18/10/2013 The Week in Parliament

It says the body has double standards and is capable of solving

conflicts. France says it shows its frustrations. Now it is time for the

week in Parliament. Welcome to the week in Parliament.

David Cameron and Ed Miliband go into battle over green taxes,

unemployment and the cost of living. Don't you feel faintly

embarrassed that in five years he has gone from a husky to gas a

badger. While borrowing, more spending, more debt. We talked to

two Parliamentary experts about what happens when a good law goes bad.

And we chat to the Deputy Speaker of the Commons and find out what it was

like to cheer her first debate. It is quite something to give up those

steps. In the true sense of the word, it was awesome. But lest a

start with the good news and bad news. David Cameron came to the

Commons for questions on Wednesday armed with the latest unemployment

figures which showed the drop to just 2.5 million people out of work.

The session became before British Gas announcement of higher gas

prices. But first Ed Miliband turned his attention to the jobless

figures. Today's figures show a welcome fall in unemployment. They

also show that prices have risen faster than wages, 39 out of 40

months that living standards have fallen. Will he confirm what

everybody knows, that there is a cost of living crisis in this

country? First of all, let the welcome his welcome for the

unemployment figures. Not everybody in the house would have been able to

study them. It is good news. Unemployment is down 18,000. Women's

unemployment is down, youth unemployment is down, long`term

unemployment is down. Vacancies are up. The fall in the claimant count

is 41,000 this month alone. That is the fastest fall in the number of

people claiming unemployment benefit since February 1997. These are

welcome figures. Of course we all want to see living standards

improve. Last year disposable income increased. But the way to improve

living standards is to grow the economy and cut taxes. But sticking

with the cost of living, Ed Miliband said the government had no answer to

Labor's policy of a pressure is on energy bills. `` the Labor Party's

policy. Can he confirm that he has on his side the energy companies and

we have consumer bodies and a small energy producers and the vast

majority of the British people. If an energy price freeze was such a

great idea, why did he not introduce it when he stood as energy

secretary? The fact is it is not a price freeze, it is a price on. He

is not in control of worldwide gas prices, which is why he had to admit

the next day he could not keep his promise. That is the truth. The

reason the right honourable gentleman does not want to talk

about the economy is that he has not got a credible economic policy. He

cannot explain why the deficit is falling, the economy is growing,

unemployment is coming down. Given his problem is no credible economic

policy, he does not help himself by having a totally incredible energy

policy. I thought he might get to the record of the last government.

They found a new tactic. They have been floundering and blame the last

government and green levies. Let us talk about green levies. Who was it

who said that vote blue, go green? I think it was this Prime Minister.

Who was it who said as Leader of the Opposition, and I quote, I think

green taxes as a whole need to go up? Let me ask, doesn't he feel

Bentley embarrassed that in five short years he has gone from Harvard

a husky to gas a badger? The only embarrassing thing is this tortured

performance. He wants to talk about the record of the last labour

government. Let me remind him on the cost of living they doubled the

council tax, they doubled the gas bills, they put up electricity bills

by half, they put up petrol tax col times. The increased the basic state

pension by a measly 75 p. On the day we can see there are 1 million were

people in work in our country, that is 1 million reasons to stick to the

economic plan we have. It is 1 million reasons to keep on getting

the deficit down, delivering on education, delivering on welfare. It

is 1 million reasons to say more borrowing, more spending, more

adept, that is the same old Labour, never again. David Cameron and Ed

Miliband. On Monday night, a Liberal Democrat MP raised the subject of

pubs. He argued that governments had come about because of a loophole in

the beer orders. Prior to 1989, most pubs were tied to the large

breweries. It is believed rightly that is all this led to a decrease

in the choice of products. However, the beer orders failed in one

spectacular way. It clearly should have prevented any company from

owning and supplying more than 2000 pubs. This was the tragedy and

disaster of the beer orders. The result was the formation of the

number of public companies such as Punch taverns. Those at the helm had

little if any connection to the sector and very little empathy with

it. Everybody wanted a piece of the action. They all piled in to make

money with little interest for the pubs themselves, the people that run

them, the communities that use them or the wider economic impact.

We got thinking, what about other bits of legislation that have not

quite done what they set up to do. There are plenty of examples. Aimed

at getting absent parents providing to the upkeep of their children. It

led to so much confusion, bureaucracy and heartache it had to

be abolished and replaced. There is a more recent example. This was the

original Licensing Act that went through in 2003. During the debate,

ministers promised an explosion of light music. It became quite obvious

five years later when they had a survey by the live music Forum that

that was not the case. What effect did it have on small venues? They

did not apply for licensing. Therefore the number of available

venues dropped significantly. What do you think happened in the

original legislation, where did it go wrong? They gave what they

thought was an exemption for small venues. But actually nobody

understood that. I think it was cobbled together at the very last

minute by the parliamentary draughtsmen. Nobody was really

paying attention. It went through at the bleeding. `` third reading.

Nobody looked at it. Nobody made use of it. What did you do to remedy the

situation? It became clear by 2007 that the small venues were just not

putting on live music. What we decided to do, the music industry,

this was a whole collection of members of Parliament, I was the one

fortunate enough to be the one spearheading it, I put down a

private members bill which put in a new clause that was understandable,

finally. As a result, we got that show last October. Literally on the

anniversary of it coming into act. With me are the director of research

at the Hansard Society and the author of making better when

Parliament. . Also with me as a labour MP and member of the

political and instructional forum committee. `` institutional reform.

Doctor Fox, what is the process at the moment for getting an idea in

the law? There is a process of consultation sometimes, but not

always in government when they are preparing a bell. When it arrives in

Parliament, sometimes it gets little legislative scrutiny. Not always. It

is not in Victoria. Sometimes people have an opportunity to look at it,

but not enough. There is not protesting. There is not enough

critical analysis. There is too much legislation going through Parliament

to quickly. Is it the case that pre` legislative scrutiny is not used

enough or it does not work? There have been improvements. It is not

used enough. It is going at a painfully slow pace. Lord Butler was

telling us that over 77 bills passed through Parliament in between

2005`2010 that were amended but never went into law as they

intended. 77 of them. An immense amount of parliamentary time. The

problem with parliamentarians, we believe that every problem in life

can be solved by legislation. Dogs barking, children crying. The

legislated. That is the answer. But there are so many unintended

consequences. The bills become nonsensical. You see that Parliament

legislates to much. What is the alternative? For example if you want

to make it easier to control dangerous dogs. What is the

alternative? I was here for the dangerous dogs Bill. There was a

hysterical campaign by the press. There was not a substantial number

of attacks by dogs. But they had a lot of publicity during August.

Parliament had to react to the demands of the press. We put in a

law that was unworkable. Many laws are unworkable and based on

campaigns and outcry. Politicians want this adulation everyday from

the press. So they follow what the tabloids are demanding. Do you

agree. Is there too much legislation and what is the alternative? There

is. There were about 3000 pages of primary legislation in each

parliamentary session. We are now looking at around 16,000 pages. That

gives you a sense of the difference. Part of the problem is that when

legislation is rushed, you end up with Parliament having to end up

with new laws having to correct the deficiencies in previous

legislation. Particularly when it is in the case of the Home Office over

the past decade or so, you get duplications. Legislation for the

same things. Often it is in response. It is in response to

pressures from the press and the media. The response to these

campaigns. It is more about managing a political problem than a policy

problem. Part of the difficulty is that when implementation strikes the

point of implementation is that bills are not implemented for three

or four years in full after he received Royal assent. The ministers

and the servants who started the policy process took the bill to

Parliament and are not actually round to be accountable. It is a

very brave government that says, we are come to do a lot less. That is

the problem. Governments tend to measure their success not by the

quality of the legislation, but the quantity. There was a bill in 2001

and called the regular tour the legislative reform Bill. It was

incomprehensible that nobody understood it. They had to put a new

bill in five years later to explain what it went. The problem with

legislators in the way we carry out this, other countries have done far

better. We rely on people like the Hansard Society to point us in the

right direction. We came up with some good ideas on how we can look

carefully at the legislation instead of rushing it. But the government

rejected all of them, I am afraid. There are mechanisms that we need.

What tentative legislation. You have been critical of what you call

Christmas tree bills, legislation that has all sorts of bits and

pieces on them. How can you stop that happening? That is the problem

go into what Paul was talking about. Ministers want their bill in the

common speech. There is only so much time and opportunity. You get all of

this policy baubles on one legislative tree is a desperate

convoy of provisions. Often they have inconsistent principles. The

reality is the way in which to stop that is changing the way in which

government thinks about the legislative process and the policy

process, changing the speed at which things are done. There is a role in

Parliament for doing better post` legislative scrutiny. When things do

go wrong, we should learn the lessons and learn from that next

time. At the moment, there is not that culture of learning. We are

just heading towards poor legislation.

What's the worst legislation. What's the worst example you can think of

with unintended consequences? All the drugs acts passed since 1971.

Every single one have increased the use of drugs and drugs harm. We have

a catalogue of errors through the decades. The one that everybody

cites as a real problem is Dangerous Dogs Act, back in the 1990s. A

current bill going through at the moment that will have unintended

consequences is the lobbying bill and the impact it will have on the

charity sector in terms of campaigning in the run up to the

election. Thank you both very much for coming in to see us.

Politicians by definition rather like elections even if they're also

a bit scared of them. There was a flurry of excitement in the Commons

there week with the announcement of a new deputy Speaker. This

particular vacancy had to be filled by a Government side MP and hustings

were held at the start of the week in which all seven, yes seven Tory

MPs who put themselves forward, had a chance to set out their stalls.

Bets were placed on who would be victorious when the votes were

totted up. This being one election conducted by votes being transferred

between candidates, as the person at the bottom of the poll was knocked

out through various rounds of voting. On Wednesday afternoon,

Speaker Bercow revealed the winner. The counting went to six stages. 513

valid votes were cast in that round, excluding those ballot papers whose

preferences had been exhausted. The quota to be reached was therefore

257 votes. The person elected first deputy chairman of ways and means

with 273 votes is Mrs Eleanor Lang. The next day she was in the chair

for a debate on defence. Madam Deputy Speaker, may I be the first

honourable member of this House to be able to welcome you to your new

position, to congratulate you on your election as deputy Speaker and

wish you well in your new role in the House. I will give way. From

these benches Madam Deputy Speaker, thank you ` well done. From these

benches we note you have achieved what the military would call initial

operating capability. We wish you the very best. Could I welcome you

to the chair and see you getting clear guidance from your deputy, my

experience of the honourable member for Chorley is that I wouldn't

listen to him too close on every occasion because he has a

mischievious sense of humour. Minutes after chairing her first

debate, she was asked how her first day at the office has gone. I have

been so lucky today because Lindsay Hoyle and the other deputy speakers

have been terribly kind to me and have explained everything to me in

words of one syllable. They've taken me through the things that we have

to do. There are so many matters that happen in the House which you

take for granted. Somebody has to make them happen. They don't just

happen. Lindsay and Dawn have been brilliant in helping me through my

first day. It was quite something, actually, to go up those steps and

sit in the chair. It was in the true sense of the word, it was awesome.

It's a big chair. It's very comfortable, actually. The wonderful

thing about it is that of course, it's a fantastic vantage point of

the chamber. You can see everyone and everything. You can hear

everyone and everything. As many are of that opinion say aye. Of the

contrary no. Division. Clear the lobby. The new deputy Speaker

Eleanor Lang there. The Coalition Government has been accused of

blocking the devolution of more powers to the Welsh Assembly and its

Commons. In the Commons Labour MPs criticised coalition ministers for

challenging new Welsh laws in the Supreme Court. The Welsh First

Minister visited Number Ten in the week to explain to David Cameron for

failing to respond to a report that says Wales should get control of

some taxes. Earlier I asked BBC World's Parliamentary correspondent

in if legislators in Cardiff felt that London was checking up on them?

Yeah for two years the Welsh Assembly has had the power to make

laws in Wales in devolved areas like health and education. A couple of

them have been challenged by the Attorney General here, who referred

them to the Supreme Court because he said he thought the Assembly had

exceeded its limited powers. He wanted judges to sort that out. Now,

Labour MPs, a host of Labour MPs this week simply don't buy that

argument. They think it's the UK Government here trying to block

devolution, saying it doesn't like what the Welsh Government, which is

run by Labour, is doing. It's doing it effectively out of spite. The

Government at Westminster set up the Silk Commission. It reported nearly

a year ago now. Remind us briefly what it says. The Silk Commission

suggested this radical idea that the Welsh Government, for the first

time, should have responsibility for raising some of the ?15 billion a

year it spends. Initially it would get control over taxes, such as

Stamp Duty, and ultimately some power to vary income tax bands. It

would get the power to borrow money and the Welsh Government thinks

that's really important in terms of actually being able to finance major

projects, albeit on motorways or big hospitals. As you say, reported last

November, the UK Government was expecting to deliver its response in

the spring. Spring came and went. Summer came and went. Autumn's well

under way, we're still waiting. Westminster then would seem to be

dragging its feet? It depends who you talk to in the coalition. Nick

Clegg says it's the Conservatives who don't like devolution. That's

why he hasn't been able to deliver a response to give Wales more power.

Talk to David Cameron, as I did a couple of weeks ago, before the

party conference, they say no, they just want to get the details right,

they want to make sure that's all right. According to the Prime

Minister, voters in Wales might be interested in the powers debate, but

really, they have other priorities. I think that the bubble in Cardiff

is completely obsessed by powers, whereas the people in Wales actually

what they want to know is results. How are we going to get our Health

Service sorted out in Wales? Which the Welsh Assembly is not doing a

good job on. How are they going to raise education standards? Above

all, the question for the United Kingdom Government, how do we get

the Welsh economy moving faster? How do we reform welfare to get people

back to work? David Cameron not giving away too many clues about a

date there. The Welsh First Minister fears unless a decision is given

soon, it simply won't become law before the general election and the

powers will be delayed. Is David Cameron right, do the people have

other things to worry about? That's possibly true, if you look at

opinion polls. All four parties in the Welsh Assembly, including the

Conservatives, saying it's time to devolve more powers, that way the

Assembly would TB accountable and have `` would be accountable.

In a week when it's been what politicians can do to curb the cost

of living that's dominated debate at Westminster.

you would get rained on at least one of the days, but the good thing is

that it is at least mild, and it has recently been very mild. 18 degrees

on Friday. The average is close to 14 degrees. It is in the far north

of Scotland where temperatures are a fraction below the average. Close

enough to the average. This mild air, which has been coming from the

south`west in the last few days, is here to stay, or through the week.

The cold air is going to be tucked into the far north`east of the UK.

This is how we entered the night. Saturday, first thing in the

morning, cold and rainy. The rest of the country will be damp, if not

wet. 13 `14 degrees in Cardiff and Plymouth. A summary for the weekend.

We are calling