0:00:19 > 0:00:21Hello there, and welcome to Tuesday In Parliament,
0:00:21 > 0:00:23where the government faces more questions over the collapse
0:00:23 > 0:00:26of the construction firm Carillion.
0:00:26 > 0:00:28At this stage, there are real suspicions that the government
0:00:28 > 0:00:33was too close to this company, and to wedded to its
0:00:33 > 0:00:35was too close to this company, and too wedded to its
0:00:35 > 0:00:36privatisation role.
0:00:36 > 0:00:39The government is dealing with this in a responsible and measured
0:00:39 > 0:00:41way, rather than making cheap political shots.
0:00:41 > 0:00:46MPs resumed debate on the bill that transfers EU laws
0:00:46 > 0:00:49on to the UK statute book, and focus on the environment.
0:00:49 > 0:00:55And there are calls for celebrities to way into the fight
0:00:55 > 0:00:58And there are calls for celebrities to weigh in to the fight
0:00:58 > 0:00:59against childhood obesity.
0:00:59 > 0:01:03It is not just a coincidence of scheduling that these type of ads
0:01:03 > 0:01:05are run alongside some of our biggest TV shows,
0:01:05 > 0:01:07such as The X Factor, Britain's Got Talent,
0:01:07 > 0:01:08I'm A Celebrity, Hollyoaks, or The Simpsons.
0:01:08 > 0:01:10But first, the government has ordered a fast-track investigation
0:01:10 > 0:01:13into directors at the failed construction giant Carillion.
0:01:13 > 0:01:20The company went into liquidation on Monday after running up losses
0:01:20 > 0:01:23on contracts and struggling with heavy debts.
0:01:23 > 0:01:25The Business Secretary has asked for an investigation by the official
0:01:25 > 0:01:27receiver to be broadened and speeded up.
0:01:27 > 0:01:30Facing questions in the Commons, the Chancellor was asked
0:01:30 > 0:01:34about the effect of Carillion's collapse on the taxpayer.
0:01:34 > 0:01:39But yesterday, the Treasury approved a minute providing for a contingent
0:01:39 > 0:01:43liability on Carillion, for which we've had no estimate,
0:01:43 > 0:01:47so could the Chancellor please explain to the House what sort
0:01:47 > 0:01:50of expenditure is going to be covered?
0:01:50 > 0:01:52I see he's given an indemnity to the receiver.
0:01:52 > 0:01:56And how he's going to report to the house on how much
0:01:56 > 0:01:59money the government is going to be liable for?
0:01:59 > 0:02:01Yes, Mr Speaker.
0:02:01 > 0:02:03The government has given an indemnity to the official
0:02:03 > 0:02:06receiver in order to take on the role of special manager
0:02:06 > 0:02:12of the assets of Carillion to ensure continuity of public services
0:02:12 > 0:02:15in the many schools, hospitals, local authorities,
0:02:16 > 0:02:18that have contracts with Carillion.
0:02:18 > 0:02:22And what the Treasury has done is provided the official receiver
0:02:22 > 0:02:25with a line of credit that enables the official receiver's office
0:02:25 > 0:02:27to operate the company's public sector contracts,
0:02:27 > 0:02:34recovering the cost in due course from the department that would have
0:02:34 > 0:02:38paid fees for those services anyway, but the official receiver is only
0:02:38 > 0:02:42able to step in and do this with the Treasury's underwriting,
0:02:42 > 0:02:44and we deemed it appropriate to give that underwriting.
0:02:44 > 0:02:46Neil Gray.
0:02:46 > 0:02:48Mr Speaker, clearly, there is an element of risk,
0:02:48 > 0:02:51not just from government borrowing, but from the borrowing of companies
0:02:51 > 0:02:53against the UK Government.
0:02:53 > 0:02:56Can the Chancellor therefore advise the House what exposure his
0:02:56 > 0:02:59government has from lending to Carillion via the likes of UK
0:02:59 > 0:03:03Export Finance or George Osborne's direct lending scheme?
0:03:03 > 0:03:12I'm not aware of any direct exposure of HMG as a creditor of Carillion.
0:03:12 > 0:03:14I put it no stronger than this, Mr Speaker.
0:03:14 > 0:03:18At this stage, there are real suspicions that the government
0:03:18 > 0:03:20was too close to this company, and too wedded to its
0:03:20 > 0:03:23privatisation role. We need full transparency
0:03:23 > 0:03:26of the meetings and discussions that took place between government
0:03:26 > 0:03:30ministers, civil servants, and representatives of Carillion,
0:03:30 > 0:03:33and what warnings were given to ministers, and what actions
0:03:33 > 0:03:36recommended implemented or not.
0:03:36 > 0:03:39We now need the Treasury to start playing its proper role,
0:03:39 > 0:03:42and provide an independent assessment of the potential costs
0:03:43 > 0:03:46and risks facing the taxpayer.
0:03:46 > 0:03:48It's already been referred to.
0:03:48 > 0:03:51The SCA Cabinet Office minutes was published after the statement
0:03:51 > 0:03:53establishing a contingent liability.
0:03:53 > 0:03:57We urgently need to know from the Treasury,
0:03:57 > 0:04:03what is the potential range of costs now facing the taxpayer?
0:04:03 > 0:04:05Chief Secretary.
0:04:05 > 0:04:07Well, first of all, we publish all of those minutes,
0:04:07 > 0:04:09all of those details of meetings already.
0:04:09 > 0:04:11We are a transparent government.
0:04:11 > 0:04:13We make decisions in an objective fashion.
0:04:13 > 0:04:17Those decisions are signed off by the Treasury and they are signed
0:04:17 > 0:04:21off by the Cabinet Office, and recent decisions on Carillion
0:04:21 > 0:04:25contracts have been made on the basis of joint and several
0:04:25 > 0:04:29liability to make sure the taxpayer is protected.
0:04:29 > 0:04:32We always look for value for money in the way
0:04:32 > 0:04:35that we set up our contracts, and I think that the government
0:04:35 > 0:04:39is dealing with this in a responsible and measured way,
0:04:39 > 0:04:44rather than making cheap political shots at a time...
0:04:44 > 0:04:48At a time when people's jobs are in question
0:04:48 > 0:04:51and we are working to sort that out.
0:04:51 > 0:04:52Liz Truss.
0:04:52 > 0:04:55Now, after a break for Christmas, MPs returned to the debate
0:04:55 > 0:04:59on the EU (Withdrawal) Bill, the legislation that moves European
0:04:59 > 0:05:04rules and regulations on to the UK statute book to start a legislative
0:05:04 > 0:05:07rules and regulations on to the UK statute book to stop a legislative
0:05:07 > 0:05:09black hole opening up after Brexit.
0:05:09 > 0:05:12MPs are now holding their final debates on the bill before it goes
0:05:12 > 0:05:13off to the House of Lords.
0:05:13 > 0:05:16The Green Party MP Caroline Lucas made another attempt to transfer
0:05:16 > 0:05:19the idea of animal sentience into UK domestic law.
0:05:19 > 0:05:23EU treaty law says governments must have regard to animal sentience,
0:05:23 > 0:05:28in other words, their awareness of their feelings or pain.
0:05:28 > 0:05:30The government here says it wants to transfer
0:05:30 > 0:05:33that into UK law later, in a separate bill.
0:05:33 > 0:05:37But Caroline Lucas did not want to wait for that.
0:05:37 > 0:05:41I don't have confidence - maybe those on the other side do -
0:05:41 > 0:05:44but I don't have confidence that this new bill, brought forward
0:05:44 > 0:05:48by the Secretary of State, is likely to be on the statute books
0:05:48 > 0:05:52by the time we leave the EU, if that's what happens.
0:05:52 > 0:05:55I simply want to make sure that there is legislative certainty,
0:05:55 > 0:05:58belt and braces, by making sure that we have my amendment
0:05:58 > 0:06:01in that EU bill as well.
0:06:01 > 0:06:04Would she not agree with me that perhaps a bird in hand,
0:06:04 > 0:06:08in other words, her proposal, is much better than two in the bush,
0:06:08 > 0:06:11and of course, would it be cruel of me to remind the house
0:06:11 > 0:06:14that the Secretary of State for DEFRA, of course,
0:06:14 > 0:06:18is on record having made a solemn pledge to support, in this case,
0:06:18 > 0:06:21the Foreign Secretary in his bid to be leader,
0:06:21 > 0:06:26but then ended up stabbing him repeatedly in the front?
0:06:26 > 0:06:31We can do better on animal welfare than the EU
0:06:31 > 0:06:32currently allows us to do.
0:06:32 > 0:06:34Foie gras, for example, is prohibited in this country,
0:06:34 > 0:06:37but we can't stop it being imported in from those who make it,
0:06:37 > 0:06:40such as Belgium, France, etc, in the EU, because it's against free
0:06:40 > 0:06:41movement of goods.
0:06:41 > 0:06:44And wouldn't she agree that it's this side of the house that actually
0:06:44 > 0:06:47is now putting in tougher sentencing on animal welfare breaches,
0:06:47 > 0:06:49and that's where we should be focusing on, rather than looking
0:06:49 > 0:06:51at the past?
0:06:51 > 0:06:52Well said.
0:06:52 > 0:06:54Well, I thank him for his intervention.
0:06:54 > 0:06:58I think I would certainly agree that the new laws on sentencing
0:06:58 > 0:07:01are certainly to be welcomed, but I don't see why we have
0:07:01 > 0:07:02to have an either/or.
0:07:02 > 0:07:08What I am simply trying to do is to make sure
0:07:08 > 0:07:10that there isn't a legislative gap.
0:07:10 > 0:07:12But Caroline Lucas failed to get her amendment through.
0:07:12 > 0:07:17Earlier, a Labour MP put forward her amendment,
0:07:17 > 0:07:18preserving all environmental protections currently
0:07:18 > 0:07:20provided by the EU.
0:07:20 > 0:07:22This new clause seeks only to properly realise the government's
0:07:22 > 0:07:25stated ambition for this bill, which it has repeatedly assured us
0:07:25 > 0:07:28of during this process, that the same rules and laws
0:07:28 > 0:07:32will apply after we leave EU as they did before.
0:07:32 > 0:07:35will apply after we leave the EU as they did before.
0:07:35 > 0:07:38We have been promised a green Brexit, and told that leaving the EU
0:07:38 > 0:07:40will not threaten the health of people or nature.
0:07:40 > 0:07:43So why is their opposition to amending this bill to make those
0:07:43 > 0:07:44promises legally binding?
0:07:44 > 0:07:47Another Labour MP pointed to what he said were lower welfare
0:07:47 > 0:07:49standards in the United States.
0:07:49 > 0:07:52What I find very perplexing is, honourable members opposite who say
0:07:52 > 0:07:56that their salvation is going to be a trade deal with President Trump
0:07:56 > 0:08:01and with the United States, but of course, we all know
0:08:01 > 0:08:04that the United States' primary goal, their driver,
0:08:04 > 0:08:09will be to have a treaty in respect of agriculture.
0:08:09 > 0:08:12If we do a deal... I will give way in a moment.
0:08:12 > 0:08:16If we do that deal on agriculture, the Americans will want to sell
0:08:16 > 0:08:20products in, animal products, that have come under
0:08:20 > 0:08:24low welfare standards, and lower regulatory standards.
0:08:24 > 0:08:28lower welfare standards, and lower regulatory standards.
0:08:28 > 0:08:31That will be the nature of the deal they are seeking.
0:08:31 > 0:08:33If the Secretary of State for the environment,
0:08:33 > 0:08:36though, has said, no, no, that is absolutely not the case,
0:08:36 > 0:08:38we're going to have exactly the same regulatory standards that we have
0:08:38 > 0:08:41now, he is effectively telling the Americans, "no trade deal".
0:08:41 > 0:08:44On the subject of animal welfare, you know, at Dover and at Ramsgate
0:08:44 > 0:08:47in East Kent, we have to put up with the evil and wicked trade
0:08:47 > 0:08:50of live animal exports, and we have to do that
0:08:50 > 0:08:53because of European law, and we see an opportunity for our area,
0:08:53 > 0:08:57for our communities, for animal welfare,
0:08:57 > 0:09:00in stopping that evil trade, by leaving the European Union
0:09:00 > 0:09:03so we will be able to take back control.
0:09:03 > 0:09:05But Caroline Lucas argued that ministers could have stopped live
0:09:06 > 0:09:08animal exports already.
0:09:08 > 0:09:11They could have done it if they had the political will, but secondly,
0:09:11 > 0:09:14if the government wants to persuade us that they care as much
0:09:14 > 0:09:16about animal welfare as they claim to, then why on earth
0:09:16 > 0:09:19would they oppose this amendment?
0:09:19 > 0:09:24It simply makes sure that we do not have a gap when we leave the EU
0:09:24 > 0:09:28and before the new bill, if it happens, comes in.
0:09:28 > 0:09:31We have here a problem which ought, in fact, to unite both sides
0:09:31 > 0:09:37of the house as to how we best go about retaining what
0:09:37 > 0:09:39is best of EU law.
0:09:39 > 0:09:44And though we have made some steps in the right direction,
0:09:44 > 0:09:48I have to say that I regret that I don't think we have yet got
0:09:48 > 0:09:52anywhere near enough to the point where I can feel really comfortable
0:09:52 > 0:09:56that we've done this as well as we should.
0:09:57 > 0:09:58You're watching Tuesday in Parliament, with me,
0:09:59 > 0:10:01Alicia McCarthy.
0:10:05 > 0:10:08Now, more whiplash and personal injury cases in England could be
0:10:08 > 0:10:13dealt with by Small Claims Court, if the government gets its way.
0:10:13 > 0:10:16Ministers wants to increase to £5000 and £2000 respectively the value
0:10:16 > 0:10:19Ministers want to increase to £5000 and £2000 respectively the value
0:10:19 > 0:10:22of the claims which can be dealt with in this way.
0:10:22 > 0:10:25Small Claims Courts deal with lower value cases for a lower
0:10:25 > 0:10:27cost, but there are caps on the compensation that can be
0:10:27 > 0:10:30awarded, and many claimants represent themselves.
0:10:30 > 0:10:35Lord Keane explained the government's thinking.
0:10:35 > 0:10:41As regards what are sometimes termed whiplash claims -
0:10:41 > 0:10:45it's a somewhat misleading term, whiplash is a cause,
0:10:45 > 0:10:47a soft spinal injury or soft neck injury is the effect -
0:10:47 > 0:10:50most of these are relatively straightforward in the context
0:10:50 > 0:10:51of causation, for example.
0:10:51 > 0:10:54In other words, liability is not normally a significant issue.
0:10:54 > 0:11:01The issue is the extent of injury and any consequent loss
0:11:01 > 0:11:05in the context of wage loss and other things, and these can,
0:11:05 > 0:11:08we believe, be adequately dealt with under the small claims
0:11:08 > 0:11:15procedure, particularly as it is being further developed.
0:11:15 > 0:11:20And that is why we consider it appropriate to increase
0:11:20 > 0:11:21that limit to 5000, which would cover
0:11:21 > 0:11:23about 95% of all claims.
0:11:23 > 0:11:25He explained why he thought there was a problem.
0:11:25 > 0:11:27The safety of vehicles in this country has improved enormously
0:11:27 > 0:11:29in the last ten years.
0:11:29 > 0:11:33The Thatcham assessment of safe car seats, and this
0:11:33 > 0:11:38is relevant to whiplash injury, has moved from a new car number
0:11:38 > 0:11:43of about 12% in 2006 to 88% in 2016.
0:11:43 > 0:11:48So there has been a vast improvement in safety of vehicles.
0:11:48 > 0:11:52In the same period, the number of road traffic accidents has
0:11:52 > 0:11:55dropped by more than 25%.
0:11:55 > 0:12:02In the same period, the number of claims for whiplash-related
0:12:02 > 0:12:07injury has not moved in a downward direction at all.
0:12:07 > 0:12:13It remains at about 85-90% of all road traffic claims,
0:12:13 > 0:12:17and the numbers remain at a very high level, and that is regarded
0:12:17 > 0:12:21as indicative of the fact that there is a claims culture
0:12:21 > 0:12:25with regard to whiplash injuries, and part of that is,
0:12:25 > 0:12:28you term it fraudulent, exaggerated claims, set up
0:12:28 > 0:12:33claims - these exist.
0:12:33 > 0:12:38It was the limit on personal injury claims for employer liability
0:12:38 > 0:12:43and accident at work to £2000 that caused the most debate.
0:12:43 > 0:12:50The question really is not so much, in my opinion, the value
0:12:50 > 0:12:52of the small claims limit, it is a question of...
0:12:52 > 0:12:55The degree of complexity in personal injury claims and at what point
0:12:55 > 0:12:59the claim is capable of being handled by an individual
0:12:59 > 0:13:04by themselves, and at what point they need legal representation.
0:13:04 > 0:13:07If you remove the ability of injured workers to pursue claims
0:13:07 > 0:13:09against their employers, which is what these changes
0:13:09 > 0:13:11will effectively do, the threat of litigation is now
0:13:11 > 0:13:14the main driver for maintaining health and safety in the workplace,
0:13:14 > 0:13:17and that is with cuts to the HSE, and also with lack of
0:13:17 > 0:13:25local government inspections.
0:13:25 > 0:13:28And what this will mean, it will be particularly bad for
0:13:28 > 0:13:30low-paid workers with unscrupulous employers and working
0:13:30 > 0:13:31in non-unionised premises.
0:13:31 > 0:13:37And what we believe these changes will do is that they will render
0:13:37 > 0:13:40low-paid workers more vulnerable to injury because they will be less
0:13:40 > 0:13:45focused in terms of austerity by employers on health and safety.
0:13:45 > 0:13:48But then it will be the double whammy of them being less
0:13:48 > 0:13:56able to seek redress after they have been injured.
0:13:56 > 0:13:59With regard to employers' liability claims and public liability claims,
0:13:59 > 0:14:00rather different issues do arise.
0:14:00 > 0:14:02Because you are dealing with issues of health and safety.
0:14:02 > 0:14:04And that can lead to complexity.
0:14:04 > 0:14:07And that is why we have retained a lower limit of £2000
0:14:07 > 0:14:08for that type of claim.
0:14:08 > 0:14:09Lord Keen.
0:14:09 > 0:14:11Now, we have all heard the messages warning
0:14:11 > 0:14:13about the dangers of obesity.
0:14:13 > 0:14:16There is particular concern about the impact of being overweight
0:14:16 > 0:14:21on the health of children.
0:14:21 > 0:14:25Too much fast food and too many sugary drinks have led to a rise
0:14:25 > 0:14:26in the number of youngsters who are obese.
0:14:26 > 0:14:29But what can be done to tackle the problem?
0:14:29 > 0:14:31A Conservative MP opened a debate in Westminster Hall and called
0:14:31 > 0:14:34for the stars of prime-time television programmes,
0:14:34 > 0:14:38such as Britain's Got Talent and I'm a Celebrity, to take a stand
0:14:38 > 0:14:42against junk food being advertised to children watching their shows.
0:14:42 > 0:14:47The poorest UK households are exposed to double the amount
0:14:47 > 0:14:49of television food adverts compared to the most affluent viewers.
0:14:49 > 0:14:55This exposure is problematic.
0:14:55 > 0:14:57With food advertising in the UK disproportionately featuring
0:14:57 > 0:15:01unhealthy food items, and young children especially
0:15:01 > 0:15:05vulnerable to marketing techniques that promotes unhealthy food,
0:15:05 > 0:15:07the pervasive harms of adverts placed puts pressures
0:15:08 > 0:15:10on the poorest in society.
0:15:10 > 0:15:14It is not just a coincidence of scheduling that these type
0:15:14 > 0:15:16of adverts run alongside some of our biggest TV shows
0:15:16 > 0:15:19such as the X Factor, Britain's Got Talent,
0:15:19 > 0:15:28I'm A Celebrity, Hollyoaks or The Simpsons.
0:15:28 > 0:15:31If we are truly to affect change, as Jamie Oliver has already
0:15:31 > 0:15:34demonstrated, we need some of that star magic on this issue.
0:15:34 > 0:15:36The power of celebrity can never be underestimated.
0:15:36 > 0:15:38With this in mind, I am calling on those household
0:15:38 > 0:15:40names like Simon Cowell, Ant and Dec, Dermot O'Leary
0:15:40 > 0:15:46and Amanda Holden to take some corporate responsibility,
0:15:46 > 0:15:50stand up to the broadcast and say that they will no longer be used
0:15:50 > 0:15:55as a hook to sell harmful junk food to our children, their own children.
0:15:55 > 0:15:59A DUP MP told how he had been diagnosed with type two diabetes
0:15:59 > 0:16:01after living on a diet of takeaways and fizzy drinks.
0:16:02 > 0:16:04He had since last four stone.
0:16:04 > 0:16:1111 years ago, whenever I was diagnosed as a type two
0:16:11 > 0:16:17diabetic, food management for me at that stage was important.
0:16:17 > 0:16:20But more important for me ten years or 15 years previous.
0:16:20 > 0:16:27Because the lifestyle I had grossly affected by health.
0:16:27 > 0:16:30I say that as an adult, and I look at my grandchildren,
0:16:30 > 0:16:32Katie and Mia, and I don't want them to be
0:16:32 > 0:16:35in the same position as me.
0:16:35 > 0:16:37And a life changing illness that was preventable.
0:16:37 > 0:16:39There is a wealth of evidence worldwide to prove the facts
0:16:39 > 0:16:41that we are arguing about.
0:16:41 > 0:16:42The American psychological Association to studies
0:16:42 > 0:16:43from Deakin University in Australia.
0:16:43 > 0:16:47The most recent contribution at Cancer Research UK further
0:16:47 > 0:16:49confirms further that children who are exposed to junk food
0:16:49 > 0:16:52advertising on television each more unhealthily than those who are not.
0:16:52 > 0:16:55So TV advertising works, and that is exactly why so much
0:16:55 > 0:17:03money is spent on it.
0:17:03 > 0:17:05It is also why Ofcom's broadcast restrictions on junk
0:17:05 > 0:17:07food advertising came into effect ten years ago.
0:17:07 > 0:17:12Following, as I understand it, a report commissioned
0:17:12 > 0:17:14by the Government's office for science, which identified
0:17:14 > 0:17:16that same link.
0:17:16 > 0:17:22Further action by the Government is now necessary and ease
0:17:22 > 0:17:24Further action by the Government is now necessary and
0:17:24 > 0:17:27restrictions need to be extended to what is considered as family
0:17:27 > 0:17:29viewing or stop content such as soaps and game shows and those
0:17:29 > 0:17:31programmes broadcast before the watershed.
0:17:31 > 0:17:33Products with fat, salt and sugar are often found to sponsor sporting
0:17:33 > 0:17:37events or teams of which children are a key part of the audience.
0:17:37 > 0:17:38For example, Cadburys in the official snack partner
0:17:39 > 0:17:40of the Premier League.
0:17:40 > 0:17:41The current restrictions do not encapsulates these areas,
0:17:41 > 0:17:44and in our digital world it is important that
0:17:44 > 0:17:45restrictions advance in order to protect children.
0:17:45 > 0:17:48I see this as presenting a huge challenge and cost to the health
0:17:48 > 0:17:52and well-being of the individual, of course, but obviously to the NHS
0:17:52 > 0:17:54and the country with overweight and obesity-related ill-health
0:17:54 > 0:17:57estimated to cost the NHS - and again I suspect
0:17:57 > 0:17:59this underplays it - some £5 billion a year.
0:17:59 > 0:18:01Now, there is no denying that obesity is a complex
0:18:01 > 0:18:05and far-reaching problem.
0:18:05 > 0:18:10This will not, sadly, be solved by one action number.
0:18:10 > 0:18:12This will not, sadly, be solved by one action alone.
0:18:12 > 0:18:15As all pretty much have said in this debate today and my honourable
0:18:15 > 0:18:18friend the Member for Erewash said in opening the debate.
0:18:18 > 0:18:20Neither, I have to say, will it be solved overnight.
0:18:20 > 0:18:22This is a tanker to turn round.
0:18:22 > 0:18:23But action was being taken.
0:18:23 > 0:18:26As part of the plan, we introduced two key measures
0:18:26 > 0:18:28to challenge the food and drink industry to improve
0:18:28 > 0:18:32the healthiness of the food.
0:18:32 > 0:18:34the healthiness of the food
0:18:34 > 0:18:36children eat everyday and these policies are already
0:18:36 > 0:18:37showing positive signs.
0:18:37 > 0:18:41The soft drinks industry levy, which is set to become law in April,
0:18:41 > 0:18:43has already seen almost half the soft drink market
0:18:43 > 0:18:46reformulate their sugary soft drinks to include less sugar.
0:18:46 > 0:18:49Companies such as the makers of Lucozade, who I will be visiting
0:18:49 > 0:18:53myself later this week to see in more detail, and Ribena,
0:18:53 > 0:18:55and Tesco, have been leading the way removing millions
0:18:55 > 0:18:56of tonnes of sugar.
0:18:56 > 0:19:01I think this is a crucial step forward.
0:19:01 > 0:19:03I think this is a crucial step forward
0:19:03 > 0:19:04towards our children's health.
0:19:04 > 0:19:07As data shows us that sugary soft drinks are the main contributor
0:19:07 > 0:19:09of sugar in our children's diets.
0:19:09 > 0:19:12Steve Brine.
0:19:12 > 0:19:15The Government has been challenged in the Lords over the protection
0:19:15 > 0:19:17of women's workplace rights after the UK leaves
0:19:17 > 0:19:18the European Union.
0:19:18 > 0:19:20The Minister said there had been a clear commitment
0:19:20 > 0:19:21to protect those rights.
0:19:21 > 0:19:27Other peers were more sceptical.
0:19:27 > 0:19:29I am not sure I am convinced with his re-branding
0:19:29 > 0:19:37of the Government as a champion of equality and workplace rights.
0:19:37 > 0:19:40Their lukewarm response to the recent House of Commons Women
0:19:40 > 0:19:41and Equalities Committee report on this very subject
0:19:41 > 0:19:48speaks volumes, my lords.
0:19:48 > 0:19:52Will the noble lord the Minister accept that British women
0:19:52 > 0:19:56facing discrimination in accessing their maternity rights
0:19:56 > 0:19:59for instance at work, and his own Government figures bear
0:19:59 > 0:20:01this out, that there are thousands of women who do face
0:20:01 > 0:20:02discrimination in this area.
0:20:02 > 0:20:05discrimination in this area?
0:20:05 > 0:20:08Would they have a better future if we align ourselves as closely
0:20:08 > 0:20:11as possible to EU legislation and European of justice case work
0:20:11 > 0:20:21in this area post-Brexit?
0:20:24 > 0:20:27My lords, obviously, we will take note of what the EU does,
0:20:27 > 0:20:30but I think one of the important things about Brexit is that we can
0:20:30 > 0:20:33make our own decisions about this, and we do not have to be part
0:20:33 > 0:20:36of the EU to have high standards in the workplace.
0:20:36 > 0:20:40We already go way beyond the EU minimum standards in a number
0:20:40 > 0:20:42of important areas such as annual leave, maternity leave
0:20:42 > 0:20:44and flexible working.
0:20:44 > 0:20:47But I think it is a matter for the United Kingdom Parliament
0:20:47 > 0:20:50to consider these matters, and not the EU.
0:20:50 > 0:20:53I am very glad to hear the Minister say that the Government
0:20:53 > 0:20:57will not roll back on EU rights for women in the workplace.
0:20:57 > 0:21:07The European Commission this year introduced proposals for a directive
0:21:08 > 0:21:11which would provide,
0:21:11 > 0:21:12on work-life balance for parents and carers,
0:21:12 > 0:21:13which would provide,
0:21:13 > 0:21:18for four months, paid, nontransferable leave for fathers.
0:21:18 > 0:21:21Will Her Majesty's Government commit to keeping pace with the EU
0:21:21 > 0:21:25regarding equality and employment rights, including this directive?
0:21:25 > 0:21:31My lords, whilst we are in the EU, we will obviously continue to take
0:21:31 > 0:21:34a constructive approach to the various council working
0:21:34 > 0:21:39groups, and particularly that that the noble Baroness refers
0:21:39 > 0:21:41to, the new work-life balance directive, and we will seek
0:21:41 > 0:21:43to ensure that the text is appropriately clarified.
0:21:43 > 0:21:47And we look forward to continuing discussions under
0:21:47 > 0:21:51the Bulgarian presidency.
0:21:51 > 0:21:54I am not going to make any commitments as to what we decide
0:21:54 > 0:21:56to do about different parts of that work-life...
0:21:56 > 0:22:03It is called the work-life balance directive.
0:22:03 > 0:22:07Certainly, we will continue those discussions and if we are part
0:22:07 > 0:22:10of the EU we will sign up to it if appropriate.
0:22:10 > 0:22:13If not, these are decisions for ourselves.
0:22:13 > 0:22:16One eminent equality lawyer has said that the failure to bring
0:22:16 > 0:22:18across the Charter of fundamental rights into UK law means
0:22:18 > 0:22:21that the freestanding right to equality will have no equivalent
0:22:21 > 0:22:22in domestic law.
0:22:22 > 0:22:24So we would lose one of those fundamental standards underpinning
0:22:24 > 0:22:26the other regulations that we are bringing
0:22:26 > 0:22:33across in the withdrawal Bill.
0:22:33 > 0:22:38Given that we have heard the new Brexit Minister in the other
0:22:38 > 0:22:40House anyway wants to get rid of such rights,
0:22:40 > 0:22:42what comfort can this
0:22:42 > 0:22:44Minister offer to women that their right to equality
0:22:44 > 0:22:45will not be weakened?
0:22:45 > 0:22:48Well, my lords, one eminent lawyer has made that statement,
0:22:48 > 0:22:50but not all eminent lawyers agree with that statement.
0:22:50 > 0:22:53We are fully signed up to human rights and we will continue to be
0:22:53 > 0:23:01fully signed up to all other aspects of human rights.
0:23:01 > 0:23:04And leaving the EU does not make a difference in this matter.
0:23:04 > 0:23:06An SNP MP says that consumers are being ripped off
0:23:06 > 0:23:07by mobile phone companies.
0:23:07 > 0:23:10Patricia Gibson said many consumers were continuing to pay
0:23:10 > 0:23:13for their handset after they had covered the cost of buying it.
0:23:13 > 0:23:15Having a mobile phone today has pretty much become
0:23:15 > 0:23:16a necessity to all of us.
0:23:16 > 0:23:20Even though we may often wish we didn't, we rely on them
0:23:20 > 0:23:22all to a certain extent.
0:23:22 > 0:23:26It is just the modern way that we live our lives.
0:23:26 > 0:23:30And I am sure, like me, the Minister is deeply concerned
0:23:30 > 0:23:33to hear about the report from Citizens Advice that too many
0:23:33 > 0:23:34loyal mobile phone customers are being ripped off
0:23:35 > 0:23:40by their providers.
0:23:40 > 0:23:43And I use the term advisedly, Mr Chair - ripped off
0:23:43 > 0:23:44by their providers.
0:23:44 > 0:23:46Most people pay for their handset over two years
0:23:46 > 0:23:47of their phone contract.
0:23:47 > 0:23:49She pointed to research by Citizens Advice.
0:23:49 > 0:23:52It seems that 36% of mobile handset customers stay on their previous
0:23:52 > 0:23:58contract after the 24 month fixed period.
0:23:58 > 0:24:00On average, people stay on their contract for
0:24:00 > 0:24:03an extra seven months.
0:24:03 > 0:24:11However, the chances are, that if you are a customer with one
0:24:11 > 0:24:13of the bigger mobile phone providers who dominate the market,
0:24:13 > 0:24:15the price consumers are charged each month will not change.
0:24:15 > 0:24:18Meaning that consumers continue to be charged for their handsets
0:24:18 > 0:24:20even though they have already paid for them over the course
0:24:20 > 0:24:24of their two year contract.
0:24:24 > 0:24:29The fact is, Mr Chair, that most providers don't tell
0:24:29 > 0:24:31the customer how much of their monthly bill goes
0:24:31 > 0:24:34towards the mobile phone handset and how much is paying
0:24:34 > 0:24:36for data and calls.
0:24:36 > 0:24:39The Minister said there was a competitive market
0:24:39 > 0:24:41and that the Government was determined to make billing
0:24:41 > 0:24:43easier to understand.
0:24:43 > 0:24:46In my opinion, this means more transparent.
0:24:46 > 0:24:49It includes making it clearer when a customer has paid off
0:24:49 > 0:24:52the price of their handset and is in a position
0:24:52 > 0:24:55to switch to a cheaper deal, saving them money.
0:24:55 > 0:24:57And, in future, it would be easier to move
0:24:57 > 0:25:05to a different phone provider.
0:25:05 > 0:25:07Consumers will be able to send a free text
0:25:07 > 0:25:08to their current provider
0:25:08 > 0:25:11to request a switching code that they give to their new provider
0:25:11 > 0:25:14in order for switching to be very timely and seamless.
0:25:14 > 0:25:16The change will make switching much quicker and easier for consumers
0:25:16 > 0:25:19and will go some way towards helping to address the issue
0:25:19 > 0:25:21that the honourable lady has raised.
0:25:21 > 0:25:22Margot James.
0:25:22 > 0:25:25And that is it from me for now.
0:25:25 > 0:25:28But do join me at the same time tomorrow for another round-up
0:25:28 > 0:25:30of the day here at Westminster, including the highlights
0:25:30 > 0:25:32from Prime Minister's Questions.
0:25:32 > 0:25:37But for now, from me, Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.