequality is to improve activity which determines living standards in

the long run, that's why the Government has established a

national productivity investment fund and published a Green Paper on

industrial strategy highlighting the role of improved skills, of

infrastructure, investment and of R and D. My Lords, the resolution

foundation argues to prevent the biggest increase in inequality since

the 1980s, requires a shift in social policy choices, notably the

freeze in most working age benefits in the face of rising inflation.

Will the Government now follow the advice of Iain Duncan Smith and

reconsider the freeze because he warned that it was never intended,

it should have such a dramatic impact - effect on incomes, his

words. Wouldn't it be the right thing to do to protect low income

families in and out of work in this way for a Government that claims to

be working for everyone? My Lords, I think we have to have a

little bit of context, savings are necessary to reduce borrowing and to

put the public finances back on a sustainable footing after the

financial crisis and between 1980 and 2014 spending on welfare

actually trebled in real terms to ?96 billion whilst GDP increased by

much less. Our approach is a different one. We are committed to

supporting working families with a whole load of measures, getting

people back into work... Thank you. Innovating, growing and putting the

country on it a good footing. It's only a forecast from the resolution

foundation, forecasts aren't always right and we're determined to make

the changes we need for this country.

Going back to the exchange about inequality... My Lords, the Minister

said whether any assessment has been made of the effect of the national

living wage on which inequality and whether there is anything more that

can be done in this respect? I thank my Nobel friend, because I

believe that the national living wage, brought in in April last year,

is a fantastic example of policies that the Government has introduced

to make work pay. In terms of looking forward, it will rise again

to ?7. 50 next month and it has already given the working, many

working people in Britain the fastest pay rise in 20 years.

Observers will have noticed that there's a startling contradiction

between the presumption in the question that income inequality has

been growing very sharply and the resumption in the reply that it's

doing the opposite. There are different measures but most of them

do think that inequality is growing. Wouldn't it be useful if the ONS did

convene a panel of people to get a little more clarity as to why these

figures can be banded around with such different descriptions of what

is happening. I think the ONS keep is honest, they look at these

figures over time and they helpfully update and the OBR forecasts are

updated all the time so that we can see what's happening. I would like

to come back to the point which is that the resolution foundation is

looking at a forecast but if you look at what has happened, five

years ago it was predicted, I think by the IFS, that there would be a

rise in inequality. In fact, it hasn't happened. Things continued to

progress and we have seen a recoveriy and that's what we need to

continue by having the right policies which this Government is

pursuing under our new Prime Minister. My Lords, I am shocked

that the Minister doesn't recognise that young working families are

facing serious financial pressure and struggling and that it looks as

though it's going to be worse with inflation. But would she agree that

part of the reason are the very high rents that most of these families

face, and would she be willing in the budget tomorrow to permit local

councils to go out and borrow the necessary amounts of money to drive

forward development of affordable rental housing. She has often

acknowledged that the housing market is broken, but all the Government

solutions are on the demand side, supply doesn't increase, especially

not in the affordable area. I wouldn't want to steal the

Chancellor's thunder today. I think that there is certainly some

provision for Prudential borrowing but I would like to come back to the

support that we give to working families. The national living wage,

already mentioned by my noble friend, that's given the fastest pay

rise in 20 years. We have raised the personal allowance to ?12500 by the

end of parliament. We are introducing universal credit which

has the benefit of making work pay so that you go out and work, you

aren't held back by benefit dilemmas. We are committed to make

work pay and we believe that is the very best way forward for the people

of this country, for hard working families which I agree are our

priority. My Lords, the Minister cannot

discount the resolution foundation in such a cavalier manner, it

produced very - it's got a strong reputation and it produced very real

and well-backed analysis. It said that higher incomes will rise but

slowly, middle incomes are going to stag and low incomes are going to

stall. -- stagnate and low incomes are going to fall. We know how

little is the base for low incomes for them to be able to afford to

fall without poverty increasing substantially. They say, the

foundation says it will be the biggest rise in inequality since the

late 1980s. I do not need to remind the House which party was in power

during that period and which Prime Minister, many of whose Cabinet

members of course are still with us. LAUGHTER

I would add that the resolution foundation report also says, which

is a point I have been emphasising, that economic forecasts can change

dramatically and there is no way of knowing just how the future will

play out. I believe that the approach we now have, including

industrial strategy, investment in infrastructure, housing, digital,

transport, all of this is making a big difference. We have protected

the most vulnerable through benefits system which is highly distributive

so households get four times in support as spending while they pay

in tax whilst the highest pay five times as much in tax as they receive

in pay. We want a fairer society and getting workless households into

work and improving productivity and skills is to my mind the best way

forward. My Lords, I beg leave to ask the

question standing in my name on the order paper.

My Lords, the Government's White Paper on exiting the EU was

published on 2nd February. It sets out the Government's priorities and

the broad strategy for exiting the EU and made clear that we will take

back control of our own laws. There are a number of options as to how EU

immigration might work once we have exited the EU, we are considering

those options and will consult businesses and communities.

Parliament will also have a critical role to play. Of course the main

pressure so-called is really from non-EU migrants. Why didn't the

Government years ago use clause 45 of the TFEU and particularly section

three and three A, C and D, to improcess the necessary civilised

restraints on migrants coming in with authorisation so that none of

the horrendous hostility to immigrants from all over would have

been so evident in the referendum on 23rd June?

My Lords, I think the noble Lord, I can't be accountable for what

happened in the past, I think we have been a very generous country in

terms of letting people come here for the purposes of work. What I can

say is that there was very clear message last year which is about

controlling the numbers of people who come into this country, both

from the EU and from non-EU countries and that is what we intend

to do and to keep parliament fully involved in the process. On 12th

January the Government stated in response to an oral question that,

quote, the drekive sets out in order for an EU citizen to reside in

another member state beyond the three months they must be exercising

a treaty right. That is working self-employed, self-sufficient or a

student. After being asked three times why it did not implement this

three month rule for EU citizens still here without a job but not a

student the Government said ap I quote, it's not a failure to

implement, this country is more than generous in its implementation of

that directive. Close quotes. Firstly, why does the Government

maintain that only by leaving the EU can we reduce EU mu gracious, when

the Government accepts it has not applied the EU directive three month

rule as firmly as it could have done but instead considers that it has

been quote, more than generous in its implementation of that drekive,

close quote, how much lower would the figure have been in each of the

last five years if the Government had applied the EU three month rule

directive as firmly as it believes it was entitled to do so?

My Lords, as the noble Lord said, we have been a very generous country

and certainly whern Labour were in power they decided not to exercise

the opt-out as the noble Lord was asking. In terms of what would the

figures have been. Had we adopted a different process, my Lords, we are

where we are. The country has given us a very, very clear message in the

referendum and we intend to follow that through in terms of making sure

that net migration to this country is in the tens of thousands. My

Lords,ish endeavour to be helpful to the noble lady, the Minister. The

previous questions have been about the past. Could I ask about the

future. Article 45 of the treaty on the functioning of the European

Union relates to free movement of workers, not people generally. I

wonder what thought the Government has given to the excellent report by

the House of Commons Brexit committee which also talks about the

rights of EU and UK national citizens with aspects of immigration

policy, including students, family reunion and on EU spouses compared

with non-EU spouses and I declare my interests as listed in the register.

My Lords, it is absolutely right that we settle and I am glad she's

talking about the future by the way, and not the past, probably neither

of us, certainly I don't remember, but certainly in terms of the

directive which is about the movement of workers and their

families, I think the Prime Minister's made it absolutely clear

about protecting the rights of EU nationals living in this country but

we talked a lot the other day in committee about the fairness of the

process and therefore protecting the rights of UK nationals in return.

The Government does not want to do this on a unilateral basis and we

need to think about all the people, UK nationals living in the EU, and

EU nationals living here. My Lords, the Minister actually has

been very patient with the House over recent questions and explaining

to us the rights of residency after five years' work of European

citizens. And also about the right of citizenship after six years. Can

she tell the House whether as regards citizenship if a European

citizen becomes a citizen of the UK, does that mean he or she has the

right to remain in this country? The noble Lord, I am grateful to him, we

talked about this at length the other day, and of course in terms of

residency rights, the right of residency, a person and by the way,

this is an EU law, and not a UK law, so all the talk we have about

comprehensive sickness insurance, this is EU law which we implement,

after five years of abiding by treaty obligations, the Noble Lord

is right, a person living i an EU national living in this country has

permanent residency, they do not have to prove that permanent

residency. But then he goes on to make another point, which is very

valid, which is to swish that from applying for British citizenship and

in that application process, which is based in UK law, that person has

to prove residency and not to be breaking any immigration rules after

six years, they will then be granted UK citizenship and the noble Lord is

right, they have the right to remain here.

I beg you to ask the question in my name on the order paper. This

government is committed to working for everyone in all parts of the

country. I am grateful for the report on rural proofing. We will

better understand the needs in those communities. The government is

revising its commitment to rural proofing. I welcome the work the

Ministry is doing, but why do so many government departments fail to

realise the big barrier of transport costs on people with low incomes.

They are so often cut off and excluded by the cost of transport.

Surely we can't allow ourselves to stumble into a situation where you

have to be well off to live in the countryside? I entirely agree with

the noble lord. It is important we enhance accessibility. Sparsity and

the typography of the countryside means there are challenges and that

is why I am pleased that the community minibus fund which was

launched will enable I think 300 local charities and community groups

to receive a new minibus which I think is going to be very helpful,

but clearly there is more that we want to do. I should say that the

whole issue of transport and accessibility is important, that

ball incidents, that under the Post Office transformation, all post

offices will have banking facilities. There are ways in which

we can assist rural communities. International apprenticeship week,

what is the government doing to encourage apprenticeships in rural

areas? The government is committed to reaching 3 million apprenticeship

starts by 2020. This includes trebling the amount of

apprenticeships in food and farming from 6000 to 18,000. National parks

are looking to double the number of apprenticeships and it is important

that we encouraged not only this week, but we work with employers of

all sizes. There is a new apprenticeship levy coming into

force in April this year for the larger businesses. This is an

enormous opportunity and raising the skills of young people in the

countryside and across the nation is a force for good. The commission for

oral communities was established in 2005 by the last Labour

Administration to promote awareness of rural needs amongst the

decision-makers across government. It produced the report on rural

lives, highlighting those living in poverty in rural areas can be harder

to identify and help. But the coalition government scrapped the

CRC in 2013. With issues of agriculture, trade and food policy

on Brexit, what structures are in force to ensure the interests of all

communities are heard and acted upon during these negotiations? I will

make sure the noble lord a copy of the revived rural proofing guidance.

I have been working on this and it is important that all departments

understand the issues of rural communities and that is why, and

also as the Minister for oral affairs, I am on a number of task

forces, connectivity and housing to mention two, precisely to ensure the

rural voice is heard. Given what the Minister has just said, I wonder if

he is concerned by the fact that in many rural and underprivileged

areas, libraries and leisure centres are under threat. These are the very

places that offer a glimmer of light to people who lead rather dark lives

in terms of entertainment and education. This rather takes me back

to my DC MS days and one of the things that strikes me is very much

how vibrant so many rural communities are, certainly in my

part of Suffolk. The amount of cultural activities, dance, 30,

music, it is incredible. We all want to improve, we all want to have

greater access ability to those things, but the noble Lord may be

painting a rather too pessimistic picture. Making work pay is a very

seductive slogan, but is a minister not aware that many of the families

who are worst of in our country have someone working in the economy. What

steps can the government take to ensure people are paid properly and

indeed earn at least a living wage? My Lords, it is a national living

wage and it is an obligation and I am very pleased that it is going to

rise to ?7.05 in April. That is why we want to ensure people on low

incomes, the increasing tax allowance and further coming through

is precisely to ensure that we are helping those at the lower end of

the income range. Rural proofing doesn't seem to have reached local

government where many local services have been withdrawn from villages

into urban centres as a consequence of a very deep cut to local

government funding. I do wonder what advice the noble Lord the Minister

will provide to his fellow Secretary of State, or noble Lord Lord born

about funding for district councils and county councils to enable rural

proofing? As I say, the rural proofing guidance is to go across

Whitehall. DC old she is a very important government department in

that respect. The are considerable amounts of money going to these

organisations. We have to have a growing economy to afford all the

things we want to do. That is why this country is the fastest-growing

economy in the G7. That's important because it's only when we grow our

economy that we are going to have the resources to do many of the

things I'm sure your Lordships would wish to have done. With the Minister

care to correct his assertion about the national living wage and the

national minimum wage? Secondly, can the noble Lord the minister assure

me that when the government are putting in new free schools in areas

where there is no need in terms of numbers, they will have the needs of

the rural community in mind. I used to be the heads of the schools

committee in Lancashire. Come we be assured that the government enter

coming from Whitehall with little knowledge and step over the needs of

the local community. Some of those schools need money and investment.

My Lords, it is precisely why I suspect we are going to hear about

more investment because we want to enhance the opportunity of children

across the country and it is precisely why we have some schools

that are simply not up to the standard we want them to be and that

is why we will need to invest more and it is why I am a champion for

oral schools precisely because we want to ensure that there are

opportunities in rural areas in the same way they have them across the

rest of the country. As for the living wage, I will check Hansard,

but it will raise to ?7 50 per hour. I will ensure to see whether I've

made a mistake. My Lords, I take you to answer the question standing in

my name on the order paper. The police are operationally independent

of government. The investigation of allegations of sexual abuse and how

the police conduct these investigations including whether to

commission any form of internal enquiry are operational matters for

the relevant chief officer. It is for the Police and Crime

Commissioner to hold the force to accounts. My Lords, having served in

the Home Office for many years I understand about the operational

independence of the police, but, my Lords, it's gone beyond operational

affairs, it's become a matter of confidence in the police and the

police service. The Chief Constable of Wiltshire has gone beyond the

police duties of investigating allegations and following up

evidence and has pronounced a verdict of guilty on the late Sir

Edward Heath in respect of allegations of child abuse and has

done that even before he's enquiry is complete. The officer in charge

of the enquiry, having made a stupid mistake at the beginning, has now

been obliged to be withdrawn because of ill health. He is having, I

think, a nervous breakdown. Is it not high time the enquiry is being

pursued in a way which looks to many people more like a fishing

expedition than a serious pursuit of allegations and evidence. Is it not

time that this operation was reviewed independently? Either by a

retired judge, as in the case of operation Midland, or a retired

Chief Constable or recognised -- with efficiency and integrity.

Without talking about any single investigation, may I express my

concern of the people who have been wrongly named in the press and

certainly after they have died have had defamatory statements made about

them. In any investigation it is a matter for the police. If the... In

terms of complaints against the Chief officer, I took the bill

through myself and the act strengthens the independence of the

police complaints system. Any allegations of misconduct against

the Chief officer should be investigated by the IPC said. The

newspaper quotes last month came from an anonymous source claiming to

know... -- IPC C. I would like to ask my noble friend the Minister to

whom is this Chief Constable accountable? If not the Police and

Crime Commissioner for Bush and Swindon, surely not secret and

unnamed groups of people that he has decided to appoint. There are

increasing concerns about the conduct of this enquiry and we

really need to know who is this Chief Constable accountable to? I

thank my noble friend for that question and he will know that it is

not appropriate for me to comment on individual operational matters,

these being out of the relevant chief officer, but chief officers

are, as I have said held to account in respect of operational matters by

the Police and Crime Commissioner. An independent

review was commissioned recently. It talked about the secret and unnamed

group. My Lords, it is recognised as best practice that, and Bush police

have done that, but they have engaged a panel of independent

experts outside of policing who are providing ongoing scrutiny of the

investigation to make sure it's proportionality is right.

The newspaper quotes came from an anonymous source claiming to know

the views of the Chief Constable for Wiltshire thchlt raised issue of the

relationship between the police and the national press and makes the

case for Leveson part two even stronger.

Can we come to the role of of the police and crime commissioner to

which the Minister has referred. Because a second issue relates to

the call for a Government instituted judicial inquiry into the

investigation which Wiltshire Police. Could the Government confirm

in fact the Wiltshire Police and crime commissioner has the power to

commission such a judicial inquiry into an operation by his own force.

The third issue is that if any hard evidence actually emerged that the

Chief Constable had made the comments claimed by the anonymous

newspaper source, could the Government confirm that the

Wiltshire Police and crime commissioner could, under his

powers, suspend or dismiss the Chief Constable? In other words, isn't the

ball very much in the elected Wiltshire Police and crime

commissioner's court? Well, I think the noble Lord raises a very good

point in terms of what is the role of the police and crime commissioner

in this situation. Without talking about the specific case that the

noble Lord has asked about, it is for the police and crime

commissioner to make the decision to appoint, to suspend or to remove a

Chief Constable. In making the decision to compel a Chief Constable

to resign or to retire, a PCC is bound by certain requirements,

including acting reasonably and fairly and consulting the Chief

Constable and the local police and crime panel and a PCC may compel a

Chief Constable to resign or retire under section 38-3 of the police

reform and social responsibility ability of 2011. My Lords, before we

resume consideration of the bills report stage t may be for the

convenience of the House if I say a brief word about the arrangements

for its third reading, which we expect to take place this evening.

At the conclusion of report stage we will move to the question for short

debate in the name of the noble Lord. The legislation office will at

that point be working on making the bill available for noble Lords who

may wish to table amendments at third reading. The time scale for

this will depend on whether or not the bill needs to be reprinted. When

the bill is ready for amendments to be tabled, a notice will be put