:00:23. > :00:28.Hello and welcome to Tuesday in Parliament. Our look at the best of
:00:29. > :00:34.the day in the Commons on the Lords. On this programme, another spanner
:00:35. > :00:37.in the works for ministers EU departures planned, peers vote for
:00:38. > :00:41.one more alteration to the government 's Brexit bill. It
:00:42. > :00:47.ensures that Parliament has the critical role in determining the
:00:48. > :00:53.future that we will bequeath to generations. I find it quite
:00:54. > :00:57.extraordinary that your lordship is spending hours here and basically
:00:58. > :01:01.what is an effective amendment. Ministers are urged to reconsider
:01:02. > :01:06.the ending of their policy to give lone refugee children sanctuary in
:01:07. > :01:10.Britain. They are opposed who are sure for safety. Closing the scheme
:01:11. > :01:16.will not stop that pull factor. Labour criticises the ending of
:01:17. > :01:20.automatic entitlement to housing benefit for 18-21 -year-olds. This
:01:21. > :01:24.will make significantly more young people forced to rough sleep in our
:01:25. > :01:29.country and will make them increasingly vulnerable. First, the
:01:30. > :01:34.Brexit bill has cleared the House of Lords but with two significant
:01:35. > :01:38.changes made by peers, the bill that starts the EU departure process must
:01:39. > :01:43.now return to the House of Commons, where MPs will either accept or
:01:44. > :01:47.reject the wishes of peers. Before its final stage of debate in the
:01:48. > :01:52.Lords, peers returned to the details of the built in two areas of
:01:53. > :01:55.contention in particular, first the Liberal Democrats propose the
:01:56. > :02:01.holding of a second referendum, once the terms of the UK's exiting an old
:02:02. > :02:12.and a Labour peer supported the idea saying many who voted leave in June
:02:13. > :02:14.last year might be starting to have second thoughts. We are going to be
:02:15. > :02:17.seeing huge tranches of money spent on trade negotiators seeking to
:02:18. > :02:21.reinstate immigration processes and any number of things that this will
:02:22. > :02:24.cost us and I think as people recognise that in fact our public
:02:25. > :02:29.services are going to see greater and greater depletion in the shadows
:02:30. > :02:34.of this Brexit movement, people are going to say, is this really what we
:02:35. > :02:38.wanted? It goes back to that thing, did people vote to become poorer?
:02:39. > :02:43.People voted to start the process and we get to the point where there
:02:44. > :02:50.is a deal, at that point, the people should decide finally on whether the
:02:51. > :02:55.deal is acceptable. There is no need, there would be no point or
:02:56. > :03:04.issue for having a third referendum after that second decisive
:03:05. > :03:11.referendum. Surely, we voted on leaving remaining, nothing else.
:03:12. > :03:16.People voted on 57 varieties of the future of this country. At the time
:03:17. > :03:22.of the European referendum last year, it is clear in my mind that
:03:23. > :03:27.the starting point for Liberal Democrats was as follows, there
:03:28. > :03:33.would be one referendum, it was not suggested for one moment that there
:03:34. > :03:36.would be two or three or four referendums. A former diplomat
:03:37. > :03:43.claimed government followers who are strongly against a second referendum
:03:44. > :03:47.were in the position of lemmings. The matter how awful the deal turns
:03:48. > :03:51.out to be, no matter how unlike the promises of the Leavers turns out to
:03:52. > :03:55.be, no matter how Steve the cliff or storming the sea, we must go over,
:03:56. > :04:01.there is no time to think again, no chance of turning back on any
:04:02. > :04:07.decision. I find that strangely reminiscent of the Moscow I worked
:04:08. > :04:14.in in 1968 when Soviet foreign policy ran on the Brezhnev doctrine.
:04:15. > :04:21.It said that once you have voted communists in, you cannot vote them
:04:22. > :04:23.out. The Ukip peers said the Liberal Democrats were grossly
:04:24. > :04:29.overrepresented in the House of Lords. If they use this dishonest
:04:30. > :04:34.advantage, by their own standards, by their own manifesto, if they use
:04:35. > :04:38.this dishonest advantage to vote down the will of the people, to vote
:04:39. > :04:45.down the will of the House of Commons and then my Lords, they will
:04:46. > :04:49.reveal their contempt for democracy. And it will do your Lordships house
:04:50. > :04:53.no good at all. The government should avoid an inclination to
:04:54. > :04:59.oversimplify the outcome of the most complex peacetime negotiations
:05:00. > :05:03.probably ever. Neither is the complexity of a further referendum a
:05:04. > :05:09.good way of dealing with the process. At the end of negotiation,
:05:10. > :05:15.it will add to our divisions, it will deepen the bitterness. It is
:05:16. > :05:18.not democratic, it is unwise. To call a second referendum as this
:05:19. > :05:23.amendment seeks to do it undermines the will of the people as expressed
:05:24. > :05:27.in the EU referendum. The people voted to leave the European Union
:05:28. > :05:31.and leave we will and I hope the noble Lords will withdraw their
:05:32. > :05:35.amendment. Despite that, the Liberal Democrats did put their proposal for
:05:36. > :05:43.another referendum to a vote but it was easily defeated, the peers voted
:05:44. > :05:48.against the proposal. That was just the start of the events today. The
:05:49. > :05:53.second big issue of the day centred on the role of Parliament when a
:05:54. > :05:58.final EU exit deal emerges in two years' time, it should MPs and peers
:05:59. > :06:03.get a decisive vote on that deal? Without help or hinder the EU
:06:04. > :06:06.negotiations? And what if a parliamentary vote rejected the
:06:07. > :06:12.deal? The essence of this amendment is clear and it has been clear from
:06:13. > :06:19.the start. It simply seeks to ensure that Parliament and not ministers
:06:20. > :06:25.have control over the terms of our withdrawal at the end of the
:06:26. > :06:31.negotiating process. We now face the most momentous piece time decision
:06:32. > :06:37.of our time. And this amendment, as the noble Lord has so clearly set
:06:38. > :06:42.out, secure as in law, the government's commitment, already
:06:43. > :06:46.made to another place, to ensure that Parliament is the ultimate
:06:47. > :06:51.custodian of our national sovereignty. It ensures that
:06:52. > :06:58.Parliament has the critical role in determining the future that we will
:06:59. > :07:03.bequeath to generations of young people and I urge your Lordships to
:07:04. > :07:06.support the amendment. A former Tory leader said that MPs would have
:07:07. > :07:11.their say regardless, it did not need to be in the Brexit bill. They
:07:12. > :07:14.do not even need the authority of my right honourable friend the Prime
:07:15. > :07:21.Minister for that. They certainly do not need this new clause for that.
:07:22. > :07:27.They do not need any authority of that. They will have their say, they
:07:28. > :07:31.will have their way. The only assurance we are going to have is by
:07:32. > :07:38.putting this on the face of the bill. My Lords, the government has
:07:39. > :07:42.not got the former over this, they have not got good form. They went
:07:43. > :07:45.into the Supreme Court after the High Court had told them what the
:07:46. > :07:52.judgment should be and they foolishly went on, in my view, so we
:07:53. > :07:55.need this on the face of the bill because the government has form in
:07:56. > :08:01.bypassing Parliament and we need to know that that will not happen
:08:02. > :08:05.again. Why would we deny Parliament the heart of our democracy, the
:08:06. > :08:12.authority to approve or push for a better deal, rather than accepting
:08:13. > :08:17.no deal without a proper state? This Parliamentary route, giving
:08:18. > :08:21.Parliament a meaningful final vote is my preferred option. So we get to
:08:22. > :08:25.the final hour at midnight when the deal has been done and the Prime
:08:26. > :08:30.Minister says hang on, I cannot agree a deal, I have to consult the
:08:31. > :08:37.House of Commons, it is ridiculous. It is a ridiculous proposal to
:08:38. > :08:39.suggest... It is not the Prime Minister's proposal, it is
:08:40. > :08:43.ridiculous to say that the Prime Minister may not conclude an
:08:44. > :08:48.agreement until this has been sorted. This is putting an
:08:49. > :08:57.assurance, an undertaking even by the Prime Minister into a statutory
:08:58. > :09:02.obligation and it is wise and sensible so to do. If you
:09:03. > :09:05.contemplate what might happen in two years' time, you will see only two
:09:06. > :09:11.sadly that sovereignty lies with Europe. If this house or the other
:09:12. > :09:16.house were to reject the deal, we would end up as puppets in their
:09:17. > :09:20.hands. Cannot honestly be imagined that if one or other house, whether
:09:21. > :09:25.it is approval or act of Parliament goes back to Europe in just under
:09:26. > :09:30.two years' time and says we do not like the deal, that the other 27
:09:31. > :09:36.will say, oh dear, here is a much better one? Or that they will say,
:09:37. > :09:47.let us all 27 now agreed to extend the negotiation time? I don't think
:09:48. > :09:50.that is the case. I feel that during the referendum, we did vote for
:09:51. > :09:52.taking back control and it seems to me that taking back control does not
:09:53. > :09:56.mean giving such momentous decision about the UK to a tiny cohort of
:09:57. > :10:01.politicians. I find it extraordinary that your Lordships house is
:10:02. > :10:07.spending several hours here on what is basically a defective amendment!
:10:08. > :10:10.There are better ways, he is incapable of putting down an
:10:11. > :10:16.amendment that is in order, then so be it! He is a highly creative
:10:17. > :10:23.lawyer and there are other lawyers looking who come perhaps produce an
:10:24. > :10:29.amendment that is not defective. I ask your Lordships to rest on the
:10:30. > :10:34.long contest a principle that this country's future should rest with
:10:35. > :10:40.Parliament. And not with ministers. It is in that spirit that I content,
:10:41. > :10:44.commend, this new clause to the Lordships house. The government
:10:45. > :10:49.cannot possibly accept an amendment which is so unclear on an issue of
:10:50. > :10:54.this importance on what the Prime Minister is to do if Parliament
:10:55. > :10:58.votes against leaving with no agreement. The parliamentary vote we
:10:59. > :11:03.have promised will be a meaningful vote, we will leave with a deal or
:11:04. > :11:07.we will leave without a deal. That is the choice on offer. But the
:11:08. > :11:12.choice offered by this amendment by Klaus four is unclear. At the end of
:11:13. > :11:18.the debate, peers voted decisively for the amendment to the Brexit bill
:11:19. > :11:23.requiring an meaningful Parliamentary vote on the final exit
:11:24. > :11:33.deal. My Lords, they have voted contends, 366, not contends to 68,
:11:34. > :11:38.so the content habit. And so those peers changes to the bill must now
:11:39. > :11:42.be considered by MPs. Meanwhile in the Commons, ministers have seen off
:11:43. > :11:47.a potential Conservative rebellion on the issue of unaccompanied child
:11:48. > :11:51.refugees. The Tory MP Heidi Allen put forward a proposal requiring
:11:52. > :11:55.councils to state how many children they could take but MPs voted
:11:56. > :11:59.narrowly against her plan. Last month there was an angry reaction to
:12:00. > :12:04.the news the government was ending the scheme that allowed vulnerable
:12:05. > :12:09.refugee children to come to Britain. The scheme was named after the
:12:10. > :12:14.Labour peer Lord dubs. Campaigners hope that 3000 would be given
:12:15. > :12:18.sanctuary but only 350 have been taken. The Home Secretary said that
:12:19. > :12:22.the programme rest being an incentive for refuge street children
:12:23. > :12:26.to make perilous sea crossings to Europe. The government has a great
:12:27. > :12:30.record in the region but for me and many in this house the remains a big
:12:31. > :12:33.issue in Europe that stopped been addressed on how we safeguard
:12:34. > :12:36.children had that might come to us from Europe and that is a matter
:12:37. > :12:52.close to our hearts. Since the government
:12:53. > :12:55.announced that the Dubbs Scheme scheme would be close, local
:12:56. > :12:58.authorities have stepped forward and said they can do more. If that
:12:59. > :12:59.capacity is there, safeguarding strategy and something that extracts
:13:00. > :13:02.that information from local authorities on a regular basis, it
:13:03. > :13:04.is powerful information and we must know what. Just to remind ourselves,
:13:05. > :13:06.Lewisham said they could take 23 children and they have been someone.
:13:07. > :13:10.Gloucestershire would like ten but only have received two, the small
:13:11. > :13:14.numbers add up. Does she agree that local authorities are already
:13:15. > :13:17.reviewing capacity on a week by week basis and this is very evident when
:13:18. > :13:23.we look at the number of referrals that are coming out of London to
:13:24. > :13:26.look after our own British children. Does she accept that actually this
:13:27. > :13:33.is something that local authorities are taking part in everyday of the
:13:34. > :13:36.week? I do. That is what has borne this debate for me, they have said
:13:37. > :13:41.they are struggling and others have said they have got capacity. Somehow
:13:42. > :13:45.we are not joining those conversations together and for the
:13:46. > :13:49.benefit of these refugee children and children in care, I know there
:13:50. > :13:56.is further capacity out there. The pool factor is safety. There are
:13:57. > :14:02.Afghan children running from the Taliban, Sudanese children running
:14:03. > :14:06.from rape and murder, indeed, they are pulled to assure for safety.
:14:07. > :14:10.Closing the Dubbs Scheme will not stop that factor but it will make
:14:11. > :14:16.the traffic is the most attractive proposition that those children have
:14:17. > :14:18.an crucially, amendment one and new clause 14 identify our
:14:19. > :14:23.responsibility to involve them in the safeguarding process and involve
:14:24. > :14:26.not just the Home Office but the Department for Education. Surely
:14:27. > :14:30.what the government should do is seek the further advice of the
:14:31. > :14:35.expert anti-slavery commissioner, before it makes any changes and
:14:36. > :14:39.closes the scheme and if it wants to persist in this view, at least
:14:40. > :14:42.tested against the evidence and not just the many organisations and
:14:43. > :14:46.charities who have been arguing so strongly on the basis of the work
:14:47. > :14:51.that they themselves are doing with children and young people across
:14:52. > :14:58.Europe and other places as well who are at risk of trafficking and who
:14:59. > :15:07.are at risk of being sucked into exploitation and sexual abuse.
:15:08. > :15:13.The government has committed to a statement. We have been consulting
:15:14. > :15:19.local authorities about their capacity and will set out plans to
:15:20. > :15:24.boost capacity for foster carers and supported lodgings. We will continue
:15:25. > :15:27.to consult with local authorities about their capacity to support
:15:28. > :15:32.asylum seeking and refugee children in order to identify those
:15:33. > :15:38.authorities most able to support unaccompanied children. The minister
:15:39. > :15:43.added he was happy to give MPs regular updates on the number of
:15:44. > :15:52.children resettled in the UK. The Commons rejected the proposal 287
:15:53. > :15:56.votes to 267, a majority of 20. You're watching our round-up of the
:15:57. > :16:01.day in the Commons and the Lords. Still to come, is it fair to
:16:02. > :16:03.reinvestigate events of 40 years ago during the dark days of the Northern
:16:04. > :16:12.Ireland troubles? Labour is claiming that ending the
:16:13. > :16:19.automatic entitlement to housing benefit for 18 to 21-year-olds is a
:16:20. > :16:23.nasty, vindictive policy. The proposal within the Conservative's
:16:24. > :16:28.2015 election manifesto and a statement last week confirmed the
:16:29. > :16:34.policy will go ahead from April. It could affect 10,000 youngsters and
:16:35. > :16:40.is expected to save ?105 million in this Parliament. Answering an urgent
:16:41. > :16:44.question, a minister defended the policy. It removes the incentive to
:16:45. > :16:55.leave the family home and pass the cost onto the taxpayer.
:16:56. > :16:59.About stopping young people slipping straight into a life on benefits and
:17:00. > :17:02.brings parity with young people in work but who may not be up to leave
:17:03. > :17:04.the family home one unemployed young person can. She said the policy
:17:05. > :17:07.would have interventions, including care leavers, those with children
:17:08. > :17:11.and apprentices. Labour said many housing charities had concerns.
:17:12. > :17:15.Surely the Minister does not think these charities are wrong. If she
:17:16. > :17:19.knows they are right, surely the government is not going to go ahead
:17:20. > :17:24.with these cruel and counter-productive cuts. This is
:17:25. > :17:29.about levelling the playing field? These young people who are old
:17:30. > :17:34.enough to marry, work, pay taxes, fight for our country, will now be
:17:35. > :17:38.denied the same right to basic help with housing costs as any British
:17:39. > :17:43.adults. Does she think an unemployed young adult is more likely to get a
:17:44. > :17:46.job if they have a stable address or if they are living in a hostel or
:17:47. > :17:52.sleeping on the streets? We should call this for what it is. A nasty,
:17:53. > :17:56.vindictive policy that will make injustice worse from a government
:17:57. > :18:00.who said they would tackle burning injustice. The key point about
:18:01. > :18:06.nipping it in the Bard is important because once it takes hold it could
:18:07. > :18:10.be damaging. Young people can be forgiven, they may think this is
:18:11. > :18:15.fair, but when we do this and we protect every single penny going to
:18:16. > :18:19.pensioners, including in winter fuel allowance the millionaires just
:18:20. > :18:23.because they are over 65, they can be forgiven for thinking we are not
:18:24. > :18:27.playing fair to everybody. What we are trying to do is play fairly for
:18:28. > :18:30.the those young people in work and having to make the decision that
:18:31. > :18:37.they cannot afford to leave this family home and stay living with
:18:38. > :18:40.their parents. I'm working on homelessness in Greater Manchester.
:18:41. > :18:45.I went round the streets of Manchester and was shocked to see
:18:46. > :18:49.the risk young people face from the dealing of psychoactive substances
:18:50. > :18:53.and the threat from violence. Does the Honourable lady not understand
:18:54. > :18:58.this will make significantly more young people forced to rough sleep
:18:59. > :19:00.in our country and will make those young people increasingly
:19:01. > :19:04.vulnerable? Is this not the personification of the return of the
:19:05. > :19:09.nasty party? The honourable gentleman makes the assumption that
:19:10. > :19:20.this will increase homelessness. What we expect is behavioural change
:19:21. > :19:22.and young people, where they can, to stay living with their parents. When
:19:23. > :19:25.they cannot stay living with their parents, they will be exempt from
:19:26. > :19:27.this policy. When it was announced in December that the Police Service
:19:28. > :19:32.of Northern Ireland were proposing to examine all 302 killings by
:19:33. > :19:36.British troops during the Northern Ireland troubles the decision was
:19:37. > :19:39.denounced in some quarters as a witchhunt. The Commons defence
:19:40. > :19:45.committee is now looking at whether the government can protect British
:19:46. > :19:47.soldiers from what the Conservative chair Julian Lewis called
:19:48. > :19:52.persecution 40 years after the events. Doctor Lewis broke in on the
:19:53. > :19:57.questioning by a Conservative member to tease out what he saw as the
:19:58. > :20:01.double standards being applied. If a terrorist has killed 16 people and
:20:02. > :20:07.they get prosecuted, they are let out after two years. Is that right?
:20:08. > :20:10.Whereas if a soldier has killed one person, wrongly, and they are
:20:11. > :20:16.prosecuted, they serve a life sentence. Do you see the imbalance
:20:17. > :20:27.that appears to the average man on the street? Plainly balance is what
:20:28. > :20:31.is needed. If there are imbalances, that's a problem. There are and it's
:20:32. > :20:38.a problem so what do we do about it? That's what we are talking about.
:20:39. > :20:42.What in the legal world can we do about that? A law professor
:20:43. > :20:47.suggested the solution might lie outside the scope of the criminal
:20:48. > :20:51.law. The way these things have worked in other jurisdictions is
:20:52. > :20:55.variations on mechanisms of truth and reconciliation in which people
:20:56. > :20:59.come forward with information and as part of the providing of that
:21:00. > :21:03.information, they are effectively take themselves out from the
:21:04. > :21:07.criminal process system. That has worked in several jurisdictions.
:21:08. > :21:11.It's more cost effective, it tends to create harmony rather than
:21:12. > :21:17.discord, it's quicker, cheaper, if you can get and this is a crucial
:21:18. > :21:22.point, if you can get the political will by the participants. If they
:21:23. > :21:25.can't agree between themselves in the relation to crimes between
:21:26. > :21:31.Republicans and loyalists, is that an option for us to do justice to
:21:32. > :21:35.the soldiers? Coming back to the realities of what you can do is
:21:36. > :21:40.legislating chamber, you can do whatever you want, you are
:21:41. > :21:44.sovereign. Would it be wise? Absolutely not, you would exacerbate
:21:45. > :21:47.the disharmony. He said the need to achieve a balanced approach was
:21:48. > :21:51.crucial. Some people call it one of the most
:21:52. > :21:55.beautiful walks in the world. The coast-to-coast walk stretches for
:21:56. > :21:59.190 miles across northern England from the Cumbrian coast near
:22:00. > :22:06.Whitehaven to the Yorkshire coast near Whitby it takes at least ten
:22:07. > :22:09.days to complete if you are fit, but it has no official status. A North
:22:10. > :22:15.Yorkshire MP has explained why it's high time to give the walk official
:22:16. > :22:19.recognition. Across mountains and fells, wandering through valleys and
:22:20. > :22:24.villages, it is an inspirational crossing of the North of England. It
:22:25. > :22:27.might seem self-evident that the coast-to-coast walk would be one of
:22:28. > :22:33.Britain's 50 official national trails. It is, however, with regret
:22:34. > :22:37.that I report that this remarkable route is yet to be officially
:22:38. > :22:41.recognised and has not taken its rightful place alongside what are in
:22:42. > :22:46.many cases far less celebrated walks. Despite its renown and the
:22:47. > :22:51.thousands that walk it every year, the coast-to-coast does not even
:22:52. > :22:56.appear on Ordnance Survey maps. He said parts of the walk had got over
:22:57. > :23:02.warm. Areas of the past have become virtually owned walkable and with
:23:03. > :23:07.National Trail status we can insure its kept as safe as possible, giving
:23:08. > :23:11.people the confidence to undertake one of Britain's most magnificent
:23:12. > :23:15.journeys. Money is the issue with designating new national trails. I
:23:16. > :23:20.know that natural England have indicated to him that while they
:23:21. > :23:25.support the idea of designating the coast-to-coast path as a National
:23:26. > :23:30.Trail, it currently has no plans to designate any new national trails.
:23:31. > :23:34.At the moment the government's priority is to develop coastal
:23:35. > :23:46.access proposals under the Marine and coastal access
:23:47. > :23:50.at 2009 for the England coast path. George Eustice. Finally, NMP
:23:51. > :23:52.believes it's only right and proper that we all enjoy an extra bank
:23:53. > :23:55.holiday this year. Why? Simple. Now 65 years since the moment when the
:23:56. > :23:58.young Princess Elizabeth became Queen Elizabeth II. Her long reign
:23:59. > :24:02.on the throne means that Queen has gone past her silver jubilee, her
:24:03. > :24:05.gold in the throne means that Queen has gone past her silver jubilee,
:24:06. > :24:10.her golden and her diamond jubilee. So she has now reached her, you've
:24:11. > :24:14.got it, her sapphire jubilee. Just as previous dew believes have been
:24:15. > :24:20.celebrated far and wide, it must surely be right that the sapphire
:24:21. > :24:24.jubilee is too. In fact, I say to this house that Her Majesty's
:24:25. > :24:32.sapphire jubilee should be the greatest jubilee of all is no other
:24:33. > :24:37.monarch has reached 65 years on the throne. And it is inconceivable that
:24:38. > :24:42.any future king or queen will accomplish such an achievement for
:24:43. > :24:47.centuries to come. We must not allow this year to pass by without a
:24:48. > :24:51.celebration befitting the occasion. Saluting Her Majesty for all she has
:24:52. > :24:56.done for our nation and the wider commonwealth. A Labour MP described
:24:57. > :25:00.what happened in previous years when extra bank holidays were granted.
:25:01. > :25:06.Before the diamond jubilee I wrote to the then Prime Minister David
:25:07. > :25:10.Cameron. His reply, unfortunately, was unhelpful, merely restating the
:25:11. > :25:15.NHS management view. We were left with a situation where Hyde working,
:25:16. > :25:25.dedicated NHS staff who gave up their days off in order to provide a
:25:26. > :25:28.vital service were not adequately remunerated and I do not want to see
:25:29. > :25:30.this happen again with this new bill. But despite that, the bill got
:25:31. > :25:33.the initial approval of MPs. Very little chance of it becoming law so
:25:34. > :25:37.don't get your hopes up for that extra bank on a day.
:25:38. > :25:42.That's it for this programme, but join me for our next daily round-up
:25:43. > :25:47.when we'll have all the news of the Chancellor's Budget. Until then,
:25:48. > :25:49.from me, Keith mac Dougal, goodbye.