06/12/2016 Tuesday in Parliament

Hello and welcome to Tuesday In Parliament.

The Government promises a more integrated approach

In an overhaul of the railways, Ministers are told a report

on community integration should not be used as a stick to beat

And what would make you put down that glass of wine?

Peers think it's time to put calorie labels on bottles of booze.

Experiments I have seen show that if people are aware of the amount

of calories they're drinking, they'll drink up to 50% less

The Transport Secretary has set out his plans to overhaul the way

that England's railway network is run.

Chris Grayling wants to start bringing back together the operation

Mr Grayling wants each rail franchise to be run

by joint management teams, including representatives

from both the train operating company and Network Rail.

Each franchise will be run by one joint team,

but the franchise owners and Network Rail will continue

The first new joint management teams will come into operation

when the South Eastern and the East Midlands

Called to the Commons by Labour, he said he wanted to improve

These reforms will set the railway on a firmer footing for the future.

We can and will make sure our network plays its part

in making this country a country that works for everyone.

I will be bringing forward a new strategy for our railways

with more detail than I'm setting out today, Mr Speaker,

The last time the Tories privatised the rail tracks it resulted

in a series of fatal accidents that led to the creation of Network Rail

Now the Secretary of State wants to start us on the slippery slope

back to the bad old days of Railtrack, where profit-chasing

companies are entrusted with the safety-critical role

of being responsible for our infrastructure.

Has the Secretary of State not learned the lessons of Railtrack,

or is he simply choosing to ignore them?

And why does he expect it to be different this time?

It's time for our railways to be run under public ownership,

in the public interest, as an integrated, national asset

in public hands with affordable fares for all and long-term

Sadly, today's announcement will take us further away

But an incoming Labour Government will be redress

Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, there isn't an imminent

The trouble is, with the party opposite, they always just

They want to turn the clock back to the days of British Rail

and unions having beer and sandwiches in Number 10.

The point about this, this isn't about privatisation -

I'm not privatising Network Rail - I'm creating teams on the ground

with the same incentives to work together in

The Secretary of State's right to acknowledge the problems

with the rail network, but he shouldn't do this

There is higher passenger satisfaction and reliability

in Scotland than any other network in the UK, but Scotland

Will he agree to devolve power over Network Rail

The point the honourable gentleman has missed, he's just describd

Scotland is the one place where we've got a working alliance

So what he's describing is a step on the road to the model that

I want to create across the railway, which, he says, builds

A joined-up approach could bring benefits,

and has been called for on many occasions by the

Transport Select Committee, amongst others.

But in the specific model that he's now advocating,

And could this be the beginning of a potentially highly expensive

The opposite is the case, Mr Speaker.

This is not about fragmentation, it's by joining up.

As she will know, we have teams on the ground around the railway,

some looking after the tracks, some looking after the trains,

sometimes working together well, sometimes not.

By creating a structure that shapes teams on the ground -

and that involves decentralisation within Network Rail of the kind

Nicola Shaw recommended, the kind of partnerships that

Sir Roy McNulty recommended - and I think that takes us

to the place that she's talked about in the past, to a more

joined-up railway, that does a better job for the customer.

Isn't this the Minister that's got a bit of form?

In a previous job, he wrecked the prison system.

And now he's got the job at Transport, and he's

Does he share my hope that this might stop the buck-passing

between train-operating companies and Network Rail, something that

many of my constituents north of the river on the Thameslink line

have suffered on a daily basis, and something I drew

My friend is absolutely right, I make no pretence that there

are some genuine problems on our railways at the moment.

They are mostly a problem of intensive use, of dramatic

increases in passenger numbers, beyond anything that was envisaged

So we do have to deliver change and improvement.

That partly comes through capacity improvements - and a lot of money

is being spent on the Thameslink route right now.

It also comes through just better performance on a day-to-day basis.

The Communities Secretary has told MPs that too many UK politicians

have refused to tackle integration problems as they feared

Sajid Javid was answering an urgent question

on a Government-commissioned review on integration.

Dame Louise Casey concluded in her report that segregation

and social exclusion are at "worrying levels",

and are fuelling inequality in some areas of Britain.

She said women in some communities are denied even their basic rights

as British residents, and she accused public bodies

of ignoring or condoning divisive or harmful religious practices

Among her recommendations were that immigrants could take an oath

of integration with British values and society, with schoolchildren

Sajid Javid set out the Government's initial response to the report.

I've seen for myself the enormous contribution that immigrants

and their families make to British life, all without giving

But I've also seen with my own eyes the other side of the equation.

For too long, too many people in this country and been

living parallel lives, refusing to integrate and failing

to embrace the shared values that make Britain great.

And for too long, too many politicians in this country have

They've ducked the problem for fear of being called a racist,

failing the very people that they're supposed to be helping,

and I will not allow this to continue.

Does he agree with Louise Casey, that speaking English

And will he agree to reverse the cuts that have been made

to the funds available for courses in teaching English

Does the Secretary of State have a view on the recommendations

to promote British values in all communities, especially

those values of tolerance and respect for others,

and which would support equality on the grounds

of sex, sexuality, race and religion?

Given that many of the recommendations are challenging -

some may be controversial - will he have a programme to consult

with elected councils and the different communities

in those areas most impacted by the recommendations?

It is an independent report, it is not a statement

Naturally, the Government would want to take the right amount

of time to look at each of the findings of the report.

And certainly, the recommendations that Dame Louise has made.

He also asked about the importance of English, that is one

of the central machinations of the report, making sure that

every community in Britain can speak English.

I remember, when I was about eight or nine years old,

going with my mother when she had to visit the GP, and acting

Many years later, I'm pleased to say, she learned English

and now speaks it very well, and it has transformed her life.

Not just for her, but it's great news for British society

I know from experience the difference that can make.

One of the issues that was highlighted by the chair

of the Select Committee is that of speaking English.

One of the most concerning areas of the report is how women in some

communities are denied equal rights and opportunities.

We are constantly urging people who suffer sexual abuse,

You cannot speak out if you cannot speak English.

If you cannot speak English, you cannot even ring 999.

And yet, the Casey Report finds that DCLG spent more money promoting

the Cornish language between 2011-13 than it did English.

The minister said that wasn't the case - the Government spent

?780,000 on the Cornish language and 11 million on English.

I welcome all efforts to prevent a great in the UK.

This is not the first study to find problems in this area.

But I am concerned that there is no real understanding in this report

of the simple truth that integration is a two-way street,

and it should definitely not be used, as it so often is,

as a stick with which to beat the minority communities of Britain.

I agree with the Secretary of State that we have for too long had

a soft-headed attitude towards integration,

which has led to segregated communities up and in this country.

I know he has already been asked about faith schools,

can I ask him to spend some more time looking at the report,

because I share its concern that faith schools further

Does he agree with me that this report does is a serious and

determined response? Ending austerity, I believe,

is the best thing this Government could do to tackle social exclusion

and promote integration. Will he challenge the toxic rhetoric

that pits groups in our society Will he look to Scotland to see how

the strategies we're implementing are giving opportunities for people

to share experiences? Will he reverse the damaging cuts

to ESOL, as others have mentioned? And will he refuse to accept

the offensive suggestion It's a shame, Madam Deputy Speaker,

that the honourable lady has to be And that, for once, she can't act

in a more mature fashion. When she and the SNP has something

useful to say, I will respond. The Justice Secretary Liz Truss has

faced renewed criticism over the time it took her to come

to the defence of three High Court judges who ruled the Parliament must

have a say in triggering Brexit. That decision was criticised by MPs

and some newspapers, with one - the Daily Mail -

saying the judges were The Supreme Court is now hearing

the Government's appeal After calls for Liz Truss to condemn

the attacks on the judges, it took nearly two days

for her to release a statement defending the independence

of the judiciary as, "the foundation upon which our

rule of law is built." After the press attacks

on the judiciary, it took the Justice Secretary nearly 48

hours to release a statement. The former Lord Chief Justice,

Lord Judge, said of this statement, "I think it was a little too

late, and think it's And if so, will she now take

the opportunity to apologise? It is not the job of the Government

or the Lord Chancellor The process is working

absolutely as it should. People have the right

to bring a case to court. The Government has the right

to defend its position in the court. The judiciary are independent

and impartial, and the press can scrutinise the process

within the law. As we sit here today,

in this Parliament, just across Parliament Square,

the Supreme Court is sitting with 11 She not agree with me -

does this whole House not agree with me -

that the integrity of the Supreme Court and the Justices

should not be impugned? Well, I completely agree

with my honourable friend. As I said last month,

the Supreme Court Justices are people of great

integrity and impartiality. In recent years, it's become

commonplace for some members on the benches opposite to deprecate

the judges of the European Court of Justice and European Court

of Human Rights simply for Does she agree with me that such

scant respect for the rule of law has encouraged the climate

in which a major tabloid - which I believe some

people call a newspaper - think it's appropriate to describe

justices of our own Supreme Court The independence of the judiciary

is a vital part of our rule of law. But as my honourable

friend has just said, what I think is important

here in the UK is that it's British courts making those decisions,

and that's precisely what we're The president of the Supreme Court,

Lord Neuberger, said at the beginning of the Article 50

appeal, "This appeal is concerned "with legal issues, and as judges,

our duty is to consider those issues "impartially and to decide

the case according to law. So does the Lord Chancellor agree

with me that, had she done her duty and spoken out at the time to defend

the judiciary, those words would not I frequently make it clear

that the independence of the judiciary is a vital part

of our constitution But I also think it's absolutely

right that the president of the Supreme Court,

who has absolute integrity and impartiality, should

make that case as well. An independent judiciary

and a free press are two And while we may not always like how

each acts, we should be I absolutely agree

with my honourable friend. We can be incredibly

proud in this country of our independent judiciary, it's

the cornerstone of the rule of law, But we also have a robust,

free press, which is vitally important in making sure

we have a free society. You're watching Tuesday in

Parliament with me, Alicia McCarthy. Now, is a GP who sees 15 patients

in a day productive? And what about a surgeon who

performs ten operations in one week? Economists accept that

it's difficult to measure productivity in the NHS,

but the Office for Budget Responsibility has nevertheless

concluded that growth in health care productivity "has been slower

than in the economy as a whole." A Lords committee investigating

the future of the NHS has been questioning senior health officials

about how to make health The OBR's analysis of how

productivity has grown, particularly since 1997-2013, we saw an average

of 0.9% which is incredibly small, despite unprecedented levels of

spending on health I think both of you would agree

that productivity - and Professor Whitty

has just mentioned it in his previous answer -

is going to be fundamental the books in terms of what we spend

and what we actually deliver. What can be done to actually

improve it and why are there such variations in productivity

around the health care system? Well, it's a much debated

question and I'm not going to try and give you a sort

of pat answer because of course there have been long treaties

written on the subject, but clearly key to it is

the relationship As you well know, what you see

in most sectors of the economy is technology is one of the biggest

drivers of productivity Health has a very different

relationship with technology. Most technologies, wonderfully,

both prolong life and allow us to treat diseases we've

never been able to treat before And so why is health

behind other sectors? I think that is probably

the root cause of it. Well, there are two things

if I might interrupt. First of all, all the health

care providers in the period since '97 have had access to the

same technologies. Their levels of productivity

have varied enormously and I know dashboards

are actually demonstrating that Dashboards are used by some NHS

bodies to assess performance I think actually, you've

already stolen my answer. I think the transparency

around this in terms of the data and

the dashboards available is probably the single

most important thing we can do in that

area and what we need to do is promote a culture in which health

providers are looking at who is best in class and asking themselves

what can they do in exactly the same way as you see in most

sectors of the economy. With masterly understatement,

the OBR say that measuring medical productivity

is not straightforward, But I have to say in this area,

I think that the medical profession And there are many leaders

of the medical profession around the table here,

you know, my plea to the medical profession for me would be

that this is something they should take seriously because currently,

they do not in reality. The incentives are not

stacked up along actually trying to improve

productivity, they're stacked up along trying to prolong life

which is a very important thing to do but the two need to be kept

firmly in balance. What other barriers

are there for the medical and how would you

break those barriers? Well, I think it's quite

interesting in the sense that I think the medical profession has

warped itself into a place which is incredibly efficient in terms

of single disease management of conditions which is what led to many

of the remarkable advances we've seen, but firstly,

that doesn't deal very well with multi-morbidity

which it is actually quite inefficient at dealing

with as a result, and the second problem

is that the medical profession

has got itself hung up, I think, on longevity rather

than quality of life measures and longevity rather than efficiency

measures and if you make those bits of the system as important in

medical training all the way through the system, I do think we could

change it incrementally If we wish to make the NHS

sustainable, there are two, clearly, broadly two ways you can do that

which is increase the amount of money going into the system is one

approach but the other is whatever quantum is given by the public,

to actually make the system more efficient and actually the data

to do that and incentives to use Peers have renewed their calls

for a minimum price per unit of alcohol

to tackle problem drinking. The Scottish Government

is already attempting to bring But the Scotch Whisky

Association is fighting the move and has applied to appeal

in the UK Supreme Court. There's been a lengthy legal

challenge over the policy, which would set a minimum unit price

of 50p in Scotland. In the Lords, one peer highlighted

findings from a recent review by Public Health England

on the consequences of alcohol abuse and he urged the Government

at Westminster to act. Is she aware that the report

indicates that we now have over a million people a year going

into hospital due to alcohol-related illnesses of one sort

or another and that this report now indicates

that alcohol is the biggest killer

of males between 15 and 49 and that it's time that we really do need

to start taking some action on this? Can she give some indication that we

will have discussions taking place on the report, to give us

a timetable on that, and what the likely progress would be and not

simply wait Isn't she aware that if we move

ourselves, we would help Scotland I concur with much of

what the noble Lord says. It's frustrating to have to wait,

but we do think it is important to wait for the outcome

of the case in Scotland with I totally agree with him

that the admissions to hospital that are alcohol-related are absolutely

worrying and that it's now the leading risk factor

in ill health for people Is my noble friend aware of any

plans to improve calorie Experiments I have seen show that

if people are aware of the amount they will drink up to 50% less

than they plan to otherwise. I'm not entirely sure

whether the Government is planning to introduce calorie

labelling and I know there is calorie labelling

on some drinks, but certainly, I'll have to get

back to the noble lady because I don't know

the answer to it. Finally, peers have held their first

big debate on the Government's Among other things, it aims to give

students more information about who goes to a particular

university and what they achieve and make it easier and quicker

for new universities and higher Opening the debate for

the Government, Lord Younger reassured peers that

standards wouldn't suffer. Research from the UK Commission

for Employment and Skills tells us that nearly half of job vacancies

between now and 2024 are expected to be

in occupations most likely

to employ graduates. So to meet this need, the Bill

speeds up and streamlines the processes for new providers to enter

the market while maintaining the world-class reputation of our

higher education institutions. But, let me reassure

this House, this does not mean and must not mean

a lowering of standards. In order to enter the market,

become eligible to award its own degrees and ultimately

to call itself a university, pass rigorous entry requirements

and undergo tough scrutiny. The key to our concerns

is that the main focus of the Bill is not about promoting

scholarship, encouraging research or a concern for truth,

but rather the goal of turning the UK's higher education

into an even more competitive, market-driven one

at the expense of both quality A Lib Dem criticised any suggestion

that universities could be graded. Many universities like to

hang banners from their estate proclaiming all sorts

of positive statements Do we really want

to see banners which say, this is a gold or

silver institution? I guess there won't be many

proclaiming bronze status. This will be a terrible message

to prospective students and which will see the gold-standard

universities prospering even further while bronze will become

the poor relation. Today's second reading debate

is an opportunity to look at the Bill as a whole

and I welcome it. Indeed, one of my regrets

is that we did not legislate in the last coalition Government

as we intended to do and I am pleased that the Government is now

grasping that nettle. The man who'd been in charge

of universities towards the end of the last Labour government

explained what he'd wanted to do. A bigger sector,

a better and more applied sector, and one that was

more accountable to its users. It would therefore

be churlish for me, I think, not to acknowledge that

this Bill has similar stated aims. But I was also clear that more does

not necessarily mean better That's why the Government must

guard against lower entry standards for new challenger

institutions, reducing the quality of Britain's University

offer overall. The stack 'em high, sell 'em cheap

approach would be hugely retrograde. Do join me again at the same time

tomorrow for another round up of the day here at Westminster,

including the highlights David Liddington will be filling in

for Theresa May. But for now from me,

Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.