13/03/2017 Monday in Parliament

Download Subtitles




Highlights of Monday in Parliament presented by Joanna Shinn.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 13/03/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



The Commons and Lords thrash out the bill which paves the way for leaving


the European Union. The EU has been clear we cannot open these


discussions until the Prime Minister has given formal notification that


the UK wishes to withdraw from the EU. It is about whether we will


honour the unequivocal commitment made by the official vote to leave


campaigns that if the United Kingdom voted to leave the EU, the rights of


all EU citizens in the UK would be guaranteed. Add a setback for the


government is Peers vote that international students shouldn't be


classed as economic migrants. You want our trade. You don't want our


children. Said by the Prime Minister of India. First, the Commons and the


Lords have returned to the bill which will pave the way from


Britain's exit to the union. Two amendments will put down by the


House of Lords last week, one requesting a meaningful vote on the


Brexit deal, the other to guarantee the status of EU migrants living in


the UK. David Davis said that couldn't be discussed after Article


50 had been triggered. We must pass the straightforward


bill without further delay so the prime in this can get to work on the


negotiations and we can secure a quick deal that secures the status


of both European Union and citizens of the UK and also UK nationals


living in the EU. Nick Clegg said that his family situation was echoed


by many other households in the household. My mother has lived here


for 50 years, she is great four years, she's been a teacher


bumptious pater taxes, my wife loves this country. Not the weather-bob at


the country. It's raising children here, pays taxes, works. It beggars


belief. It beggars belief that people like them and millions like


them have had a question placed over their status, their peace of mind,


their whale being in our great country because of the action or the


shameful in action of this government. Many of my constituents


in their 40s who never voted before because they thought until then


their voices and votes didn't count, they did so for the first time. And


contrary to what commentators on both the left and right may say,


these people are not simpletons, they are not children. They are


adults with as much right to vote as you and I. They knew the risks of


voting to leave and they did so anyway. We must respect that


decision and not seek to undermine it. Even if we thought the


international trade Secretary was right to say they were an important


card to play, even if that were acceptable language, it is not like


a nuclear deterrent. If you're not prepared to follow through with


deportation or to use people in that way, then it cannot be a bargaining


chip or a card to play. The Lords have in certain -- inserted this


amendment to give Parliament a meaningful vote and ministers are


asking them to venture it out of the bill, is disease-mac to delete it,


so that they should ask themselves today we want to actively go through


the lobbies and delete that from the text as the bill currently stands?


There has been no agreement about what to do with UK citizens. Now the


government on the three month mark, the EU commission knows full well


they are going to be dragged back to the house, now they must explain


regardless of what those discussions regardless of what those discussions


and negotiations are. I can think of nothing worse than to bind their


hands in the worst way and make sure hands in the worst way and make sure


that UK nationals don't get reciprocal arrangements. MPs voted


to overturn both amendments sending the bill back to the Lords again.


The United Kingdom's withdraw from the EU is obviously one of the most


momentous steps that our nation will take in our lifetime. I believe


significant opportunities do indeed lie before us. As someone who voted


to remain, I am not deaf to people's concerns, and I don't dismiss those


concerns as somehow betraying a lack of patriotism but that decision to


leave the EU has been made, and they spill, this very simple bill,


delivers on that decision. It's about whether we will honour the


unequivocal commitment made by the official leave campaigns that if the


UK voted to leave the EU, the rights of all citizens in the UK would be


guaranteed. Unlike most other issues arising from the referendum, there


is absolutely no dispute about what was promised to EU citizens. During


the campaign, the vote leave campaign, supported by a number of


noble Lords in this house, made the following categorical statement


"There will be no change for EU citizens already lawfully resident


in the UK." A post-Brexit deal could liberate the haggis. In a nod to the


announcement that Scotland's first Minister will be seeking a second


independence referendum, Boris Johnson said new trading agreements


could allow the delicacy to be sold in the United States. Currently,


it's banned there because it contains sheep 's lungs. It would be


in the interests of every part of this country because it is the case


at the moment, honourable members might not know this, the United


States not only has an embargo on British beef but on Scottish haggis


as well. I think it would be a fine thing, I didn't know whether members


of the Scottish parties agree with that, but there is no other way of


doing a free trade deal and liberating the haggis to transfer


and travel across the Atlantic unless we do a free-trade deal with


the United States. Let me remind our friends from the Scottish


Nationalists party, who seemed so determined to tear themselves, to


wrench themselves apart from the UK, even though they had a decisive


referendum... A decisive referendum on this matter, as members opposite


will recall, only a couple of years ago. Let me just remind them. Never


mind haggis. The Scotch whisky exports to India, a potentially huge


market, the Indian thirst for whisky is colossal, currently running at


only 4%. Scotch whisky sales only only 4%. Scotch whisky sales only


account for 4% of the Indian whisky market. That is because at the


moment, without a free-trade deal, the Indian government imposes a 150%


tariff on the Scotch whisky. As the government starts to think however


belatedly about the kind of future relationship at wants with Europe,


they should consider what kind of relationship they want with the rest


of the world and in doing so we need more than warm words from the


government. We need a plan. I believe our foreign office has been


at its very best and it has been allowed to give proper weight to the


values of Britain in its foreign policy as well as British interests,


and I had the Secretary of State will look to that legacy, embrace it


and build on it, not undermine it any further than he already has. The


government has defended its 2% Nato spending commitment after


suggestions from Labour it had been missed. The opposition also


criticised war pensions and the figure. The minister said the


spending was within Nato guidelines. One Conservative MP asked about the


Nato members missing the 2% target. Which of our Nato allies do not


currently spend 2% of GDP on defence and what reasons have they given for


doing so? Subject to the constraints of brevity! The 23 that don't spend


2% would take too long to list but I can reassure my honourable friend


that the five that meet the 2% target are the US, the UK, Poland,


Greece and Estonia, and I'm sure my honourable friend can did use the


absentees. Does the Minister appreciate that a free and Germany


would not only give concern perhaps to some of Germany's neighbours but


also to Russia... That would, in fact, potentially increase the


difficulty is that we face with tensions on the Russian border. I


disassociates myself from the honourable lady's remarks. That was


extraordinary. How many ministers come here to say exactly the same


thing? Some of our European partners take this whole thing for granted


and we and the Americans pick up the bill. What are we going to do about


it and make them pay what they should pay. Well, I'd like to


reassure my honourable friend there is progress. There are five


countries that meet the 2% target, up from three from 2014. There are


ten countries that meet the 20% pledge on major equipment and


research, and the cuts to defence spending have been halted. The


National Institute for strategic studies concluded the government had


missed the 2% Nato defence spending target and would have missed it by


even more if it hadn't included budgetary headings such as pensions


that don't contribute to defence capabilities not included when


Labour was in government. Isn't it time we went back to the criteria


used for defence spending went this party was in power so that we may


give our armed forces the resources they need? Well, mostly, Mr Speaker,


I wonder if he's read the report of our own select committee which says


they commend the UK government's commitment to UK defence and find


its accounting criteria for within Nato guidelines, as does Nato


itself. The defence Minister. This is Monday in Parliament. Still to


come, MPs ask how to deal with crumbling school buildings. Many


containing asbestos. First, five-year-old April Jones was


murdered by Mark Bridger in 2012. He kept images of child sex abuse on


his laptop. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. He is never reveal the


whereabouts of her family has been campaigning for all of those guilty


of sex offences to have their names on the sex offenders register for


life. They also want to see the Internet better policed and for


harsher sentences to be imposed on people caught with indecent images


of children. A petition calling for these changes started by the family


gained so much support it prompted a debate in Westminster Hall. April's


parents, Paul and coral, and has is to Jasmine watched the proceedings.


I was on my iPad, when I read that a girl had disappeared in


Montgomeryshire. There was something about that tweet because it wasn't


an unusual tweet. You get tweets like that but there was something


about it that made me feel a sense this was something serious. The


family's MP recalled the intensive search for April Jones. Six days


later, we now know that a local man Mark Bridger was arrested and


charged with abduction and murder and perverting the course of


justice. In May 20 13th, he was found guilty and sentenced to life


imprisonment. The sentencing judge rightly, in my opinion, pronounced


he should never be released from prison again. The loss of April


Jones hit rural Welsh communities hard. It shattered our comfortable


belief such horrors could never happen here in Wales, said speak,


such monsters could not live among us. I want to pay tribute to April's


family. In the midst of the unfathomable horror of their


experience, they've succeeded in ensuring that while her murderer


will seek out his life -- live out his life in obscurity, April will be


cherished and her legacy should be that children are better protected.


A member of the Petitions Committee said it was one of the most


difficult issues she's had to talk about. The petition April's family


established calls for all sex offenders to remain on the sex


offenders register for life, for service providers and search engines


better policed, and for harsher sentences for those caught with


indecent images of children. I'd appreciate it, and I'm sure those


following this debate, if the Minister would clarify the


circumstances which would allow someone to be taken off the


register, and whether any monitoring of activity is undertaken for those


no longer subject to the notification requirements. She


raised another campaign supported by April's family to force murderers to


state where their victims remains are located. Coral Jones has said,


"As her mum, I'd love to know where she is, we'd all love to know. No


mother or family would like their child's remains elsewhere. They'd


like to put them at rest." The minister spoke to the Jones family.


I simper cannot imagine the horror of what you've had to experience.


And you are an inspiration to us all, how you have managed to take


such there are, and the worst imaginable situation, and to use


those feelings so constructively to campaign for changes to make sure


that no other family has to experience what you've had to


experience, and no other community has to suffer what you've suffered.


And I thank you sincerely for your bravery and your persistence in


bringing this matter to the attention of the people of Great


Britain, and us here today. She said ministers had


to comply with a court ruling in 2010 enabling people to


apply to have their names removed. We were told there must be


reasons... Opportunities for them to be


considered and it was this objection about human rights,


not to be denied a family life. At the time, the


Government was worried and disappointed by the ruling


and we remain disappointed today. Say she said she was very


sympathetic to the demands of the petition and the concerns


of the Jones family. Senior education officials have been


pressed by MPs over a report that found nearly ?7 billion needs to be


spent to bring England's school buildings up to a


satisfactory standard. The financial watchdog,


the National Audit Office, warned the deteriorating school


buildings were a significant The Government said it


will spend ?23 billion between now and 2021


on school buildings, many


of which are more than 40 years old. The Public Accounts


Committee first heard from the former headteacher of a school


which was recently moved a new building after


problems with asbestos. On windy days, literally,


the wind got through the building, We had two or three cases


where we had to close of schools and in fact students had to go


into the defumigation van, emergency van,


to make sure they were de-dusted


and hosed down and cleaned. parents would call emergency


services and so on but that was not a building that was fit to have


children in for several years, really, prior to its closure


and moving to the new building. They were first challenged over


asbestos in schools. The only way to address the asbestos


is to rebuild the building. The cost of rebuilding the estate


is roughly ?100 billion. Roughly 85% of schools


in the sruvey have asbestos in them. The advice of the Health


and Safety Executive is to leave asbestos


where it is and manage it,


because it is difficult asbestos in situ,


not damaged, but... It sounds like a reasonably


unique situation, I hope. Like that, you would


attempt to remove it or do something better with it,


but the majority of asbestos is within the building


and best left alone. When it becomes dangerous, yes,


of course you have to do that. The questioning and then turned


to the Government's drive to open hundreds more free schools


at a cost of nearly ?10 billion. Are you confident that


what is designated on the scheme are sufficient to ensure


not to that the 6.7 billion gets addressed, but that schools don't


fall further behind and that figure, So, we will be able


to give you a much better answer to that question when


we have the results of the condition You will know there is enough money


in the pot to stop it getting We will know how much schools have


depreciated over the five years At the moment, all we can


rely upon is what local About three fifths of


local authorities tell them their estate has got better


in the last five years and a quarter The free schools programme will be


9.7 billion by 2021. How do we reconcile that fund


for not just a novelty, the novelty of opening schools


and parents having a choice with findings all schools in a way that


satisfies the needs of local parents It is vital to achieve three


things. We need to be able to tackle


the condition of existing schools, it is vital that we provide


additional 500,000 or so places every parliament


because that's what the population demonstrates is required


and we are required to achieve the manifesto agreement


of increasing choice. We have to do all those three things


and to those with spending, that's why I referred to as ?14 billion


we would have spent by the end of this Parliament on tackling


the ?6.7 The novelty of 500 targets


to the detriment of funding mainstream regular funding


going into all schools makes it difficult for those schools that


aren't free schools to boost themselves up if the funding


that they receiving I'm working just on the basis that


you expect me as the accounting and delivering a manifesto


commitment and that is what I am You could have a debate in another


place about the balance between competing


political priorities. Women who order abortion pills


online without seeking a doctor should not face criminal


prosecution, a Labour MP Diana Johnson has


described the current law on termination of


pregnancy and Victorian. But in reply, she was told


the proposals were unsafe, and unusually, the bill under the ten


minute rule was pushed to a vote. Ms Johnson said her bill addressed


a fundamental question. members will, like me,


conclude that the criminalisation Women are poorly served by laws that


state that even early-term abortions are inherently criminal,


and doctors are poorly served by a criminal framework that does


not apply to other areas We should create an environment


in which the stigma of the criminal law is removed and in which women


can come forward for advice and high-quality, woman-centred


health care as early as possible Proportion is still a major


and often risky procedure If abortion pills can be so easily


bought over the internet-perhaps by an abusive boyfriend


or husband-that should lead us to take steps to protect young


and vulnerable women from those Take the young teenager,


terrified to discover that she is pregnant,


who googles proportion What she needs are not


fewer legal safeguards but support and information,


which the Bill would take away. Ten minute rules bills are a way


of airing views and have no chance of becoming law,


so often they are allowed to pass without a vote in the knowledge


they will not get But given the controversial


subject, there was a vote. MPs voted by 172 to 142


in favour of the bill. There was a setback for


the Government in the Lords tonight, when peers supported a move to stop


classifying overseas students as The proposal attracted


support from all sides of The House of Lords voted


with a majority of 94 to I of the job these words to add to


all of the comments made by noble lord I full heartedly agree with.


Quote, you want our trade, you don't want our children. Set by the Prime


Minister of India. If that is the impression which is being received


in India and other nations around the world, how can we possibly


expect to attract the brightest and the best?


My conversations provide clear evidence that even those people


who are anxious about immigration welcome foreign students and do not


think they should be included in the migration figures.


They do not want immigration rules that are any more restrictive


than the current ones placed on undergraduate and postgraduate


students and academics - not now, nor in future,


when our immigration policy is revised to deal with Brexit.


To use somewhat unparliamentary language, it is a no-brainer.


lost their licence to bring in foreign students.


This has been a scandal that has gone on for years and I very much


regret that from the academic lobby, which should be powerful,


accurate and on the case, hardly a word have we heard.


There are accusations that international students overstay.


Can the Minister confirm that a Home Office report has shown


that only 1% to 1.5% of international students overstay?


If he will not answer that question, will he say why the Government


continually refuse to put in visible exit checks at our borders?


While, of course, there is no room for complacency,


the United Kingdom continues to be the world's second most popular


destination for international students and we have welcomed more


than 170,000 international students to the UK for


The higher education minister, Lord Younger of Leckie.


Alicia McCarthy's here for the rest of the week.