17/03/2017 The Week in Parliament

Hello and welcome to The Week in Parliament,

as the bill triggering the UK's exit from the European Union clears

Parliament after peers back down in their battle with the Commons.

There is no reason whatsoever to think that if this House

were to stand its ground, that the House of Commons

would change its view.

But Nicola Sturgeon springs a surprise by announcing she intends

to call a second independence referendum in Scotland.

A demand attacked by Theresa May.

Constitutional gameplay must not be allowed to break the deep bonds

of our shared history and our future together.

People in Scotland will have a referendum

and we will have our say!

Also on this programme, the Chancellor backs down

from a planned hike in National Insurance

for the self-employed.

I have decided not to proceed with the class four NICs measures

set out in the Budget.

But first...

Anyone expecting full-scale Parliamentary fisticuffs

at the start of the week would have been sorely disappointed.

The bill giving Theresa May the authority to begin the UK's formal

exit from the European Union passed through Parliament on Monday night

with relatively little fuss, after the House of Lords backed down

in its row with the Commons.

The Lords had inserted two amendments into what became known

as the Article 50 Bill.

The Brexit Secretary came to the Commons Chamber to make clear

the Government was not going to give in to those demands

for a "meaningful vote" on the final Brexit deal,

or on guaranteeing the rights of EU citizens living in the UK.

The European Union has been clear that we cannot open these

discussions until the Prime Minister has given formal notification

that the UK wishes to withdraw from the European Union.

That, Mr Speaker, is why we must pass this straightforward bill

without further delay, so the Prime Minister can get

to work on the negotiations and we can secure a quick deal that

secures the status of both European Union citizens in the UK

and also UK nationals living in the EU.

But the former Deputy Prime Minister said his family situation,

with a Dutch mother and a Spanish wife, was echoed by

many other households.

My mother has lived here for more than 50 years.

She has raised her children, she has worked as a teacher,

she has paid her taxes.

My wife loves this - most of the time -

loves this country.

Not the weather, but loves this country.

She is raising children here, pays taxes, works as a lawyer here.

It simply beggars belief, it beggars belief that people

like them and millions like them have had a question mark

placed over their status, their peace of mind,

their well-being in our great country because of the action,

or rather the shameful inaction of this Government.

Even if we thought the international trade secretary was right to say

they were an important card that we must play,

even if that were acceptable language, it is not a card,

it is like a nuclear deterrent.

If you are not going to press the button, it is not a deterrent.

And if you're not prepared to follow through on deportation order

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

chip or a card to play.

I have a sister who has lived and worked in Italy all her life,

pretty much, and she remains there and has retired there.

And I do not think it is beholden on this place to dismiss

their concerns and worries quite so lightly as were dismissed

in the other place, and have been dismissed here today.

Many of my constituents in their 40s who have never, ever voted before

because they thought that until then, their voices

and their votes did not count, they did so for the first time.

And contrary to what commentators on both the left and the 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.

MPs then voted to overturn both those House of Lords amendments

on the rights of EU nationals and on that call for a so-called

"meaningful vote", sending the bill back to the Lords again,

where peers were urged not to press their amendments.

That decision to leave the European Union has been made,

and this bill, this very simple bill, delivers on that decision.

It appears to me that very little attempt has been made, if any,

to meet the points that were made in this chamber.

It seems that the Government has relied totally on its power to get

a whipped vote through, and to steamroller this through.

He asked, what if other countries did not agree the status

of UK citizens first?

What if they don't?

Do we then kick out European citizens that are here?

Is that the logic of the argument?

And if it is, is that acceptable to this House?

But one peer argued it was time to let the Commons have its way.

Earlier this evening, the Government had a majority

of 45 in the Commons.

There is no reason whatsoever to think that if this House

were to stand its ground, that the House of Commons would

change its view later this evening.

For the Liberal Democrats, I have to say to the noble lady,

for the Liberal Democrats to press this matter

is in Parliamentary terms, I say nothing about any other

consideration, but in Parliamentary terms, it is a completely

pointless gesture.

And I, for my part, I cannot support it.

They have voted, contents, 118.

Not contents, 274.

So, the not contents have it.

Lord Fowler.

And that vote meant the bill cleared Parliament,

receiving Royal assent later in the week.

But if you thought that meant sighs of relief

all round in Downing Street, another cloud had popped up,

somewhat unexpectedly, on Theresa May's horizon.

While Westminster was busy watching its own political

manoeuvrings on Monday, Scotland's First Minister,

Nicola Sturgeon, announced that with the Brexit button about to be

pushed, she would be seeking a second independence referendum

between the autumn of 2018 and spring 2019.

But has there been a shift in opinion since

the last referendum in 2014?

A question we put to polling expert Professor John Curtice

from the University of Strathclyde.

The honest answer to that question is no, in that for much

of the period since September 2014, including most of the period

up to June 2016, of last year, on average,

the polls said Yes 47, No 53.

So, a bit narrower than the outcome in 2014, but not extremely so.

That, in truth, is still the average in the opinion polls, but that said,

what we do need to bear in mind is that the 45% that the Yes side

got in 2014 is much higher than we would have anticipated

just two years in advance.

It is now perfectly clear, and this has emerged in a Scottish

social attitudes report this week, that the long-term legacy of that

first independence referendum was to result in a marked increase

in support for independence.

Back in 2012, on the long-term measure that we have on that survey,

only 23% of people could be classified

as supporting independence.

It is now 46, so any second referendum is going to be

fought against a very, very different political backdrop

than the one that was fought just a couple of years ago.

Professor John Curtice.

So, is another referendum inevitable, and how far can

Theresa May control the timing of any vote?

A question I put to Akash Paun from the Institute for Government.

I'm not sure it is yet absolutely inevitable.

I mean, Nicola Sturgeon, in her speech this week,

has gone a lot further, clearly, than she has

over the past few months.

Ever since last June, she has been talking up

the likelihood that we may in the end have to have

another referendum.

This week, she has said yes, this is now the plan,

she is going to go to the Scottish Parliament

and ask for their backing to start the process.

But at the same time, there are still, there is

still a chance that the UK Government might seek some kind

of compromise deal with Scotland, that good in the end persuade

of compromise deal with Scotland, that could in the end persuade

the Scottish Government not to go ahead.

And yes, the question of timing is still to be resolved as well.

Because this would be absolutely crucial for Theresa May,

when the referendum is held would make a big

difference, presumably?

Yes, I think the timing question is enormous.

Nicola Sturgeon said that what she saw as the sensible window

for the referendum would be between autumn 2018 and spring

of 2019, so during the latter period of the Brexit negotiations.

And I think the British Government will be extremely reluctant

to authorise a referendum in Scotland while they are still

finalising terms of the Brexit deal with the rest of the EU.

I mean, it would be enormously distracting and disruptive,

so I do think it is likely that Theresa May will seek to push back

the timing beyond the end of the Brexit negotiation period,

and in the end, the Scottish Parliament does not

have the legal power to go ahead and told another referendum.

How far do you think this is a problem of Theresa May's making?

Is there anything more that she could have done to woo

Scotland, and indeed the other nations, to get them

a little bit more on side?

I do think the Prime Minister has made some mistakes

since she came to power last July.

First of all, it is important to see that Nicola Sturgeon is a committed,

passionate believer in Scottish independence and she was always

going to seize an opportunity if one came along to go for Indy Ref 2,

as she has now done.

But I think if you look back at last July, in the first few

days of her premiership, Theresa May went up to Edinburgh,

she said publicly and to Nicola Sturgeon that her plan

was to seek and achieve a UK wide agreement on Brexit

for triggering Article 50.

That clearly did not happen, and when it was announced

at the Conservative Party conference that Brexit...

that Article 50 was going to be triggered by the end of March,

that had not been agreed with any of the devolved governments,

and nor had the terms of the UK Government's White Paper,

in Theresa May's speech earlier this year.

So I think the UK Government has sort of inflated expectations

that they would collaborate and seek consensus with the devolved

governments, and have not lived up to that,

and that has played into the SNP narrative somewhat.

All right, let's just come back to Westminster for a minute.

It seems like an awfully long time ago that on Monday,

the Government got the bill allowing Theresa May to trigger our exit

from the EU through Parliament.

Now, although that did go backwards and forwards

between the Lord in the Commons, it was not quite as brutal a battle

as some people thought perhaps it might be.

Can Theresa May find any grounds for optimism

from that going forward, do you think?

That perhaps, getting things through Parliament at Westminster

might not be quite as difficult as she thought.

Yes, I do think it was surprising, actually, in the end,

how smooth that process was.

I mean, if you look back at several decades of Conservative Party

history, the party has been bitterly divided over Europe,

and it is surprising how united they now are behind what is,

you know, a pretty hard Brexit strategy as set out

by the Prime Minister.

So, in the end, there were just two rebels in the House of Commons

against the Government whip on the House of Lords amendments,

so that has obviously meant she has got the majority

in the House of Commons, and then in the House of Lords,

it was the decision by Labour to back down after the Commons

overturned the amendments, and not to engage in ping-pong

or seek to delay the bill any further.

That has meant that the Government has got its way.

Akash Paun from the Institute for Government, thank you very

much indeed for coming in to the programme.

Thank you.

Akash Paun from the Institute for Government.

Back in the Commons, at Prime Minister's Questions,

the SNP's Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, reminded

Theresa May she had promised to get UK wide agreement before triggering

the exit from the EU.

We have been one country for over 300 years.

We have fought together, we have worked together,

we have achieved together.

And constitutional gameplaying must not be allowed to break the deep

bonds of our shared history and our future together.

THE SPEAKER: Angus Robertson.

Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister can wag her finger as much as she like.

If she is not prepared to negotiate on behalf

of the Scottish Government, and secure membership of the single

European market, people in Scotland will have a referendum

and we will have our say.

Scotland will be leaving the European Union.

It will leave the European Union either as a member

of the United Kingdom, or were it independent,

it is very clear that it would not be a member of the European Union.

What we need now is to unite, to come together as a country,

and to ensure that we can get the best deal for the whole

of the United Kingdom.

At Holyrood the next day, the First Minister gave an equally

robust defence of her position.

A referendum cannot happen when the people of Scotland have not

been given the opportunity to see how our new relationship

with the European Union is working.

And it should not take place when there is no clear political

or public consent for it to happen.

Our country does not want to go back to the divisions and uncertainty

of the last few years.

Another referendum campaign will not solve the challenges

that this country will face.

We don't want it, we don't need it, why when she listen?

Ruth Davidson said she wants to put this Parliament first.

Well, let me issue this direct challenge to Ruth Davidson

and to the Conservative Party.

If on Wednesday next week this Parliament votes for an independent

referendum to give the people of Scotland a choice

over their own future, will the Conservatives respect

the will of this Parliament?

Or are the Conservatives running scared?

The First Minister said this week she didn't want a fact free debate.

So, let's start with one fact she cannot deny.

Isn't it the case that according to her own government statistics,

leaving the UK would mean ?15 billion worth of extra cuts?

Well, the band is well and truly back together, isn't it?

Tory and Labour combining again to talk this country down.

Here is the reality.

Scotland has a deficit created on Westminster's watch,

and we have to do deal with that deficit whether we are

independent or not.

Isn't it much better to have the tools and the powers

of independence to deal with that deficit concert with our own values

and not Tory values?

Nicola Sturgeon.

And so, by the end of the week, the two sides were squaring up,

with Theresa May saying now was "not the time" for a second referendum,

and Scotland's First Minister insisting voters there

should have their say.

Back at Westminster, the Chancellor, Philip Hammond,

made an announcement that in other times would have dominated

the headlines for days.

He confirmed he was reversing the most controversial change

announced in his Budget, a proposed rise

in National Insurance for the self-employed.

Some of his own MPs had accused him of breaking a Conservative

manifesto promise not to put up National Insurance,

income tax or VAT.

Theresa May announced the climb-down at Prime Minister's Questions

and a short time later, Mr Hammond came to the Commons

himself to make a statement to MPs.

Mr Speaker, it is very important both to me and to my right

Mr Speaker, it is very important both to me and to my right

honourable friend the Prime Minister that we can ply not just

with the letter but also the spirit of the amendment.

Therefore, as I set out in my letter this morning to the chairman

of the select committee, my right honourable friend

the member for Chichester, I have decided not to proceed

with those measures set out in the Budget.

There will be no increases in National Insurance contributions

rate in this Parliament.

This is chaos.

It is shocking.

It is shocking and humiliating that the Chancellor has been forced

to come here to reverse the key budget decision announced

less than a week ago.

If the Chancellor has spent less time writing stale

jokes for his speech, and the Prime Minister less time

guffawing like like a feeding seal on those benches,

we would not have been landed in this mess.

Might the Chancellor considered to make up the loss in revenue

to their down on those employers who force their employees

into self-employment against their wish,

destabilise their lives and thereby get out of paying

National Insurance contributions, as all good employers do.

The change of heart was welcomed by a leading Tory

critic of the policy.

I know that the Conservative government really wants a tax

system that will support risk-takers and creators.

So, will the Chancellor committed to work with colleagues

over the coming months?

Who believe it is time to take a simple and holistic view

on personal taxation for the self-employed,

which will support wholeheartedly those who build new businesses

and take risks.

The government will always be on the side of those who genuinely

strive to take risks, to innovate, to grow businesses,

and to contribute in that way to the economy.

Philip Hammond.

Time now for some news in brief.

Five-year-old April Jones was murdered by

Mark Bridger in Powys in 2012.

Bridger, who kept images of child sex abuse on his laptop,

was sentenced to life imprisonment.

April's family has been campaigning for all 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 those changes, started by the family,

gained so much support that it prompted a debate

in Westminster Hall.

April's parents, Paul and Coral, and her sister, Jazmin,

were there to watch.

The Minister paid tribute to them.

How you have managed to take such grief 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 have experienced and no other community has to suffer

what you have experienced.

The social media giants Google, Facebook, and

Twitter faced criticism

from MPs for not doing enough to remove hateful

and exploitative content.

..which has acted as a moneymaking machine for the peddlers of hate,

extremism, the support of Isis, full support of these

neo-Nazi groups.

We have no interest in making money from that.

But you have.

We work very hard to make sure that doesn't happen.

We work with advertisers to give them more transparency

so that they don't appear next the product.

But it is worth pointing out that some of the videos you are referring

to were not videos that would break our guidelines.

If a terror organisation or an illegal organisation attempts

to have the YouTube channel or attempts to make money from that,

that would be shut down.

The new MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central made his maiden speech

in the Commons.

Gareth Snell held the seat for Labour after Tristram Hunt

stood down to become the director of London's

Victoria and Albert Museum.

Garrett Snell turned to the Potteries' most famous export...

We were the beating heart of a ceramic empire that stretched

to the four corners of the world.

And, today, proud members of the turnover club can be seen

inspecting their tableware for that all-important backstamp,

hoping to find neatly inscribed on the back of their plate or cup

the five greatest words in the English language -

Made in Stoke-on-Trent.

Hear, hear!

It is the ceremony, Mr Speaker, to which my own daughter Hannah has

taken up with vigour.

Indeed, so enthusiastically does she wish to discover the origins

of a dinner plate that she has on occasion forgotten

to finish its contents before turning it over

and depositing her lunch in her lap.

A Conservative MP came up with a plan to put some fizz

into English sparkling wine.

Nusrat Ghani says sales topped ?100 million in 2015.

She brought in a bill to have English wines served

at all the UK's overseas embassies.

What could be a more recruit setting to promote English wine than

the famed ambassador's reception.

However, the lack of consistency in the policies in toasting

and serving British products means that we are missing opportunities

to share it off to a new market that should be fertile territory

to share it off to a new market that should be fertile territory

for export - China, Japan, Singapore, and even India,

where wine consumption amongst the professional classes

is growing exponentially.

Fancy taking a stroll around Parliament from

the comfort of your home?

A virtual tour, with 360-degree views, launched

on the parliament.co.uk website and Google Maps.

And visitors to Parliament can also try it out.

It is accessible via a computer or mobile device.

Everyone knows that owners are supposed to clean up

when their furry friend makes a doggy deposit,

but increasingly it seems many don't know what to do with the plastic

poop bag and have taken to hanging them from trees or bushes.

Anne Main suggested in "no bin areas", there was an alternative...

Anne Main suggested in "no bin areas", there was an alternative.

They ought to use the stick and flick approach.

This is on the Forestry Commission's website, it is an approach

that they advocate.

And having been on the Jeremy Vine show, trying to flick and stick

a pseudo poo which happened to be a chocolate eclair and it

didn't flick at all well, I can say it is actually quite

an effective, in reality, way of doing it.

Anne Main.

Election news now from the House of Lords.

A by-election campaign is under way and only hereditary peers

can contest the seat.

Here's Simon Vaughan to explain all.

Welcome to our virtual interior of the House of Lords.

Campaigning is taking place for a hereditary by-election.

Now, there are places for 92 hereditary peers.

Less well-known, there are also 15 hereditaries

elected as Deputy Speaker.

And, remember, they are the only members of the House

of Lords to be elected.

Now, this vacancy was caused in January by the death

of Scottish peer Lord Lyell.

The whole House gets to vote on this by-election

and there are more than 800 voters.

That is because Lord Lyell was one of the peers prepared to serve

in a senior role as a Deputy Speaker.

Now, there are 27 candidates, including some famous names.

A few peers are hoping to return to the House of Lords.

Now, they had to leave along with most of the hereditaries under

the Blair government reforms of the 1999.

Let's take a closer look.

16 candidates for the Tories, three are Lib Dems,

seven across benches, and there is one candidate

who has declared a party or group affiliation.

So, those other contenders for a coveted place

on these red benches.

I must stress that only members of the House of Lords can vote.

Voting takes place on Tuesday March 21st with the winner

announced the following day.

Alicia.

And that's it from me for now, but do join Keith Macdougall

on Monday night at 11 for another roundup of the best of the day

here at Westminster.

But for now, from me, Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.