28/04/2016 Thursday in Parliament

Hello and welcome to Thursday In Parliament, are a look at the best

of the day in the Commons and the Lords. On this programme, conspiracy

theories strike the Commons. A leading campaigner for the British

exit from the EU accuses ministers of doing deals to keep in with the

trade unions. Mr Speaker, this stinks. This weeks as cash for

questions. The row over anti-Semitism spills over into the

Commons. I am sick and tired of people trying to explain it away,

and yes, I am talking to you, Ken Livingstone. And

an MP talks about life with her son who has autism. The slightest change

in the house and all hell breaks loose. But first, the senior

Conservative, Bernard Jenkin, has criticised the Government for making

changes to the trade union Bill. Ministers had intended to bring in

new rules on strike ballots, membership fees and political

donations, but they have had a change of heart on many of these

issues, asking what is known as an urgent question, Bernard Jenkin said

that backtracking by ministers was out of line with what had been in

the Conservative manifesto at the general election. It is now being

reported on Channel 4 News and in today's papers that these unexpected

concessions are linked to the question of a ?1.7 million donation

the trade unions may make from their political funds which are now much

larger than they would have been to the Labour Three main campaign. He

referred to the former cabinet minister Alan Johnson, who chairs

Labour In For Britain. He was trying to raise ?75,000 for some balloons

and badges. Now they are getting ?1.7 billion. It has been confirmed

to me to more than two independent sources that number ten instructed

these concessions to be made after the discussions with trade union

representatives. This being true, would amount to the sale of

Government policy for cash and political figures. What would have

been the reaction if a Labour Government had changed a bill in

order to favour the Labour Party's ability to support the Government on

some controversial policy and to give it money? Mr Speaker, this

stinks. This weeks as the same as cash for questions. This shows this

Government really is at the rotten heart of the EU. But the banister --

Business Minister said the bill was in the process of being batted

between the Commons at the Lords, sometimes called parliamentary

ping-pong. The trade union Bill is now in ping-pong. That is customary.

Ministers have held discussions with Shadow ministers to discuss possible

compromises that would secure passage of the bill and delivery of

the commitments made in the Conservative Party manifesto. On the

basis of the amendments passed by this out yesterday evening, I can

reassure my honourable friend that we are well on the way to securing

all of our manifesto commitments. Labour welcomed the changes of heart

by ministers. It would appear, at least partially, that the minister

listened. Well done. But he should have listened earlier, and he needs

to keep listening, actually. So can I ask you now to have a view more

meetings with trade unions? Who made entirely reasonable proposals on

online balloting and facility time that still remain in the bill. Mr

Speaker, there is still time for him to think again. These benches are in

complete opposition to the Trade Union Bill. Can the Minister confirm

that the change to a piece of legislation that affects 6 million

work use for the Government not to consult with those 6 million

workers. There would be concerned if as part of the ping-pong process any

Government at any time made concessions on a bill as a result of

something that had nothing to do with that bill. My friend Mike is an

honourable man and I'm sure he can confirm that no Government of which

he was able heart would ever do that. -- honourable friend. I would

just say to my right honourable friend that not every compromise is

a conspiracy. This is a shabby political episode where the

Government have been caught dilating trade union legislation to persuade

the true genius to come on-board with the campaign to stay in the EU.

Is it not now clear that the Government, big business, big banks,

the BBC and is now the big trade are all ganging up on the British people

to try to persuade them to stay in the EU? Now that the governments are

responding to this barmy idea and that the Government are seemingly

prepared to give way on different subjects, can I ask him what is the

price for dropping this lousy, rotten Trade Union Bill altogether?

Mr Speaker, it is the goal of my life to give pleasure to the

honourable gentleman, but I have two, I am afraid, tell him that

there is no price because we believe in this bill. We believe in our

manifesto, and we are well on our way to delivering it. Nic Bowles.

The crisis in the steel industry has come under scrutiny at a

parliamentary committee. Last month, the owners of the Port Talbot

steelworks put the steelworks up for sale. Many associated jobs are at

risk as well as the jobs of the Tata Steel workers. The chief executive

of Tata Steel UK has blamed high energy prices and business rates for

the company's decision to sell its assets. The cheer of the Commons

business committee asked about the timescale for sale. There is an

article in the Financial Times this morning. Tata Steel buyers told to

table offers by next week. The timescale seems a very, very short

to be able to allow potential buyers to be able to pull things together.

Why is the timetable so short? In fact, with the advisers that we have

and which are world renowned advisers, they do believe that this

is quite a liberal time frame compared to what administrators

would do. So for the purposes of the committee's understanding, could you

tell is the precise timescale? Are there particular milestones the

company has along the way and what of those deadlines that potential

buyers have to fulfil? We have indicated the time skills. I will

have to look at the exact timescale for the different stages of the

process, but there is no dead drop time that has been given, although

you will appreciate that with the kind of losses that are there,

urgency is important because we cannot continue to lose money. He

was asked about Tata Steel's pension liability. What are the liabilities

to the taxpayers should you determine that you can't any longer

support the business? I think we need to be aware that first of all

if this pension fund liability is not taking care of their is no buyer

sitting up there to buy this business. And if we don't solve that

problem, we are staring at some very, very bad consequences for the

taxpayers of the UK. The Business Secretary was asked about the same

issue. Do you agree there is a potential risk that the public purse

is left holding the baby in terms of the pensions liability? No. That is

not my focus. I don't think that is the big risk. What I do know is that

there are already discussions taking place between the trustees of the

pension plan, between the company, I know they have talked to the pension

regulator, and they are working on a solution. What I am keen to do and

we are involved in is striding to facilitate a solution in any way

that we can. You don't think it is a risk? I don't think that is the

major risk. She asked me about pensions. I can't be too detailed

about the discussions that are going on, but given my knowledge of this

-- the discussions, my focus is on how we can facilitate that but I do

not sit here thinking that that is a big risk. Ian Wright also pressed

the Business Secretary over why he had not gone to the Tata Steel board

meeting in Mobile in March at which the decision to sell the UK business

had been made. -- Mumbai. You look like you were really on the back

foot after that more my meeting and announcement, scrambling around and

looking to try to get the initiative rather than saying that we were

aware of this and have been working with Tata Steel as a company and it

is a secure transition to try to get a responsible seller. We saw none of

that in the aftermath of the meeting. If people are interested in

how things look, then that is a different issue. Business confidence

is important in terms of perception as well. Of course perception is

important, but frankly if my order -- if my and my advisers had turned

up just before the meeting, that would have been too late. What is

crucial is the work that is done before the meeting. If I want to

turn up for a photo opportunity before the meeting, that may look

great in the papers, but it would not have helped the workers of the

situation. The crisis in the steel industry. Well, the controversy over

anti-Semitism and the Labour Party has intensified over the last 24

hours. An argument broke out inside the BBC premises in Westminster

between the Labour MP John Mann and the one-time Mayor of London, Ken

Livingstone. Go back and check what Hitler did. There is a book.

Factually wrong. Racist remarks. The heated argument followed remarks

made by Ken Livingstone and he defended the MP suspended this week

by the Labour Party Nas Shah, who was reprimanded for commenting that

is real should be moved to America. Ken Livingstone said that she had

not been racist. As Passover ends on Saturday, let me say again, as

clearly as I possibly can, anti-Semitism is wrong, end of

story. I am sick and tired of people trying to explain it away and yes, I

am talking to you, Ken Livingstone. Of course, the illegal settlements

are wrong and the Palestinians deserve a better deal. Of course,

rocket attacks on Jewish kibbutzim are wrong. It is no better when a

senior politician looks at the president of the United States of

America and only sees the colour of his skin and his part Kenyan

ancestry, when Tory candidates run a deliberately racially charged

campaign against Labour opponents. It is profoundly irresponsible and

offends the fundamental decency of the British people, so I hope I

speak for all sides of this house when I say racism and racial

prejudice are simply not welcome in our political system or in our

political parties. His opposite number focused on words used by the

Labour MP. There has been naivete on these benches this morning. A member

said this morning that she regarded the events as trial by Twitter and

likened the events as tweaking a picture of an MP on a zip wire. She

clearly does not understand the gravity of the situation. Despite

the wise words of the shadow leader, and I respect him for it, although I

profoundly disagree over what he said about my honourable friend, he

makes a powerful point. He is a beacon of sense in his party on

this, but where is the sense from the rest of these benches on what is

a deeply, deeply serious matter? Chris Grayling. You are watching our

round-up of the day in the Commons and the Lords. Still to come: MPs

discuss how to stop drones being a hazard to commercial aircraft. There

are more than half a million people with autism in the UK, according to

official figures. That is around one in every hundred people, and if you

include families, autism touches the daily lives of over 2 million

people. To mark World Autism Awareness Week, the Commons has

focused on aspects of dealing with the condition, the causes of which

are not known, that have been under investigation for yields. -- four

years. First, a Conservative spoke about

her son, who has Asperger's syndrome. It was evident to me that

my very bright and articulate boy was not like other boys of his age.

He had an extraordinary high level of concentration and high reading

skill and could converts with adults in a very unusual way. However, he

was also very anxious, fearful of bright lights and unable to cope

with anything unexpected in his day. Literally the slightest change in

the time we left the house and all hell broke loose. Many great artists

and writers have been on the spectrum, rather than those of us

who are typical... They are vital to our growth as a

nation both culturally and economically. The great Alan

cheering's genius brought us the computer, possibly the greatest leap

since the steam engine. -- Alan Turing. You read about his school

years and they were truly awful. He was misunderstood throughout his

life. We took a holiday to Disneyland Paris and the first few

years Cinderella was out and about and we took her to meet her and her

friends. But of course once she met the small characters, they were

bigger than her and she could simply not cope with that, it was not what

she had expected. Like other families, we spent the rest of the

holiday checking where the characters would be on each and

every day, to not to meet them but to find roots of avoiding them.

Suddenly we saw everything was not quite as it should be, particularly

taking him to things like swimming and football, and it is a very hard

moment when you see that diagnosis and there is no denying there is a

sense of anger, a sense of guilt, sometimes a sense of shame. But

there is also sometimes a sense of relief. For many parents they will

be looking for that diagnosis and that sense of relief that comes from

that. Of course there are big consequences for family life. There

is a lack of understanding of autism. Families face stigma and

stereotypes and the complexion of autism is not understood. People

with autism, high functioning people with autism, frequently have a high

degree of focus, meaning that they can spot patterns or errors in data

that are not readily recognised by other people. Making them attractive

to employers for software firms. Even people more significantly

affected by autism can also hold down jobs successfully, they often

benefit from working in highly structured working environments,

sometimes thriving on jobs of a repetitive nature. The debate to

mark World Autism Awareness Week. The Government has been urged to

regulate the use of drones after reports that a plane approaching

Heathrow Airport was struck by one. The Transport Secretary has told MPs

he was talking to the pilot's union BALPA and others but it is now

thought the incident did not involve a drone. MPs continued to raise

concerns. Shouldn't the Government hit the warning of Heathrow and

instead of the rather complacent position taken up realise the ten

shall for catastrophes by vandals or careless people using drones, but

the dreadful possibility of terrorists using drones on nuclear

power stations? Already drones are being used to sneak mobile phones

and drugs into Wandsworth prison. Shouldn't the Government wake up and

realise that this new menace is a potential great threat and take

precautions in order to reduce the universal access to drones that

exists now? Mr Speaker, there is no complacency whatsoever by the

Government on the use of drones. As I said, there is a prison sentence

which is available and that I will obviously keep the situation under

review. But it is also important to find out the facts behind certain

incidents. The incident that was reported on the 17th of April is now

thought that that was not a drone incident. There are growing concerns

about incidents involving drones which threaten public safety and it

is not very clear if it is a problem to do with regulations themselves or

the enforcement of those regulations. With the Secretary of

State look at those issues? I certainly will. -- would the

Secretary of State look at those issues? I certainly will. I had a

planned meeting with BALPA to discuss this and also laser pen use

and the problems that that is using for civil aviation in this country

and I certainly will keep these things very much under review and do

further work along with BALPA and the industry, the CAA, on drones and

drone use. Can my honourable friend assure me that all regulations and

guidance with regards to drones and air safety will apply and be

communicated to airports outside London? Such as East Midlands

Airport in my constituency, to make sure we have a consistent policy

with regard to air safety across the country. Yes, I think my honourable

friend gives a very good point, this is not just a matter for London

airports but any airports. It's also a matter of the airports outside

London, which are very important international connections right

across the country. Mr Speaker, I hear what the Transport Secretary is

saying about his engagement with airports but it's also an issue for

stadiums, railway stations and other places where the public gathering

huge numbers. Can he tell us what discussions he has had with the

widest possible range of stakeholders, including for example

local authorities on the use of drones? Well, Mr Speaker, the issue

that I was addressing in this country is in this question was

related to aviation. And that is the point that I have updated the house

on. Of course there are wider issues right across the Government and the

Government keeps these matters consistently under review. With the

ministers say in a written answer that he's not even going to consult

on anything until the European aviation agency has not decided

itself what to do? All of this while there are reports of drones hitting

aircraft and drones being and over London altogether when President

Obama is in town. Other countries have already brought in other

initiatives so when are we going to see some real proposals from the

Government without having to wait for a US president to come to town?

Mr Speaker, I think the point the honourable member made in his

question, he said it might have been. Governments don't legislate on

what might be, they act on what are the dangers. As I've said, we are in

discussions with BALPA, the airline pilots's union, as well as the CAA

as to the right way to develop this. If you will remember me saying all

drones should be banned completely, that is something they never thought

about when they were in office. Patrick McLoughlin. The Government

has been accused of blatant rationing of treatment for patients

with the blood-borne virus hepatitis C. The claim was in the Lords, as

peers called for more sufferers to be given a drug. ... Chronically

infected with hepatitis C virus. The deaths of cancer Jude to the virus

in under 60s doubled in the last decade. We have a treatment, a drug

that is effective in both successfully reducing the disease as

it reduces the viral load in 98% of patients treated to virtually zero

in the whole spectrum of the gene of the hepatitis C virus. It has the

potential to eradicate the disease in the population. In that scenario,

why would we only treat 10,000 patients per year, as the guidance

says, for the next two years? There are clear budgetary constraints

here. 220,000 people is the number that the Lord mentions, I thought it

was slightly lower, this may cost many tens of thousands of pounds per

treatment and clearly, however much we would like to treat 220,000

people, it's just not feasible to do so. Good my honourable friend the

kind enough to tell the house what the 200,000 people who will not

receive treatment this year are expected to do? How long they are

expected to wait for treatment? Bearing in mind that most or many of

them will develop cirrhosis or liver cancer and go on to die, how much it

would cost the taxpayer and the National Health Service to care for

and treat each one of those patients through to death and how much less

it is than the cost of providing treatment today? My lord, there are

many people who suffer from hepatitis C who are asymptomatic and

don't actually know that they've got hepatitis C will stop the figure of

220,000, I don't know if that figure is true or not. But people who do

have it can have treatment using interferon, the drug, which is an

extremely unpleasantly than bagging take up to a year and have many

side-effects. In some ways it is a miracle drug but it is incredibly

expensive. We have to accept not just with hepatitis C but many

cancer treatment as well, there are some drugs that are similar going to

be too expensive to spend on large and other people. If there are large

budgetary constraints, surely those victims who are infected by state

action should have priority? Is the noble Lord aware that there are many

Welsh patients were infected with contaminated blood in English

hospitals and they are now being used in a game of pass the parcel

between the UK Government and the Welsh Government. Can he now say

what was agreed at the meeting on the 24th of March between his

officials and officials of the Welsh Government, because patients in

Wales have not been able to get an answer from the Acting Chief Medical

Officer of the Welsh Government about this, or perhaps he could

write to me. My Lords, the basis of making available this new drug for

hepatitis C is based... Not the route of infection. There is a

consultation going about whether a special fund might be established

for those who have received infected blood. I can't answer specifically

on the issue about the Welsh people but I will write about it. That's it

for this programme. Join me for the Week in Parliament when we not only

look back at the last few days in the Commons and the Lords but also

report on why the familiar chimes of Big Ben may not be ringing out soon.

Until then, from me, Keith McDougall, goodbye.