29/04/2016 The Week in Parliament

Hello and welcome to the week in Parliament.

The football fans who died at Hillsborough were

unlawfully killed.

After the inquest verdict comes the verdict of Parliament.

How could it have taken 27 years for the truth to emerge?

Millions of pounds of public money were spent retelling discredited

lies against Liverpool supporters.

Is Britain walking by on the other side?

David Cameron faces fury for not taking more child

refugees from Europe.

There are children's homes full in Italy and Greece and over 1000

children will sleep rough in Greece alone tonight.

How are they safe?

And time is up at Westminster for Big Ben.

It is getting what you might call its 5 million bong service.

But first.

But first.

It wasn't the first time the Hillsborough disaster had been

debated in Parliament.

The unfolding of the tragedy and the subsequent events,

including what came to be seen as a police cover-up,

had been discussed by MPs several times before.

Passions had often run high.

But the latest debate on Wednesday was the most powerful yet.

It came with the full force of the verdict of the two-year-long

inquest into what happened on the fateful day 27 years ago.

The inquest jury said the 96 Liverpool fans had

been unlawfully killed.

It pointed to serious failures on the day by the police

and ambulance services and criticised the safety

arrangements at the ground.

By contrast with the rowdiness of Prime Minister's Questions,

the Commons was near silent as the Home Secretary told MPs

the inquest verdict was of national importance.

It overturns, in the starkest way possible, the verdict

of accidental death returned at the original inquests.

No one should have to suffer the loss of their loved ones

through such appalling circumstances, and no one should

have to fight year after year, decade after decade,

in search of the truth.

I hope that for the families and survivors who have been

through such difficult times, yesterday's determinations

will bring them closer towards the peace they have

been so long denied.

I commend this statement to the house.

Millions of pounds of public money were spent retelling discredited

lies against Liverpool supporters.

Lawyers for retired officers threw around disgusting slurs.

Those for today's force tried to establish that others were

responsible for opening the gate.

If the police had chosen to maintain its apology,

this inquest would have been much shorter.

But they didn't, and they put the families

through hell, once again.

The initial coroner said and forced alcohol testing on all the victims

of this unlawful disaster, including children,

including a ten-year-old.

That is a disgrace and we want to know that would never happen

to a single victim again.

Despite being quest being adversarial, not link yesterday's

verdict was unequivocal.

--

-- the

-- the inquest.

Liverpool supporters were totally absolved of any blame

and did not contribute to the disaster in anyway.

It seems to me that the lesson this house needs to take away

is that we have to subject ourselves and our situation is quite a lot

of examination and to maintain it, if we are to ensure for the future

that we do not have a repetition of this frankly deplorable episode.

I would like to agree that this must rank alongside bloody Sunday as one

of the most disgraceful establishment cover-ups of our time.

The ruling confirms that some police officers

have behaved abominably.

And I note what the Shadow Home Secretary said about them

being from the same force who so brutally repressed

the miners' strike.

In the eyes of the establishment, football fans were less than human.

As soon as the police and the establishment see groups

of people not as individual people but as less than human,

then we enter into very dangerous circumstances.

Before then, the miners were less than human and we may look today

at how we treat disabled people, asylum seekers, or the victims

of child sex abuse, and wonder if we also think maybe

they are less than human.

Reaction also in the House of Lords.

How could it have taken 27 years for the truth to emerge?

The South Yorkshire Police force put protecting themselves

above care for the fans, the families and the truth.

They had relationships with the media which made

it possible for them, falsely, to smear the

families and the fans.

There will be no complete justice until those responsible

for the events at Hillsborough, for the monstrous cover-up,

for the lies and the years of organised deceit,

are properly called to account.

May I say that the moral culpability of those

who participated in the cover-up is particularly grave.

Will he do all he can to encourage the prosecuting authorities to come

to an early conclusion as to whether criminal

proceedings should follow?

Parliament's reaction to the inquest verdicts on Hillsborough.

Should Britain be taking more unaccompanied child

refugees from Europe?

On Wednesday the former Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper

described as "shameful" the Government's current refusal

to take extra children.

Two days before that, the Commons had debated the demand

of the Lords for Britain to accept 3000 Syrian child refugees who've

travelled to Europe.

That plan had been initiated by the Labour peer Lord Dubs,

himself a 1930s child refugee from the Nazis.

We judge that the best way to make a difference and to help

the greatest numbers of those in need, is to support the majority

of refugees to enable them to stay safely in their home region,

which is why I make the points I do in respect of the aid

and assistance.

But where people have made that journey to Europe,

that we support our European partners to fulfil their duties.

His decision not to accept the amendment is to ignore the tens

of thousands of children who are in Europe now.

Now.

The reality is that we know 10,000 have gone missing in the last year.

They are in the hands of traffickers now.

These children are already in Europe.

They are alone, far from their families.

They are cold, frightened, hungry, frequently without help

or access to those who might help or protect them.

Their lives are miserable, brutish, and at least half of them we know

have experienced or seen violence which we can only dream

of in our nightmares, or hope that we don't.

We have a shortage of social workers in the county of Kent

and a shortage of foster carers.

My concern, as a constituency MP and as a proud person of Kent,

is that I want to make sure we have the right facilities,

professionals and funding to support the children from my county that

all ready struggling.

MPs rejected the Lords' proposal 294 votes to 276,

a government majority of 18.

But the next day, peers insisted Britain should take the refugees.

British people are seeing that there is a problem for children

exposed and vulnerable in various parts of Europe.

They are not all safe.

They may be in an EU country but many are in dangerous

circumstances and the fact that so many have disappeared altogether

is an indication of how alarming the position is.

Even if the pull factor is applying, if there is concern that children

should be with their parents, there is no shortage of children

who are unaccompanied, and need help.

The minister quoted the United Nations Refugee Agency.

They cautioned against creating routes and benefits that target

unaccompanied children because of the risk of encouraging

families to send children ahead alone.

In other words, causing children to come unaccompanied,

and all the risks that go with that.

But peers voted by a majority of 107 to back Lord Dubs.

So to Wednesday, and at PMQs, the SNP weighed into the argument.

Europol estimates that 10,000 unaccompanied children

in Europe have disappeared.

This is an existential question about the safety

of vulnerable children.

The Prime Minister thinks it is not the responsibility

of the United Kingdom to help unaccompanied children in Europe.

So I ask him, who has a moral responsibility to feed them,

to clothe them, to educate them and give them refuge, if not us?

He asks the question, who is responsible for refugees?

The person who is responsible is the

country in which they are in.

And I want Britain to play our part but

you have to ask yourself, do we do better by taking a child from a

refugee camp or taking a child from the Lebanon

or taking the child from

Jordan than we do taking a child from France or Italy or Germany.

And to compare this to the 1930s is frankly to insult those countries

who are our neighbours and partners.

The Prime Minister has just suggested that child refugees alone

in Europe are safe.

There are children's home is full in Italy and

over 1000 children will sleep rough in Greece alone tonight.

How are they safe?

10,000 children have disappeared in Europe.

How are they safe?

The agencies say that children are committing survival sex.

They are the being abused, subject to

prostitution and rape.

It is not insulting other European countries

to offer to help.

They want us to help.

So, will he reconsider his position on Alf Dubs' amendment

before it comes back to the vote and stop with his attitude to lone

child refugees, putting this House and this country to shame?

She asks if we are helping other European

countries, and we are helping other European countries, not least with

the ?10 million we recently announced.

But I would say the crucial point is this.

How do we in Britain best help child refugees?

We think we helped them by taking them

from the refugee camps, taking them from Lebanon, taking them from

Jordan, bringing them to this country.

That is what we are doing.

We have a proud record and it is nothing to be ashamed of.

The arguments over Britain taking more child refugees.

Now, a look at some of the other stories around Parliament

in the last few days.

The already bruised Housing Bill, allowing housing association tenants

to buy their homes, has taken a further battering from peers.

There'd already been 11 Government defeats on the Bill in the Lords,

now there've been two more.

A former Head of the Civil Service said councils should be allowed

to keep the receipts from sales to provide replacement housing.

Those most in need are denied the opportunity

of a new home to rent went it becomes vacant.

The only saving grace for local authorities was the

prospect of replacement funding.

It is essential that local authorities

who have had their budgets reduced, year on year, for some considerable

time, are not expected to sell off their high-value homes and hand over

the entire receipts to the Secretary of State.

We intend to give authorities with particular housing

needs in their area the opportunity to reach bespoke agreements about

the delivery of different types of new homes.

No sign of an end to the junior doctors dispute.

13,000 operations are cancelled when they walk out again

and withdraw from emergency work.

Labour says it's all the Health Secretary's fault.

He can barely show his face in a hospital because he ends up being

chased down the road.

This is a deeply, deeply sad day for the NHS.

I'll tell her judgment issue.

It is whether or not you back a union

which is withdrawing life-saving care from your own constituents.

Health secretaries should stand up for their constituents, for their

patients.

So, can I ask the BMA directly whether they will show

unity, put patients first and draw back from this dangerous escalation?

From NHS to BHS.

The familiar store on the high street, where we bought

the cosy lampshades, goes into administration after

88 years of trading.

As a new buyer is sought, the questions start.

BHS staff and the public will

understandably want to know whether

the former owner, who took so many

millions of pounds out of the

business, will have to pay his fair

share of the liabilities which

accrued during his stewardship.

It is, perhaps, unfortunate that the

party opposite decided to vote

against our very moderate but very

important proposals on Sunday

trading, where there was clear

evidence that that would have

actually helped the retail sector.

Perhaps if they had not on that,

they might have a bit more credibility.

Dangerously addictive or good fun?

Fixed odds betting terminals,

sometimes better known as FOBTs

need more regulation, say most but not all MPs

in a Westminster Hall debate.

Seven of the MPs across the parties

agree with me that they are a

dangerous past time.

It is about location.

It is about the proximity of these machines to people who may be

vulnerable to developing a gambling habit.

Some streets in the east end of Glasgow have as many as four

bookmakers in the same street, within a few hundred yards of each

other with multiple units in each shop.

These machines are already very heavily regulated.

Every aspect of their operation is controlled.

They must be licensed, the maximum stake is controlled, the maximum

pay-out is controlled.

The fact is that gambling is available in many

forms and there is no control over how much anyone can stake on a five

furlong flat race which is over in less than a minute.

In trouble for a Facebook posting.

After MP Naz Shah says Israel should be moved to America,

she apologises to the House but hours later is suspended

from the Labour Party.

And I wholeheartedly apologise to this

House for the words are used before

I became a member.

I accept and understand that the words I used

caused upset and hurt to the Jewish

community and I deeply regret that.

Anti-Semitism is racism, full stop.

And should every maintained school

become an academy, free from local authority control?

Some Conservatives are known to be doubtful.

Helping them with their doubts is the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Last week, the Prime Minister told the House

that he was going to put rocket boosters on his forced academisation

proposals.

This weekend, in the light of widespread unease,

including amongst his own MPs, it seems the

wheels are falling off the

rocket boosters and the government is considering a U-turn.

I haven't yet met other rocket booster with a

wheel on it but I'm sure...

Rocket science isn't really my subject and

I think perhaps it isn't his.

I will repeat again, Academy is raising

standards in our schools.

And I want a system where it is heads and

teachers running schools, not bureaucrats.

David Cameron.

Now a complete change of tone.

It's kept time in Westminster for more than 150 years.

But now Big Ben and its clock are due a facelift.

So what will that mean for the bongs?

We sent Duncan Smith to the Tower, the Elizabeth Tower that is.

BONG!

It is a British icon. BONG!

A symbol of democracy. BONG!

And it is in need of repair.

Water damage, rust, and the passing years have taken

their toll on the Elizabeth Tower and the world-famous clock.

A ?29 million refurbishment programme is

due to start next year.

And the bells will fall silent.

It is part of British life, isn't it,

the bongs of Big Ben.

How do you think we will cope without it?

Well, I know the authorities are going to do

there best to ensure that the striking of the bells can

take place if there is a big national event

that needs to be commemorated, even while the clock mechanism isn't

actually functioning.

But it is a fact of life, unfortunately, that to

repair the clock, there will be occasions when we won't be able to

hear the chimes.

Five, four, three, two, one!

BONG!

So, Big Ben will still ring in the New Year but the

restoration will replace much of the famous landmark under wraps.

It will have scaffolding from the bottom

to the top.

We are going to try and keep as many dials showing as

possible.

So, at all times, there will be one dial showing at a time.

It will be silent for a period but we are hoping to make the impact

as small as possible.

At one point, the roof will be taken off so, for

the public, it will be quite something to live through.

Plans include installing a lift.

Current access for clockmakers and visitors

is only via 334 stone steps.

And the clock face may go back to the future.

It's black and gold look may be changed to be more in keeping

with the colours of Pugin's original design.

The conservation architects who work for parliament

are now researching the original paint specification that it was

first designed in.

Over the years, it has been changed and altered and,

at the moment, we don't actually know what the colours were.

But there is an awful lot of research

going into this and it will be fantastic to restore it to how Pugin

saw it 150 years ago.

It has been going for 157 years?

Yes, it has, virtually nonstop.

There are not many mechanical things that you can say that for.

People don't appreciate it.

And it is still doing exactly what it was put there for.

It is not in a museum, it is an incredible

piece of machinery.

Will this keep it going for another 157 years?

I have no reasons to believe it will cause any problems in

future.

As long as it is maintained, as long as we have clockmakers to

maintain it, it won't be a problem.

BONG!

News from Duncan Smith on Big Ben.

Well, at the present time...

you're never more than a few minutes away from the next Referendum story.

Some days in the campaign are more heated than others.

On Thursday came talk of a conspiracy.

A leading light in the campaign for the UK to leave the EU accused

Ministers in the Remain camp of caving in on plans

to curb union power.

They say concessions made to the Trade Union Bill were done

just to get the unions' support, and, more importantly, votes,

for Britain to stay in the EU.

It has been confirmed to me, through more than two independent

sources, that Number Ten instructed these concessions to be made after

the discussions with trade union representatives.

This being true would amount to the sale of

government policy for cash and political favours.

Mr Speaker, this stinks.

This reeks the same as cash for questions.

This shows the Government really is at the rotten

heart of the European Union.

The Minister said the Bill was in the process of being batted

between the Commons and the Lords, known as parliamentary ping-pong.

The trade union bill is now in ping-pong,

and as is customary at such times, ministers have held

regular discussions times, with

Shadow ministers to discuss possible compromises that would secure

passage of the bill and commitment of delivery made in the Conservative

Party's manifesto.

There would be concern, if, as part of the

ping-pong process, any government at any time had made

concessions on a bill, as a result of something that

had nothing to do with that bill.

My honourable friend is an honourable

man and I am sure that he can confirm that no government that he

was a part of would ever do that.

I would just gently say to my honourable and right honourable

friends that not every compromise is a conspiracy.

Mr Philip Hollbone.

This is a shabby political episode where the

government has been caught diluting trade union legislation to persuade

the trade unions to come

on board with their campaign to stay in the European Union.

Isn't it now clear that the government, big

business, big banks, the BBC and now the big trade unions

are all ganging up on the British people to try and

persuade them to stay in the European Union?

Now that the government, according to this barmy idea that is

being propagated this morning from the right

wing of the Tory party, now that the government is

seemingly prepared to give way on different subjects,

can I ask him, what is the price of dropping

this lousy, rotten, trade union bill altogether?

Mr Speaker, it is the goal of my life to give leisure to

the honourable gentleman.

On Wednesday the Prime Minister, a campaigner

for Britain to stay in the EU, seemed grateful for this

question from Labour.

Does the Prime Minister think it makes more

sense for us to listen to all of our closest friends

and allies around the world or to a combination of

French fascists, Nigel Farage and Vladimir Putin?

I'm glad he takes the English pronunciation of Nigel

Farage rather than the poncey foreign sounding one that

he seems to prefer.

I think that is a very good thing.

Obviously, I think we should listen to our

friends and our allies and as I look around the world, it is hard to find

the leader of a country that washes as well that wants us to do anything

other than stay inside a reformed European Union.

David Cameron replying to Ben Bradshaw.

Now with a look at some of the more off-beat political stories this

week, here's Alex Partridge.

In the House of Commons, the SNP's Karen Monaghan

accuses Labour's John Wilcox of heckling her with the worst language

than anything she had heard in 20 years of teaching in Glasgow.

So outraged!

The Sun reports that old Powles Samantha Cameron and Sarah

Vine had a foul-mouthed spat as Sam accused Michael Gove of betraying

the PM by backing Brexit.

Baffled by Welsh place names?

So are Ukip it seems.

In Rhondda, they put out a leaflet that misspelled the

constituency name.

For the benefit of any other candidates, it is one N

and two Ds.

Traditionalists can rest easy as the Queen has

rejected a plan to arrive at the State Opening

of Parliament in a car rather than a horse-drawn carriage.

But rumour has it she will take the lift to reach the House of

Lords and not the stairs.

Ruth Davidson has promised a serious campaign for Holyrood.

To show she meant what she said, she rode a buffalo

on a farm in Fife

and told Pink News she would be wearing her lucky pants

on election night.

So, that's going well, then.

Mmm. Must look mine out of the cupboard!

A big political week coming up.

Voting takes place for the legislatures of Cardiff

Edinburgh and Belfast.

There are also local elections in England.

This time next week we'll know the results.

Meanwhile, the Commons and the Lords are back in business

after the Bank Holiday weekend.

So do join me for the next Week in Parliament.

Until then, from me, Keith Macdougall, goodbye.