17/11/2017 The Week in Parliament

Hello and welcome to the programme

in a Westminster week

dominated by one big event.

European Union withdrawal bill,

committee.

Order.

How are we going to leave the EU? I

will be reporting on the big debates

in the Commons.

MPs keep up the pressure

on the government to cut payment

waiting times for claimants

being switched to a controversial

new benefit.

Universal credit has forced them

into debt, made it harder for them

to stay in work and left many of

them facing eviction.

I have been

talking to the Conservative MP in

elected to chair the liaison

committee, but what does it do?

We

are there because we are used to

cross-party consensus working and we

want to develop ideas, influence and

understand what policy is.

But first, on the long

road to Brexit,

this week will go down as something

of a Parliamentary milestone,

as MPs held their first two days

of line-by-line scrutiny

on the EU Withdrawal bill.

We asked Henry Mance,

of the Financial Times,

for his take on the week's debates..

It's one of the most

constitutionally significant bills

in recent British history,

and this week MPs got a chance

to get their teeth into the detail.

The EU withdrawal bill,

formerly the Great Repeal Bill,

entered the committee stage

in the Commons on Tuesday.

The bill's primary purpose

is to ensure legal continuity

after Brexit, converting EU law

into British law.

Before the debates began,

David Davis offered one major

concession to MPs who wants

to ensure that Parliament

will have a full vote on any deal

agreed with Brussels.

I can confirm that once we have

reached an agreement we will bring

forward a specific piece of primary

legislation to implement

the agreement, to be

known as the withdrawal

agreement implementation bill.

But clever politicians

know you always have

to read the small print,

so what happens if MPs

vote no to a deal?

Will the consequence be

that we will still leave

on the 29th of March,

2019 but without an agreement?

Yes.

And what happens if the UK doesn't

reach a deal with the EU?

If we don't have EU withdrawal

agreement, we can't

have a withdrawal agreement bill.

In other words, no deal,

no full vote for Parliament.

That wasn't the only thing that

some pro-EU MPs didn't

like about the EU withdrawal bill.

Some Conservatives rejected

an idea from the government

of inserting a specific date,

the 29th of March, 2019,

at 11pm London time, into the bill.

What if, said the Conservative

former Chancellor Ken Clarke,

the EU and the UK decided

they needed a few more days,

or a few more weeks

to conclude negotiations?

It would be utterly foolish if 28

governments all agreed to extend

the process and the British

representative had to say,

but we have put into British law

a timing which says,

to the second, when we

are actually leaving.

Steve Baker, junior Brexit minister,

wasn't interested in hypotheticals.

The government intends

the United Kingdom to leave the EU

on the 29th of March,

2019, and that is why

we intend to put that

on the face of this bill.

Occasionally, the debate seemed

a rerun of the referendum.

Two world wars took place before

the existence of the European Union,

and the fact that we,

in Europe, have lived in this

country and in Germany and France

for decades in peace,

is that not because of France

and Germany and other countries now

being in a position of never,

ever will they be going to war

because of the European Union?

By Wednesday, we had returned

to the technical stuff,

in particular whether the government

would commit to maintaining all

workers' rights and environmental

protections after Brexit.

Theresa May has said she will do

that but Labour want her to promise

that any changes that are made

are made by primary legislation,

not by delegated powers.

Throughout the referendum,

prominent Leavers consistently drew

attention to what they claimed

were the high costs of the EU

implementing regulations,

including the working time directive

and the temporary agency

workers directive.

Prominent members of the Cabinet

are on record as having called

for workers' rights to be removed.

That time-honoured Labour message,

you can't trust the Tories.

The Conservatives didn't like that,

among them Priti Patel,

returning to the backbenches

after resigning as

International Development

Secretary a week earlier.

I am pleased to speak in this

debate, particularly

to clause two and three.

Of course, I am speaking

today in this debate

following an intensive course over

the past week on how to stage

an exit, which was the focus of

a degree of international attention.

She welcomed the freedom that

ministers would have

before and after Brexit.

We can do that in terms of how

we can modernise laws more quickly,

more efficiently, making them more

relevant, because we will have

control over them.

That is the fundamental point.

And that way we can have

modern regulations that

will maintain and protect rights,

as the Prime Minister herself has

guaranteed that we would,

and as the Solicitor General

mentioned.

But we can also look at reducing

many of those that are not

functional, add costs.

Some Conservatives did agree

that the bill needed to be amended

to put more constraints

on the government.

I put the government on notice

that we are going to have

to draw together the issues

that we are debating today,

and I'm convinced there will be

similar issues next week,

all of which derive from the same

problem as to the way the government

has approached this and drafted this

legislation at the moment,

and it must be remedied.

The government could lose a vote

on these points if as few as 20

Conservative MPs rebel,

but the conciliatory attitude

explains why none of this week's

debates were in doubt.

No MPs rebelled and the government

defeated the amendments

by a minimum of 12 votes.

The tests will get tougher

as the committee stages progress.

A crescendo is expected

in mid-December, when MPs

will finally debate and vote

on what happens if Britain does not

reach a deal with the EU.

Henry Mance.

MPs and peers have kept up

the pressure on the government

all week over the welfare

payment universal credit.

It merges half a dozen working

age benefits into one.

It's being rolled out

across the country

with the aim of simplifying

the system and making it easier

for claimants to move into work.

But critics say the six-week wait

before the first payment

is made is leading to

debt and rent arrears.

At Prime Minister's questions

Jeremy Corbyn read out a letter sent

by one lettings agency.

The agency is issuing all of its

tenants with a pre-emptive notice of

eviction, because universal credit

has driven up arrears where it has

been rolled out. Will the Prime

Minister pause universal credit so

it can be fixed? Or does she think

it is right to put thousands of

families through Christmas in the

trauma of knowing they are about to

be evicted because they are in rent

arrears, because of universal

credit?

After four months, the

number of people on universal credit

in arrears has fallen by a third. It

is important that we look at the

issues on this particular case. The

right honourable gentleman might

like to send the letter through. In

an earlier Prime Minister's

Questions, he raised a specific

constituent case, who had written to

him about her experience, Georgina.

As far as I am aware, he has not let

-- scent that letter to me despite

the fact that I asked for it.

The following day universal credit

was debated by both MPs and Peers.

One mother visited a church in

Hartlepool with her disabled son.

She was moved onto universal credit

and waited seven weeks for her

money. She told one of my clergy

that sheet of paper napkins from

McDonald's because she was unable to

afford toilet paper. Her son's

condition means that he wears

nappies, which she was also unable

to afford. Can any of us imagine the

stress and indignity of such a

situation?

I am as concerned as

anyone else in this chamber that

there are glitches in the workings

of the system involved. It is not to

be amazed about, actually. It is to

certainly worry about, but look at

the glitches we have had in the IT

systems through our Parliament and

throughout this government. They are

being tackled. These are being

tackled, and they will be overcome.

Our local council has had to spend

£3 million to stop people being

evicted because of late payment for

rent. Local food banks are running

out of food because of the increase

in people having to go there, going

hungry because of what the

government scheme has done to them.

Glasgow will be the last major city

to be subject to the full roll-out,

but before that, how many thousands

of families, children and vulnerable

people will have to suffer and

starve?

Members on all sides, the

cross-party working pensions select

committee, peers, charities, the

children's Commissioner and our

constituents have raised concerns.

We can't all be wrong.

I am firmly

of the view, as are most people on

both sides of this house, that work

should always pay. That is the

principle that underlines universal

credit.

The minister said universal credit

was being rolled out at a measured

pace over nine years

with frequent pauses in the process.

Universal credit is a vital reform

and it changes how we support people

out of work and in work, and how we

help them progress from one into the

other. It is a lot of change, a new

benefit, a new IT system, new

operational system, new ways of

working with partners and that

brings challenges. We will continue

to work with claimants, with

stakeholders and partners, with

honourable and right honourable

member is to resolve these

challenges as they arise, and

improve universal credit as it is

introduced across the country.

At the end of the debate MPs voted

without a division to call

on the Government to cut

the time claimants have to wait

before receiving their first

universal credit payment.

And the chair of the Work

and Pensions Committee called

on the Work and Pensions Secretary

to come to the Commons on Monday

to explain what the government

would now do to reform the benefit.

The Government has said it doesn't

intend to impose direct rule

in Northern Ireland

despite introducing an emergency

bill to allow public

spending to continue.

The Northern Ireland Secretary told

MPs the recent round of talks

between the Democratic Unionists

and Sinn Fein had failed

to break the deadlock over

power-sharing in Stormont.

Despite his strong preference

for a restored executive to bring

forward its own budget,

James Brokenshire explained why

the Government now had to step in.

But the ongoing lack of agreement

has had tangible consequences for

people and public services in

Northern Ireland. Without an

executive, there has been no budget.

And without a budget, civil servants

have been without political

direction to take decisions on

spending and public services in

Northern Ireland.

The Democratic Unionist Ian Paisley

said the situation could not

continue indefinitely.

In taking this decision, there is no

political accountability in Northern

Ireland, either to a non-functioning

executive, and importantly tonight,

to him and his ministerial team in

Northern Ireland either. That is not

sustainable for any period of time.

There must be political

accountability and he must move

urgently to appoint ministers and

take political control.

That is not

a step that I do intend to take.

Labour backed the bill

but described it as a twilight

zone between devolution

and direct rule, and urged

the Prime Minister to step in.

We are told so often that the reason

she is still persisting in this

difficult role at this difficult

time is because she has a great

sense of duty and public service. I

can think of no greater duty or

public service that she could play

right now than to serve the peace

process in Northern Ireland by

intervening personally, by getting

her hands dirty to try and bring

about the breakthrough that we all

so desperately require.

Owen Smith.

Members of the Welsh

Assembly held a-minute's

silence on Tuesday in tribute

to their colleague Carl Sargeant.

He was found dead on November

the 7th, four days after being

sacked from his post

as Cabinet Secretary

for Communities and children.

A ruling by the Supreme Court has

cleared the way for Scotland

to become the first country

in the world to set a minimum

unit price for alcohol.

The policy was first

announced five years ago

but its implementation stalled

when the Scotch Whisky Association

launched a legal challenge.

The First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon,

said the policy would improve public

health and would be introduced

as soon as possible.

Now for a look at some news

from around Westminster in brief.

MPs have denounced an inquiry

into a controversial pregnancy test

as a whitewash and a cover-up.

A major scientific review

of hormonal tests widely used

in the 1950s, '60s and '70s

concluded that they did NOT cause

major birth defects.

The inquiry was set up

after a long-running campaign

by parents whose children suffered

heart problems, missing limbs,

spina bifida and other conditions.

All the available evidence

on possible association has been

extensively and thoroughly reviewed

with the benefit of up-to-date

knowledge by experts

in the relevant specialisms.

The evidence which has been reviewed

by the expert group will be

published in the next year once it

has been rightly checked in line

with legal duties and data

protection confidentiality.

In addition to the overall

completion, the expert working group

has made a number of recommendations

to safeguard future generations

through strengthening the systems

in place in detecting,

evaluating, managing,

and communicating safety concerns

in the use of medicines

in early pregnancy.

Having had some experience

as a former public health minister,

and knowing about contaminated

blood, I'm afraid to say I smell

something suspicious in all of this.

I think there have been cover-ups.

Mr Speaker, I am so disappointed

with the Minister's response.

Clearly, he is just quoting

what his staff at the ministry

have been telling him.

I do wish the Minister would

actually go through the occupants

that have been submitted

to the enquiry and the

documents we have had.

Because if he had read those

documents, he would never have come

to this dispatch box and said

what he has said.

I'm not just quoting notes that

have been put before me,

I'm quoting evidence from an expert

working group, an expert panel.

And it would really be something

if members in this House suddenly

started to second guess expert

scientific and medical evidence.

I'm not just quoting

what is before me.

The Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson

has apologised and admitted he made

a mistake in the case

of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe,

the British-Iranian

woman who was jailed

while on holiday in Iran.

She was accused of spying.

Her family believe her

situation was made worse

by Boris Johnson's suggestion

that she was training journalists.

Will he finally take

the opportunity today to state

simply and unequivocally,

for the removal of any doubt,

either here or in Tehran,

that simply got it wrong?

Mr Speaker, I am more than happy

to say again what I said

to the right honourable

lady last week.

That, yes, of course I apologise

for the distress and suffering that

has been caused by the impression

that I gave that the government

believed, that I believed

that she was there in

a professional capacity.

She was there on holiday.

The top civil servant

at the Ministry of Justice has

admitted his department was too

ambitious when it attempted

to introduce a new form

of electronic tagging for criminals.

The ankle tagging scheme uses GPS

satellite technology.

It was meant to be a cheaper

alternative to prison.

But a National Audit Office report

found that by March it had cost

the Government £60 million

and still hadn't been implemented.

Having been an IT procurement

manager myself, I do

have some insights here.

The procurement was

absolutely shambolic.

You had untested providers.

You had no clue of liability for

who was responsible for the service.

And you wouldn't have an integrator.

So whoever put this down

as a procurement strategy

I don't think had any idea

what they were trying to achieve.

It was completely

fundamentally flawed.

We pushed ahead with this model,

cognisant of the risks,

thinking that we would successfully

disaggregate the market,

thinking, and again this

was a mistake we made,

thinking that as part

of a reprocurement that we could

somehow get suppliers to invent

on the hoof tags that

could do everything.

Now, that was an overly ambitious

reading of what the market

was capable of delivering.

We could be facing a return

to the medical dark ages

unless action is taken to tackle

antibiotic resistance and get people

to use them only when appropriate.

Antibiotic resistance, known as AMR,

already represents a major

global health issue.

In the UK alone, it is estimated

that every year at least 5,000

deaths result from antibiotics no

longer working for some infections.

If we do not act now,

antimicrobial resistance will be

responsible for 10 million deaths

per year by 2050.

This is more than the worldwide

number of people who are

killed by cancer in 2015.

We run the risk of returning

to a medical dark age where routine

operations such as hip operations

cannot be carried out,

and the standard infections

of today become deadly.

For the first time in 650 years

of the role, the next

Black Rod will be a woman.

Sarah Clarke currently organises

the Wimbledon Tennis Championships.

She will take over early next year,

replacing David Leakey,

who is standing down.

There was good news for bees.

The Environment Secretary has

announced that an extended ban

on controversial neonicotinoid

pesticides will be

supported by the UK.

Such chemicals can cause

bees to lose their buzz,

according to new research.

One MP was delighted.

Although there are over 250 species

of the, including 25

species of bumblebee,

they have some remarkable

characteristics in common.

For example, a bee can find its way

in an astonishingly sophisticated

way with a combination

of using the angle of the sun,

counting landmarks,

and exploiting electrical fields.

And, remarkably, they can exchange

information with other bees

about the precise location

of the perfect flower,

and some evidence suggests they do

so using movements known

as a waggle dance.

But beyond their own intrinsic

value, they play a vital role

in the broader environment.

And that role was summarised

beautifully by the poet

who said: To the bee,

a flower is the founding

of life and to the flower,

that the is the message of love.

Parliament has a plethora of select

committees that scrutinise the work

of different government departments

and put ice cold fear into the heart

of many a bureaucrat or mandarin.

But a couple of times a year,

the heads of all those committees

come together to put questions

to the prime minister of the day.

And this liaison committee

now has a new chair,

the Conservative Dr Sarah Wollaston.

A little earlier I asked her just

what the committee was for.

The Liaison Committee

coordinates all the work

of the select committees.

It is made up of all

the select committee chairs

so it is a bit like a super

committee within Parliament.

It's best known role perhaps

is being able to check evidence

with the high minister,

which we do three times a year.

Its best known role perhaps

is being able to take evidence

from the Prime Minister,

which we do three times a year.

But it also has a very

important role, if you like,

in giving more power to the select

committees, giving

them a stronger voice.

From the public's point of view,

when they in politics seems to be

at a particularly low ebb,

people watch the work

of select committees,

and I think they see Parliament

at its best, with MPs working

across party lines to get things

done in a much more constructive way

than they often see

in the Commons Chamber.

So, you say you wanted give

the committee is a stronger voice.

What kind of things

do you have in mind?

How would you make

their voice stronger?

I think coordinating

so they together more.

Because we know for example

in the last Parliament we saw

the Health Committee

and the Communities

and Local Government Committee

and the Public Accounts Committee

working to have on social care

and crises in social care.

I think that sort of coordinated

action was able to persuade

the Chancellor with clear evidence

the case for why you needed an extra

£2 billion for social care.

So, that kind of work

I think is very important.

I think that is something

I would like to see developed,

committees working together

to get things done.

The Liaison Committee perhaps

holding one-off concessions perhaps

to call in people on very important

issues that cover several

departmental areas.

You say the thing that

the Liaison Committee is best

known for is its hearings

with the Prime Minister which it has

a couple of times a year.

How are you going to handle that?

The feeling is that it can be a bit

unwieldy and that liaison committees

never really lay a glove

on the Prime Minister at all.

I think the way to do

it is to focus it.

So, to plan beforehand

what you want to discuss.

The first meeting with

the Prime Minister will be

on the 20th of December,

and what I envisage,

because that will be shortly

after the European Council,

is that we spend an hour of that

having the opportunity

to drill down on the issues.

Rather than it being like PMQs

where you only get one

question and one answer,

having the time to develop those

questions, but also not forget some

really important domestic issues.

So, I imagine we will spend the rest

of the time thinking in advance

about what they key issues

of our domestic agenda

that we want to question her about.

So what advice would you give

Theresa May about how she should

approach the committee?

I think not to regard it like PMQs,

not just to bat things

off, to actually take

the opportunity to engage.

There is a huge amount

of expertise in the room.

People aren't there as select

committee chairs to create

trouble, we genuinely

of their because we are used

to cross-party consensus working

and we want to be able to help

develop ideas and influence

and understand what policy is.

And to share that expertise

with Number ten in a way that isn't

driven in a party political manner

but given by the expertise

of members across all

select committees.

Sarah Wollaston, newly appointed

chair of the Liaison Committee.

Let's take a look at some

of the other stories making

the political news this week.

Here's Julia Butler

with our countdown.

Conservative MP Johnny Mercer

revealed his new facial hair

in aid of Movember -

a campaign committed to changing

the face of men's health.

What is your excuse for not

doing your homework?

Labour peer Lord Stevenson gave

a pretty detailed account

of why he hadn't done his.

It's not been a good day so far.

I attended a wonderful memorial

service for a noble Lord

and it was a moving experience,

so moving that I left

the church without my bag

and nearly all my possessions,

all my keys, my wallet,

and everything else.

Somebody found the bag,

didn't hand it in, took it home,

thought it was the other

of Lord Stevenson, and spent four

hours trying to find him,

and then realised it wasn't him

and it was me,

and I got my bag back.

Australia is this week

voted in a referendum

to legalise same-sex marriage.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said

he hopes to introduce

legislation before Christmas.

At the Lord Mayor's

banquet at Guildhall,

the Prime Minister almost had

a run-in with the golden mace.

It wasn't the first time

she has had to back off

from a ceremonial ornament.

And two new peers were introduced

to the House of Lords this week.

The addition of Christopher Guy

and Sir Bernard Hogan Howe brings

the current total in the Upper House

to 801, and counting.

Julia Butler.

And that's it from us for now but do

join us every weeknight next week

at 11 O'Clock on BBC Parliament

for a full roundup of the day

at Westminster as MPs

continue their scrutiny of the EU

Withdrawal Bill, and the Chancellor

Philip Hammond delivers his budget.

But, for now, from me,

Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.