05/02/2016 The Week in Parliament

Hello and welcome to The Week In Parliament.

Coming up: David Cameron unveils his deal to change our relationship

with the EU.

To a lukewarm reception from some of his own.

In the parts of Europe that will work for us and out

of those that don't.

The thin gruel has been further watered down,

Mr Speaker.

There's a plea for more help for foster carers to help them cope

with troubled children.

As all foster carers know, the child that you have

for the first three to six weeks of a placement is not the child that

you will have after six weeks.

Women express anger and derhsion over gender pricing and one

manufacturer's pink pens.

My husband has never allowed me to write as he doesn't want me

touching men's pens.

But first: It was a big week for David Cameron as he unvdiled

the deal he wants to do with Europe to change our relationship

with the EU.

The Prime Minister highlighted four main areas: Allowing the UK to opt

out from any moves towards closer union.

Cutting red tape.

Protecting non-eurozone countries like the UK when it comes to trade,

and preventing people who come to the UK from other EU countries

from claiming certain benefhts.

But his proposals got a verx mixed reaction in the Commons.

In keeping Britain out of ever closer union,

I also wanted to strengthen the role of this House and all national

Parliaments, so we now have a proposal in the texts that

if Brussels comes up with legislation that we do not

want, we can get together whth other Parliaments and block it

with a red card.

The draft texts represent the strongest package we have ever

had on tackling the abuse of free movement and closing down

the back-door routes to Britain

If someone comes from another country in Europe,

leaving their family at homd, they will have their child benefit

paid at the local rate, not at the generous British rate.

And crucially, we have made progress on reducing the draw

of our generous in-work bendfits.

People said that it would bd impossible to end the idea

of something for nothing and that a four-year restriction on benefits

was completely out of the qtestion, but that is now what is in the text.

This negotiation in reality is a Tory Party drama

that is being played out in front of us, as we see at the momdnt.

We believe that the Prime Mhnister has been negotiating the wrong goals

in the wrong way for the wrong reasons.

For all the sound and fury, the Prime Minister has ended up

exactly where he knew he wotld be - making the case to remain in Europe,

which was what he always intended, despite a renegotiated spectacle

choreographed for television cameras over the whole continent.

Can I suggest that he stops pretending to have won

some major victory?

He has not even secured the treaty change he promisdd

and much else besides.

What is at stake is much bigger than his recent discussions.

It is about whether or not we remain in the EU.

That is what the debate across the UK will be in thd run-up

to the referendum.

Is not the only way to get control of our borders,

our tax revenues and our welfare system to leave, be a good Duropean

and let them get on with their political union?

The thin gruel has been further watered down.

My right honourable friend has a fortnight, I think,

in which to salvage his reputation as a negotiator.

Macro

Once the Macro EU negotiations are complete, will the Prime Minister

confront people's anxiety, demonstrate strong leadershhp

and unequivocally come out hn favour of our EU membership?

Can the Prime Minister confhrm that nothing in this renegotiation waters

down important security cooperation at the EU level like intellhgence

sharing, joint investigations, and the EU arrest warrant,

and that when a deal is dond finally that it will join members on this

side of the House making a strong case that our membership of the EU

helps bring criminals to justice and keep Britain safe?

The next day Eurosceptics hdld a debate on parliamentary

sovereignty.

There can be no greater isste for this parliament to debate

and defend than this country's sovereignty.

It goes to the heart of everything we do.

Yet as our EU renegotiations proceed,

it appears that little effort is being made to truly

restore parliamentary soverdignty.

If you cannot get rid of thd people that are in an institution then

it is not democratic.

We have reached a point of no return.

We have to say no.

We have to leave.

Sovereignty does not reside in this place.

It does not reside in those sent to serve in this place.

It resides forever in those who have sent us to serve in this pl`ce.

Not attempting to address now the technicalities

of this issue, the economic rights and wrongs, let me conclude

on a note of freedom with the words of John Milton himself.

Me thinks I see in my mind ` noble and puissant nation rousing herself

like a strong man after sledp, and shaking her invincible locks.

Methinks I see her as an eagle muing her mighty youth

and kindling her undazzled dyes at the full midday beam.

Geoffrey Cox.

Eurosceptics then clearly think the Prime Minister should h`ve

bargained harder to get more powers returned

to the Parliament at Westminster.

But he has got a promise in the draft that the UK won't be

drawn into ever closer union and a provision for a "red card

as a way to stop some EU legislation.

But how would that work and will voters be persuaded by it?

Earlier I spoke to Prof Matthew Goodwin from the University of Kent

and asked him to explain the red card idea.

The basic idea of the red c`rd system involves a number of EU

member states essentially clubbing together to block,

slow down, legislation at ET level.

That seems to be very important because Eurosceptics argue that

Britain is gradually giving away international sovereignty

to the European Union.

And that also is important because it tackles that one common

criticism of the EU which is that it has a democratic deficit at its core

and does not necessarily listen as much as it should do

to the interests of nation states.

The Eurosceptics in David C`meron's party have already said

that they don't think this is an idea that would work

even if the other states approved it.

They think the idea that yot can club together with other st`tes

to get this to happen is pretty remote.

But is it the sort of idea that might prove popular with thd public?

Is it something that people will like?

The general idea of Britain reclaiming some of its sovereignty

from the European Union would be popular among voters includhng those

crucial swing voters who colprise around 20% of the electoratd

and who could make all the difference in a close referdndum.

But issues of national sovereignty are not the dominant concern

for voters particularly when it comes to renegotiation

of Britain's EU membership.

When a pollster surveyed voters last year and asked what are the top

priorities for you in the renegotiation, the top

two were not related to sovereignty issues.

They were related to immigration issues.

Number one was enacting controls on immigration,

reducing the numbers.

And number two was modifying the amount of benefits that EU

migrant workers can claim.

Those sovereignty issues were down in position three or four.

So, important but not at thd top of voters' priorities.

One of the other big ideas that David Cameron was toting was this

idea of competencies, that once a year the EU

would have

to look at what it had control of and if necessary give sole

of those powers back to national parliaments.

Is that something that is going to be realistic to achieve?

This is an idea with long roots that the Conservatives in p`rticular

have often argued, that Britain should be regularly reviewing

the amount of influence that the European Union has

in domestic policy areas and should be trying to reclaim some control

over those areas.

It is an idea that is going to be popular again with voters

if they believe that they are obtaining a greater level of control

over domestic issues.

Whether or not it is realistic is another matter.

It is now simplistic to say we will be reclaiming control over

these areas, given the incrdasingly complex nature of the EU.

After the referendum it is `lso going to be difficult for voters

to cast a judgment on whethdr or not that is the case.

Most voters are not tuning in to the fine details of ET policy,

most voters probably don't dven know what the renegotiation

baskets even are.

Over the long haul these iddas might play a role in the referendtm debate

but they are not game changdrs.

Isn't that the problem for both David Cameron and his Eurosceptics

to some extent, that whilst the public might be interested

in our relationship with Europe they are not paying attention

to the finer details?

I think that is a really interesting point and I think it speaks very

loudlly to this comparison that lots of people draw

between the independence referendum in Scotland and the EU

referendum on the horizon.

There is a crucial difference between the two that speaks

to your question.

In Scotland you had a real groundswell of interest and public

passion in that referendum.

But as we know from the polling in Britain in general the issue

of Europe has been one of low salience.

It has never featured in the top five most pressing

priorities for voters.

Pretty much since Maastricht onwards it has been under 10%

in the Issues Index Tracker which asks voters what are

the top two issues.

So it is not likely to trigger a mass outburst of passion

and interest among an electorate that is instinctively scepthcal

about the EU but is by no mdans in love with the idea of debating

what the EU is and whether Britain should be a part of it.

Thank you.

Plenty for us to think about.

Thank you for coming in.

Professor Matthew Goodwin.

A plea for more help for those who foster children with mental

health problems has been made in Parliament.

As part of its inquiry into the well-being of lookdd

after children, the Education Committee listened to the fhrst hand

experiences of two carers, who've fostered children

over several years.

But first, it heard from a 16-year-old girl who's been

looked after by foster carers.

Can you tell the committee about the placements you have had

since you have been in care?

I have been in care for two and a half years and this

is the longest

placement I have had, about ten months, and I havd

had 13 placements.

Quite a lot of movement.

Very unsettling.

13 places in two and a half years.

I gave up believing in myself.

I let people use me as I was used because I felt that was nattral

to let people do that.

I have had bad relationships were things have gone wrong.

I thought it was normal until I moved to Christine's.

The child that you have for the first three to six weeks

of placement is not the child you will have after six weeks.

They settle in and then you see the real child.

By then you have ticked the box saying they sleep well,

they do not bully, and it is a lot of rubbish.

Six weeks later you have a potential monster in your house.

Because you have been given a child with no diagnosis,

no help, what can you do?

It is really, really diffictlt.

I was going to ask Teresa and Christine first of all

what training, if you could outline the training received specifically

on mental health and well-bding

Pretty zero.

We didn't get any training on that.

Did you request any?

Were you actively refused any?

No.

We get sent an e-mail at the beginning of the year stating

what training will be held over the 12 months

and that is it, really.

The committee later heard from the Minister.

I was anxious to make sure that we looked very carefully,

going back two and a half ydars ago when I took on this role,

at how we support foster carers so that they have the skills,

the knowledge and the understanding as to what are the types

of behaviour we have to deal with potentially?

And what is the best way of handling them?

Who can they go to for support?

It was about ?36 million I think that we spent on providing

multi-systemic therapy, so that there was a greater prospect

of foster carers feeling confident that the role they were takhng

on was one that they were able to cope with because if you go back

to the very first question about stability of placement,

one of the reasons placements break down is because foster

carers are unable to cope.

Edward Timpson.

It has been another busy wedk at Westminster so let's takd a quick

look at some of the other stories in brief.

The Zika virus has been declared a global health emergency.

The viruses by mosquitoes.

It has been linked to thous`nds of babies in Brazil being born

with underdeveloped heads and brains.

MPs were told the risk to the UK is extremely low.

One doctor agreed but saw a bigger problem.

I would have thought that the district is actually

spectators and competitors returning from the Rio Olympics back

to other hot countries.

We could end up with this establishing in north Afric`,

where many women do go on holiday, southern Europe, pregnant

women do go on holiday.

The age at which women qualhfy for state pension is increasing

first to 65 and then to 66.

It means that thousands of women born in the 1950s who were dxpecting

to retire at 60 will have to work for longer.

Many haven't got an occupathonal or private pension

to tide them over.

Campaigners want government action.

It broke the contract with its citizens, that cithzens pay

in the national insurance in the understanding

that they will get something back when they are in need.

That contract with these women have been broken.

I say again, if this was a private provider,

we would be after them for mis-selling.

But at Work and Pensions Secretary is, the minister said the government

had already made changes.

I would say to the honourable lady that a confession was made hn 2 11.

At second reading, the Secrdtary of State said that he would go away

and think about matters and consider them.

He did.

He came back, made a concession worth ?1.1 billion, ensured

that the two-year extension was reduced to 18 months,

and in the case of 18 months, 81% of women affected would have

to work no more than 12 months.

Nations meeting in London h`ve pledged more than $10 billion

to help Syrians affected by the five-year conflict.

The money will go towards food, medical care and shelter.

In the Lords, peers accused Russia of bombing civilians in Syrha.

Every bomber flying from Russia unloading unguided bombs in large

numbers and killing almost indiscriminately, and doesn't that

also have the dramatic affect of driving up the refugee ntmbers

which also continues to destabilise Europe.

Maybe just maybe we're not taking this seriously enough.

The noble Lord is absolutelx right.

There is no question that Rtssia is actively targeting civilhans

and is almost certainly bre`ching international humanitarian

law in the process.

That has to stop.

Staying in the Lords, peers have criticised new powers

in the immigration bill givhng the authorities the power

to stop and search drivers.

The bill gives the police the right to search someone's car if they have

reasonable grounds for belidving the driver is in the UK illdgally.

Peers warned that black and Asian drivers will bear the brunt.

The call to cut membership of the Northern Ireland assdmbly

in time for this year's collections was defeated in Stormont.

The assembly was debating the bill to reduce the number of MLAs

per constituency from six to five by 2021.

The Alliance Party said bringing in the change earlx

could save ?11 million.

We can look at over governance in relation to Northern Ireland

and compared with other regions on these isles.

Scotland, it is my understanding, has one MSP for approximately 4 ,000

people.

Wales, approximately one AM for 50,000 people.

But here in Northern Ireland, we have one MLA for around

16 to 17,000 people.

That is a drastically different ratio, by any assessment.

But other parties opposed the Alliance Amendment.

The DUP it accused the Alli`nce of grandstanding as the election

approaches.

While Sinn Fein said the prhority should be to cut the number

of quangos in the province.

There was astonishment and ready to after the Times newspaper

found that clothing, toys and toiletries forward in cost

sometimes twice as much as those for men.

It seems that we pay more for everything, from shoes

to the humble razor.

If it is pink.

The minister was scathing.

I don't know if any of you can remember the stream of online

reviews when a set of ballpoint pen manufacturers manufactured

a ladies version in pastel shades and hundreds of women came online

to express their heartfelt gratitude.

One said, my husband has never allowed me to write.

He doesn't want me touching men's pens.

Once I had learned to write, this feminine colour,

and the feminine grip size, which was more suited to my delicate

little hands has unable to leet to vent thoughts about new recipe

ideas, sewing and gardening.

I'm sure we can all sympathhse with that.

And, of course, men joined hn.

The complaints of the delic`te pens but to slippery forefingers

calloused from a hard day's shark wrestling and that they hatdd

the visions of fairies and rainbows they got when ever

they used these pens.

The Equalities Minister Caroline Dinenage with just some

of the reaction to gender pricing.

The Scottish Parliament has always had the power to vary incomd

tax by 3p in the pound.

But it is a power that has never been used.

The thought was it was too luch pain for not enough game.

But from this April, it is in charge of half of hncome

tax at standard and upper r`tes

And it has the ability to vary the bands.

With the proviso that if it wants to change one,

it has to change both.

Rather than, for example, just putting up the top ratds.

And for the first time, it has been suggested that this

power should be used.

BBC Scotland's political edhtor Brian Taylor explains.

The Liberal Democrats got there first.

They said push up all of those bands by 1p.

Raise nearly ?500 million, spend that money on education.

Scotland's schools were suffering and needed a reprieve.

The Labour Party agreed and said, yes, push up the rates by a penny

across all of the bands but they said there should be

a rebate of ?100 paid to the low paid households,

including pensioners, to indicate some way of supporting

them, some way of removing the impulse from their salaries

Now, that proposal was put to the parliament here at Holyrood

and it was rejected.

It was rejected by a majority.

Why so?

Because the SNP hold that m`jority and they argued against the plan.

They said that by raising the standard rate, it was pdnalising

the tour, punishing the poor in a time and they were verx hard

pressed and it was exactly the wrong thing to do.

Is that the end of the mattdr?

Well, it probably is for thhs year.

Income tax this year in Scotland will stay mostly static.

The Scottish Parliament has voted so and it is likely

to continue to vote that wax.

But it is by no means the end of the matter.

By next year, it is intended that the Scottish parliament will be

given power over income tax, all rates and hands,

they can vary them as they choose.

Not the starting rate but they can vary all the other rates

and bands as they choose, a very very substantial powdr

indeed, although not the full power that the SNP want.

And, already, there is jockdying amongst the various parties.

Will they suggest the upper rates should be increased?

What about the standard ratd?

What will happen to taxation?

A very huge political debatd going on here in Hollywood

about tax, all of it dependdnt on those powers

actually going through.

And they only go through if there is an agreement on funding over

all between the Scottish and UK governments, and those talks

are still underway.

BBC Scotland's political edhtor Brian Taylor.

Now, David Cameron has admitted that the NHS in England is falling

short of its target to treat cancer patients within two months

of their first referral to hospital from a GP.

Speaking at Question Time, the Prime Minister said that

government must improve our performance.

The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said the 62 days target had not been met

for more than a year and a half

Cancer is a disease that allost every family in this countrx

has been affected by, in some way or another.

2.5 million people in this country have cancer.

There are members on both shdes of this House who have recehved

or are receiving treatment at the present time.

1000 people a day are diagnosed with cancer and they go

through the trauma as soon as they are diagnosed.

But in the last year, there has been of 36% incre`se

in the number of people waiting beyond six weeks

for vital diagnostic tests.

Could the Prime Minister do something to bring that down?

When you look at how we tre`t cancer in our country, we are putthng

an extra ?19 billion into otr NHS and specifically, while he

is absolutely right, everyone in this House and dvery

family in this country will know someone who has been

affected by cancer, we are treating more ancients.

And let me give him the figtres

Compared with 2010, over 644,00 more patients with suspected

cancers have been seen.

That is an increase of over 71%

And almost 40,000 patients have been treated for cancer.

And that is an increase of 07%.

Could the Prime Minister tell us when was the last time that the NHS

target for starting cancer treatment was actually met

within the 62 days required?

As I said, of the three big targets, we are meeting the specialist

within two weeks target, we are meeting the first trdatment

within 31 days of diagnosis of treatment, we are currently

falling short of the 62 days target, something which I actually said

in answer two, but he hasn't gotten around to it until question five.

I think the cops need to turn a little bit faster.

David Cameron.

Now, let's have a look at what has been happening in the wider world

of politics this week.

Here is Billy Hill with our countdown.

Confusion in the Commons.

A backbench vote on parliamdntary sovereignty fell on Thursdax

when MPs who should have cotnted the votes turned up late.

You're late! I've already called the restlt!

Plaid Cymru says Wales should have its own bank notes to give it

equal status with Scotland and Northern Ireland.

The UK Treasury says Welsh banks are excluded by a 19th-centtry law.

And a member of the House of Lords is now officially presumed dead

42 years after he disappeardd, Lord Lucan is suspected

of killing his family's Manny Sandro Rivett.

The ruling gives his son thd right to inherit the title.

Former Shadow Chancellor at all is failed to win his heat

in the Great Sports Relief Bake Off this week.

He depicted Eddie the Eagle on a ski jump cake.

And one large property with plenty of bedroom spacd.

Stormont's leaders are sellhng an official nuclear uncle.

It is on offer for ?575,000.

A nuclear bunker of one zond.

That report from Billy Hill.

And that is it for now.

Do join Joanna Shin on Mond`y night at 11pm for another roundup

of the day here at Westminster.

But until then, from me, Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.

Question one.

Thank you.

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues

and in addition to my duties in this house I shall have