0:00:12 > 0:00:14Hello there, and welcome to Thursday In Parliament.
0:00:14 > 0:00:15Coming up:
0:00:15 > 0:00:18There's anger in the Commons as the Health Secretary announces
0:00:18 > 0:00:22he is to impose new contracts on junior doctors in England.
0:00:22 > 0:00:27Does the Secretary of State not feel a sense of shame?
0:00:27 > 0:00:29It wasn't me that refused to sit around the table and talk
0:00:29 > 0:00:31until December, it was the BMA.
0:00:31 > 0:00:34Google executives say they understand why the public
0:00:34 > 0:00:36is angry about its tax bill.
0:00:36 > 0:00:40And an SNP MP agrees with a report criticising the Government's
0:00:40 > 0:00:44procedure for English Votes For English Laws.
0:00:44 > 0:00:46The current standing order and procedure is a guddle,
0:00:46 > 0:00:49a boorach and in short, a complete mess.
0:00:49 > 0:00:52But first, the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt has announced
0:00:52 > 0:00:54that the Government will impose a new contract on junior
0:00:54 > 0:00:58doctors in England.
0:00:58 > 0:01:00Doctors have staged a series of protests and launched industrial
0:01:00 > 0:01:02action in their long-running dispute with the Government
0:01:02 > 0:01:05over new contracts.
0:01:05 > 0:01:08In the week, the doctors' union, the British Medical Association,
0:01:08 > 0:01:11rejected a final take it-or-leave-it offer.
0:01:11 > 0:01:14The Government's chief negotiator Sir David Dalton then advised
0:01:14 > 0:01:19ministers to do whatever was necessary to end the deadlock.
0:01:19 > 0:01:21The Health Secretary came to the Commons and explained why
0:01:21 > 0:01:23change was needed.
0:01:23 > 0:01:26Under the existing contract, doctors can receive the same pay
0:01:26 > 0:01:31for working quite different amounts of unsocial hours.
0:01:31 > 0:01:34Doctors not working nights can be paid the same as those who do,
0:01:34 > 0:01:38and if one doctor works just one hour over the maximum shift length,
0:01:38 > 0:01:45it can trigger a 66% pay rise to all doctors on that rota.
0:01:45 > 0:01:47He set out what the new contract would do.
0:01:47 > 0:01:51Tired doctors risk patient safety, so in the new contract,
0:01:51 > 0:01:54the maximum number of hours that can be worked in one week will be
0:01:54 > 0:01:59reduced from 91 to 72.
0:01:59 > 0:02:03The maximum number of consecutive nights doctors can be asked to work
0:02:03 > 0:02:05will be reduced from seven to four.
0:02:05 > 0:02:08The maximum number of consecutive long days will be reduced
0:02:08 > 0:02:10from seven to five.
0:02:10 > 0:02:14And no doctor will ever be rostered consecutive weekends.
0:02:14 > 0:02:17Because we do not want take-home pay to go down for junior doctors,
0:02:17 > 0:02:21after updated modelling, I can tell the House these changes
0:02:21 > 0:02:25will allow an increase in basic salary of not 11%,
0:02:25 > 0:02:30as was previously thought, but 13.5%.
0:02:30 > 0:02:34Three quarters of doctors will see a take-home pay rise,
0:02:34 > 0:02:36and no trainee working within contracted hours
0:02:37 > 0:02:40will have their pay cut.
0:02:40 > 0:02:42Jeremy Hunt also announced a review into ways to improve doctors'
0:02:42 > 0:02:47morale, but the opposition was scathing.
0:02:47 > 0:02:51This whole dispute could have been handled so differently.
0:02:51 > 0:02:55The Health Secretary's failure to listen to junior doctors,
0:02:55 > 0:02:59his deeply dubious misrepresentation of research about care at weekends
0:02:59 > 0:03:03and his desire to make these contract negotiations
0:03:03 > 0:03:08into a symbolic fight for delivery of seven-day services has led
0:03:08 > 0:03:14to a situation which has been unprecedented in my lifetime.
0:03:14 > 0:03:18Can the Health Secretary not see that imposing a new contract
0:03:18 > 0:03:22which doesn't enjoy the confidence of junior doctors will destroy
0:03:22 > 0:03:26morale, which is already at rock bottom?
0:03:26 > 0:03:29She feared many doctors would head for countries like Australia.
0:03:29 > 0:03:34A poll earlier this week found that nearly 90% of junior doctors
0:03:34 > 0:03:39are prepared to leave the NHS if the contract is imposed.
0:03:39 > 0:03:42How does the Health Secretary propose to deliver seven-day
0:03:42 > 0:03:48services with one tenth of the current junior doctor workforce?
0:03:48 > 0:03:52How can it possibly be right for us to be training junior doctors
0:03:52 > 0:03:57and the consultants of tomorrow, only to be exporting them en masse
0:03:57 > 0:04:00to the southern hemisphere?
0:04:00 > 0:04:03It's quite obvious that after three years, the BMA were prepared just
0:04:03 > 0:04:07to let the whole thing drag on with talks and days of action
0:04:07 > 0:04:10until he either abandoned the seven-day service or gave them
0:04:10 > 0:04:15an enormous pay settlement in order to buy them into doing it.
0:04:15 > 0:04:19The problem around recognition of unsocial hours might increase
0:04:19 > 0:04:22the difficulty we already have in recruiting people
0:04:22 > 0:04:27for the acute specialties: A, maternity and acute medicine.
0:04:27 > 0:04:28They are already struggling.
0:04:28 > 0:04:31This may well make that worse.
0:04:31 > 0:04:34What we now need is to move forward in a positive spirit that actually
0:04:34 > 0:04:38brings this dispute to an end, takes the temperature down
0:04:38 > 0:04:41and actually recognises that we all want the same thing,
0:04:41 > 0:04:43and that is safety for patients.
0:04:43 > 0:04:46Will he entertain the idea of a commission, as advocated
0:04:46 > 0:04:49by my right honourable friend, the member for North Norfolk,
0:04:49 > 0:04:51and indeed others on both sides of this House,
0:04:51 > 0:04:54to find a long-term consensual solution to the growing health
0:04:54 > 0:04:58and care challenges we face?
0:04:58 > 0:05:01I think the trouble with commissions is that they tend to take rather
0:05:01 > 0:05:03a long time to come up with their conclusions,
0:05:03 > 0:05:05and we need to sort out these problems now.
0:05:05 > 0:05:08I spent 30 years in the world of work representing employees,
0:05:08 > 0:05:10conducting negotiations and solving disputes.
0:05:10 > 0:05:14I have seldom seen a sense of grievance so grotesquely
0:05:14 > 0:05:18mishandled, insulting the intelligence of junior doctors
0:05:18 > 0:05:23by telling them that they do not understand what is on offer.
0:05:23 > 0:05:29Does the Secretary of State not feel a sense of shame that his handling
0:05:29 > 0:05:33of this dispute should have so poisoned relationships
0:05:33 > 0:05:35with junior doctors, the backbone of the National
0:05:35 > 0:05:38Health Service?
0:05:38 > 0:05:41Mr Speaker, he can do a lot better than that.
0:05:41 > 0:05:45We have been willing to negotiate since June.
0:05:45 > 0:05:47It wasn't me that refused to sit around the table and talk
0:05:47 > 0:05:51until December, it was the BMA, who before even talking
0:05:51 > 0:05:54to the Government, balloted for industrial action.
0:05:54 > 0:05:57What totally irresponsible behaviour, and if Labour
0:05:57 > 0:05:59were responsible, they would be condemning it as well.
0:06:00 > 0:06:03The Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt.
0:06:03 > 0:06:05Google executives have told the Public Accounts Committee
0:06:05 > 0:06:09that they understand public anger at the firm's ?130 million UK tax
0:06:09 > 0:06:14bill, but they maintain that it was a fair amount of money,
0:06:14 > 0:06:16reached after an audit by Her Majesty's
0:06:16 > 0:06:18Revenue and Customs.
0:06:18 > 0:06:22MPs asked why it took six years to come up with the figure
0:06:22 > 0:06:25and challenged them on their tax arrangements.
0:06:25 > 0:06:27The session started with enquiries about the salaries of senior
0:06:27 > 0:06:30Google staff.
0:06:30 > 0:06:33Can you confirm reports that your Chief Executive was paid
0:06:33 > 0:06:37?138 million last year?
0:06:37 > 0:06:39I don't have the exact figure in front of me...
0:06:39 > 0:06:43$199 million.
0:06:43 > 0:06:46In the last few days, a new stock-based compensation
0:06:46 > 0:06:49was announced four our recently appointed Chief Executive.
0:06:49 > 0:06:51That is an amount which is based on stock.
0:06:51 > 0:06:54The value of the stock depends on the performance in the future
0:06:54 > 0:06:55and it invests over multiple years.
0:06:55 > 0:06:57Well, it's a lot of money. That's true.
0:06:57 > 0:06:58Yes.
0:06:58 > 0:07:01And your tax settlement that you announced a couple of weeks ago
0:07:01 > 0:07:04with HMRC, covering a ten-year period, was ?130 million.
0:07:04 > 0:07:07That's correct.
0:07:07 > 0:07:10OK, we will get into what that involves maybe later.
0:07:10 > 0:07:13Mr Brittin, I'm just here...
0:07:13 > 0:07:16We are here for taxpayers in Britain.
0:07:16 > 0:07:19Do you hear the anger and frustration out there that
0:07:19 > 0:07:22with those huge figures, you settled for a figure
0:07:22 > 0:07:25of ?130 million?
0:07:25 > 0:07:26Absolutely.
0:07:26 > 0:07:30And I welcome the chance to come and talk to you about this.
0:07:30 > 0:07:31I understand the anger and indeed it...
0:07:31 > 0:07:33Do you really understand the anger, Mr Brittin?
0:07:33 > 0:07:35What do you get paid, Mr Brittin?
0:07:35 > 0:07:38If that's relevant, I will happily disclose that to the committee.
0:07:38 > 0:07:41What I understand is... I'm asking what you get paid.
0:07:41 > 0:07:43I will happily disclose that if that is a relevant
0:07:43 > 0:07:45matter for committee. It is a relevant matter.
0:07:45 > 0:07:47I am asking you, so it is a relevant matter.
0:07:47 > 0:07:50Can you tell me what you get paid, please?
0:07:50 > 0:07:52I don't have the figure, but I will happily provide...
0:07:52 > 0:07:54You don't know what you get paid, Mr Brittin?
0:07:54 > 0:07:55Well...
0:07:55 > 0:07:56Chair... Let me...
0:07:56 > 0:07:59You tell us you want a transparent system, and yet with the system
0:07:59 > 0:08:02that is here, you used the double Irish, you used the Dutch sandwich
0:08:02 > 0:08:05and you used Bermuda, and your argument so far...
0:08:05 > 0:08:06We will come onto Bermuda.
0:08:06 > 0:08:09Your argument so far that I have heard is everybody else does it,
0:08:09 > 0:08:10so we do.
0:08:10 > 0:08:13Matt Brittin explained why Google set up its HQ in Dublin.
0:08:13 > 0:08:16We have people speaking over 40 languages there, serving
0:08:16 > 0:08:17customers across the region.
0:08:17 > 0:08:21The reason we do that is we believe we can provide a better service
0:08:21 > 0:08:22by having expertise that is concentrated and shared.
0:08:22 > 0:08:25And many of our UK customers export to multiple markets,
0:08:25 > 0:08:28and having that resource that can speak multiple languages and help
0:08:28 > 0:08:29them reach those customers...
0:08:29 > 0:08:31We assemble our operations for business reasons,
0:08:31 > 0:08:33not for tax reasons.
0:08:33 > 0:08:36Just to be quite clear on that point, because it is an important
0:08:36 > 0:08:39one, the evidence you have given us today is that you have set up
0:08:39 > 0:08:42in Dublin because of the ability to get lots of linguistic
0:08:42 > 0:08:43skills in Dublin?
0:08:43 > 0:08:46But it has nothing to do with the tax rates?
0:08:46 > 0:08:47No...
0:08:47 > 0:08:48LAUGHTER
0:08:48 > 0:08:51That's what you just said. No, I said that...
0:08:51 > 0:08:54To be clear, we set up our operations...
0:08:54 > 0:08:57No, we love beingin London and we have hired 1000 more staff
0:08:57 > 0:08:59since I last appeared. Multilingual?
0:08:59 > 0:09:02Why did it take you six years, which is as long
0:09:02 > 0:09:04as the Second World War, to explain your activities
0:09:05 > 0:09:07adequately to HMRC?
0:09:07 > 0:09:09This is a process that HMRC drives and runs,
0:09:09 > 0:09:12and one of the things they did in that process is they did take
0:09:12 > 0:09:15an extended period of time to look at the nature
0:09:15 > 0:09:16of an internet business.
0:09:16 > 0:09:19So one of the things they did was slow down the process in order
0:09:19 > 0:09:22to ask us, other tax authorities and look at the nature
0:09:22 > 0:09:23of the internet.
0:09:23 > 0:09:25So they went back and looked at the detail of how
0:09:26 > 0:09:26our products operate.
0:09:26 > 0:09:29But the timetable of the process is driven by HMRC, according
0:09:29 > 0:09:32to their published and fairly detailed and rigorous standards.
0:09:32 > 0:09:34Tom's team was fully involved in answering their questions
0:09:34 > 0:09:36throughout that period.
0:09:36 > 0:09:39So basically you are saying that it's HMRC's fault for being so slow.
0:09:39 > 0:09:42They run the process according to their published standards
0:09:42 > 0:09:44and the requirements the Government puts on them as their
0:09:44 > 0:09:46independent tax experts.
0:09:46 > 0:09:48Well, our committee is charged with looking at the effectiveness
0:09:48 > 0:09:51and efficiency in economy, and if it takes six years
0:09:51 > 0:09:54to investigate something, either you are very bad
0:09:54 > 0:09:58at explaining or they are very thick at understanding.
0:09:58 > 0:10:01Next up was senior tax officials from HMRC,
0:10:01 > 0:10:05who were confident that they had got the full tax due from Google.
0:10:05 > 0:10:09What I hope the public will see is that HMRC has done a thorough
0:10:09 > 0:10:13and professional job and got the amount of tax that they can get
0:10:13 > 0:10:15from Google under the law.
0:10:15 > 0:10:18And indeed, over the period of 2010-2015 from large
0:10:18 > 0:10:22businesses generally, ?38 billion in additional tax
0:10:22 > 0:10:24from large businesses.
0:10:24 > 0:10:27It is impossible to get that large amount from large businesses
0:10:27 > 0:10:29without doing a thorough and professional job.
0:10:29 > 0:10:32That is what I want the British public to believe.
0:10:32 > 0:10:36Whether they believe that the amount of tax that Google has to pay under
0:10:36 > 0:10:39the law is fair or not is a matter for them to debate,
0:10:39 > 0:10:43but it is not a matter for which I can account to.
0:10:43 > 0:10:49And HMRC insisted it was not outmanoeuvred by large corporations.
0:10:49 > 0:10:52Now, there has been a furious reaction in the Commons
0:10:52 > 0:10:55to the Government's attempt to justify proposed cuts to short
0:10:55 > 0:10:58money, the payments given to opposition parties to help them
0:10:58 > 0:11:01perform their parliamentary functions.
0:11:01 > 0:11:04In his Autumn Statement, the Chancellor George Osborne
0:11:04 > 0:11:07announced a 19% cut in funding, to be followed by a freeze
0:11:07 > 0:11:10for the rest of this Parliament.
0:11:10 > 0:11:14In opposition, the Conservatives banked ?46 million a year in short
0:11:14 > 0:11:18money, yet in Government, they want to cut short money
0:11:18 > 0:11:20by 20% for the opposition.
0:11:20 > 0:11:23There is a word for that, Mr Speaker, but it's not
0:11:23 > 0:11:24parliamentary.
0:11:24 > 0:11:28How can it be right for the Government to cut the policy
0:11:28 > 0:11:32development grant of political parties by 19% when it's not cutting
0:11:32 > 0:11:37the amount of money spent on special advisers its own?
0:11:37 > 0:11:39Unlike the impression given by his remarks,
0:11:39 > 0:11:43short money has actually risen very substantially over the course
0:11:43 > 0:11:46of the last five years.
0:11:46 > 0:11:50It has gone up, Mr Speaker, by more than 50%.
0:11:50 > 0:11:54It is more than 50% higher than it used to be and if we make no
0:11:54 > 0:11:56changes, Mr Speaker, over the course of the next few
0:11:56 > 0:11:59years, it will continue to rise still further.
0:11:59 > 0:12:03The country will not understand why politicians should be exempt
0:12:03 > 0:12:05from having to deal with their...
0:12:05 > 0:12:07To deal with the effects of the financial deficit,
0:12:07 > 0:12:11which we were bequeathed by the last Labour Government.
0:12:11 > 0:12:14The only reason why we have to tighten our belts as a nation,
0:12:14 > 0:12:16Mr Speaker, is because of the whopping financial deficit
0:12:16 > 0:12:19which we were bequeathed by the last Labour Government.
0:12:19 > 0:12:22And it cannot be right that politicians should argue
0:12:22 > 0:12:25that they should be in some way exempt, a special class,
0:12:25 > 0:12:28and not have to do their bit.
0:12:28 > 0:12:29The chair of the Public Administration and
0:12:29 > 0:12:33Constitutional Affairs committee voiced his concerns.
0:12:33 > 0:12:36It is quite clear from these exchanges that the Government...
0:12:36 > 0:12:40If the policy is as reasonable as he insists, then the Government
0:12:40 > 0:12:44have handled this matter in a clumsy manner.
0:12:44 > 0:12:47The opposition feels unconsulted.
0:12:47 > 0:12:51Or is it that there is an agenda behind this change which is rather
0:12:51 > 0:12:58more political in its intent?
0:12:58 > 0:13:00Government is growing. Special advisers are growing.
0:13:00 > 0:13:01The house of Lords is growing.
0:13:01 > 0:13:04But our ability to hold the Government to account
0:13:04 > 0:13:05is being stripped back.
0:13:05 > 0:13:09One rule for Tory cronies, one rule for everyone else.
0:13:09 > 0:13:13Can the Minister reassure me that all the parties in this house
0:13:13 > 0:13:18will be fully involved in every stage of
0:13:18 > 0:13:22all the consultations?
0:13:22 > 0:13:25And will he bear in mind that a flat cut in short money and policy
0:13:25 > 0:13:29development grant money has a disproportionate effect on smaller
0:13:29 > 0:13:31parties, particularly regional parties?
0:13:31 > 0:13:34These are important matters in allowing us to function properly.
0:13:34 > 0:13:39Does the Minister agree that this is public money and that the public
0:13:39 > 0:13:42will deeply resent this being spent on politicians to do more politics?
0:13:42 > 0:13:45Does he agree that the rules on short money need to reflect
0:13:45 > 0:13:48the fact that the cost of doing politics, of doing policy,
0:13:48 > 0:13:50of doing research and of communication have come down?
0:13:50 > 0:13:52We live in a world where Google is at
0:13:53 > 0:13:54our fingertips.
0:13:54 > 0:13:56We don't need an army of researchers.
0:13:56 > 0:13:58We live in a world of Twitter and blogs.
0:13:58 > 0:13:59We do not need a whole department
0:13:59 > 0:14:01of press officers.
0:14:01 > 0:14:04Does he agree that the public will resent money used to pay
0:14:04 > 0:14:06for Spads, special advisers and shadow special advisers who have
0:14:06 > 0:14:09watched too much of The West Wing to sit in Portcullis House
0:14:09 > 0:14:10at public expense.
0:14:10 > 0:14:12This government and the party opposite have form when it
0:14:12 > 0:14:15comes to reading the electoral playing field.
0:14:15 > 0:14:18The party opposite may have broken the -
0:14:18 > 0:14:22the law by spending above the legal limit at by-elections.
0:14:22 > 0:14:27They're ramming through
0:14:27 > 0:14:29one-sided changes to the funding of political parties while leaving
0:14:29 > 0:14:32in place their ability to raise huge sums from hedge fund managers.
0:14:32 > 0:14:35Now they intend slashing short money which ensures opposition parties can
0:14:35 > 0:14:36hold government to account.
0:14:36 > 0:14:38Can the Minister guarantee that these cuts
0:14:38 > 0:14:41will not be the final chapter in our transition from a multiparty
0:14:41 > 0:14:47state to a one-party state Robert Mugabe would be at home in.
0:14:47 > 0:14:50Mr Speaker, I don't know where to start.
0:14:50 > 0:14:52In trying to rebutt some of the absurd
0:14:52 > 0:14:54assumptions in that question.
0:14:54 > 0:14:59I think the short answer is to all of them, no.
0:14:59 > 0:15:02You're watching Thursday in Parliament.
0:15:02 > 0:15:07Here on BBC Parliament with me Alicia McCarthy.
0:15:07 > 0:15:10Housing associations should ensure that large cash surpluses are spent
0:15:10 > 0:15:14in a way that results in more homes being developed if there's housing
0:15:14 > 0:15:18shortage in their area.
0:15:18 > 0:15:21The call came from the chairman of the communities
0:15:21 > 0:15:28and local government committee as he delivered its report
0:15:28 > 0:15:30on the government's plans to let housing association tenants buy
0:15:30 > 0:15:31their homes.
0:15:31 > 0:15:34The comment comes amid concerns about salaries paid to some top
0:15:34 > 0:15:36housing association executives.
0:15:36 > 0:15:38In its report, the committee also questioned the funding model
0:15:38 > 0:15:41the government was using for this latest right to buy scheme.
0:15:41 > 0:15:44They warn that suppliers of social housing could be reduced
0:15:44 > 0:15:54unless action was taken to make sure they
0:15:54 > 0:15:56were replaced on an at least one-for-one basis.
0:15:56 > 0:15:58Throughout our investigations we've found a great
0:15:58 > 0:16:00deal of uncertainty, that's a key point.
0:16:00 > 0:16:02A lack of detail about the robustness of the funding
0:16:02 > 0:16:04model for the right to buy is extremely questionable.
0:16:04 > 0:16:07We call on the government to cost the programme
0:16:07 > 0:16:08fully as a matter of urgency.
0:16:08 > 0:16:10We feel there are unresolved issues and
0:16:10 > 0:16:11we remain concerned that the government's policies
0:16:11 > 0:16:13could have a detrimental effect on the provision
0:16:13 > 0:16:16of accessible and affordable housing across all tenures but in particular
0:16:16 > 0:16:18affordable rental homes.
0:16:18 > 0:16:20We found that large numbers of homes sold through the statutory
0:16:20 > 0:16:23right to buy for council tenants had in a relatively short
0:16:23 > 0:16:25space of time become rental properties in the private sector.
0:16:25 > 0:16:28This is a concern to is because private rented sector
0:16:28 > 0:16:31is often more expensive than social housing.
0:16:31 > 0:16:33The quality of homes can, in some cases
0:16:33 > 0:16:35be lower.
0:16:35 > 0:16:38Selling much-needed social assets at a discount only for them
0:16:38 > 0:16:40to become more expensive in the private rented sector
0:16:40 > 0:16:42is therefore a significant concern for the community.
0:16:42 > 0:16:44The success of the extended right to buy largely
0:16:44 > 0:16:47depends on homes sold being replaced and housing supply maintained.
0:16:47 > 0:16:49We appreciate the size of the challenge
0:16:49 > 0:16:52of building more homes to meet demand but we seek more details
0:16:52 > 0:16:56from the government how it will meet its
0:16:56 > 0:16:59objective, at least one-for-one replacement of the homes sold.
0:16:59 > 0:17:02I was interested in conclusion number 96, which says
0:17:02 > 0:17:06it is important that housing associations which generate
0:17:06 > 0:17:08surpluses apply them to delivering new housing.
0:17:08 > 0:17:11In his report he highlights the fact that the department has identified
0:17:11 > 0:17:16the housing association sector as having a surplus of ?2.4 billion
0:17:16 > 0:17:19which it could make use of.
0:17:19 > 0:17:22Does he share my concern that there is actually
0:17:22 > 0:17:24tremendous scope for more efficiencies within housing
0:17:24 > 0:17:27associations and is he is concerned as I am that some of the Chief
0:17:27 > 0:17:31Executives of these housing associations receive very large
0:17:31 > 0:17:34salaries indeed.
0:17:34 > 0:17:37I think this was an issue which the committee were mindful of.
0:17:37 > 0:17:39I think that wording is very clear.
0:17:39 > 0:17:43Where there those large surpluses, where there are housing
0:17:43 > 0:17:46shortages to be met, Housing associations should be
0:17:46 > 0:17:49looking to spend those surpluses in way that delivers more homes.
0:17:49 > 0:17:51The housing minister thanked the committee for its report
0:17:51 > 0:17:55but made no promises.
0:17:55 > 0:18:01The new system of English votes for English laws is overly
0:18:01 > 0:18:05complicated and may not last long, MPs have warned.
0:18:05 > 0:18:09The Public Administration select committee said
0:18:09 > 0:18:12the arrangement could end up as a short-term experiment
0:18:12 > 0:18:16due to levels of opposition in the Commons.
0:18:16 > 0:18:20Legislation deemed to affect England, or England and Wales,
0:18:20 > 0:18:27is now subject to an extra layer of scrutiny involving only
0:18:27 > 0:18:30MPs elected there.
0:18:30 > 0:18:34Minister said it was an important balance to devolution
0:18:34 > 0:18:36elsewhere but a senior MP disagreed.
0:18:36 > 0:18:39Our main conclusion is that while there is evidence
0:18:39 > 0:18:40that the principle behind Evel commands
0:18:40 > 0:18:43popular support, we have significant down that the current standing
0:18:43 > 0:18:45orders are the right answer or represen a sustainable
0:18:45 > 0:18:46solution to the English question.
0:18:46 > 0:18:49They may be unlikely to survive the election of a government that
0:18:49 > 0:18:51cannot command a double majority of both
0:18:51 > 0:18:52English and UK MPs.
0:18:52 > 0:18:55The government should use the remainder of the
0:18:55 > 0:18:5712-month period in the run-up to the review of the standing orders
0:18:57 > 0:19:03to rethink the issue and to develop proposals that are more compostable,
0:19:03 > 0:19:06more likely to command the confidence of all
0:19:06 > 0:19:08political parties represented in the House of Commons
0:19:08 > 0:19:13are therefore likely to be constitutionally durable.
0:19:13 > 0:19:17The ad hoc approach to change in the constitution of the union
0:19:17 > 0:19:20which only dates back to the devolution reforms
0:19:20 > 0:19:23initiated by the then Labour government in 1997,
0:19:23 > 0:19:26and which has treated each of Scotland,
0:19:26 > 0:19:29Wales, and Northern Ireland and, indeed, England in different ways
0:19:29 > 0:19:32at different times has been characteristic of constitutional
0:19:32 > 0:19:36reform since the 1990s.
0:19:36 > 0:19:39The government must abandon this ad hoc approach.
0:19:39 > 0:19:43Labour's front bench said that Evel in its current form was not
0:19:43 > 0:19:45coherent, transparent, or sustainable.
0:19:45 > 0:19:48And the government should go back to the drawing board.
0:19:48 > 0:19:51A view echoed by a Labour backbencher.
0:19:51 > 0:19:55This is a worthwhile report which identifies this as
0:19:55 > 0:20:00a foolish piece of legislation.
0:20:00 > 0:20:03That will perversely live up to its acronym
0:20:03 > 0:20:06and accelerate the process
0:20:06 > 0:20:08of the break-up of the United Kingdom.
0:20:08 > 0:20:11By putting barriers between the four countries.
0:20:11 > 0:20:15Of course, in the SNP, we have never objected to,
0:20:15 > 0:20:19in principle, to the concept of English
0:20:19 > 0:20:22votes for English laws, not least because it's the logical
0:20:22 > 0:20:26of independence for Scotland but the committee's report confirms,
0:20:26 > 0:20:28as we said all along, that the procedure
0:20:28 > 0:20:31is in short a complete mess.
0:20:31 > 0:20:34MPs have called on ministers to increase
0:20:34 > 0:20:36the compensation available to people who lost money
0:20:36 > 0:20:39on their pension investments with Equitable Life.
0:20:39 > 0:20:42When the insurance company came close to collapse in 2000,
0:20:42 > 0:20:46it was one of the UK's biggest financial scandals.
0:20:46 > 0:20:49A compensation scheme was set up in 2010 for the 1.5 million
0:20:49 > 0:20:53people who suffered losses.
0:20:53 > 0:20:56A Conservative Bob Blackman heads the all-party parliamentary group
0:20:56 > 0:20:59on Equitable Life.
0:20:59 > 0:21:01There is no doubt that this was a scandal which has
0:21:01 > 0:21:03been absolutely outrageous.
0:21:03 > 0:21:06For the length of time it has gone on and
0:21:06 > 0:21:10for the repeated failure of governments of all persuasions
0:21:10 > 0:21:12to actually adequately compensate those people who are victims
0:21:12 > 0:21:15of a scam.
0:21:15 > 0:21:20Mr Blackman urged ministers to speed up the compensation payments
0:21:20 > 0:21:23and boost the amount of money available.
0:21:23 > 0:21:24He was supported by Labour.
0:21:24 > 0:21:27There must be understanding from the government's side that
0:21:27 > 0:21:30when compensation packages are devised
0:21:30 > 0:21:33that the mechanism to deliver that is done properly
0:21:33 > 0:21:35and that all the calculations are done appropriately
0:21:35 > 0:21:38and where money is promised, money is delivered.
0:21:38 > 0:21:42So government needs to ensure that regulation of these
0:21:42 > 0:21:45industries is robust and be quicker to compensate those who lose out
0:21:45 > 0:21:46in the future.
0:21:46 > 0:21:50It seems to me that the point the government must also grasp
0:21:50 > 0:21:52in this is what happens from here on in.
0:21:52 > 0:21:57Specifically, as we are now asking people to make greater provision
0:21:57 > 0:21:59for their own pensions,
0:21:59 > 0:22:04that will only work if there is confidence
0:22:04 > 0:22:08that they will get the pension they are investing in.
0:22:08 > 0:22:10Equitable Life and other such scandals have undermined
0:22:10 > 0:22:13that a great deal.
0:22:13 > 0:22:16The Treasury Minister's said there was no more
0:22:16 > 0:22:20money available for the compensation scheme.
0:22:20 > 0:22:23I do, of course, appreciate that there are many policies holders
0:22:23 > 0:22:25not now receiving the income they expected but by already paying
0:22:25 > 0:22:30over ?1 billion to over 900,000 policyholders we've taken action
0:22:30 > 0:22:32to solve the government's parts in the Equitable Life issue.
0:22:32 > 0:22:35We've been able to pay in full the losses of the most trapped
0:22:35 > 0:22:38policyholders and double the payments to the vulnerable
0:22:38 > 0:22:46non-annuity policyholders as well as providing a one-off
0:22:46 > 0:22:49payment to the pre-1992 annuitants, although
0:22:49 > 0:22:52who - although, unaffected, by government maladministration
0:22:52 > 0:22:54are recognised to be suffering as a result.
0:22:54 > 0:22:55Damian Hines.
0:22:55 > 0:22:57The signing of an anti-cuts petition by the Prime
0:22:57 > 0:22:59Minister's mother indicates the severity of the financial
0:22:59 > 0:23:01situation now facing local authorities across
0:23:01 > 0:23:04England and Wales.
0:23:04 > 0:23:07That was the claim of a Labour member of the house of lords
0:23:07 > 0:23:09as peers debated reductions in library services.
0:23:09 > 0:23:14In Lancashire, which is where I live,
0:23:14 > 0:23:17the budget which is being recommended to the county council
0:23:17 > 0:23:20this very afternoon involves a reduction in the number
0:23:20 > 0:23:24of libraries across this large county from 74 to 34.
0:23:24 > 0:23:34In other words, 40 libraries to be closed.
0:23:34 > 0:23:41Is this really an acceptable situation, as far as the government
0:23:41 > 0:23:46is concerned.
0:23:46 > 0:23:50My Lords, decisions for library services are,
0:23:50 > 0:23:54of course, a local authority matter and Lancashire Council has completed
0:23:54 > 0:23:59a consultation seeking residence views on the service design,
0:23:59 > 0:24:01needs and use.
0:24:01 > 0:24:04Libraries are changing all across the UK and we understand
0:24:04 > 0:24:08a further period of deep consultation
0:24:08 > 0:24:11will be taking place between now and May.
0:24:11 > 0:24:14I would encourage residents to make the Council aware of their specific
0:24:14 > 0:24:23library needs and their ideas for the future.
0:24:23 > 0:24:25My Lords, would my noble friends accept that it isn't just libraries
0:24:25 > 0:24:27but it is also museums and galleries
0:24:27 > 0:24:30that are under great pressure.
0:24:30 > 0:24:32She'll remember that in the financial statement
0:24:32 > 0:24:35in November, which was a very favourable one for those of others
0:24:35 > 0:24:37interested in heritage and the arts, the Chancellor talked
0:24:37 > 0:24:40about cutting Heritage, galleries, museums as being a false economy.
0:24:40 > 0:24:44Can we do something to ensure that what is good for the nation is good
0:24:44 > 0:24:46in local government.
0:24:46 > 0:24:50I entirely agree with my noble friend about the importance
0:24:50 > 0:24:53of funding for these areas and, indeed, as he said, the settlement
0:24:53 > 0:25:00was very reasonable.
0:25:00 > 0:25:03The Prime Minister's mother has done what the Minister asked and sat down
0:25:03 > 0:25:05and wrote a very serious
0:25:05 > 0:25:07letter to her local authority complaining about local authority
0:25:07 > 0:25:10cuts, does that not indicate that we have reached a very serious
0:25:10 > 0:25:14situation indeed and the Prime Minister and his government need
0:25:14 > 0:25:18to do something about it if they are to
0:25:18 > 0:25:23maintain the social fabric of our local communities.
0:25:23 > 0:25:25My Lords, the settlement means that every council
0:25:25 > 0:25:28will have for the financial year ahead, at least the resources
0:25:28 > 0:25:31allocated by the provisional settlement and, in addition,
0:25:31 > 0:25:34those councils with a sharp fall in grant
0:25:34 > 0:25:38money will now receive transitional funding as they move from dependence
0:25:38 > 0:25:41on central government grants to greater financial autonomy.
0:25:41 > 0:25:43Lady Neville Rolfe.
0:25:43 > 0:25:46That's it for now.
0:25:46 > 0:25:48Do join me on Friday night at 11 for a
0:25:48 > 0:25:50full round-up of the week at Westminster.
0:25:50 > 0:25:57Until then, from me, goodbye.