29/10/2015 Thursday in Parliament

Hello and welcome to Thursday in Parliament.

Tory MPs condemn the government on tax credits.

It's punishing people who are going out there and trying to work

and do the right thing, and that just does not sit right with me.

The Speaker criticises the delay in publishing the report

Sir John should be aware that there is a very real sense of anger

and frustration across the whole House at what seems a substantial

And MPs hear a plea for more humanitarian aid for Syria.

The UK has been very influential, has really stepped up to

the plate to give more, but more is not enough.

MPs have backed a motion calling on the government to reconsider

the effects of tax credit cuts on the lowest-paid workers.

The proposed changes to tax credits, the top-up welfare paid to working

households on low incomes, were knocked back in the House

George Osborne is expected to announce next month how he's going

to lessen the impact of the cuts on families but this was the first

Commons vote to express concern about the Chancellor's cuts and

nearly every Conservative who spoke in the debate criticised

the affect the cuts would have on working families.

In terms of the current mitigation that is being talked about, free

child for three and four-year-olds and how that helps, but if you don't

have a three and four-year-old, it's completely pointless.

There's talk about the personal income tax allowance increasing

I would like to see it go up to ?15,000

But if you don't earn more than ?11,000,

So if you're on that ?11,000, you're still being hit with that ?1200-1400

cut, and it's punishing people who are going out there and trying to

work and do the right thing and that just does not sit right with me.

So that's something that I could not support.

I can be returned to the fold, I'm sure.

There is huge fear out there in the public

and we need to come forward with some proposals as fast as we can.

It is therefore, in my view, difficult to understand why we

weren't willing to give tax credit recipients the same time in order to

adapt and change into the situation that we were proposing.

So the decision to cut so quickly and, I'm afraid, so deeply was

clearly problematic and the response of both Houses has shown quite

clearly that people were concerned about the changes in question.

But in terms of how we move forward from this

situation, the one thing that we have to be aware of is we need to

I think the worst example of a crass comment in relation to

all this issue was the Conservative MP who stated, quite clearly, that

if somebody loses ?30 per week as a result of these changes, they simply

need to go out and work an extra three hours! And

as somebody who's taken an interest in this issue, I was actually

One can only think that because I don't think anybody in any party

in this House would deliberately impoverish the working poor with

dependent families and, I'm afraid, I did differentiate in this context.

It was compounded by the method taken

of having a statutory instrument, therefore it's unamendable, and not

having enough information, not having a proper impact statement.

The motion for the debate had been put forward by a former Labour

minister who chairs the Work and Pensions Committee, Frank Field.

He said the House of Lords had done the Chancellor a favour

by voting to delay his cuts and he called on the government to help.

The Prime Minister, for example, is very waxed in telling the

country that eight out of ten people of families will be better off

The truth is that eight out of ten may well be better off

but practically all of those of our constituents who draw tax credits

are in the two out of ten who will be made substantially worse off.

And I think it then again unites backbenches on both sides

of the House, is whether these changes to tax credits

It's one of the problems we have of our popularity in shovelling around

taxpayers' money without realising that sometimes, some day, the music

stops and people might think the bill is not actually affordable.

There would be very little opposition to the government

introducing these reforms so people who are not claiming tax

credits now would claim them in the future and who would know

It's very, very different when this place has helped shape people's

lives and their expectations and their drive to actually say, all

of a sudden, to blow the whistle and say, we're changing the rules.

I think people, both here and in the country, feel very strongly.

Why are we here again, discussing tax credits?

Frankly, Mr Speaker, the government has got itself into a mess

These proposals which have now been passed through the statutory

instrument and been rejected in the Other Place are wrong-headed and

Work must pay, we all agree, but you don't make work pay by

taking money from those in work who rely on tax credits today to achieve

More than 3 million families will be worse off next year. Some working

families will lose nearly ?3500 a year. ?2.5 billion has been found

for an inheritance tax cut benefiting the wealthiest 4% of

people in this country yet at the same time, ?4.5 billion is being

taken out of the pockets of low and middle-income families. The case for

is clear because they labour market depending on a high level of wealth

is not the way to develop stability. But we acknowledge the concerns

expressed in recent weeks. The Chancellor said we would listen and

that is precisely what we intend to do because we are determined to

deliver higher wages and lower welfare that the British people want

to see and be working Britain deserves.

And MPs voted for Frank Field's motion by 215-0.

The report into the Iraq war will not be

published until next year, it's been announced, and MPs and the Speaker

Sir John Chilcot said the 2 million-word report would be

finished in April 2016 and then published in June or July.

It's more than five years since the enquiry's last public hearing.

It's cross-examined 129 witnesses and cost over ?10 million.

David Cameron has told Sir John he's disappointed

the findings will not be published until next summer and, in

the Commons, MPs raised the matter with the Speaker, John Bercow.

Mr Speaker, at the same time as Business Questions, it was announced

by Sir John Chilcot by means of a letter to the Prime Minister that

it will be a further seven months before the Iraq enquiry is to be

published, which will mean it will be seven years

since it was established and a full 13 years since the war was started.

At this time of year in particular, Mr Speaker, would it not just be in

order, a mark of respect to the 179 families of dead British servicemen,

if the government had come to the House so that people could explore

both the reasons for the delay and publication of the enquiry and,

of course, the possible legal consequences that might follow to

certain individuals if that enquiry allocates responsibility

The Speaker said he was not aware of the timings of the letter

but that he was aware of the concern of the House.

The whole situation is extremely unsatisfactory and I think

if the Leader of the House would like to come to the box,

Well, Mr Speaker, let me just simply say, first of all, that I share,

and the government shares, the right honourable gentleman's

frustration about the amount of time this has taken.

None of us have ever sought to hide that.

There are clearly lessons that will need to be learned

It's in none of our interests that this should

have taken so long, particularly as we were in opposition at the

time, so we have no vested interest at all in delaying this matter.

I absolutely understand the honourable gentleman's concerns

but, of course, he will understand that this is a process that is out

Sir John's timetable is entirely in his own hands and in terms

of the timing of this, I do not know either, Mr Speaker, the time

at which the letter was actually released, but it's certainly not my

job to preannounce a letter from Sir John Chilcot before actually he

The simple fact, however, is that there have been many rumours around

that the Chilcot enquiry has been delayed by Whitehall not clearing

things quickly enough and by not providing enough information about

challenging the ability to release information. I think it would be

extremely helpful to the House if there were a statement and I ask, Mr

Speaker, for you to encourage that because, frankly, this is an insult

and a compounding of the grief of the many families who have lost

I assure my honourable friend that I have seen absolutely no evidence

of a desire in government to stall this.

Indeed, the Prime Minister has been, frankly,

as keen as anyone in this House, including the two right honourable

So there is absolutely no desire in the government to slow this up.

It's been a matter of frustration that it has taken so

He's absolutely correct in saying that it's not for him

to pre-empt the delivery or the publication of letters, but in light

of what I do sense, there's quite a strong feeling across the House.

It might indeed be extremely helpful if, when the Leader of the House is

in full possession of the facts, he perhaps considers an early short

statement on which there would be an opportunity for questioning

The Chilcot enquiry was set up by the old Public Administration

And at that time, there were misgivings about

the form of enquiry and a suggestion made that the enquiry should be run

An entirely new form of enquiry would have been better if

I think it would perhaps be an uncontroversial observation that had

there been a Parliamentary committee looking at this matter, it would not

have been possible for it to do its work more slowly, even if it had

I think it is important, on the half of the House, whether it concerns or

perturbs him or not, that Sir John should be aware that there is a very

real sense of anger and frustration across the whole House at what seems

a substantial disservice that has been done.

Chris Grayling said he would consider the point

about his statement and the Speaker finished by thanking MPs for

underlying the strength of feeling felt across the House on the issue.

You're watching Thursday in Parliament with me,

The worsening demands of the refugee crisis in Syria is outstripping the

generosity shown by the countries of Europe. That was the view of the

United Nations official when a committee of MPs looked at the

humanitarian effects of the conflict. Britain has said it will

take 20,000 refugees over the next four years and the Department for

International Development has given ?1 billion in humanitarian aid. One

committee member believed some local councils in Britain were acting too

slowly to take refugees. In my area, the local authorities are not

registering quickly. Is this something you are aware of? Our

local communities very much want to support the refugees and are keen to

encourage it but if there is a procedure here which is causing

this, we need to unlock it. I would like to take the opportunity

to make sure that the commitment is recognised as an important step for

this Government and it is on the back of very important work and

giving over ?1 billion to the response in the region. With respect

to that number, 20,000 against 4 million is zero point 001% and if we

are thinking about how we distribute them amongst constituencies in the

UK, that figure would bring six people into each constituency so it

is hardly a big strain on the system and our experience as an agency is

in the US where we resettle annually 10,000 as part of the US Government

federal programme of resettlement and that is a federal programme so

it is not local states or counties or whatever offering up numbers, it

is a federally distributed system of allocation amongst those states. We

had some statistics from Oxfam showing that the UK in terms of its

contribution, it is around 220% of its actual contribution we are

others are contributing much less. What is happening to the Syrian

people is on variable. -- is unbearable. It was a sophisticated

civilisation and was the first country where I worked and to see

half of its population having to move as displaced or as refugees, to

see this country being completely destroyed. The UK has been very

influential and has had a very important role and has really stood

up to the plate to give more, but this more is not enough. 19 million

displaced people. So the abolition of the situation and their needs are

outstripping the generosity. What can be done? I think this unbearable

situation is starting to lead to a unbearable consequences, including

in Europe and there is a need for an awakening. The global architecture

is unfit for purpose. For what we are witnessing. $20 billion of

global wealth spent on humanitarian response is not sufficient. Are you

saying there are four that some of us would agree that in fact

humanitarian in the medium-term needs to be hard-wired into budgets

rather than just saying, these things come along once in a while

and we will deal with them on a case-by-case pieces. I agree that a

lasting peaceful situation is what we all want but it seems to be as

far away as ever. In the absence of wit, we do need more countries and

the UK has been leading in terms of contributions, to do more for this

and I feel that the UK Government should do more with other donors to

give more to this appeal. It is also about finding sustainable solutions,

not just aid. Aid is there or the sake of eight because that is a

common human dignified thing to do as a country. It will not solve the

displacement crisis that Europe is going to face, because when you were

the kind of primal terror and evil that is operating in kind of Syria

today, all defences and guards and aid is not in itself going to stop

people looking for solutions and safety for their families in Europe,

and is driving people to claim refugee status in Europe so I think

we do need to separate out those two things. The latest on the Syrian

crisis. Transport Secretary Patrick McLauchlan has said that the car

manufacturer Volkswagen behaved disgracefully throughout the mission

scandal that affected cars in the UK. EU officials have decided that

UK cars will undergo real tests as well as laboratory examinations from

2016. The current difference between laboratory testing and emissions

tests are unacceptable. The UK has been pressing Europe to address this

problem and the agreement was met in Brussels yesterday to introduce

real-world testing in 2017 as an important milestone. -- said that

all of the affected vehicles will be fixed by 2016, however the UK's

managing director has said that this may not be deliverable. What

assurance can we have that the affected vehicles will be fixed by

the end of 2016? I will be looking to Volkswagen, who acted

disgracefully in this whole episode, to ensure that they live up to the

expectations which they promised originally. The still unfolding

scandal at Volkswagen has lifted the lid from the much more widespread

problem about emissions testing which was known about for a very

long time. Why did the Department not act sooner? The Transport

Secretary said the problem could've been dealt with before this

Government came to power. The questions continued. Some 1.2

million cars have been affected across the UK. It is important to be

mindful of the innocent drivers, which of course they all are. They

now face a higher road tax bill and the decreased sale value. Does the

Minister agree with me that consideration should be given to the

fate of Volkswagen due to this? I think we have made that fairly clear

but I think Ali was one of those issues that Volkswagen will have to

address in due course. Isn't the reality that Minister's statements

are leading motorists and the public into being none the wiser, so can we

clear the air on one point and what happened at the EU technical

committee yesterday. It was not just setting a new timetable for cars to

conform to existing regulations, did it not also involve permission to

breach those limits by 50% and that permission being open-ended and is

that not what the UK representatives voted for? What was important was

that we got agreement for a real-world emissions testing right

across the whole of Europe and this was something that was objected to

in the past. We pressed forward in May and I am very pleased that we

achieved it yesterday. The honourable member said it was not as

much as he would like or as fast as you would like, but I would say we

have made more progress in the six months of this new Conservative

Government than was ever made by the last Government. The Transport

Secretary there. Now, exasperating and sometimes frightening for

vulnerable victims. Cold calling and nuisance messages triggered 175,000

complaints to the Information Commissioner's office last year. The

problem is particularly acute for the elderly and housebound as they

can cause distress and anxiety. In the Lords, the Lib Dem Lord Sharkey

wanted to know what action is being taken to reduce the number of these

calls. We have already increased the number of monetary penalties the

regulators can issue and have made it easier for the Information

Commissioner's office to take enforcement action. We are currently

running at ?1.5 million competition fund to develop more innovative,

safe, and cost-effective technologies to block unwanted calls

and we will consult shortly on calling line identification, a

subject close to my heart. Last November, I wrote to the ministers

saying that the rules on cold calling and consumer credit needed

review. One year on and there has been no review. Everyday is a delay

and that means more and more people being exposed to debt management

advice. Cold calling for mortgages is banned. Why is it not banned for

debt management? The noble Lord makes a good point and the FCA has

committed to undertake a review of its rules for cold calling and for

text messages from these firms. The Baroness will be aware of the work

done by the MTS scams team that looks at repeat victims, usually

elderly people who are on soccer 's lists which are circulated between

different companies. -- suckers lists. Could the lady tell me what

can be done about people calling pretending to be from the Telephone

preference service and that there is now a charge for that service and

trying to extract money from the victims. Given that those vulnerable

people I then often referred to other departments for support and

care, whether that support and care will continue to be available given

the level of cuts that there now are in local authority budgets.

Fraudulent scam activities are a crime and could be -- should be

reported. I have a feeling that the consumer representatives and the

Government are very much on the same site here and I look forward to

taking these issues forward. We know that there are one in ten people who

get up to 20 calls per month and they certainly know about it. Did

the lady explain why the amendment that we got through from the

consumer rights act about collar line identification has not yet been

brought forward, and doesn't she agreed that those other proposals

that we put their such as automated reporting of nuisance calls or call

blocking a comment, we should have added and maybe should do now. We

are going to consult on the caller identification. I think mine noble

lady and myself both thought this was very important and we are on the

case. Lady Neville Roth. Now, bonfire night is approaching and

alongside the usual warnings about sparklers and fireworks, one Tory MP

is concerned about the hedgehog. He is running a campaign to preserve

the woodland creature. He used business questions to: People do

check that the hedgehog was not nestling in a bonfire. The

Government took up the call. We have seen a really distressing for

learner hedgehog population over the last few decades. The hedgehog was

always, when I was a child, you would find one in every garden.

People would feed them at the back door. It does not now happened to

anything like the degree that it used to, and I would say to members

on all sides of the house and anyone who is listening to this debate,

bonfire night is a period of real danger for hedgehogs. If you drive

around the country, you will see large piles of wood set up for

bonfires next week. It is all too easy an altar, natty hedgehog finds

refuge in those bonfires in the next few days and I would ask anyone who

has a bonfire set up in the next few days please double-check before you

like them and make sure there is not a hedgehog nesting inside because we

can't afford to lose any more. So check your bonfires everyone. That

is it for Thursday In Parliament but to join me for the week in

Parliament Will we will be looking back at all the highs and lows of

the last few days in Westminster. Until then, goodbye.