:00:11. > :00:12.Hello there, and welcome to Tuesday In Parliament.
:00:13. > :00:16.Coming up: MPs question a Home Office minister
:00:17. > :00:25.about the facilities at one near-empty detention centre.
:00:26. > :00:28.Widescreen televisions, sky satellite channels, and Internet
:00:29. > :00:31.cafe on site. MPs argue over just when
:00:32. > :00:34.the referendum on our membership And he probably wasn't
:00:35. > :00:37.expecting that! One MP muses on the unintended
:00:38. > :00:50.consequences We have what can become at its worst
:00:51. > :00:55.the teaching equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition. More on that
:00:56. > :01:00.later. But first: stop The author of a Home Office review
:01:01. > :01:06.has described a state-of-the-art facility for asylum-seekers awaiting
:01:07. > :01:09.deportation as "an absolute outrage" in a time of austerity
:01:10. > :01:10.for public services. The Cedars, near Gatwick,
:01:11. > :01:12.provides accommodation for families. There are nine flats,
:01:13. > :01:14.cooking facilities, a canteen and extensive play and
:01:15. > :01:16.entertainment facilities, But the report's author,
:01:17. > :01:19.Stephen Shaw, has told MPs on the Home Affairs Committee that
:01:20. > :01:22.although there was a staff of 80, there were no residents at all on
:01:23. > :01:25.the two occasions he visited. And the questioning was picked up
:01:26. > :01:38.by another Conservative last year the government spent ?6.4
:01:39. > :01:44.million running a removal Centre for asylum seekers and I understand that
:01:45. > :01:47.it held 64 people and all have been removed and it had a staff of 80
:01:48. > :01:50.even when it was empty and you commented that this was a
:01:51. > :01:54.misdirection of public funds that could have been better used for
:01:55. > :02:03.other purposes. If you were the minister, what would you do with the
:02:04. > :02:06.The Cedars now? There are congratulation is why that hasn't
:02:07. > :02:10.featured thus far in what I have said but at a time when the Home
:02:11. > :02:17.Office, as most government departments, are facing a period of
:02:18. > :02:24.austerity, it seems to me an absolute outrage that so much money
:02:25. > :02:27.has been spent at The Cedars and I also think, and this will surprise
:02:28. > :02:31.you, it is true that hardly anyone goes there and quite a lot of them
:02:32. > :02:36.are released back into the community and there are some repeat detention
:02:37. > :02:40.seekers. On the two occasions I have been there have been nobody there. I
:02:41. > :02:44.actually think it is almost that you are taking, in the main, a single
:02:45. > :02:51.mum, living in probably not very good social housing somewhere, you
:02:52. > :02:57.are removing her to a country with a very uncertain future, and you are
:02:58. > :03:01.putting her in these palatial facilities are two or three days
:03:02. > :03:06.that she is bemused by it, and therefore makes their use of. It is
:03:07. > :03:10.almost an unkindness, not a kindness, to do it in that way. I am
:03:11. > :03:13.sure we would want to put that directly to the Minister.
:03:14. > :03:16.And the questioning was picked up by another Conservative
:03:17. > :03:23.Is it appropriate for Her Majesty 's government to be spending money on
:03:24. > :03:26.all sorts of luxuries that hard-working families can ill
:03:27. > :03:31.afford, like widescreen television, sky satellite channels and an
:03:32. > :03:36.Internet cafe and basketball court on site, are these appropriate for
:03:37. > :03:41.the taxpayer to be spending? I think we need to be looking very carefully
:03:42. > :03:44.at our immigration removal Centre on that balance of striking that it is
:03:45. > :03:47.something that is not a prison, it is for someone to facilitate their
:03:48. > :03:53.departure from this country and therefore we Ahram -- providing
:03:54. > :03:58.appropriate accommodation, I hope for relatively short periods of
:03:59. > :04:02.time, to see that they are removed. That is my question? Is it
:04:03. > :04:05.appropriate for widescreen televisions on sky channels to be
:04:06. > :04:09.provided to people in these centres when hard-working families can ill
:04:10. > :04:12.afford them? If you actually visit and immigration removal Centre you
:04:13. > :04:18.will find they are not palatial environments. With respect, I am
:04:19. > :04:23.asking your judgment on whether this is an appropriate use of taxpayers
:04:24. > :04:27.money. Having some facilities to make the environment for those who
:04:28. > :04:31.are being removed from the country appropriate is an appropriate
:04:32. > :04:36.spending of money, but it is not, in my view, that this should be
:04:37. > :04:41.sugar-coated or excessive and clearly we keep the issues and close
:04:42. > :04:46.review while balancing off the desire to be fair to those who are
:04:47. > :04:49.being removed and doing that in an appropriate way, but ultimately
:04:50. > :04:50.people with no relief to be in this country should be removed or should
:04:51. > :04:57.depart. James Brokenshire. Now, what's wrong with
:04:58. > :05:00.Thursday June 23rd as the day for the referendum
:05:01. > :05:02.on Britain's EU membership? Quite a lot if a Commons debate
:05:03. > :05:04.is anything to go by. The date's not yet confirmed,
:05:05. > :05:07.but is thought to be the one favoured by David Cameron
:05:08. > :05:10.as he enters the final phase Some MPs from Scotland,
:05:11. > :05:13.Wales and Northern Ireland say June 23rd is too
:05:14. > :05:15.close to May 5th, when there are elections to their
:05:16. > :05:17.devolved assemblies and Parliaments. The Westminster leader
:05:18. > :05:19.of the Democratic Unionist Party said a June referendum would overlap
:05:20. > :05:34.with the other elections. We need to ensure that the
:05:35. > :05:39.government respects the devolved administrations in Northern Ireland,
:05:40. > :05:43.Scotland and Wales on an issue of such import. We must put their
:05:44. > :05:47.national interest above every other consideration, we must respect the
:05:48. > :05:51.rights of the people who go to the polls in May and we must allow for
:05:52. > :05:55.the fullest possible debate on the biggest decision to be made by this
:05:56. > :06:00.country for generations. Could he help clarify the date by suggesting
:06:01. > :06:03.what date he thinks the referendum should be held? I also have concerns
:06:04. > :06:08.that the longer it is left then the more damaging it is to the economy
:06:09. > :06:12.of the United Kingdom. I personally would be content to have the
:06:13. > :06:16.referendum in the autumn. Can I just say, Eurosceptic English point of
:06:17. > :06:20.view, we say to the Prime Minister, we are self-confident, we know our
:06:21. > :06:24.arguments, and we say to the Prime Minister, bring it on. No delay,
:06:25. > :06:30.don't look worried, bring it on and we can have a proper debate and we
:06:31. > :06:33.can win this. For the sake of our collective mental and emotional
:06:34. > :06:38.health, as well as having to say this many times, I'd take the
:06:39. > :06:41.opportunity to advise any amateur criminologists hoping to gain clues
:06:42. > :06:47.about the date of the referendum from closed textural analysis of my
:06:48. > :06:51.remarks not to bother. There are not any clues. The Minister said we are
:06:52. > :06:56.trying to tempt him into naming the day and he will not do that because
:06:57. > :07:00.of career limiting implications. We are not trying to get him to name
:07:01. > :07:08.the day, we are trying to get him to name when the day is not going to
:07:09. > :07:12.be. It is a question of elimination. If I could commend him to the poem,
:07:13. > :07:18.when you have mislaid a certain thing, keep your cool and don't get
:07:19. > :07:22.hot. Elimination or it helps a lot fuller. The way to help missing
:07:23. > :07:29.something is to find out what it not. The referendum will absorb the
:07:30. > :07:33.minds and hearts of people throughout the United Kingdom, like
:07:34. > :07:38.it hasn't done for 40 years and that we must do that unencumbered with
:07:39. > :07:43.any other electoral consideration at the same time. It is perfectly
:07:44. > :07:46.feasible to have an overlap, providing you accept that you have a
:07:47. > :07:51.six-week gap as a minimum between two poles. I would remind the house,
:07:52. > :07:56.Mr Speaker, that a six-week gap is the full length of a general
:07:57. > :08:02.election campaign. We decide the government of this country on the
:08:03. > :08:05.basis of a six-week campaign. My constituents are pretty cheesed off
:08:06. > :08:09.with politics and I think that we need to understand that not everyone
:08:10. > :08:14.in the country is as excited about politics as we are in this place and
:08:15. > :08:17.actually you need a short campaign where people can focus on the issues
:08:18. > :08:22.and make a decision at the end of their short campaign. Just a point
:08:23. > :08:27.in this compressed time period with the possible date of June 23, the
:08:28. > :08:30.Scottish schools are about to go on holiday at that point and many of
:08:31. > :08:37.the electorate will be either planning or starting to take their
:08:38. > :08:41.holidays. The 22nd in some local authorities will be the day and it
:08:42. > :08:44.is unthinkable to have a vote of such importance during English
:08:45. > :08:48.school holidays and yet this vote could actually take place during
:08:49. > :08:53.Scottish school holidays. The bottom line is if this referendum is held
:08:54. > :08:57.on the 23rd all the 30th of June, for instance, this would be over a
:08:58. > :09:00.month and a half after the fifth of the May elections and I believe the
:09:01. > :09:05.people of the UK are perfectly capable of making an important
:09:06. > :09:08.decision a month and a half after local elections and to suggest
:09:09. > :09:09.otherwise in my view is patronising and disrespectful.
:09:10. > :09:12.The Commons gathered as it was confirmed that informal talks
:09:13. > :09:16.aimed at averting a planned strike by junior doctors were taking place.
:09:17. > :09:20.A 24 hour stoppage covering all but emergency care was scheduled
:09:21. > :09:24.to get under way at eight o'clock on Wednesday morning.
:09:25. > :09:32.Junior doctors are in dispute over pay and working hours,
:09:33. > :09:35.as the government tries to negotiate a new contract
:09:36. > :09:43.Labour accused the government of being the blockage in the talks.
:09:44. > :09:48.Independent reports that a potential deal on the junior doctor contract
:09:49. > :09:50.was put to the government that would have resolved the junior doctor
:09:51. > :09:54.concerns without costing any more money and potentially could have
:09:55. > :10:02.avoided tomorrow's industrial action. A source said it to the
:10:03. > :10:07.newspaper that the one person who would not agree was the Health
:10:08. > :10:11.Secretary. He said no. Let me ask the Health Secretary are very direct
:10:12. > :10:16.question. As the government at any point rejected a cost neutral
:10:17. > :10:21.proposal from the BMA on the junior doctor contract, yes or no? Mr
:10:22. > :10:26.Speaker, the only reason that we do not have a solution on the junior
:10:27. > :10:31.doctors is because in December, on the one outstanding issue, which is
:10:32. > :10:35.about pay on Saturdays, the BMA said they would negotiate by last month
:10:36. > :10:39.they said they refused to negotiate. That is the only outstanding issue.
:10:40. > :10:46.If they are prepared to negotiate and be flexible on that, so are we.
:10:47. > :10:49.What is noticeable is that despite 3000 cancelled operations, no one in
:10:50. > :10:54.the Labour Party is condemning these strikes. By refusing to condemn the
:10:55. > :11:00.junior doctors strike the pair -- that the lady opposite as that shown
:11:01. > :11:02.she has little regard for patient safety. Will my honourable friend
:11:03. > :11:05.repeat his condemnation for the strike which will seriously endanger
:11:06. > :11:09.patient safety and will he ensure me that they will continue to press for
:11:10. > :11:14.the new contracts which will guarantee safe patient care and a
:11:15. > :11:19.better contract for doctors? Mr Speaker, I think she got a bit of a
:11:20. > :11:23.reaction, don't you, by those comments? The party opposite are
:11:24. > :11:27.saying that if a negotiated settlement can't be reached then we
:11:28. > :11:32.should not impose a new contract, in other words we should give up on
:11:33. > :11:36.seven care for the most vulnerable patients. There was a time when the
:11:37. > :11:39.Labour Party used to speak up for vulnerable patients, but now it is
:11:40. > :11:40.clear that unions matter than patients.
:11:41. > :11:42.You're watching Tuesday In Parliament,
:11:43. > :11:50.here on BBC Parliament, with me, Alicia McCarthy.
:11:51. > :11:53.The Government has said it will not send troops into Libya to take
:11:54. > :11:56.But a Foreign Office Minister has said the UK would respond
:11:57. > :11:59.to requests for assistance - as and when a unity
:12:00. > :12:05.Tobias Ellwood would not be drawn, however, on RAF flights over Libya
:12:06. > :12:08.or whether special forces were there.
:12:09. > :12:11.His comments came in the wake of attacks targetting Libya's oil
:12:12. > :12:15.industry by mililtants linked to the group calling itself
:12:16. > :12:24.There are discussions being had as to what we can do to facilitate
:12:25. > :12:25.assistance once a Government is actually formed
:12:26. > :12:28.as to what we can do to advise, assist, support and train.
:12:29. > :12:38.Just to confirm that we are not going in there in order to hold
:12:39. > :12:41.and take ground in that sense whatsoever.
:12:42. > :12:43.I should make the distinction between
:12:44. > :12:45.support that is being given for stabilisation in Tripoli
:12:46. > :12:49.versus the ground forces, which is what I'm
:12:50. > :12:51.alluding to, as to what support may come through.
:12:52. > :12:59.Separately to support that might be required to deal with Daesh.
:13:00. > :13:02.When you say sport, you're talking about military?
:13:03. > :13:05.Help in terms of whether it is a pilot or drones,
:13:06. > :13:22.The first question that has to be answered is confirmation
:13:23. > :13:25.and invitation because otherwise it would be illegal for us to send any
:13:26. > :13:31.Once the Government is in place, if an
:13:32. > :13:38.invitation is then given to us to provide them assistance
:13:39. > :13:41.in training of their Armed Forces, then we are happily going
:13:42. > :13:44.So you are saying that at the moment,
:13:45. > :13:49.if there is an invitation from some kind of Government of Libya,
:13:50. > :13:54.then the only thing we're going to dealing with is systems
:13:55. > :13:59.Therefore we are not going to go in, for example,
:14:00. > :14:01.using drones are using planes to carry out some targeted bombing?
:14:02. > :14:18.As the situation stands at the moment, that is the case.
:14:19. > :14:22.That possibility of the spread of Isis, could the United Kingdom
:14:23. > :14:25.intervene effectively in Libya against Daesh without an invitation
:14:26. > :14:29.from a UN-backed Government of national accords?
:14:30. > :14:35.So basically, can we go in unilaterally, without their
:14:36. > :14:38.agreement if we feel that the nature of the threat posed by Daesh
:14:39. > :14:43.is to such a degree that it would cause
:14:44. > :14:48.high volatility within the oil sector and, indeed, a humanitarian
:14:49. > :14:52.crisis across the Mediterranean, as we have
:14:53. > :15:02.You again ask a hypothetical question but you
:15:03. > :15:05.have touched on something very important, which we have not really
:15:06. > :15:07.dealt with yet and that is the consequence of a lack
:15:08. > :15:11.of governance in a country which is being utilised
:15:12. > :15:14.by the criminal gangs in order to ferry people who are not
:15:15. > :15:17.necessarily from Libya but indeed from other
:15:18. > :15:27.That is why we need the ports and the maritime peace secured
:15:28. > :15:33.From the perspective of the scenario that you spell out,
:15:34. > :15:36.I can only repeat what I said about the Prime Minister
:15:37. > :15:40.If there is an immediacy and a threat to the UK,
:15:41. > :15:46.then he will make that judgment itself but sadly
:15:47. > :15:49.--certainly there is no planning whatsoever from the current
:15:50. > :15:54.situation to pursue what you are suggesting.
:15:55. > :15:57.At the start of the year David Cameron said it was time
:15:58. > :16:01.to demolish the worst "sink housing estates" and rebuild
:16:02. > :16:10.Speaking to the BBC the prime minister said there should be a big
:16:11. > :16:12.shift towards more affordable housing to buy.
:16:13. > :16:15.A panel to be chaired by Lord Heseltine will report on how
:16:16. > :16:18.investment from bodies like pension funds might be unlocked and draw up
:16:19. > :16:20.a list of sites that could benefit from regeneration.
:16:21. > :16:23.In the Lords peers wondered how it would all be paid for.
:16:24. > :16:27.Estate regeneration provides a big opportunity to turn around run-down,
:16:28. > :16:30.low-density public sector estates to produce many more new homes
:16:31. > :16:37.The funding announced is only part of the package we are working on.
:16:38. > :16:40.An advisory panel, co-chaired by my noble friend Lord Heseltine
:16:41. > :16:43.and my honourable friend Brandon Lewis, will explore how
:16:44. > :16:48.we can help the projects to go forward.
:16:49. > :16:59.The panel will meet for the first time today. I thank the noble
:17:00. > :17:02.Baroness for her response. I am sure she is aware that in many parts of
:17:03. > :17:07.the country the number of households in severe housing needs is
:17:08. > :17:12.increasing. It is 3000 in my own city. With the numbers of people
:17:13. > :17:16.sleeping rough, having gone up by 41%. Could the noble lady tell me
:17:17. > :17:23.when precise funded proposals will be published? And could she also
:17:24. > :17:25.assure us that decent, affordable homes will be provided for those
:17:26. > :17:42.families in the most severe need? The noble lady underlies why we're
:17:43. > :17:47.doing this. We are trying to introduce more than 1 million new
:17:48. > :17:53.homes into this country by 2021. In terms of the funding, that funding
:17:54. > :17:57.that was announced was purely seed funding to attract other forms of
:17:58. > :18:03.funding, both in the public and the private sector. And in terms of the
:18:04. > :18:07.mix of Tanya, that certainly will be on the panel's minds. -- Kenya. --
:18:08. > :18:08.Kenya. One of the ways to make homes
:18:09. > :18:10.affordable is to ensure that they are energy efficient,
:18:11. > :18:14.so that people do not have to pay Will she assure the House that these
:18:15. > :18:20.homes will not be built so energy inefficiently that they have to be
:18:21. > :18:24.dealt with again within 20 years? Can she assure the House that energy
:18:25. > :18:27.efficiency will be high My Lords, I will not be
:18:28. > :18:35.sitting on the panel, but I shall certainly bring that
:18:36. > :18:38.point to my noble friend Of course, my noble friend
:18:39. > :18:43.is absolutely right that, the more energy efficient a house
:18:44. > :18:47.is, the cheaper it is to live in and the cheaper the bills
:18:48. > :18:49.are for the tenants The Minister's right honourable
:18:50. > :18:55.friend the Prime Minister, when he announced this initiative,
:18:56. > :18:56.talked about bulldozing Can the noble Baroness tell us how
:18:57. > :19:05.many families will be living in those sink estates and how far
:19:06. > :19:12.the ?140 million will go --in those sink estates and how far
:19:13. > :19:15.the ?130 million will go towards providing them
:19:16. > :19:16.with adequate accommodation? Perhaps she can tell
:19:17. > :19:18.us whether she agrees with the Prime Minister's
:19:19. > :19:20.terminology in describing those My Lords, "sink estate"
:19:21. > :19:30.is terminology that conjures up a picture of an estate that
:19:31. > :19:35.has become run-down, in which people feel
:19:36. > :19:38.less safe to live or, indeed, where the standard
:19:39. > :19:41.of accommodation is not The ?140 million of funding is seed
:19:42. > :19:51.funding for other types of funding to come in both from the public
:19:52. > :19:57.and the private sector. While that regeneration
:19:58. > :20:00.is being done, I do not expect that the tenants will be
:20:01. > :20:06.living in those houses. An MP has said that assessments
:20:07. > :20:09.of disabled people on benefits may have been falsified to show
:20:10. > :20:12.that they are fit for work The claim was made during a debate
:20:13. > :20:18.in Westminster Hall in which Labour and SNP MPs called for a fundamental
:20:19. > :20:21.rethink of the system. The assessments have been carried
:20:22. > :20:25.out by private companies, Atos and Maximus, on people
:20:26. > :20:26.receiving There seems to be an alarming trend
:20:27. > :20:34.of cases being rejected based on factual errors or even-I hesitate
:20:35. > :20:40.to say this-falsification. I have had several cases of people
:20:41. > :20:42.telling me that their assessment report bears absolutely no
:20:43. > :20:44.relation to the assessment that they experienced
:20:45. > :20:50.with Maximus or Atos. I am sure that other Members have
:20:51. > :20:52.heard similar evidence. One or two cases could be dismissed
:20:53. > :20:55.as an honest mistake, but the situation appears to reveal
:20:56. > :20:59.a disconcerting pattern of behaviour that indicates that the trade-off
:21:00. > :21:03.between cost cutting and profit maximisation is being felt
:21:04. > :21:14.by very vulnerable people. And those who are all work
:21:15. > :21:18.capability assessments that they will tell you they found the entire
:21:19. > :21:23.process at best a demeaning and at worst intimidating. It is a cause of
:21:24. > :21:28.deep distress which is particularly alarming when one considers that
:21:29. > :21:32.some of the claimants live with challenging health and mental
:21:33. > :21:36.conditions. And find going through these assessments almost more than
:21:37. > :21:41.they can bear. These assessments indeed can exacerbate or even
:21:42. > :21:45.precipitate mental health problems. New research from the universities
:21:46. > :21:48.of Liverpool and Oxford found that in areas where more people were
:21:49. > :21:53.assessed for E S H, there was a greater increase in mental health
:21:54. > :21:58.conditions and prescriptions for antidepressants and even the number
:21:59. > :22:00.of suicides the research estimates this could have led to 590
:22:01. > :22:09.additional suicides. The contract to carry out
:22:10. > :22:11.assessments in March 2015, it has made a number
:22:12. > :22:19.of improvements to the claimants' The honourable lady mentioned
:22:20. > :22:24.falsification of data at one point as well. We are very clear that we
:22:25. > :22:31.have a clear process which has a validation of data and she also went
:22:32. > :22:37.on to comment on the providers are incentivised as well. Our providers
:22:38. > :22:41.are not incentivised by outcome. We have our full range of a balanced
:22:42. > :22:44.performance measures that are focused on quality and volumes and
:22:45. > :22:46.in customer satisfaction, which brings me back to the point that we
:22:47. > :22:49.are speaking about people. English schools should be given
:22:50. > :22:52.the right to challenge the timing of visits by Ofsted inspectors
:22:53. > :22:55.and appeal against their findings. That was the demand
:22:56. > :22:58.of a Liberal Democrat MP, John Pugh, who said the decisions
:22:59. > :23:06.of schools inspectors had far on a school's reputation,
:23:07. > :23:12.its funding, even its very survival. Introducing a Bill to put his
:23:13. > :23:14.proposals into affect, Mr Pugh said action was needed
:23:15. > :23:17.to redress the balance of power But he began his speech
:23:18. > :23:21.with an announcement which slightly I apologise in advance, Mr Speaker,
:23:22. > :23:30.for my lacklustre demeanour. I recently had a bout of winter
:23:31. > :23:33.vomiting, and I am concerned that I have more to worry
:23:34. > :23:41.about than projecting my voice. Stand over there then shouted
:23:42. > :23:51.the DUP's Sammy Wilson. John Pugh got to the
:23:52. > :23:54.substance of his bill. Good teachers and heads
:23:55. > :23:57.who fear an errant verdict They leave the profession early,
:23:58. > :24:03.or, in the worst cases, We do not have a collegial,
:24:04. > :24:09.peer-reviewed model Instead, we have what can become,
:24:10. > :24:17.at worst, the teaching equivalent of the Spanish inquisition,
:24:18. > :24:20.where careers go up in flames at the mere whiff of
:24:21. > :24:24.educational heresy. I recognise that inspection has
:24:25. > :24:27.a valuable role in education, but the way we currently do it
:24:28. > :24:31.in England, via the bloated bureaucratic beast that Ofsted
:24:32. > :24:33.has become, is clumsy, poor value for money
:24:34. > :24:40.and unaccountable. Critically, there is no independent
:24:41. > :24:44.appeal on matters of substance. The Bill seeks to give schools
:24:45. > :24:47.powers to contest an unfair judgment by appeal to independent
:24:48. > :24:51.regional panels. Currently even lodging complaints
:24:52. > :24:54.was seen as futile he said and few schools did it and it was time
:24:55. > :24:58.to address what he called this Well Mr Pugh won the right
:24:59. > :25:03.to take his bill forward, but a lack of time means it stands
:25:04. > :25:08.no chance of becoming law. Mps flattened the opposition coming
:25:09. > :25:13.home first in the annual Westminster The members of the Commons
:25:14. > :25:18.were victorious, battering the opposing teams made up
:25:19. > :25:22.of peers and journalists. The shrove Tuesday flip-a-thon
:25:23. > :25:24.was held this year in aid The victorious cross party team
:25:25. > :25:35.of MPs was led by pancake veteran stephen pound,
:25:36. > :25:38.aided and abetted by a behatted band including new Mps Labour's Clive
:25:39. > :25:41.Lewis and the Conservative Which flipping nonsense brings us
:25:42. > :25:46.to the end of today's programme, but do join me again at the same
:25:47. > :25:49.time tomorrow for another round up of the best of the day
:25:50. > :25:51.here at Westminster, including the highlights from prime
:25:52. > :25:53.minister's questions. But until then from me,
:25:54. > :25:57.Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.