08/09/2017 The Week in Parliament

Hello and welcome to the Week In Parliament.

MPs return to Westminster after their summer break and begin

debating a bill transferring EU laws into UK legislation.

The Brexit Secretary says it's vital for an orderly Brexit,

but Labour accuses the government of a power grab.

Let me be clear, this bill does only what is necessary for a smooth exit

and... The combined effect of the provisions of this bill would reduce

MPs to the position of spectators as power pours into the hands of the

vicarage. -- of the executive. Jeremy Corbyn calls for an end

to the pay cap for nurses - the Prime Minister reckons

he's being profligate... As a result of the decisions taken

by Labour, we have to spend more on debt interest than on NHS pay.

And a Labour peer tries again to end hereditary

We had a by-election last year where there was an electorate of three and

there were seven candidates. It was no surprise that the first

week back after the summer break Talks on the terms of the UK leaving

the EU had continued over the summer, with both sides

expressing frustration over In the Commons, David Davis provoked

laughter in the chamber on Monday when he told MPs that no-one had

ever said the negotiations While on Wednesday,

at Prime Minister's Questions, a Conservative MP tackled

Theresa May over the powers contained in the EU Withdrawal bill,

which MPs were due to begin debating The Bill repeals the European

Communities Act of 1972 and also transfers EU laws

into UK legislation. Whilst some rules and regulations

will simply transfer across, many will have to be changed

so that they remain However, many MPs are concerned

that the Withdrawal Bill gives ministers the ability to make

sweeping use of powers, known as Henry VII powers,

to change legislation without full Could my right honourable friend

assure me that she will look in particular at those amendments which

seek to change the EU withdrawal bill so it does not become an

unprecedented and unnecessary government power grab? Minister. I'm

grateful for my right honourable friend for raising this is you and I

know that like me, she wants an orderly exit from the European Union

and will be supporting this bill which enables us not just to leave

the EU but you do so in an orderly manner with a functioning statute

book. We will require certain powers to make corrections to the statute

book after the bill becomes law, because negotiations are ongoing. We

will do them via secondary legislation which will receive

parliamentary scrutiny. An approach that has been endorsed by the House

of Lords Constitution committee. Well, the next day that committee

released an updated report which was rather less helpful

to the government, and we'll be hearing from two of its members

later in the programme. When the first day of debate began

on Thursday, the Brexit Secretary sought to reassure MPs

about its aims. Put simply, this bill is an

essential step. Whilst it does not take us out of the European Union,

it does ensure that on the day we leave, businesses know where they

stand. Workers' rights are held and consumers remain protected. This

bill is essential to ensure that when really, we do so in an orderly

manner. This bill does only what is this is

very for a smooth exit and to provide stability. That we are

leaving is settled. How we are leaving is not. This bill encourages

us to surrender all power and influence to the government and

ministers. That would betray everything we were sent here to do.

We have got to make sure that on the day of exit, the statute book works.

The only way we can achieve it in the timescale with which we are

constrained and which are set out in Article 50, is to have a flexible,

pragmatic system such as the system laid out in the draft Bill. If you

look at the amendments put forward, the very powerful reasons that MPs

from different parties have come up with for rejecting this bill, that

shows there is something seriously and fundamentally flawed in the bill

and it cannot be allowed to go forward in its present form. If that

gives a problem for government timetable is, tough. We do not need

to legislate in this fashion to carry out the technical task of

leaving the EU. I remain bemused as to why the legislation has been

drafted in this form. Parliament has a job to hold the government to

account and this bill as drafted stocks are standing up for democracy

in this House and stops us making sure the government doesn't screw up

Brexit in the process as it takes through and its decisions. This bill

was always going to be a sows ear because the government started the

negotiation without clear objectives or outcomes. Therefore the bill had

to take into account any scenario, Deal or no Deal. The government

claimed the bill will restore some of the two Parliament and secure

certainty post Brexit. That is not the case. It transfers huge powers

to ministers, not members of this House over matters that are vital to

this House. Like maternity and paternity leave, holidays, and all

sorts of other issues. I think the bill could increase uncertainty,

including the likelihood of judicial review because the powers in the

bill also broadly drawn. You can love Parliament and wanted jealously

guard its rights and privileges, but still show pragmatism in the

national interest when the times demand it. Because that is politics,

that is the job we are sent to hear -- here to do. That is poetry and

pragmatism. MPs will conclude that debate

and hold their first votes on the bill at around

midnight on Monday. Well, to discuss all that

I was joined a little earlier by the Conservative peer and member

of the Lords constitution Ann Taylor - now Lady Taylor,

who was a Labour whip during her party's turbulent time

in office in the late '70s. She's also now chair of that

constitution committee which released its latest report

on the EU Withdrawal And Pete Wishart,

the SNP's spokesman I began by asking him, given

that the UK was leaving the EU - My view is that there functionality

of the repeal bill, the way it applies across the nations of the

United Kingdom, suggest this is not the means to deliver it. I have just

come from the debate and my sense is that some of the themes of the bill

are starting to be set, a sense from the back bench of the Conservative

Party and the front bench of the labour and two others of us, there

could be progress made on all this. With respect, you haven't answered

my question, what would you do differently? The key debate is going

to come around the Henry VII powers. To give his government all these

powers when it comes to legislation. And I think it was a means to deal

with all of these big powers. And less unpalatable of that. Even if

the SNP had a bill that dealt with the worst aspects of the Henry VIII

powers, I was still be troubled. The idea from us that it is a power

grab. Let's pick up on this power grab. It's a real concern. The

committee described it as breathtaking in its scope and

potential. Doesn't the government have to this? It is not challenging

the principle of the bill, if you have withdrawal, you have to get the

mechanisms and right. We are focusing on what is the mechanism,

and the government has introduced into the bill some provisions which

are moving in the right direction but there is still an awful long way

to go to ensure the relationship between Parliament and the executive

is right and enabling Parliament to be involved in scrutiny and approval

of the measures. The way it is done at the moment, it is complex and

confers on ministers exceptional powers. Ann Taylor, whether you like

it or not, Henry VIII powers are perfect the legitimate, they are

used all the time? There has been an increase in the use of Henry VIII

powers and we have been experts in concern about that. This is on a

totally different level. Call 17 more less says that government

ministers can make themselves any act of Parliament that Parliament

would normally make. This is giving totally different powers. Let's put

your whip's hat on. If you were in the government whips' office and you

were facing no majority at all in the Commons, what would you be

doing? How would you be trying to keep your team onside? Is not just

your team, is the whole of Parliament. If you alienate

Parliament, you will run into more and more difficulty. What we have

done on the House of Lords Constitution committee its router

provides mechanisms which would help Parliament to deal with a situation

which could end up as a crisis if we are not careful. We have said that

with the Henry VIII powers and the delegated legislation, every measure

that the government rings forward should have a certificate saying

whether it is any change to current law. And if it is, we should have

special measures to give it more scrutiny than if it is just a

straightforward transition. That is a very simple thing but we have to

make sure that Parliament has the power and committee and

parliamentary time to deal with this. The key thing about this is

that we normally have eight days in the -- we only have eight days...

But the government's counterargument is that this is technical. Treated

like Maastricht were changing the law. This is changing the whole of

UK law. Disentangling us from an institution. Pretending that you can

do this in a days when there will be thousands of is nonsense. But the

clock is ticking. Maastricht took many days. To have eight days for

just -- is just bizarre. If the government suffered defeats in the

Commons and Lords, how serious is that? Is that something that will be

the end of the government? Because it's not an issue of a policy, it's

a principle and people have voted in a referendum. The task of both

houses is to improve the bill. There are two elements to it. One is to

ensure that there is proper Parliamentary scrutiny of the

process and the other is certainty in law once it is enacted. We have

to get the bill right, and the government doesn't accept it, it is

defeated. I don't see a problem with that and the government should be

looking to itself to ensure the outcome is a bill that actually

achieves those objectives. I am sure this is something we will return to.

Where will see what happens on Monday. But for the moment, thank

you very much for coming into the programme.

And if you'd like to see a longer version of that interview it's

available on our website, bbc.co.uk/parliaments.

Now let's go back to Wednesday and Prime Minister's Questions.

Jeremy Corbyn used the first session since the summer break

With nurses protesting outside, he stepped

up his calls for an end to the public sector pay cap.

Today, thousands of nursing and other health care staff are outside

Parliament. They are demanding that this government scrapped the 1% pay

cap. Wolpe means experienced staff are leaving and fewer people are

training to become nurses. There is already a shortage of 40,000 nurses

across the UK. Will the Prime Minister see sense and any public

sector pay cap and ensure our NHS staff are properly paid.

Theresa May said pay guidelines would be published later in the year

but it was balance between those being paid

He asks consistently for money to be spent. He can do that in opposition

because he knows he doesn't have to pay for it. The problem with Labour

is that they do it in government as well. As a result of the decisions

Labour Party took in government, we now have to pay more on debt

interest than on NHS pay. That is the result of Labour!

The SNP's Westminster leader turned to a leaked document suggesting

the Government would take a much tougher line on EU

Does the Prime Minister agree with me that immigration is essential to

the strength of the UK as well as enhancing our cultural and diversity

fabric. As I have said many times before, immigration has been good

for the UK. But what people want to see is control of that immigration.

Meanwhile, Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has

outlined her programme for Government - pledging to scrap

the 1% cap on public sector pay rises.

Our Scotland political correspondent, Glenn

Having lost seats in the UK general election, this was a chance for

Nicola Sturgeon to refresh, if not we launch, the SNP government.

Independents got just one mention. Instead the blizzard of

announcements on devolved topics. Education, she said, was her top

priority with school reform and more power for head teachers. On just she

wants to do away with short jail terms of less than one year in most

cases. On the environment she wants to end the sale of petrol and diesel

cars in Scotland by 2032, eight years ahead of the UK. The First

Minister also proposes to lift the 1% cap on public sector pay rises,

prompting some to speculate she might be prepared to raise income

tax to pay for it. She has committed to a fuller debate on that topic. In

order to get anything done as leader of a minority government the First

Minister has been careful to choose a programme that will avoid uniting

all the opposition against her. Now let's take a look

at some other news Boris Johnson updated MPs

on North Korea's missile tests. The country has fired a missile over

Japan and claims to have Boris Johnson set out

the gravity of the situation The House must be under no illusion

that this is another advance in North Korea's clear ambitions. In a

country blighted by economic failure where hundreds of thousands people

died of starvation or reduced to eating grass and leaves to survive,

the regime has squandered its resources on building an illegal

armoury of nuclear bombs. The house will wish to join me in condemning a

nuclear test that poses a grave threat to the security of every

country in East Asia and the wider world.

The British Government has promised urgent assistance to territories

and Commonwealth countries hit by Hurricane Irma.

Believed to be one of the most powerful storms on record, it's

Among the islands - hit by winds of more than 180mph -

were British overseas territories and members of the Commonwealth,

including Anguilla, Montserrat and the British Virgin Islands.

The United Nations says the number of Rohingya refugees

crossing from Myanmar - also known as Burma -

into Bangladesh has surged in recent days.

The Rohingya are a stateless, mostly Muslim, ethnic

minority who have faced persecution in Myanmar.

More than 123,000 are now said to have fled violence

This is one of the worst outbreaks of violence in decades and the

international community is effectively staying silent.

Peers also wanted to know what the UK government was doing to help.

The minister there insisted its concerns had been made clear.

We do condemn this violence and we're trying to look to ways to

assist Burma and to assist those who are directly affected.

Twelve weeks after the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the Communities

Secretary Sajid Javid told MPs that just two families had moved

Of the 196 households affected, 29 more had moved

One reason for the low take-up of temporary home offices some

residents do not want to move twice. They have said it is Tuesday where

they are until a permanent home becomes available. I don't want to

see anyone living in emergency, a -- accommodation for longer than is

necessary. Nor do I want to see families make snap decisions simply

because I have better numbers to report at the dispatch box.

The Government says it has no plans to review the new law banning

psychoactive substances - formerly known as "legal highs" -

following the collapse of a prosecution last month.

The Crown Prosecution Service is reviewing two cases

after a judge said nitrous oxide, better known as "laughing gas",

was exempt from the ban, as it's used by doctors for pain-relief.

It has not taken long for the courts to expose the vulnerability are part

of the legislation. Based with the pressing problem of psychoactive

substances will the Government seem reason and accept that prohibition,

orthodoxy of the last century and reiterated on a crude model in the

20 16th act has failed with disastrous consequences in terms of

the growth of crime, the blighting of innumerable lives were not to

mention chaos in our prisons? From this month, all three

and four-year-olds in England are entitled to 30 hours of free

childcare a week, up from 15 hours. But Labour says parents

are in "limbo" because of failings This childcare has been advertised

as free but it will be subsidised by carers or providers. Will he now

listen and commit to re-evaluating the policy's funding? As we are only

six days into September, 152,829 parents have secured a place. That

is 71%. Now there's a row brewing over

the make up of a handful Public bill - or standing

committees - scrutinise The Government wants

to have a majority on the committees in this session of Parliament,

even though it doesn't This government has no means to

expect a majority. They do not command the majority. This is a

House of minorities. That has to be reflected into the Parliamentary

standing committees of this house. The make-up of those committees is

due to be voted by MPs next weeks will stop -- next week.

Now to the Lords where, although most hereditary peers

were kicked out of the House of Lords in 1999,

Vacancies in their ranks are filled by a system

A bill to scrap the system was talked out by opponents last year.

Now its author, Labour life peer Lord Grocott,

is trying again and his bill had its second reading

We had a by-election last year. I'll have to say this slowly because it

was unbelievable. There was an electorate of three and 07

candidates. I don't know of any electoral system anywhere on the

planet or in history where you have twice as many candidates as they our

electorates will stop I have no doubt that 90% of peers in the House

of Lords would actively like to see this by-election system scrapped all

at least are indifferent to its whole continuation. It was blocked

last year by a handful, a very small number, largely hereditary peers.

That go on forever. They may think it can but you can only be King

Canute was so long. Be very nice if the Government said, yes, this is an

indefensible system which they know it is and we will give you full

backing. The Government is or is able to say we have far more

important things to do, which is true. This is a two year session.

Mine is a two clause bill. It would take a day maximum if people were

sensible about it. It is only a small improvement but it is an

improvement in our parliamentary system and just time you got on and

did it. And Lord Grocott's Bill will now

move on to scrutiny by a committee Let's take a look at some

of the other stories making Here's Richard Morris

with our countdown. Five, four, three, two, one. Over

the summer Big Ben fell silent for repair work. That has caused upset

in the Commons where one MP had the question. If Big Ben's bonds are

silent, they are loved by the community and international

visitors, could we please have a debate as to why this has happened

and is it beyond the rich man manful silencers to be worn by the workers?

First week back in the first defeat for the Government in the Lords.

There was surprise in the Commons on Thursday after Labour's and fluid

revealed she had missed a vote because she was stuck in a lift. The

leader of the Has promised to elevate the issue. I hope she won't

take it out of good humour if I say I am rather surprised the lift

dared. Protest descended on Parliament to oppose the Henry VIII

powers which could be used under the EU withdrawal bill. Protesters claim

it could amount to a ministerial power grab. In Brussels, a fire

alarm interrupted the chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier on

Thursday. It is the monthly drill. Was this a sign of a swift and

orderly exit? I was talking about something quite important.

And that's it from me for now, but do join Keith Mcdougall on BBC

Parliament on Monday night at 11 for a full round up

of the day at Westminster, including the second day of debate

But for now from me, Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.