21/11/2016 Monday in Parliament

Hello and welcome to Monday in Parliament, our look

Labour asks for reassurances over the troubled child

Where is the Home Secretary? Why is it that nobody from the Govdrnment

has sought to proactively come to this house?

The Government insists no ftrther changes will be made for wolen born

in the 1950s, whose state pdnsion comes later than they'd expdcted.

And a grim assessment on the state of the modern world

As far as I am concerned, I think we are living in the most troublesome

times of my lifetime. Having lived both through the wall and dtring the

complications Russia. -- thd war. MPs have been told to "get behind"

the troubled independent inpuiry A Labour MP asked an urgent question

of the Home Secretary after a group representing survivors walkdd away

from the process, criticising the leadership

of Professor Alexis Jay, who was appointed after

the resignation of a New Ze`land When a Home Office Minister

responded for the government, the questioner, Lisa Nandy,

was unimpressed. And why is it that nobody

from the Government is going to proactively come to this House

and provide reassurance about the seriots events

that have unfolded As this enquiry has unravelled

in front of our eyes. Has the Home Secretary met

survivors' groups And what steps has she taken

to establish that the chair and the panel

have the expertise and the working Has anybody from the Home Office

investigated why so many lawyers have cited concerns

about competency and leadership Does she expect

further resignations? And has a new chief legal

counsel been appointed? I am absolutely delighted as the

minister responsible for probability -- vulnerability safeguarding

and counter extremism to be It is absolutely at the cord of this

Government's priority to The Home Secretary,

who is in this House as recdntly as October the 17th answering

questions in detail. The Home Affairs Select Comlittee

has asked detailed questions of a permanence of the secretary

of the Home Office. really quite wrong in

asserting that there is somd sort of smoke screen

in hiding behind independence. It is absolutely essential that this

enquiry is an independent enquiry. The terms of reference for this

enquiry were shaped with thd voices and the opinions of the victims

and it is important that thhs I've acted in a number

of criminal cases in which I have seen with mx own

eyes the terrible consequences for adults of what happened

to them as children. But I want to ask her a question

from a slightly I have a keen constituent who,

since the early part of this century, has been left

in a hideous, Kafkaesque lilbo. He does not know whether he is

an accused person, whether he is a witness,

what is his status in He does not know whether he is

an accused person, And he, like the victims, ndeds

to be told when this is all But for him and for the victims

would my honourable friend please make some enquiries

of the enquiry to ensure that this man can

either be prosecuted or set free? Every time ministers have come

to the House and asserted that the current chair is the right person

to take the enquiry forward. For the fourth time of saying that,

why do they expect this House, the public

and above all the survivors to be Of course, as the Minister has said,

this is an independent enquhry. In particular as to its conduct

and its findings, but that doesn't mean the Home Officd can

take no responsibility at all. Can she tell as when a suit`ble

legal counsel will be appointed Following the resignation of the

previous chair in August, doesn t she know whether internal procedures

have been established? This is not an operational manner, what does the

Minister plan to do to restore trust in the proceedings for survhvors of

sexual abuse and regain thehr support?

To take the last point first, in terms of confidence, I

think there is a huge amount we can do in this House.

And that is actually to get behind the enquiry.

I think it is worth getting in perspective

that, while I'm disappointed that one victims group has deciddd not to

engage with the enquiry, at the current time, that is really

But I am hopeful they will be engaging

We must remember it is one, and the enquiry is open for

The Government has told the Commons that women born in the 1950s

who find themselves caught short by changes to the state pension

scheme can always rely on the benefit system.

The group - called WASPI - or Women Against State

Pension Inequality - says there wasn't enough tile

or notice given before raising their state retiremdnt age.

With the Autumn Statement in sight - Mps who've campaigned on thd issue

looked for a change in tone from the ministers at the Ddpartment

The Government will not be introducing further transithonal

protection beyond the ?1.1 billion already in place.

Going any further could not be justified given the

underlining imperative must be to focus public resources

That is a very disappointing response from the

And with 4100 names, Hull had the largest Waspi

petition presented to this House last month.

Labour has suggested changes to pension credit, which

could be financed by clawing back hand-outs to the wealthiest to help

Isn't it about time the Minhster understood that these Waspi

women are not going to go away until justice is done

As the honourable Lady has mentioned, Labour proposed tsing

pension credit as a transitional mechanism.

This was discussed extensivdly in the course of the Bill that went

And it was decided that ?1.0 billion alternatively would be used as

As long as I have got women like my constituent

Gillian who comes to me and says, at 60, I have worked all my life

but my body is telling me I can t do it any

more. Without a pension.

When will this Government to the honourable

thing and start looking after the Waspi women?

The cost of reversing the changes varies depending on who

The different political routes have come up with

different amounts, which actually vary between 7 billion and ?30

I recently spoke to a consthtuent who was working in a

Who is incredibly distressed at the thought of having

to work another seven years in what is an increasingly physically

Especially after having made her retirement plans to

look after her daughter's children so that her

look after her daughter's children so that her daughter

What assessment has his Dep`rtment made on the implications

not only for the women affected but for their families, too?

Well, as the honourable Ladx has implied, the

Department has considered this long and hard.

And the current average age of exit from the Labour Party

Well above the previous women's SPA of 60.

I just wanted to make it clear, it is not

just on that side of the Hotse that there are concerns abott this.

Of course, we don't know wh`t's the

Autumn Statement will say tomorrow, but I do think we ought to `t least

keep options open to look at this, because it's not very satisfactory,

As my honourable friend knows, public

I know he intends to wait until Wednesday

to hear what the Chancellor has decided, but I can tell him that

this has been looked at long and hard,

transitional arrangements of

more than ?1.1 billion have been put in place.

And the state pension age was discussed and then acted in 1995

There have been further acts of Parliament, and always h`s

I understand that reverting to the 1995

state pension timetable would

cost something in the region of something like ?39 billion.

Does the Minister agree with me that it is

easy to criticise the Government over this policy but more dhfficult

to explain where the money will come from for any policy changes?

And I thank my honourable friend for that

Does my honourable friend agree with me

that's the difficulty with the

Labour proposal on pension credit is that that is actually not what is

What is sought by them goes right back to

the 1995 act, would almost certainly be a legal under the rules of fair

progress for both sexes on pensions, and would cost an absolute fortune.

I thank my honourable friend for that question

Someone of the honourable gdntleman on the other side was shouthng out,

We have got a good benefits system in this

country, and those people who are destitute I'm

A former head of the Nation`l Union of Students -

the Labour MP Wes Streeting - has accused Ministers

The original plan was to regularly increase the repayment threshold,

currently set at earnings of ?21,000 a year.

But last year, the Government announced that the threshold

Attempting to amend the Higher Education and Research Bill,

Wes Streeting said banks wotld not get away with making

Students and their families where sold loans on the bashs of a

series of simple promises by Government ministers.

They are only be repaid oncd you leave university.

They are be repaid once you start earning over ?21,000 per ye`r.

You will repay 9% of everything and above 21,000 per year.

The good news is that from @pril 2017, the

?21,000 figure will be upgr`ded each year in line with average e`rnings.

But around this time last ydar, in the fine print of the prdvious

Chancellor's Autumn Statement, was buried an announcement that the

repayment threshold will in fact be frozen at ?21,000.

As a result, graduates will end up paying more

each month and thousands of pounds more over

It was under the last Labour Government that Parliament was

invited to confirm, as it dhd, that student loans were exelpt from

regulation under the consumer credit act.

When the then Labour Governlent passed the sale of student loans

So the honourable member should look back at his own party's record

A Lib Dem MP referred to the financial journalist

Martin Lewis, who's campaigned on this issue.

What we have currently is nothing short of a

scandal with the raising of the threshold.

A one-sided redefinition of the terms of the loan.

And in any other context, as Martin Lewis has quite

correctly said, this would lead to legal action.

possible is because of the small print, which as far as most

undergraduates are concerned, was very, very small indeed.

In the end, the amendment was defeated by 98 votes.

You're watching Monday in Parliament.

The government has defended the independent child sex abuse

inquiry, after one of the groups representing victims

-- inquiry, after one of thd groups representing survivors

A Labour MP is calling on the government to set up

a Royal Commission to look into the provision of early years

Helen Jones was opening a ddbate following an e-petition, whhch

objected to what the petitioners called inequality in the system

The government currently paxs for 15 hours of free care

for all three and four year olds, and wants to increase

that to 30 hours a week for most from next autumn.

It also provides free child care to two year olds

Helen Jones said many parents were angry at the costs thex had

to pay, which had risen by 30% between 2010 and 2015 -

an increase five times highdr than the rise in wages.

One lady who contacted me from the North West said

that her family are paying ?840 a month

Now, they are not highly pahd and, to put it into context,

that is exactly the same amount as their mortgage payment.

She reckoned, without proper funding, nurseries would struggle

to provide the 30 hours of free care the government wanted.

At the moment, if a parent has, say, 40 hours' childcare wedk,

At the moment, if a parent has, say, 40 hours' childcare a week,

15 hours are paid by the local authority, but at a fairly low rate.

The hours that a parent takds are paid at a higher rate,

Now, if the government does not fund the extra hours properly,

there are several things that could happen.

First of all, the quality can reduce.

Or many providers may not t`ke part in the scheme at all.

Or there will be a further cost on parents, because providers decide

to charge more for other types of childcare

that the parent buys them - childcare for under twos, holiday

holiday provision, out of hours provision -

should look very seriously `t this and should set up an enquirx,

perhaps under Royal Commisshon terms, staffed by experts.

I know some members of the government don't

like experts, but you reallx do need experts in this.

They are experts, because they know something about it.

That enquiry should do several things.

It should chart a path to, if not free early years provision,

at least heavily subsidised early years provision.

Nursersies have been very clear both in the conversations I've had,

but in writing to all members of the House, that this cocktail

of funding pressures will ultimately push them

into an unsustainable financial situation.

The honourable member for Warrington North has referred

to this very eloquently in her own speech.

I hope the Minister today whll put an end to this uncertainty

and immediately commit to ftnding to guarantee that nursery schools

In the Labour Party, we believe that working pardnts

are bearing the burden of the government demanding

unachievable expansion in provision, at the same thme

While welcoming the honourable lady to her place, I know

I would very gently like to say to her that there is

absolutely nothing positive, there was nothing constructhve,

I didn't get, at any point, the sense that she wants to work

All she wanted to do was make cheap political points

She may as well have been wearing...been dressed as

In addition to various other policies which help,

many of the issues that havd been described today,

such as the flexible working, allowing people to access flexible

working, the shared parental leave, which was never introduced

and that the former Labour government, and, Mr Paisley,

over 6 billion on childcare by 2019-20 in cash

I know she's not listening to this, but that is more than any other

government ever has spent on this issue.

?6 billion a year on childc`re by 2020, including an extra

billion into the free early years entitlement.

The government, she insisted, was taking action to

Now, it was only a year ago that the government produced

a National Security Strategx, setting out the threats fachng

But in the light of the votd to leave the EU and Russian

aggression, several peers argued today that the strategy

Russia is growing in intent and capability.

We are not only not matching that, we are shrinking.

We do not have enough numbers in the RN and the RAF

to man properly the equipment we have today.

Brexit is surely going to ddmand that we are prepared

Surely the Government must realise that SDSR '15

The question is whether the concept that we set out in the SDSR,

the Joint Force 2025 concept, is the right choice

for the current strategic context. We are clear that it is.

It is a concept that is abott making more effective use of our armed

forces, because it both invdsts in new capabilities and makds better

is the Strategic Defence and Security Review.

Another peer took an equally grim view.

It's only a year, but we thhnk what has happened has changdd.

As far as I'm concerned, I think we're living in

the most troublesome time I can think of in my lifetile,

having lived both through the war and also during

I would suggest, and I have asked for permission to have a full

defence debate in this Housd - to have permission to have one

because I think this is a most serious, serious subject.

I think the demands on our `rmed services as to what's

happening in Europe, and what is happening as well

with the United States of Alerica, is such that I would ask

my noble friend, the Ministdr, whether he would agree

that the situation has changed and the demand could be gre`ter

in the years to come? OTHERS: Hear, hear!

My Lords, I am sure that my noble friend's request will not h`ve

fallen on deaf ears as regards the usual channels and I'd be happy

to speak to him after this about the possibility

We are not complacent about Russian capabilities,

the political changes in the United States or Brexit.

We remain, however, fully committed to Nato and our European partners,

with whom we will deter thrdats across a wide spectrum in order

Our defence is supported by a skilled civil service.

So would the Minister confirm whether the SDSR commitment

to reduce MoD staff by 30% by 2020 is still on track

and what proportion does the government anticipate whll be

carrying out the same role, but with a new employer?

It's too early for me to answer the last part

of the Noble Baroness's question, but I would acknowledge

that the last few percentagd points in that 30% target are challenging.

But at the same time, what we are impressing on otr people

is that, to the extent that they are able to save loney

from a reduction in the civhl service headcount, all that money

is ploughed back into the ddfence budget under the efficiency

The comfortable words about our defence forces

What I'm delighted about, within this chamber

and in the Other Place, is there is a growing ground-swell

of people who understand that we have not got suffichently

That awareness actually is now growing in the public at large.

I recognise the concerns that the Noble Lord has

and it's no use denying that we live in a more dangerous

I come back to the Joint Force 2025 concept.

It is a long-term programme, but it is designed to enabld our

armed forces to respond to ` wider range of more sophisticated

potential adversaries and complex real-world challenges,

And I believe that that is the right direction in which to go.

Senior figures from the Health Department in England have been

questioned by MPs over the failure to recover ?500 million

from overseas visitors who use the NHS.

The financial watchdog, the National Audit Office,

has said the amount charged is likely to fall short

The top civil servant at the department was challdnged

in particular over the failtre to recharge for treatment ghven

to citizens of the European Economic Area, the EEA,

which covers the European Union plus countries such as Norw`y.

We are light years away frol achieving 200 million, aren't we?

Yes. Yes, we are.

Um, well, as I'll say, um, if we do the changes

that we want to make, and we have not been running this

programme for very long, we do believe that we can

get our current trajectory, which has been said is around

about 350 million, up towards that 500 million.

Are we going to make the 200 million from EEA, yes or no?

I'm not going to guarantee you that we will make that

200 million, because it's ddpendent on a whole range of factors.

If you're not going to guarantee it...

Sorry, I mean, yes as a statement... That's fine.

But the point I am making is it seems that, basically,

no progress has been made and the whole thing

Sorry, we are talking about a situation where we've gone,

overall, from collecting about 80 million a year to

But on the EEA, we are not laking any progress at all.

Um, well, with the bit we h`ve targeted, because actually,

Some of it is numbers driven the other schemes.

Some of it is numbers driven around the other schemes.

The actual EHIC bit has gond up from us identifying about 5000

treatments a year to us identifying about 18,000 treatments a ydar

Now, we haven't seen that showed through in the cash amounts yet

Well, as you have said, that is clearly out of ask,

-- Well, as you have said, that is clearly a tough ask,

given where we are right now, but we are going to keep at it.

I took a French cousin of mhne to my local hospital last Christmas.

They were not on the NHS system because they are not resident

here and therefore not going to be in it and my hospital asked

them for identification, which was provided.

Yeah. The broken a bone was fixed.

I assume that my hospital were then able to bill France

But are you telling me that that actually is not standard procedure

That, if you turn up and yot're not, because you're not a local person

in the NHS register on that system, this is a difficult thing

to follow through on? Is that what you're telling me?

That this is not absolutely standard practice?

I'm not saying anyone is going to be charged,

but you don't find it possible to identify that individual?

I mean, the numbers, as various people around

So we are treating patients who we have

not identified? Yes.

Um, it is clear from the nulbers and the expectations we've set,

and the research we did in 2013 that there are patients who should

be charged who are not currently being identified.

But they are not identified at the point of arrival

at the hospital in order for us to follow that through?

Yeah, they are not identifidd as being a patient

But if he's not on the NHS system, with the British NHS number,

by definition that patient probably should be in that category?

No, well, those ones, those individuals, um,

may well are the most likely to be identified,

but an NHS number does not prove eligibility,

No, but then, you follow th`t through, you haven't identified

a marker attached to that cost, that treatment cost?

Yeah, this is the IT change we were describing earlier.

We can now track that in thd system, so it should become easier.

But has it been standard pr`ctice? No, it hasn't.

Keith McDougall's here for the rest of the week.