20/12/2016 Tuesday in Parliament

Hello and welcome to Tuesday in Parliament.

Senior MPs quiz Theresa May over whether Parliament will get

It is my intention that Parliament had every opportunity to consider

these matters and we must ensure we deliver on the vote of the British

people which was a vote to leave the European Union. Again was that a yes

or no? I gave the answer I gave. Rupert Murdoch's bid for full

control of the broadcaster Sky - the former Labour leader wants it

to be stopped. This bid shows that the Murdochs

have learned nothing and think they can get away with anything. If it

was wrong for them to own 100% of sky in 2012 it is wrong today.

I reached my breaking point and grabbed her mobile and threw it

across the aisle. But first, the lorry attack

in Berlin was on the minds of Mps as they met for the last sitting day

before the Commons 12 people were killed and 48 injured

when a lorry ploughed into a Christmas market

in the German capital. The German police are calling it

"a probable terrorist attack". In the Commons - before the day's

business got underway - the Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt

was the first to speak As we wish each other

a Merry Christmas, the whole House will this

morning remember the people of Berlin as they face up

to yesterday's horrific Germany and its capital, Berlin,

have been beacons of freedom All our thoughts and prayers

are with them today. I would just like to take a moment

to reflect on the appalling news that came in from Berlin

and Ankara yesterday. And we have seen very vivid images

in our newspapers and television and I think they have shocked us

all and I just wanted to express our condolences and I'm

sure the condolences of all of us It was Theresa May's

first appearance in front of the Liaison Committee -

which is made up of the chairmen No surprises that the main subject

up for discussion was Brexit. Among other things, they wanted

to know if MPs would be given a vote on the final deal

with the European Union. Is it your intention to ensure that

Parliament has a vote on the final The parliament is going to have

every opportunity to vote through the Great Repeal Bill

on the various aspects of the relationship that we will be

having with the European Union. The question is when the final deal

is negotiated with the 27, is it your intention to ensure that

Parliament has a chance to vote It is my intention to ensure that

Parliament has ample opportunity to comment on and discuss

the aspects of the arrangements I'm not sure I understand why

it is so difficult to answer a question as to whether Parliament

will have a vote or not, given that we know the European Parliament

will have a vote on the deal, why can't you say that the British

Parliament will also have a vote? What I am saying is that there

will be an opportunity for Parliament of course to consider

and as more details do become available, how this

is going to operate. There is a question

about the timetable in relation to the agreement of the deal

and the necessity, how that timetable will operate in relation

to the European Parliament as well. What I am also clear

about is ensuring that when we come to the point we are actually

delivering on the vote of the British people,

that we will be leaving The Prime Minister was unchallenged

over whether she would use Brexit to reduce immigration.

If you are to stand any chance of meeting your net migration

target, you would have to get EU net migration down to what, 50,000?

We will be putting into place the immigration arrangements

for people coming from within the European Union that we believe

are in the interests of the United Kingdom.

So does that mean that if you conclude that it is not in

the interests of the United Kingdom to get net migration

from the EU down to 50,000, you will ditch the net migration

target, or would you give the net migration target priority over

what is in Britain's best interests in the negotiations?

This government will retain its intention

We set out very clearly for some time now that we believe

it is sustainable levels and sustainable levels

And we do that for very good reasons, because of the impact

that we believe immigration does have, that research has shown it

does have on people, particularly those at the lower end

I understand the reasons behind it, I understand the reason.

The question is what is your objective going forward?

You have a net migration target to get below the tens of thousands.

I'm asking you whether you are planning to meet that net migration

target through the Brexit negotiations and if so,

what are you aiming for on net EU migration?

If you've got to get it down from 189,000

to at least below 100,000, who do you want not to come?

and I have been clear about the Brexit negotiations.

The vote on the 23rd of June from people was that they wanted us

to have control of immigration, to put in place controls

on immigration for people coming from the European union.

We also want to ensure we get the best possible deal

for trading with and operating within the European Union.

One MP was not sure she had given a clear answer on giving Parliament

vote. Is it your intention that Parliament

should vote on a final deal once it's been negotiated,

this was a question And what I have said

is it is my intention that Parliament should have every

opportunity to consider What I'm also clear

about is to ensure that we actually deliver on the vote of the British

people which was about to leave OK, I'll leave you

to decide that one. And questions on another pressing

issue, social care. There is now around 1 million people

who should be entitled to social care who are not receiving it,

putting great pressure The reason, real-term spending

on social care fell by 9% To use the form of words

with which you might be familiar, do you agree that for social care,

crisis means crisis? As I have said, previously,

I accept that there are That is why the government has made

available the opportunity for local authorities,

as was set out in the local government finance settlement last

week, the opportunity for extra money to be available to be

spent on social care. But there is also a question

not just about those short-term pressures,

but in the medium term, ensuring that we are seeing delivery

and best practice being introduced in terms of delivery of social

care across the country. You talk about fewer people

being able to access social care. Actually there are many local

authorities around the country where we are now seeing more people

accessing social care. Clive Betts told her

he would be very interested Four years ago Rupert Murdoch failed

in his ambition to take full control He abandoned his plan

because of the public outcry over phone-hacking at one

of his newspapers, But now Mr Murdoch is having another

go at taking 100% ownership of Sky, There has been no formal

notification of the takeover bid. When that happens,

the Culture Secretary Karen Bradley will have ten days to decide

whether to refer the proposal to Karen Bradley told MPs that

because of her "quasi-judicial" role she would not be able

to comment further. But Ed Miliband -

who's been very critical of Rupert Murdoch before -

told the Commons it We're going into recess

until January ninth. And the bid may be notified

to government at any time. And it is very important,

Mr Speaker, that the House understands the reality that in even

launching this bid for 100% of Sky, the Murdochs are seeking to turn

the judgment of this House, the regulator and indeed

the country, on its head. In 2011 this House unanimously urged

the withdrawal of the bid In 2012 Ofcom published a damning

assessment of James Murdoch's behaviour in the running of News

International. Mr Speaker, that report only stopped

short of declaring Sky as unfit and improper to hold a licence

on the basis that the Murdochs were And James Murdoch was no longer

playing an executive role at Sky. Today, James Murdoch is back

as chairman of Sky and chief This bid shows the Murdochs have

learnt nothing and think they can If it was wrong for the Murdochs

to own 100% of Sky in 2011 I do not for one second

underestimate the huge public and parliamentary interest

in this proposed merger. As well as the importance of this

issue to the parties concerned. But the important thing

is that I must ensure, given my quasi-judicial role,

that I protect the integrity of the process and ensure that

as and when, if the formal notification is given,

that that is properly considered. I will be making no further

comments on the merit While there may well be a case

for asking the regulator to look at this bid,

will she also recognise that this represents a ?12 billion investment

into a British company and is a vote of confidence that Britain

will remain a centre of international broadcasting

after Britain leaves I know Christmas is a time for TV

repeats, but this one was not hit the first time around and it is no

more popular now. Mr Speaker, last week

the Minister of State told the House categorically

that the Prime Minister had not discussed this bid in her recent

New York meeting with Rupert Will the Secretary of State

repeat that assurance? How does she know, can she tell

us what was discussed? Because after all, Leveson

recommended that those Yesterday, Mr Speaker,

Rupert Murdoch wrote I have made it a principal

or my life never to ask for anything We will just pause to take that

in a moment, Mr Speaker. You will recall John Major's

testimony to the Leveson Inquiry in which he recalled Rupert Murdoch

asking him to change his And warning that, if we couldn't

change our European policies, his papers could not and would not

support the Conservative government. Does the Secretary of State

believe Rupert Murdoch, or the former Conservative Prime

Minister? He has asked specifically

about the meeting that the Prime She had a prearranged meeting

with Wall Street Journal editors. Mr Murdoch dropped into that meeting

and I can assure him that the proposed takeover

was not discussed. I'm not entirely sure that a company

controlled by Rupert Murdoch trying to buy another company largely

controlled by Rupert Murdoch is of the great public interest

that the Secretary of State seems This really is all about the party

opposite not liking Rupert Murdoch. If this was Richard Branson

in the same situation, they wouldn't be saying

a word about it. A substantial number

of my constituents have contacted me over the last week

regarding this bid. And they are all of the same

opinion, but Mr Murdoch has too much Many would like to see his bid

being referred to Ofcom Karen Bradley apologised,

saying she could not make comment on the process or the merits

of the bid. You're watching Tuesday

in Parliament, with me, The Foreign Affairs Committee

is investigating the UK's With events in Ukraine and Syria -

as well as Russia's engagement in cyber-warfare -

there's much to discuss. But at the start of the session,

the Europe Minister, Sir Alan Duncan, gave his reaction

to the murder of Russia's With fully condemn this, it is a

heinous attack and you can be assured the Foreign Office in the

proper way has been in contact with our Turkish and Russian counterparts

to express our condolences. The committee moved

on to Russia's interference There's a strong suggestion being

investigated by the CIA that the US election was interfered with by

Russia. And for example today the bar a memorandum of agreement signed

by the President Putin party with an Austrian party. There is an

undermining here of the values of liberal open-minded Western models

whether in the US or the European Union. And Russia is pursuing

asymmetric warfare to undermine solidarity of Nato and the European

Union. I think there is no doubt that using modern technology, they

are interfering in many parts of the world. We saw that in Montenegro as

well weather was a serious interference. Undeniably I think

Russian inspired in the democratic process in Montenegro. Quite what

the effect was, what exactly they did in the United States, it is

unclear. But I think there is no doubt and we have got to accept that

as a fact, that cyber warfare is now a part of modern life and the

Russians are using it as best they can in the political dimension. Not

just in the commercial one but there is political interference. We had

our difficulties with Alexander Litvinenko, there have been

impediments and also issues which we feel strongly about such as Ukraine

and subsequently Aleppo. We need to balance the respect they deserve

with firm talk about the things on which we thoroughly, of which we

thoroughly disapprove. So I hope that the balance of language and

action is finding its feet perhaps more than it has done in the past

and our attitude and it is in the paper I gave the committee, is one

of very firm views were we think they are behaving improperly such as

challenging other countries with their territorial integrity and

showing them the proper respect which are great nation is due. That

is the balance that perhaps we could strike better but that is the

balance we have got to strike. Labour's Ann Clwyd described

a meeting between the committee and the Russian ambassador to London

when the bombardment He was asked about the bombing of

hospitals and his answer to that was that there are no hospitals in

Aleppo. So we asked him, what are they then? You said they were

jihadists training camps. Now, how do you develop a dialogue when

people are dealing with so-called fair facts as opposed to our facts?

Yes, I like to think we and our politics live in a rational world

and we value the truth and one of the things that we set store by is

knowing when someone is not telling the truth. In this conflict, there

are clear and obvious occasions when people are not telling the truth and

saying black is white when it isn't. I think with the issue of Aleppo,

there are many such examples and they are very distressing. That is

where we have two show the courage and leadership to have clear views

and point out truth from fiction, and stand our ground. That, I hope,

is what the UK is doing. And we are having to do so, let's be absolutely

frank, with Russia in a number of areas. Aleppo and the Ukraine are

two examples. We will not be pushed around and told what we believe to

be the truth is not. We will advertise the truth and make it

clear. That is what we will do and that is one of our main weapons of

diplomacy. The Europe Minister,

Sir Alan Duncan. The government has admitted

that there are serious problems in the way the leasehold system

works in England and Wales. Conservative and Labour MPs

told the Commons some of their constituents had seen

ground rent charges rocket - in some cases to levels where their

houses became unsellable. What we are discussing today is

nothing short of a national scandal. It is the PPI of the house-building

industry. Every now and then, a sharp practice comes to light which

is totally unconscionable and which every reasonable person looking at

it would say, we cannot allow this to continue. Parliament must act.

This is one such occasion. The practice that has developed is to

sell new homes on a long-term lease with a misleading low grounds learnt

rent and buyout price. This practice has become, in my constituency over

the last few years and contrary to what is asserted by some developers,

it is not a tradition in my constituency. It now seems to be

part of the business model for a great many developers. It's a very

clever way of selling more units, dropping the asking price a little

to reflect the fact it is a leasehold but failed to make it

clear that in the long run, the homeowner will pay far, far more

than they would have done if the property had been freehold. My

calculation as if a ?250,000 house with a ground rent the doubles

over... Over 60 years, the successive leaseholders will have

paid.... That's in the first 60 years of release. Sadly, there are

too many bullies, cowboys and crooks and for the government to feel

comfortable with the legislation as it stands is unacceptable. We need

not only better regulation, we need not only better protection and

advice, we need legislation. There are millions of citizens out there

looking to their politicians, of whichever party, to remedy their

distress. With my right honourable friend agree that many people

entering these are the souls are entirely unaware that the landlords

have the power to make huge increases in ground rents and that

if this practice is deemed acceptable, at the very least,

tenants going into these agreements should have very clear information

about what the landlords can do, what their rights are and how they

can challenge them? When one has worked hard to save up to buy a

home, budgeted to be able to pay the costs needed to service any loan and

the other costs one reasonably accepts -- expects, when should then

expect security. For hard-working people, those who are doing the

right thing by investing their hard earned cash into buying a home, are

being ripped off, left right and centre. The government must act

urgently to stop this gross explication of hard-working

homeowners who are finding they cannot sell their homes. It seems to

me and to the Secretary of State to be one of those cases where there is

a gulf between the letter of the law and our sense of what is right. Some

of the cases we've seen in the media is heard about in today's debate

have highlighted some truly appalling behaviour. The secretary

of State and I have been looking closely at the issues raised in

recent weeks and I can tell the house that we are both absolutely

determined to stamp out unfair, unjust and unacceptable abuse of the

leasehold system. To the House of Lords now

where the day started The Leader of Lords, Lord Fowler,

announced a new inquiry into ways of reducing the size of the upper

chamber. On December five, the house debated

a motion on the size of the house. The motion sought agreement that the

house believes that its size should be reduced and methods should be

explored by which this could be achieved. 61 members spoke during

the debate and the motion was carried unanimously. If each of many

of the speeches that day was that we should not delay in such an

examination. Accordingly, and setting up a 6-member Lord's

speakers committee drawn entirely from the backbenches to examine the

possible methods by which the house could be reduced in size. I'm

pleased to announce that Lord Burns has agreed to chair the committee.

Other members of the committee will be Lord Spieth, Baroness Browning,

Baroness Crawley, Baroness Taylor of Bolton and Lord Wakeham. The

committee would get to work as soon as the house resumes after the

Christmas recess. I would just add that this is not an easy task but

hopefully, if this issue can be settled, the public will be better

able to recognise the true value of this size.

One of the roles that the Lords takes very seriously is debating

They're the means by which the Government can amend the law

Peers have been discussing a measure to increase the number of penalty

points imposed when a driver is caught using a mobile phone.

One peer said using a mobile phone was a "breach of good manners"

If the house will just indulge me, I will give my own experience with my

god daughter aged 21, who I took with her parents to the theatre in

Paris actually. Just about that time, it was a well-known singer in

France he was giving us an evening, and just as the star came on and the

lights went down, I'd goddaughter saw fit to send a text to somebody

which created a light on the machine. I quickly reminded her, you

may upset a few people here with a light, please put it off. She

ignored me and went on doing it. Despite his requests, she continued

using the phone. I reached my breaking point so I grabbed my bow

bile and I threw it into the audience, across the aisle. I saw it

bouncing off the head of maybe a Frenchman but it could have been

anyone, back into the aisle. She was totally astonished by my behaviour

and her aunt, who was also with us, said well done, well done. I've been

longing to do that for a long time. I can tell the noble Lords that my

god daughter the other day who is now 25, she was 21 at the time,

said, because I remarked she'd had a mobile with her, I said is that the

same one I threw into the audience? She said, yes it is, actually. That

was a salutary lesson. I've never forgotten it.

Lord Falkland on throwing mobile phones and the need

Well that's it from Tuesday in Parliament.

The Lords is sitting for one more day but the Commons has broken up

Although there won't be a daily round-up until the New Year it's

only good manners to point out that Alicia McCarthy will be

here on Wednesday night with a review of the last few months

But from me, Kristiina Cooper, it's goodbye - for now -