21/12/2017 Thursday in Parliament

Hello and welcome to the programme.

Coming up in the next half hour:

Ministers admit the group examining

harassment in Parliament hasn't

managed to come up with

a new complaints system.

It cannot be right that it's easier

to sanction a member of this House

for disorderly conduct in the

chamber than it is to sanction them

for disorderly, disreputable and

disgraceful conduct outside of it.

Peers condemned the state of

Liverpool prison.

How do squalid

conditions in a prison overrun with

rats and cockroaches meet

Churchill's famous dictum that the

treatment of criminals is the most

unfailing test of any country.

And the Sports Minister is outpaced.

Ministers arrived at Westminster

still digesting the news that

Damian Green had been sacked.

The First Secretary of State

had faced allegations

of inappropriate conduct -

although he was forced to resign

for wrongly saying he had no

knowledge that police had once found

legal pornography on his computer.

In the Commons, one Liberal Democrat

MP felt the rules were not

being applied consistently.

Will the Leader of the House make

time available for a Cabinet Office

debate on the selective application

of the ministerial code, so the

Cabinet Office could explain why

the Deputy Prime Minister had to go,

whereas the Foreign Secretary, who -

according to my estimations - has

breached section 1.2A,

7.1 and 8.6 of the ministerial code,

is still with us?

Andrea Leadsom advised Tom Brake

to raise his allegations

with the Cabinet Office directly.

One of the first debates of the day

was about the way Parliament deals

with bullying and harassment.

The Leader of the House revealed

that a Commons working group hasn't

yet managed to come up

with a new way of dealing

with complaints.

Andrea Leadsom explained some

of the proposed measures.

A new behaviour code,

to be consulted on,

which would apply to all those

who work in or for Parliament,

including members, peers

and staff wherever they work.

This behaviour code could sit

alongside the existing

Parliamentary codes of conduct,

which may themselves

require amendment.

For lower-level complaints,

the range of possible sanctions

could include training covering

harassment and bullying,

a full apology, as well as review

where appropriate,

of the Parliamentary pass.

In serious cases, further work needs

to be carried out to ensure

sanctions are appropriate,

fair and enforceable.

The Leader of the Opposition

has made it clear to me,

and in his letter to

the Prime Minister,

that the opposition wants

a separate, independent sexual

harassment advisor and support.

We suggest that the sexual adviser

should be appointed now,

who is independent and qualified

to take the complainant

through the process until the tender

is out, which could be by the end

of January, and a new separate

helpline to be set up now,

so if there are cases that exist

now, people don't feel

as if there is nowhere to go

with their complaints.

We cannot have this vacuum.

It can easily be done immediately.

It is profoundly disappointing

that we have been unable to deliver

a report this side of Christmas,

as anticipated and as expected

by members of this House.

This delay is nothing whatsoever

to do with the Leader of the House,

who has personally gone that extra

mile to ensure that progress

is made, but, Mr Speaker,

by failing to deliver this report,

we have let everybody

down in this House.

We have particularly let down

the staff of this House,

who were expecting quick and speedy

progress, and I am appalled

if there is any suggestion that this

may be getting punted

into the long grass.

We actually have an excellent report

ready to go that has been agreed

by all the parties in this House,

practically all the parties

in the House, and has been agreed

by all staff represented.

It cannot be right that it's easier

to sanction a member of this House

for disorderly conduct

in the chamber than it is to

sanction them for disorderly

and disreputable and disgraceful

conduct outside of it.

So could she press ahead on that?

And if she cannot find the unity

in her working group,

just to gently remind the Leader

of the House that this issue

belongs to the House,

and if she cannot get unity

in the working group,

perhaps she should publish a draft

report that all of us could take

part in commenting on,

because I think we would welcome

more progress and more momentum

behind what she's doing.

What worries me about what has been

said today - although I think

it is very good progress -

what worries me about what has been

said today is that there does seem

to be quite a lot of kicking a can

potentially down the road,

and that we're not going to hear

what is going to happen.

And I have to say, I fear that

politics is still stopping

some of those decisions,

and I want some assurances that

whatever sanctions regime

the working group has worked

towards, what ever independent

regime the working group has worked

towards, it is as swiftly

as possible coming to fruition.

Hear, hear.

Yes, the honourable lady has been

very helpful and open

with her views on this matter,

and I absolutely assure her I am

working to get this sorted

as soon as possible.

There are glaring omissions

in the work so far.

For example, the word

"violence" didn't utter

from her lips this morning.

Can I suggest to her that this

working group is far too narrowly

drawn, and she should seriously

consider setting up a special

Select Committee on which all

members of this House would be able

to apply to be elected,

and it should be conveyed

by a committee of all parties

of the houses of parliament,

because if we want to make

sure this is a modern,

exemplar of the workplace,

fixed for the rest of the world.

Well, I'm grateful to my honourable

friend, and I can absolutely

assure him that one of the proposals

the working group is looking

at is the provision of services

by an independent sexual harassment

and sexual violence advocate.

That would be very key to this.

With that particular expertise.

His comments on the proposal

of a bicameral Select Committee

is an interesting one.

I have mentioned that

as one of the proposals

that has been put to us.

She's right to say

that change is hard.

Would she agree that vested

interests, not least whips offices

reluctant to give up their power,

must not be allowed

to derail Parliament making

progress on harassment?

I have spoken to whips on both sides

of the House, in fact on all sides

of the House, and all are very keen

to see resolution of this matter.

She said in her statement work needs

to be carried out to ensure

sanctions are appropriate and fair.

Will she confirmed that recall is on

the table as an option, and also

that members who have been found to

behave inappropriately will receive

severance pay.

Recall is a

possibility. The working party has

not finished its work on exactly how

that can be brought to bear, but we

are very clear there will be

ultimate sanctions. The issue for

parliament isn't one that only

affects members. It affects peers,

staff, nonmembers staff. There is

quite a large amount of work, which

is why I was very clear that the

work on sanctions needs to be looked

at further to

make sure they are fair vote to the

person who is alleged to have

committed something bad, and also to

the complainant, who deserves

justice.

Andrea Leadsom.

MPs from across the political

spectrum have accused Russia

of trying to interfere in the UK's

political system -

presenting a serious threat

to British democracy.

The Government said it recognised

the threat but there was no evidence

that Moscow had been successful.

The Prime Minister told an audience

in Poland that Russia

was seeking to undermine

the international order.

And MPs demanded a tougher response

to the Kremlin's use of social media

and tighter election spending rules:

The UK is at risk of neglecting the

threat Russia poses, and I would

argue Russia is a clear and present

danger, and presents a threat to our

democracy. President Putin certainly

is not a friend of this country.

Russia would only have interfered in

the EU referendum, or any other

elections, here, to damage the UK

and EU security.

A committee is looking

into the issue of "fake news"

and disinformation.

The chair criticised Facebook:

Asking for more evidence of Russian

activity across the site, including

pages, group accounts and profiles,

not just restricted to pay for

advertising. I believe we have a

right to receive information from

them. They conducted their own

research during the French

presidential election, which led to

the deletion of 30,000 pages and

accounts.

It is time for British

politicians to stop making useful

idiots of themselves by taking... A

lot of the ties that have been made

between the Putin regime and the far

right are well documented, but it

pains me to say there are still some

of these useful idiots on the left

in British politics. My message is

that Russia is a nasty klepto

Chrissy, racist and homophobic, and

makes no secret of wanting to

undermine our democracy.

The

paranoid tendency to see a red under

every bed is still alive. There is

an explanation for this paranoia.

Look at Donald Trump's victory, the

success of Brexit and the

referendum. Things are not going the

way of liberals and their worldview,

and they just cannot accept that the

workers and the people are

abandoning their ideology. The left

know that the people are never

wrong, so when the people are wrong,

as with Brexit or Trump, the left

needs to find an excuse for why the

people are misbehaving. Russia is

that excuse today.

Honourable

members have their own opinion, but

they have to accept the ballot box

decision of June 2016. If they

accept that, they have to make sure

that Brexit happens. I have to say

that I do not believe that this

influence change the result of the

referendum.

There was a conclusion

that Russia was intervening

systematically abroad in the West. I

think it would be naive of us to

assume that Russia was not

intervening here in this country.

That takes us to the heart of the

reform agenda we need to look at. It

is becoming clear that there is a

dark social playbook that is being

used to great effect.

When there is

any suggestion that the Kremlin has

sought to interfere in any process,

we look into this seriously. We have

not seen evidence of successful

interference in UK democratic

processes.

As for the enquiry

referred to by Damian Collins...

The

committee is due to examine the top

brass of Facebook and other social

media sites in February. We

recognise their progress, but there

is far more they need to do in terms

of transparency and cooperation.

This is a work in progress. We do

not think the Select Committee on

this is being given the straight

answers we expect.

You're watching Thursday

in Parliament with me, Mandy Baker.

A leaked report into conditions

at Liverpool prison has concluded

that prisoners were living

in the worst conditions

inspectors had ever seen.

At an unannounced visit

to the jail in September,

inspectors found inmates living

in "squalid conditions",

with rat and cockroach infestations.

In the Lords, peers were damning.

The situation in Her Majesty 's

prison, Liverpool, is the latest

manifestation of the crisis in our

prisons. It is ace shameful litany

of squalor, sickness and apparently

even death. Instead of initially

refusing to comment on the leaked

report, the Government should

already have published it, together

with its response. Will it examine

the apparent failure of contractors

over a long period to carry out

major repair work in a way that did

not threaten the well-being of

inmates and staff?

Very troubling

matters were raised by the report,

but I'm not going to comment on the

content of the leaked report. The

inspector gave a debriefing to the

prison service straight after, and

we have responded to that. The

prison is a Victorian prison, and

there are real issues with regard to

the accommodation there. It is worth

noting that not a pound has been

spent on the cell accommodation at

Liverpool since 1994. In the

intervening period, there was a

Labour Government.

One of the most shocking sentences

in the Chief Inspector's

introduction to this report,

which is a shocking indictment

Lord Marks said the report may have

been leaked but there was no

doubting its content.

The worst inspectors had seen.

Prisoners spending 22 hours a day

in filthy vermin infested cells,

with exposed electrical wiring

and blocked or leaking lavatories.

Within weeks of the inspection,

two inmates killed themselves.

Yes, the governor has been sacked.

But that is not enough.

Will the MOJ please act urgently

to establish a crisis task force

to work with the inspectorate's

recommendations here and elsewhere

to turn around the dreadful

conditions in our failing prisons?

My Lords, we have replaced not only

the governor but the deputy governor

and the head of health care

at the prison itself.

We intend to establish a new unit

in the prison service,

to enhance our response

to the recommendations

of the inspector, which will involve

monitoring and an audit

of recommendations.

This will commence in January 2018.

The real problem is the continued

understaffing of our prisons

and the failure therefore to provide

the sort of care that common

humanity would suggest was necessary

to those in the care

of the state as prisoners.

One of the most shocking sentences

in the Chief Inspector's

introduction to this report,

which is a shocking indictment

of the way prisons are run,

reads: we saw clear evidence that

local prison managers had sought

help from regional and national

management to improve conditions

they need to be unacceptable,

long before our arrival,

but had met with little response.

Could the noble lord the Minister

please tell the House who in prison

service headquarters is responsible

and accountable for the oversight

of Her Majesty's prison Liverpool

and how that oversight is exercised?

My lord, I'm not going to name

individuals in the prison service.

I'm sorry.

I was concerned that the noble

Lord had become unwell.

I am not going to name individuals.

It would be most invidious to do so.

The prison service is

responsible for the conditions

at Her Majesty's prison,

Liverpool.

Scotland Yard has said it'll examine

dozens of investigations

following the collapse of two rape

cases in which the police had failed

to disclose vital evidence.

Even before the latest cases,

the Attorney General, Jeremy Wright,

had ordered a separate inquiry

into disclosure in criminal trials.

The Conservative Chair

of the Justice Committee said

there had been "appalling failures"

by the police and prosecutors

Given the significance of this, will

be attorney make sure that the

review he is carrying out, as

announced by the Prime Minister,

looks not only at the working

practices, but the professional

culture and the independence and

objectivity of the Crown Prosecution

Service of these matters. I noticed

it was an independently instructed

member of the bar, Mr Jerry Hayes,

who was responsible for highlighting

what was the clear failure of the

Crown Prosecution Service in this

case.

With all that went wrong in

this case which was also a great

deal, it highlighted what was good

with the criminal justice system as

well as what went wrong.

We do owe a

debt of gratitude for those who have

exercised their judgment in cases

like this and this applies to this

individual council, but in terms of

the wider point my honourable friend

makes, he knows, because I have said

it before, that my view is that

these were appalling failures of the

criminal justice system. We need

urgently to understand what went

wrong in these particular cases but

we also, as he says, need to look

more broadly at the question of

disclosure which has been an issue

for some time. It relates to what

people know they should be doing,

and how much information they are

prepared to take account of, but it

also relates to some of the

challenges we face, from a very

large amount of electronic material

and a very large number of cases

now, and so the systems need to be

fit for purpose, and the review I am

undertaking will seek to ensure that

they are.

The Attorney General.

The Government has been urged

to increase funding for refuges

for victims of domestic violence.

As part of changes to the welfare

system, ministers plan to give local

councils a "ring-fenced" grant

to pay for short-term supported

housing, such as refuges

for domestic violence victims

and homeless people.

That means accommodation will no

longer be funded directly

by the residents' housing benefit.

But charities fear the change

could threaten their viability.

All short-term provision, for

example hostels and refugees will

continue to be funded at the same

level by local authorities in 2020,

as noted at the recent budget 2017,

the document within that budget,

there will be a transfer of funds

from welfare spending to my

department from 2020, 2021. The

right honourable member voiced his

concerns on October 25 over future

funding levels for supported housing

after 2020. I would just like to

take this opportunity to reassure

him that the amount of grant funding

for this partner after 2020 will

take account of the cost of

provision and the great future

provision.

Can be Minister clarify

funding domestic violence refuge

position for the same level as today

just the shortfall across the

country. Around 90 women and their

children are being turned away every

day across the country, without an

increase in the funding for refuge

position, and without establishing a

national network, the Government

will fail to guarantee that every

woman and child fleeing domestic

abuse can be kept safe in a refuge?

The honourable lady makes a good

point. Every woman should be

protected and have a safe place to

go. There are more bed spaces than

there were in 2010. She does make a

good

point and we are doing a full audit

early next year, to see what

provision of life across the

country, and that will allow us to

see where the gaps are and the

challenges are because we want to

make sure women are safe.

Can the

minister give a guarantee that the

extra cows and costs will be met in

full without -- the extra housing

cost will be met in full without

quibble or caveat. Costs and

responsibility for delivery cannot

just be passed onto local

government, charities are housing

providers. Can I encourage the

Minister to drop the mantra that

providing housing support for people

is about getting them into work, and

just say that providing housing

support is about helping people with

their housing?

This is not at all

about penny-pinching. I can also

reassure her on the point of work.

The point I was making was about

women's refuges where there are

quite often women who are being

abused and subject to domestic

violence that have got reasonable

jobs and without giving up those

jobs, they would not qualify for

housing benefit, and I cannot see

how that is right at all.

But the opposition said

the government's statement had

failed to clear up concerns and it's

entire supported housing

policy was in trouble.

In future years, I have to say is

students will be giving this is a

case study in disastrous government

decision-making. This was the third

policy rewrite in two years since

George Osborne made the crude policy

decision simply to give the Treasury

big cost savings. The Government

still has not got it right. We'll be

Minister accept that government must

work further, with parliament, and

with the housing sector, to meet the

terms of the resolution, and sort

out a good long-term system for the

future and the funding of supported

housing?

Now, should Channel Four

move out of London?

The Culture Secretary has told MPs

there were "clear benefits"

to relocating the broadcaster

to another major city.

Ministers believe a move

would generate millions of pounds

and help the creative industries.

Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester

have all been touted

as possible new homes.

A Labour MP backed the idea.

Will the Secretary of State confirm

that there is an approximate £600

million benefit to broadcasting by

moving Channel 4 out of London? And

would she also confirm that it is

unacceptable that any four of the

120 Commissioners of programmes for

Channel 4 currently live outside of

London. There is an economic benefit

whether it is Salford which I

prefer, Birmingham, Sheffield Leeds,

it should be done today.

I thought

it would be a bid for Wrexham so I

am interested to hear his views on

other locations. There are many

different estimates to the benefit,

but it is a clear benefit to the

country of Channel 4 relocating out

of London. They are a publicly owned

broadcaster, as a publicly owned

broadcaster we expect them to

deliver benefits above and beyond

commercial benefits and that

includes relocating out of London.

Does my right honourable friend

agree that to send the message that

Channel 4 is an alternative

broadcaster then its headquarters

should not be in NSW one?

My right

honourable friend speaks with great

experience and knowledge on this

matter and I think house does well

to listen to his wide words.

'S

Channel 4 is not a programme maker

but a programme Commissioner, there

is limited benefits in moving staff

and it should be programme making

which reflects the diversity of the

country.

This is one of the

arguments which has been put forward

about the way Channel 4's business

model and how it operates. I think

we have seen with what happened with

the BBC moving to Salford, albeit I

accept with a different business

model, but that creativity, that

clustering of talent really have had

benefit. I think you only have to

look, one only has to look at the

analysis of the programming which is

commissioned outside London, to see

that basing outside London could

have real significant benefits for

those individual benefit companies

which are not in FW one.

It's not often the shadow secretary

of state gets to make

an announcement in the Commons.

But then Tom Watson

is very quick on his feet.

Mr Speaker, I would like to announce

to the House that the Commonwealth

Games have just been awarded to

Birmingham.

The minister was miffed.

The cheek of the gentleman. This was

announced formally at 9:30am in

Birmingham.

The sports minister

outrun by her shadow.

That's all we've got time for now.

But please join my colleague

Alicia McCarthy at the same time

tomorrow for a look back

at all the parliamentary twists

and turns of the last four months.

But for now from me,

Mandy Baker, goodbye.