26/10/2015 Monday in Parliament

Hello, and welcome to Monday In Parliament.

The House of Lords votes to delay the Government's cuts to tax

credits, after an afternoon of intense debate.

?3,120 from a family where he's in full-time work and she's caring

?3,120. We, really, my Lords, don't need to do this to them.

Is the Government doing enough to ensure our digital lives are secure?

This Government's data policy is chaos illuminated by occasional

And a piece of Parliamentary history - the first woman bishop to

I, Rachel, Lord Bishop of Gloucester,

swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance

But first, the showdown on tax credits in the House of Lords.

The Chamber was packed for the debate, which was opened by the

She urged peers to respect the financial supremacy of the House

of Commons, and she defended the Government's plans to cut

tax credits, which supplement the incomes of people on low wages.

This Government believes that as part of the overall package

of measures that support working people,

these changes to tax credits are right.

If we want people to earn more and to keep more of their own money,

we simply cannot keep recycling their money through

So, my Lords, that is the Government's case for these changes,

but with the amendments we are due to consider, there are

about our role in scrutinising secondary

legislation, and about the financial primacy of the other place.

There were four different motions on the table.

Lady Stowell said the Government could live with

expressing "regret" at the changes, but allowing them through.

But she said the motions from the cross-benchers, Labour

and the Liberal Democrats took the Lords into uncharted territory.

Three - those in the name of the noble Baronesses Lady Manzoor,

Lady Meacher and Lady Hollis, would, if agreed to, mean that

this House has withheld its approval to the statutory instrument.

And that would stand in direct contrast to the elected House of

Commons, which has not only approved the instrument, but reaffirmed its

I have been to see the Chancellor this morning at Number 11, and I can

confirm that he would listen very carefully, were the House to express

its concern in the way that it is precedented for us to do so.

And that is on the Right Reverend Prelate's amendment.

Does she accept that, as far as the amendment of Lady Hollis is

concerned, and the amendment in the name of the noble lady, Lady Meacher

is concerned, neither of those amendments are fatal to resolutions.

What those amendments do is withhold this House's agreement and approval,

to a statutory instrument that has been already approved

Lady Manzoor told peers about the Lib Dem motion, designed

We are talking about a measure that, according to the expert analysis

of the Institute For Fiscal Studies, will hit 3 million

My Lords, these are people doing the right thing, going out to work

They are exactly the kind of people the Government has said

Yet this change will have a seriously damaging impact

on their ability to keep their heads above water.

Fatal motions to regulations should be used incredibly sparingly, and I

wish we were not in this position, but I cannot think of a better

reason for this house to use such an option

children and the parents that go out to work to support them.

The cross-bench motion was designed to delay the changes.

The beauty of your Lordships' House, as we know, is to enable

Governments to think again if, in our professional judgment,

and to hold the elected House the Government to account.

My Lords, you can imagine that I do not take this action lightly.

I am acutely conscious of the threats made by the Government

My motion clearly leaves the matter in the hands of the elected House.

The justification for a delay is that the House of Commons will have

a full day debate and a vote on these issues, as I said on Thursday.

I understand that dozens of Conservative backbenchers are

urging the Chancellor to adjust the tax credit reforms,

Yes, there have been three votes on tax credits in the House

The Conservative MPs, not me, say they did not have

the information they needed when they voted for the cuts.

I hear that many of them are now livid about this.

The fact is, there was a vote in the other place last week.

There was a clear majority, and not a single Conservative member

voted in the sense that the noble lady is indicating.

Labour also wanted to delay the cuts.

That's a fig leaf, possibly disguising tensions in the Commons

My Lords, we can be supportive of the Government,

and give them what they did not ask for, financial privilege.

We can be supportive, instead, of the 3 million families facing

letters at Christmas telling them on average, they will lose up to

A letter which will take away 10% of their income on average.

We can and should offer transitional protection to existing families,

with council tax credits, be self-employed, whose median wage,

Families with disabled children, and carers, we could protect them.

Whereas new claimants, and those newly on universal credit?

Tony and Jacinta Goode, from my city of Norwich.

He is in full-time work, above the Living Wage.

She is a carer of two substantially disabled children.

Their Christmas letter will tell them

that they will lose ?60 a week. ?3120.

?3120, from a family where he is in full-time work, and she is

caring for two disabled children. ?3120.

We, really, my Lords, don't need to do this to them.

And next, the motion from the bishops.

I say to the Government that these proposals are morally indefensible.

It's clear to me, and I believe to very many others,

that these proposals blatantly threaten damage to the lives

This must not be the way to achieve the Government's

goals, at a cost to those who, if we believe the rhetoric, the Government

this seems punishing rather than encouragement.

And after four hours of powerful speeches,

the Government was defeated in two votes.

The Lords backed plans proposed by the cross-benchers and Labour to

Now, is the Government doing enough to protect Talk Talk customers

The telecoms company has acknowledged that a cyber attack

may have led to customers' bank details being accessed.

The Culture Minister, Ed Vaizey, was summoned to the Commons to

This is clearly a very serious matter.

We are all aware that Talk Talk suffered a very serious data breach

last week, and I want to reassure members of this House, and

of course, Talk Talk customers that may have been affected, that law

enforcement have been working very closely with the company

since the breach was noticed, and continues to do so.

But I also want to comment the Chief Executive of Talk Talk

for their openness and transparency since Talk Talk became aware of the

attack, and I know she will do all she can to protect her customers.

Today, up to 4 million people are wondering

what data they have lost and where a cyber attack will come from.

They are checking their bank accounts, their callers,

The Government needs to reassure us that

our digital lives are secure and help our digital economy to grow.

This Government's data policy is chaos illuminated by the occasional

Will the Minister acknowledge that all the innovation has come from the

criminals, whilst the Government sits on its hands, leaving it to

businesses and consumers to suffer the consequences?

We have invested more than ?860 million in cyber security.

We have a number of very, very effective schemes with

which to engage business, and it's worth remembering that this

money was invested at a time of economic austerities, and it was

one of the first decisions taken by the Coalition Government.

Constituents are getting calls, or apparent calls, and e-mails,

from companies saying that because of the Talk Talk situation,

They are saying, so that we know we are talking to

the right person, can we have your address and date of birth?

What is the Minister's advice to my constituents?

Well, clearly, this case has achieved a great deal

Common-sense, therefore, tells us that people will try

and somehow scam of the back of it, and my advice to his constituents

And also, my advice to honourable members, if

any honourable member has any issue with any constituents regarding this

case, where they feel that that issue is not being taken seriously,

Isn't it part of the problem here that all this information has to

be given online, and there is no opportunity for other forms, i.e.,

the old paperwork, which was safer, and many people feel more secure

in giving less data, but in a way that they have copies?

Well, the honourable gentleman makes an interesting point.

I think we now live in a digital world and we'll see more and more

companies engaging with their customers on a digital platform,

and indeed, it is important to stress, Mr Speaker, this is what

I'm sure all of us in this House transact with...

So, I'm not sure we can go backwards in that respect.

The challenge for Government is to engage with business and to

emphasise to them, as we have not been shy in doing, the importance of

So, won't the Secretary of State agree that telecom providers must be

held fully responsible for failing to protect confidential

data, and regulation needs to be strengthened to ensure this?

Free counselling from Talk Talk is meaningless twaddle, I'm afraid.

I thank the honourable gentleman for that extensive question, and

as I said earlier, obviously, the Information Commissioner's Office

will be looking at this data breach, and they do have extensive powers to

take action, and indeed to let the significant funds,

but we are always open, on their side of the house, two suggestions

As I said in an earlier answer, I will certainly be at the Information

Commissioner's Office to look at further changes which may need to be

You're watching Monday in Parliament with me, Kristiina Cooper.

Now, the future of children's centres came under the spotlight

Labour MPs challenged the closure of some centres but were accused

of "counting buildings" rather than the services offered to

It is crucial that we evaluate the impact

The Department for Education has funded the evaluation

of children's centres in England research and three interim reports

I expect the full impact report to be published later this year

in a consultation to follow on how children's centres can have

the greatest impact for local communities going forward.

Polfrey Sure Start, in my constituency, have twice been

rated outstanding for doing community-based work and culturally

So could the minister say what further steps can be taken to ensure

that they can continue supporting parents with this vital work?

Well, the honourable member is an excellent and assiduous MP, and

can I congratulate the sure start centre in her constituency for the

excellent work they are doing, which highlights that to look at the

future of children's centres, we've got to look at more innovation and

other ways of delivering services that work for local communities

In Enfield, we've had the closure of some 12 children's centres.

Head teachers tell me this is having the impact that more

and more children are not school ready, and this affects their

progress throughout their whole primary school career and beyond.

What's the minister intending to do to address that problem?

Well, the party opposite continue to count buildings when they talk

about children's centres rather than the services.

1 million families are benefiting from children's centres services

but in terms of school readiness, free childcare for disadvantaged

two-year-olds, all three and four-year-olds, is what is

delivering the school readiness that has seen record numbers

of children being ready for school according to the early

The minister continues to talk about the services that are offered but he

will be aware that the charity 4Children has recently highlighted

that over 2000 children's centres sites have had their budgets

significantly cut this financial year and that fewer centres are

Nearly 60% report cutting front line services, nearly 30% have

significantly cut the range of services they offer, 28% are now

forced to charge for services that would otherwise have been free

Is the minister proud of the government's legacy

Mr Speaker, firstly, can I welcome the honourable member

It's great to see many of their predecessors still

It's wonderful that new politics is being led by the same old faces,

I am proud of our record on children's centres that have

seen that record numbers of families receiving support

but also, a 50% increase in health visitors and also, we've expanded

We are on the side of the families that need children's centres most

Now, education is devolved to Wales and Scotland but SNP MPs were

concerned that decisions made in Westminster would end up

The proposed changes to tax credits will see 22,000 children in Scotland

lose their entitlement free school meals.

Our First Minister has pledged a safeguard entitlement to free

Can the Minister make a similar pledge to ensure that children

from the most vulnerable backgrounds in the rest of the UK remain

The honourable member would be aware that in the rest of the UK,

the majority of children who are entitled to free

school meals are children of parents who are on out-of-work benefits.

We are assessing the impact on what this would be and there is

nothing to say that people who are currently on free school meals will

Assuming that a similar percentage of children across the rest of the

UK will lose their entitlement to free school meals, as are estimated

in Scotland, how much does the Minister estimate that changes to

tax credits will save his department on free school meals

and how will Scotland see its budget cut as a result?

Mr Speaker, it is worth making absolutely clear that whatever the

position of tax credits are for the United Kingdom, eligibility for free

school meals in Scotland is a matter for the Scottish Government and I

would rather that the SNP didn't try to scaremonger

about what would happen in the rest of the United Kingdom but made it

very clear what they will do as far as a result of these changes.

Now, MPs have criticised the decision to

arrest three protestors during last week's state visit to the UK by

The protests took place during the President's procession through

One of the protestors placed under arrest was Dr Shao Jiang, a research

scholar who was involved with the 1989 Tiananmen Square protest.

He stands accused of an alleged breach of the peace

and suspicion of conspiracy to commit threatening behaviour.

The Metropolitan Police themselves have issued a statement

They reject any suggestion that they acted inappropriately.

They made it clear that, throughout the visit,

they had sought to facilitate peaceful protest and ensure that all

of those that wished to do so were allowed to express their views.

That is a fundamental British value of freedom of expression which I'm

Freedom of expression and association, which I'm sure this

Right honourable and honourable members from across the House will,

I am sure, share my deep concern of the way in which Dr Shao Jiang,

a former Chinese dissident and a veteran of the Tiananmen Square

protests of 1989, was arrested on Wednesday of last week on The Mall

and a short time later, two Tibetan students, one of whom was a British

citizen, were also arrested for attempting to display a Tibetan flag

whilst the Chinese President's cavalcade was passing the

Dr Shao, who's now a British citizen, stepped out into the road

while he was trying to display two A4-sized placards, protesting

against China's human rights abuses when he was tackled to the ground by

Mr Speaker, there is an ongoing police investigation.

Three people are on bail while the investigation continues

and I'm not going to jeopardise the case or any investigations

Does the Minister share my shame at the reported harassment

of a Tiananmen Square survivor, Dr Shao Jiang?

What will the Minister do if peaceful protesters,

like myself or other peaceful protesters in this Chamber, get

a knock on the door in the middle of the night from the police?

I'm not going to prejudge an investigation

by the Metropolitan Police, which I have a huge amount of respect for,

like I do the other 42 authorities that I'm responsible for.

Let's wait and see, not prejudge a case,

It seems to many people that what took place was British police action

with Chinese characteristics. I wasn't there. I saw the TV coverage.

The officers made a decision to arrest.

What I'm going to ask him to do is tell me if he can think of any

reason, hypothetically speaking, any reason why somebody waving their

country's flag should lead to them being arrested, put behind bars and

having their mobile phone and PC taken from them?

Mr Speaker, with all due respect, this may become slightly repetitive.

And so he urged her to wait for the investigation to finish.

The Speaker, John Bercow, has been explaining how the new

procedure known as English Votes For English Laws, or Evel, will work.

Last Thursday, the Commons voted to give MPs with constituencies

in England a greater say in policies that only affect England.

It will be the Speaker's job to decide what England-only issues are.

After a government bill has been introduced,

a note will be published in the appropriate place on the order paper

to the effect that I have not yet considered it the certification.

The same process will be followed for statutory instruments

If I sign a certificate, the note on the order paper will be

Any certification will also be recorded in the votes

I do not propose to record a decision not to certify.

At the end of report stages of bills, where I am required to

consider any matter for certification, I would, as

a matter of course, expect a brief suspension of the House so that I or

a Deputy can leave the chair and decide whether to certify.

Similar brief suspensions may be necessary but later stages.

I propose to accept the advice of the procedure committee not,

as a rule, to give reasons for decisions on certification

during this experimental phase of the new regime.

As set out on Thursday, we are an experimental territory

and I may indeed myself experiment by adjusting these arrangements

Whatever the views of colleagues on their merits, I hope that

the House will support me and the offices of the House in trying

to give effect to these standing orders to the best of our ability.

And we end with a piece of parliamentary history.

A woman bishop joined the House of Lords for the first time.

The Bishop of Gloucester, Right Reverend Rachel Treweek, has said

that God should be seen as neither male nor female but simply as God.

I, Rachel, Lord Bishop of Gloucester,

do swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance

to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and successors according

She took the oath and made her way to her seat,

flanked by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Reverend Justin

Welby, and the Bishop of London, the Right Reverend Richard Chartres.

A round of applause there for the Bishop of Gloucester - a rare

And given the debate on tax credits, it was quite

Georgina Pattinson will be here for the rest of the week.

But from me, Kristiina Cooper, goodbye.