27/04/2017 Thursday in Parliament

Hello and welcome to the programme, on the last day of this Parliament

before the general election and June the 8th. Coming up, condemnation

from Labour on the government's Brexit strategy.

Is not the truth that, far from uniting this country, this Tory

government and its ministers have been dividing it since they took

office? But the Brexit secretary says, out

in the country, there is huge support for Theresa May's approach.

Massive respect for our Prime Minister, and a belief that she will

deliver the best outcome in bracts in negotiations.

The government faces more questions over taking child refugees, and

Parliament comes to a close with the traditional ceremony of pro-rich in.

As the last two pieces of legislation finish their passage

through Parliament. But first, Theresa May called the

election arguing she needed a strong hand in the UK's Brexit

negotiations. EU ministers are due to meet in Luxembourg over the

weekend to hammer out their final negotiating position. On Wednesday,

Theresa May met the European Commission president, Jean-Claude

Juncker, for talks in Downing Street added that crucial summit of the

remaining 27 members. Downing Street said Mrs May reiterated the UK's aim

of building a deep and special partnership after Brexit. In the

Commons, Labour focused on the rights of EU nationals living in the

UK. As the Secretary of State knows,

around 3 million EU nationals are very anxious about their status

when we leave the EU. Labour would unilaterally

guarantee their status from day one. Under this government,

all they could do is apply for consideration

for permanent residency. But as the Brexit committee warned

in March, the current process for consideration of permanent

residency applications The Secretary of State knows

how important it is. Well, the thing I'd say

to the honourable gentleman, and I respect his concern in this

area, let me be clear about that, but the thing I'd say to him is,

the system that's there now is not designed to deal with 3 million

people, and it's been made plain. In fact, if you go

on the Home Office website, you'll see them saying,

don't make an application now, you don't need to,

and when we actually move the primary legislation, it'll be

a matter for the Home Office, but I believe that it will be very

simple when we come to that point. Because as the Financial Times

reported yesterday, the Home Office is now

saying, don't apply. Is that the official government

position for EU nationals, "don't apply for

permanent residency"? Is that how they are going

to deal with the anxiety? What that is about

is the Home Office. It's a reflection of what's

on the website, which is essentially pointing out that they don't need

to apply for their rights to be underpinned, and that's

the approach we're taking. Bear in mind, for the next two

years, irrespective of anything the government does,

all of the existing rights There will be no change

in that respect. Before we come to the point

of accident from the European Union, Before we come to the point of exit

from the European Union, we will have made this very clear

in primary legislation. The Prime Minister called

the general election in the name of building unity

to strengthen her EU But this is the Prime Minister

who sent Go Home vans around parts of urban Britain

with high immigrant populations. This is the Prime Minister who aided

and abetted the most disgraceful campaign against the first Muslim

mayor of our capital city, and this is the government who,

with its hard Brexit allies, seeks to call anyone who calls

into question their negotiating Is not the truth that far

from uniting this country, this Tory government

and its ministers have been dividing If the honourable gentleman

wants an answer to that, I think the first place he should

start is on the streets of Britain, where he will find a massive support

for our Prime Minister, a massive respect for our

Prime Minister, and a belief that she will deliver the best

outcome in the Brexit negotiations. Will he agree with me that we cannot

pretend to be a global player without running an open economy,

with an orderly, and bureaucratic without running an open economy,

with an orderly, unbureaucratic immigration policy,

which will allow our businesses and our public services the people

and skills they need? The balance that any

government strikes when it controls its own immigration policy,

controls its own borders, something which he has

fought for down the years, is one which provides proper

security and proper policy in terms of delivery of social services

and delivering housing, but at the same time,

allows our businesses, our universities, our research

centres, our financial centres, all to take part in the battle

for talent which actually makes our country one

of the greatest in the world. A conservative said if there was no

deal, trading and so-called favoured nation terms would be second best.

It would be relatively small beer. Compared with the 15% improvement

in competitiveness because of the exchange rate,

and saving ?10 billion a year which is equivalent to a 7%

tariff on our exports. Well, Mr Speaker, let me say quite

clearly that the ambition and the intention of the government

is to achieve the best possible free-trade agreement

with our EU partners. However, our position also is this:

We expect to negotiate toughly, and unlike the opposition,

our position will be made clear to the European Union,

that we are prepared to walk away from the negotiating table

if it is not possible to achieve What kind of deal does the Secretary

of State think he is likely to get if he and his government refuses

to pay their dues in Europe? Surely, Mr Speaker, negotiations

are about give and take. It is interesting,

the Scottish National Party David Davies. Meanwhile, in the

Scottish Parliament, the Conservative leader asked what the

SNP's policy was on European union membership, and the Common Fisheries

Policy. Nicola Sturgeon's stated position is

to be a full member of the EU. Their MPs' stated position is to leave the

Common Fisheries Policy. But full membership of the European Union

means full membership of the Common Fisheries Policy. Isn't that the

case, First Minister? Well, Ruth Davidson has clearly not

been paying attention. They SNP has been consistent over many, many

years in our criticisms of the Common Fisheries Policy. And very

clear about our intentions to see it fundamentally reformed. Our 2007

manifesto, continue to work for withdrawal of the CFP. 2011, the

CFP, well past its sell by date. The 2014 white paper on independence,

independence for Scotland would allow us to take a leadership role

in reforming the Common Fisheries Policy. So the reality here is, the

SNP that always stands up for Scottish fishing, and always will

stand up for Scottish fishing. But Ruth Davidson thought the SNP

was facing in several different directions.

The SNP, saying they are in favour of joining the European Union, but

the First Minister not confirming whether the first -- SNP will back

that in their manifesto. They say they are in favour of the Common

Fisheries Policy, except for MPs in fishing constituencies, who are

against it. Then we have the real whopper. In Scotland, Nicola

Sturgeon saying the coming election has nothing to do whatever with

independence, but from the broadcast studios of London, up pops Alex

Salmond to confirm that they will use this to demand a referendum that

the rest of us don't want. So the First Minister thinks it on fishing,

and EU membership and on the election, she conveys both ways and

promise all things to all people. Isn't it the case she is treating

the electorate as pools? What is a mean when the UK

Government say they want a deal that works with EU's fishing communities?

That can only mean that the Tories are preparing to sell-out Scottish

fishermen a grant other European countries access to fishing waters,

and treat that vital Scottish industry as expendable once again.

First Minister has done nothing in the last 20 years to avoid her party

looking shifty in Europe and independence. -- 20 minutes. The

First Minister said on Monday, this election is not about independence.

Yesterday, we see her sitting on a Iestyn Independence branded

motorbike, in the shadow of the Wallace Monument, on the B road to

Bannockburn. Can the First Minister tell me, what is her position today?

Well, my position is as it has always been, so Willie Rennie should

maybe listen carefully, because he seems to be struggling to understand

it. I support Scotland being independent and an independent

member of the European Union. There you go.

A Labour leader turned to a domestic issue.

After ten years SNP government, Scottish education is challenges

like never before. Since the SNP took office, there are 4000 fewer

teachers, 1000 fewer support staff, and class sizes are bigger.

International studies show that Scotland is declining in maths,

reading, and science. John Swinney's response to this was to publish a

mini manifesto, repeating the very promises he has been making every

year since 2007. So can the First Minister tell teachers, parents and

pupils why they should believe the SNP this time around?

Well, education is my top buyer at it. That is why... -- top priority.

Kezia Dugdale does not like to hear this, but this is why right now

across Scotland, head teachers and teachers have in their hands, ?120

million of additional funding. And she said Labour had not a shred

of credibility left and funding services.

Back now to Westminster, where the government admitted there had been

an administrative error in the placing of child refugees, with

local authorities in England, which meant that there were 130 more

places available. The Labour peer who successfully secured the

original commitment to take child migrants from Europe welcomed the

news. 130 children will be taken into this

country under Section 67 of the Immigration Act,

even if the reason is the Home Office having

to hang its head in shame because they made an

administrative error as part My Lords, I want to put

this to the minister. Will the government now

re-consult local authorities, because there are many local

authorities, not just in England, but in Scotland, Wales

and Northern Ireland, who've expressed a willingness

to take more child refugees, and is the minister not aware that

many representations have been made recently about the availability

of local authority places? Well, the administrative error

is most unfortunate, I wouldn't want to

see that happening. The good news is that we have

an additional 130 places, and I think we should all be very

pleased about that. And I think the important thing

here is that no child has been disenfranchised -

any eligible child has 200 children have been taken so far,

so we haven't even got to the 350. So I wouldn't want noble Lords

to think that any child had been disenfranchised

because of this Can the minister give us the figure,

what capacity have local authorities told the government they have

for unaccompanied asylum seeking children in the next financial year,

namely this one, 2017-18, on the basis that the current level

of government funding is continuing? Well, my Lords, as my honourable

friend in the other place outlined in the written ministerial statement

yesterday, the capacity In terms of future commitments,

obviously, we are hours from prorogation, and I cannot make

any future declarations at the dispatch box,

much as I would want to. And those figures will be

forthcoming, should we be successful Reading these debates that we have

from time to time on the issue, they focused almost exclusively on local

authority suggesting that they are the best providers. Is that the case

and if so, what is the arrangement by which other providers can link

into the system in order to increase the numbers available? I'm glad my

noble friend asked the question because one thing the Government

have been very keen to promote is the community sponsorship scheme

which the most Reverend, Archbishop of Canterbury has taken part in an

Lambeth Palace to take Syrian families and in fact indeed in my

own local authority in Trafford we have a community sponsorship scheme

and I never let the time pass without me encouraging noble Lords

who might know any community sponsors who might be willing to

come forward to take families. Staying in the laws, peers rejected

a motion criticising the Government on the abolition of bursary for

students on health care courses such as nurses or midwifery in England.

The allowance was paid to help for living expenses during training,

George Osborne announced plans to scrap them in November 2015 and

replacing them with loans. Ministers argue the change would free up

around ?800 million a year in government spending and could create

up to 10,000 new training places. A Labour peer argued that it meant

student nurses would rack up thousands of pounds of debt. In

essence what the Government are insisting and I think this is the

first time for decades, they are insisting that the nurses pay for

working in the health service. They are paying their ?9,000 a year to

work as unpaid nurses. And I think that is scandalous. Absolutely

scandalous. The point the Government are making is that they are prepared

if nurses pay for their own education and this is perhaps the

point the noble Lord was making, if they paid then they would lift the

cap so the universities could train as many students as they wanted. And

that is something I hope works, I want this system to work, but then

we come to the problem that it is easy enough for the universities to

expand their lectures, to provide their library facilities, but the

difficulty comes when the health service has got to provide the

tutors, the mentors, to provide the practical oversight of the students

when they are working on the wards and in clinical situations. Lady

Watkins is a registered nurse and she said there was more than one

route into nursing including a graduate scheme and a scheme like an

advanced apprenticeship. Rather than re-instigate the bursary where we

know that a lot of people applied to go to university because of the

bursary and we had a very high dropout in year one and I was a Dean

when that was happening so I speak from experience or some who

completed the course but never had any intention of working but wanted

to go into hate chart or perhaps become an air stewardess, neither of

which is a bad thing but they had used the bursary structure to get

their degree as an entry into those programmes rather than an intention

to necessarily spend a lifetime caring. So I think it would be

preferable to invest in three methods leading to registration but

seriously considering giving a bursary for the third year of

training when I would agree with the noble Lord that most students give a

huge amount to the NHS in that third share. What the new system does is

that it actually delivers more cash to cover the living costs for nurses

during their education. It delivers more money per nurse for

universities providing education through the fees and loan system.

And it removes the caps and provides the NHS with trained nurses in

total. I believe this motion is misguided, the extension is a

natural development of reform that has received cross-party support.

This will dramatically improve the participation of disadvantaged

groups and will provide a fair distribution of the cost of funding

for higher education, the true source of regret is the opposition

has used this to run scare stories about both the impact of sensible

funding changes and the impact of leaving the European Union on the

NHS workforce. I urge all members of this house to vote against the

motion. When it came to the voter peers backed the Government by a

majority of 38. You are watching Thursday in Parliament. On the last

day at Westminster ahead of the general election. Now when you think

of the suffragettes who probably think of the women who took part in

direct action to try to win the vote, but a new exhibition in

Parliament reveals the role that men played in the campaign. Suffragettes

on the streets of London, the names of campaigners like Emily Pankhurst

and her daughter have passed into history. Less well-known is the fact

that some of the suffragettes were men. A new exhibition in Parliament

highlights the role some men played campaigning for votes for women,

suffragettes in trousers. This was a phrase coined in 1907 by a Member of

the men's league for women's suffrage and essentially this

exhibition is telling the story of those men, especially the men in

Parliament who supported the long campaign for women's suffrage and in

Britain. Frederick Pedro and Lawrence later an MP and when the

ordeal of force-feeding in jail. He was imprisoned for his supports and

there were attempts to bankrupt him and make him liable for the damage

that some protests had caused. He was vilified, he had all things

Castres masculinity, he was missing is a traitor to the male

establishment. George Lansbury stepped down as an MP to force a

by-election on votes for women. He decided to stand not as a Labour

candidate but as a women's candidate, it was extraordinary at

the time. A great opportunity for the Suffrage Society as they'll

descended on East London and campaigned on his behalf, day and

night to get him re-elected. It doesn't have a happy ending, he was

deleted by a few hundred votes by the Conservative and Unionist

candidates. He ended up in prison in 1913 for his efforts, quickly

released thanks to his former colleagues who campaigned for his

release but, he was one of those MPs who really really put their beliefs

in women's equality. Although individual MPs backed change, it

took until 1917 for Parliament to agree for votes for women in the

following year. That is similar to now, there are controversial causes

which come up in Parliament brought up by private members of both houses

and don't seem to get anywhere which is really frustrating for people who

support the change. Perhaps assisted dying and what happens is that you

do gets you get movements that say something should change but if the

Government of the day is not in favour it is hard to get a

controversial measure through. That was the end of a long campaign both

in and outside Parliament said people should take courage that if

your support gets a majority support it'll happen by or crook. And you

can see more on that exhibition at the vote 100 section of the

parliament .uk website. Now as is always the way when a parliament

comes to a close there are some last-minute bartering between the

Government and the opposition to get a handful of bills into law before

the election. The controversial higher education and research bill

cleared the North of some peers were disappointed that they failed in the

end to use it to exclude overseas students from the immigration

figures in the UK. The Digital economy Bill was passed by the Lords

to, it dealt with broadband services, the BBC and public sector

broadcasters and protection for children from online pornography.

And that last bit of legislation meant there was one job for

Parliament to do. Make sure the bills passed received Royal assent

and bring Parliamentary proceedings formally to a close, the ceremony

known as prorogation. MPs were summoned to the House of Lords by

the parliamentary official Black Rod. The rout.

MPs trooped to the Lords for a ceremony led by a five Lords

Commissioners. They appeared from various parties who have the

ceremonial role of representing the Queen. They were resplendent in red

robes and Black tricorn hats which they were required to Duff at

various points. Lady Evans the Leader of the Lords is one of the

Commissioners. Her Majesty not thinking fit to be personally

present here at this time has been pleased to cause a commission to be

issued under the great Seal and thereby given her Royal assent

diverse acts which have been agreed upon by both Houses of Parliament.

Royal assent was given to a number of new laws, the title was read out

by the Lord clacks, first name of each bill and then the replies

signalling the monarchs approval in the traditional Norman French.

Neighbourhood planning act. MPs then made their way slowly back to the

Commons where they form an orderly queue to shake the speaker 's hand

and make their way out of the chamber. Some of them knowing it is

for the final time and awaiting the verdict of the voters. And that

brings us to the end of this edition of the programme and this

Parliament. We will be back with the new government and the new batch of

MPs when they arrive at Westminster after the general election on June

the 8th. In the meantime BBC Parliament will have the key

speeches from the election in fall and uncut as well as all the big

campaign events. But for now from all of us Cabaye.