0:00:21 > 0:00:24Hello there, and welcome to Tuesday in Parliament.
0:00:24 > 0:00:26Coming up on this programme: MPs and experts talk
0:00:26 > 0:00:30trade after Brexit.
0:00:30 > 0:00:32With the former head of the World Trade Organization
0:00:32 > 0:00:34predicting new deals won't compensate for the loss
0:00:34 > 0:00:36of business with the the EU.
0:00:36 > 0:00:43The 1% you can gain their will be comparable to the five, six or 7%
0:00:43 > 0:00:47you would lose on the other side.
0:00:47 > 0:00:48A committee of MPs asks
0:00:48 > 0:00:49if there's enough information
0:00:49 > 0:00:57for smokers about e-cigarette.
0:00:57 > 0:01:00And the governments urge to act to help end a hunger strike
0:01:00 > 0:01:02of the Yarl's Wood Detention Centre.
0:01:02 > 0:01:05One woman describes it as being kidnapped. Not knowing when it is
0:01:05 > 0:01:07going to end or what is going to happen to her.
0:01:07 > 0:01:08But first...
0:01:08 > 0:01:10In a speech on Tuesday morning, the international
0:01:10 > 0:01:12Trade Secretary Liam Fox said britain must be free
0:01:12 > 0:01:14to make its own trade deals outside Europe,
0:01:14 > 0:01:18if it's to seize new opportunities to sell to developing countries.
0:01:18 > 0:01:21Labour wants the UK to form a new customs union,
0:01:21 > 0:01:23but Doctor Fox insisted that would be a complete sell-out
0:01:24 > 0:01:28of Britain's national interest.
0:01:28 > 0:01:30His speech came as a former permanent secretary
0:01:30 > 0:01:36at the Department for International Trade had described
0:01:36 > 0:01:40described Brexit as, "giving up a 3-course meal in return
0:01:40 > 0:01:41for a packet of crisps,"
0:01:41 > 0:01:45A comment raised by a Labour MP at Treasury Questions.
0:01:46 > 0:01:48Does he agree with the permanent secretary that giving up the single
0:01:48 > 0:01:51market and the customs Union is like giving up a 3-course meal for a
0:01:51 > 0:01:55packet of crisps in the future? If he does not agree, then can he
0:01:55 > 0:01:59identify specific evidence his book whoa department has seen the future
0:01:59 > 0:02:04trade agreements will outweigh the damage of leaving the single market
0:02:04 > 0:02:06customs union for businesses and jobs across the country, but
0:02:06 > 0:02:07reticulated the Northeast.Hear, hear!
0:02:07 > 0:02:15.Mr Speaker, it is the Government's intention to maintain the highest
0:02:15 > 0:02:18possible access for British businesses to European Union
0:02:18 > 0:02:21markets. And the honourable Lady is right that we should approach this
0:02:21 > 0:02:26on an evidence base is. We should look for the evidence of value of
0:02:26 > 0:02:30our trade flows with Europe, what that generates in the UK in terms of
0:02:30 > 0:02:36jobs, and we should look objectively at the opportunities that lie with
0:02:36 > 0:02:43third country trade deals and the likely profile of new jobs and new
0:02:43 > 0:02:45trade and new opportunities that can be created come and we shall waive
0:02:45 > 0:02:48those carefully.
0:02:48 > 0:02:51But another quote appeared to have the Chancellor a little stumped.
0:02:51 > 0:02:52Labor's Stella Creasy raised comments from
0:02:53 > 0:02:58the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson.
0:02:58 > 0:03:01He's used a BBC interview to dismiss concerns that a hard
0:03:01 > 0:03:03Irish border would emerge after leaving the EU customs union,
0:03:03 > 0:03:06suggesting the lack of border checks between Camden and Westminster
0:03:06 > 0:03:10did not stop motorists paying the congestion charge.
0:03:10 > 0:03:15Could the Chancellor set out the benefits or otherwise of the
0:03:15 > 0:03:19arrangements the Government appears to have for a customs union between
0:03:19 > 0:03:28the Camden, is lifting and Westminster?LAUGHTER
0:03:28 > 0:03:32I'm sure, Mr Speaker, when I call a home and reflect on the deep meaning
0:03:32 > 0:03:37of that question will become clear to me. But what I will say in
0:03:37 > 0:03:40response to the honourable Lady is that if we look at the way goods and
0:03:40 > 0:03:42services flow freely between different parts of our own economy,
0:03:42 > 0:03:47and indeed it's a different parts of the United Kingdom, we see at once
0:03:47 > 0:03:52the huge benefit that it brings having frictionless borders as we
0:03:52 > 0:04:01move our goods and services.
0:04:01 > 0:04:03Well, by coincidence, the former general of the World Trade
0:04:03 > 0:04:06Organization was giving evidence to MPs on the Brexit committee,
0:04:06 > 0:04:08and he was asked about the border between Northern Ireland
0:04:08 > 0:04:09and the Republic.
0:04:09 > 0:04:15Currently on this border, if we resorted to WTO rules, how would the
0:04:15 > 0:04:20WTO regard the border between Northern Ireland and the Irish
0:04:20 > 0:04:25Republic? And what would they expect to happen at that border between
0:04:25 > 0:04:30Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic? Irish Republic, being a
0:04:30 > 0:04:34member of the UN Northern Ireland of course being outside the US the
0:04:34 > 0:04:45Brexit.Whatever option you take, either a bilateral agreement or the
0:04:45 > 0:04:56WTO option, UK exiting EU meaning Northern Ireland exiting EU, this
0:04:56 > 0:04:59will necessitate a border.
0:04:59 > 0:05:04He suggested one possible model like that of Macau and China.
0:05:04 > 0:05:08In order to be a WTO member, you don't need to be sovereign. You need
0:05:08 > 0:05:18to have another member's customs, which is something which Macau, Hong
0:05:18 > 0:05:21Kong has, whereas in the case of mad cow they are clearly belonging to
0:05:21 > 0:05:26China. But they are members of the WTO in their own right, because they
0:05:26 > 0:05:31have an autonomous trade. And the Macau option would be that you
0:05:31 > 0:05:39should think it out, giving to Northern Ireland. The same tray
0:05:39 > 0:05:42capacity as China has given to Macau, which doesn't mean that Macau
0:05:42 > 0:05:51doesn't belong to China. And then you have the single system. Apply
0:05:51 > 0:06:01the same trade relations as Ireland. Otherwise you have to have a vote.
0:06:01 > 0:06:08Again, where is this border? Is it north of us, is the East, West? That
0:06:08 > 0:06:15is politically and extremely complex question. But in my view, and I am
0:06:15 > 0:06:19putting this very simply as an expert, if it is not East and West
0:06:19 > 0:06:21it has to be North and South.
0:06:21 > 0:06:23So, what was his view of our future trade prospects?
0:06:24 > 0:06:29I'm not seeing the UK will not have trade opportunities, which it may
0:06:29 > 0:06:38not have today as part of the EU. But I would very much doubt as an
0:06:38 > 0:06:46expert, and again I am not entering any politics, that the 1% you can
0:06:46 > 0:06:50gain their will be comparable to the five, six or 7% you will use on the
0:06:50 > 0:06:56other side.Pascal let me.
0:06:56 > 0:06:57Now, the former chief executive
0:06:57 > 0:07:01of the collapsed construction firm
0:07:01 > 0:07:03Carillion has said he's perplexed by the Government's decision not
0:07:03 > 0:07:06to give the company financial help when it reached a crisis point.
0:07:06 > 0:07:09Carillion, one of the government's biggest contractors,
0:07:09 > 0:07:14went into liquidation last month with debts totaling £1.5 billion.
0:07:14 > 0:07:17The company had employed 43,000 people and had contracts to run
0:07:17 > 0:07:18services in hospitals, schools and prisons
0:07:18 > 0:07:24throughout the UK.
0:07:24 > 0:07:27As part of the investigation into the firm's downfall on January
0:07:27 > 0:07:2914, some of its former bosses have been facing the questions
0:07:30 > 0:07:34of a joint committee of MPs.
0:07:34 > 0:07:37Did government or did anyone individual and government give you
0:07:37 > 0:07:40assurance that there would be a potential cash support from
0:07:40 > 0:07:45government to get you over what you considered at that point to be a
0:07:45 > 0:07:48hot, to get you through to the end of the financial year?The
0:07:48 > 0:07:55insurance, we did not get, the permit certainly did not see... We
0:07:55 > 0:08:00would support you. What they did say is please put forward a proposal and
0:08:00 > 0:08:04we are prepared to consider and contemplate that proposal. The key
0:08:04 > 0:08:09point here is there was a number of different ways that cash could have
0:08:09 > 0:08:13come into Carillion. We could have reached a settlement with government
0:08:13 > 0:08:15on specific contract issues or government that have given us a
0:08:15 > 0:08:22short-term loan, which to be clear what happened repaid out of the
0:08:22 > 0:08:26financing of the structuring of the result of the restructuring plan
0:08:26 > 0:08:30that we were working for.Mr Green, what was your view on the
0:08:30 > 0:08:34Government's response following Carillion's downfall?Right up until
0:08:34 > 0:08:39the very end, we were optimistic that they would be able to play a
0:08:39 > 0:08:45positive role. And we were deeply disappointed. And to an extent
0:08:45 > 0:08:52surprised when that didn't happen. The funding we were asking for those
0:08:52 > 0:08:57two weeks in January, essentially 10 million to be matched, 2 million
0:08:57 > 0:09:03from the banks and then some guarantee bending for a supply of
0:09:03 > 0:09:07change financing against which we would, they would be tested for the
0:09:07 > 0:09:12broader restructuring plan. And I do find it somewhat perplexing when one
0:09:12 > 0:09:20looks at the funds that government is now having to spend on the
0:09:20 > 0:09:21liquidation on Carillion, on the guarantee arrangements that have
0:09:21 > 0:09:27needed to be put in place to support the supply chain. You know, I still
0:09:27 > 0:09:32truly believe that the least cost outcome for the taxpayer would have
0:09:32 > 0:09:39been to support Carillion, as it sought to restructure the business.
0:09:39 > 0:09:42Did you ever have a conversation with your colleagues, saying Ashley
0:09:42 > 0:09:45the Government is ever going to let us go to the war because we are too
0:09:45 > 0:09:49big to fail and we got such major contracts? For example a test to?
0:09:49 > 0:09:53Because you expressed some surprise that I feel as if you actually
0:09:53 > 0:09:58really believed that the Government was gone to Bellew out of what was a
0:09:58 > 0:10:10poor situation. Would that be fair? No, it would be fair. Let me be
0:10:10 > 0:10:15quick, we were not looking for a bailout. That is not how I would've
0:10:15 > 0:10:17you government support. This was a short-term loan to help us
0:10:17 > 0:10:21facilitate a broader restructuring. Company successfully delivered. Many
0:10:21 > 0:10:26hundreds of contracts. To the satisfaction of government and all
0:10:26 > 0:10:34stakeholders. The reason the company got into difficulties during 2017
0:10:34 > 0:10:38was because it had too much debt and its balance sheet wasn't able to
0:10:38 > 0:10:44withstand the shock from particularly for contracts that went
0:10:44 > 0:10:49badly wrong in the middle of 2017. Did you not have a naive belief
0:10:49 > 0:10:53frankly and government being the solution, taxpayers money coming
0:10:53 > 0:10:59into frankly bailout Carillion? That was eventually what you are hanging
0:10:59 > 0:11:05it all on at the end, wasn't it?As we said, we don't accept or
0:11:05 > 0:11:10recognize the bailout. We believed we were trying...But a loan to a
0:11:10 > 0:11:14company in difficulty. Alan would have only been a long if you had
0:11:14 > 0:11:18been recovered enough to pay it back. It would be a very big risk.
0:11:18 > 0:11:21In middle of January it was £10 million for one week to take us to
0:11:21 > 0:11:28the next stage.So fine a point from Sir Geoffrey.The real answer that
0:11:28 > 0:11:33you consider yourself to be to fail? No.That the Government would have
0:11:33 > 0:11:37to bail you out because you are too big to fail?That was not the view
0:11:37 > 0:11:42of the board, that was not what we believed. We really didn't.Well, I
0:11:42 > 0:11:47think we may beg to differ on that. But can I thank you for your time?
0:11:47 > 0:11:51Black Hill year there, bringing the session to a conclusion.
0:11:51 > 0:11:53You're watching Tuesday in Parliament here with
0:11:53 > 0:11:59me, Alicia McCarthy.
0:11:59 > 0:12:01Now the appointment of the controversial columnist
0:12:01 > 0:12:04Toby Young to the Board of England's new university regulator
0:12:04 > 0:12:07caused a storm last month.
0:12:07 > 0:12:09After disparaging comments he'd made about women and disabled
0:12:09 > 0:12:10people came to light.
0:12:10 > 0:12:17He then resigned.
0:12:17 > 0:12:19Now a report by the Commissioner for Public Appointments has found
0:12:19 > 0:12:21serious shortcomings and political interference in the
0:12:21 > 0:12:23appointments process.
0:12:23 > 0:12:28Weeks ago the Government told his House be process was a fair and open
0:12:28 > 0:12:31competition, and in accordance with the code of practice. But the
0:12:31 > 0:12:37commissioner has found that this is not the case. One candidate was
0:12:37 > 0:12:41rejected on the basis of their past public statements. Incredibly, this
0:12:41 > 0:12:48was not Toby Young.LAUGHTER It was a student Representative,
0:12:48 > 0:12:51rejected due to the desire by Ministers and special advisers not
0:12:51 > 0:12:56to appoint someone with close links to the student union.Hear, hear!
0:12:56 > 0:13:03The report also notes that, can the Minister tell us why being elected
0:13:03 > 0:13:09by students makes someone unsuitable to represent them? And how could the
0:13:09 > 0:13:13then Minister tell us that it was not reasonable to that social media,
0:13:13 > 0:13:28when they did so for the student representative?Hear, hear!Clearly
0:13:28 > 0:13:31it was not as extensive as it could've been.
0:13:31 > 0:13:33It was the previous higher Education Minister Joe Johnson
0:13:33 > 0:13:35who oversaw the appointments.
0:13:35 > 0:13:41He came in for some stinging criticism from MPs.
0:13:41 > 0:13:47This report is absolutely damning. Particularly in relation to the
0:13:47 > 0:13:52former Universities Minister and his role in this appointment. And there
0:13:52 > 0:13:57are very serious questions that he should be answering to this House
0:13:57 > 0:14:02about claims that he made that it was not appropriate to do due
0:14:02 > 0:14:07diligence and Canada its? A statement he made from despatch box
0:14:07 > 0:14:12was postop yet his department and him himself ordering the very same
0:14:12 > 0:14:15due diligence against a Cabinet he did not want to appoint. By Modi
0:14:15 > 0:14:22come to this House and apologise. -- when will he come to this House?The
0:14:22 > 0:14:26same due diligence was carried out by the same advices on all
0:14:26 > 0:14:29candidates and as I've said in response to an earlier question, did
0:14:29 > 0:14:35due diligence could've been or extensive.Toby Young believed in
0:14:35 > 0:14:41eugenics. He made terrible remarks about disabled people. He made awful
0:14:41 > 0:14:48remarks about women. This is a man that his predecessor thought was
0:14:48 > 0:14:54fine to be on the board of office for students. I say to him, what
0:14:54 > 0:15:00confidence now should working-class young people across this country,
0:15:00 > 0:15:03underrepresented groups and ethnic minorities have in the office for
0:15:03 > 0:15:09students if we have a government where the Minister who did this
0:15:09 > 0:15:15cannot come to the despatch box, apologise or step down.Does he
0:15:15 > 0:15:19think it was a sound judgement call to allow number ten and medical
0:15:19 > 0:15:24advisers to essentially blacklist anybody and then appoint somebody
0:15:24 > 0:15:29who is age, by not following any proper process. Was that a good
0:15:29 > 0:15:38judgement call by his predisaster? Every decision any Minister makes
0:15:38 > 0:15:42involves a judgement. It's not a scientific process. In terms of
0:15:42 > 0:15:45making sure the process works better, the department which has
0:15:45 > 0:15:49ultimate responsibility to make sure we have a much more robust and
0:15:49 > 0:15:52stringent process next time.
0:15:52 > 0:15:55The Government's come under fire over a port showing the number
0:15:55 > 0:15:57of people in England and Wales being detained under
0:15:57 > 0:16:01the mental health act has been rising year on year.
0:16:01 > 0:16:03Labor's Luciana Berger used an urgent question to raise
0:16:03 > 0:16:10the finding of the watchdog, the Care Quality Commission.
0:16:10 > 0:16:15This scathing report finds that too many patients who are subject to the
0:16:15 > 0:16:18Mental Health Act continued to experience care that does not fully
0:16:18 > 0:16:21protect their rights or ensure their well-being. Despite repeated
0:16:21 > 0:16:27government promises, we have seen yet another year of inaction. Can
0:16:27 > 0:16:30the Minister and her response except that and 2018 here in England that
0:16:30 > 0:16:36what is outlined in today's report is completely on acceptable and
0:16:36 > 0:16:39could she tell us exactly what she is going to do this week to ensure
0:16:39 > 0:16:45that no patient in our country and a mental health unit is deprived
0:16:45 > 0:16:47unnecessarily of their human rights.
0:16:47 > 0:16:49The Health Minister welcomed the CQC's report and said
0:16:49 > 0:16:52the Prime Minister had already ordered a review of the use
0:16:52 > 0:16:56of the mental health actby professor Wesley.
0:16:56 > 0:17:03I do agree with her and indeed with AC QC report that the review of the
0:17:03 > 0:17:08Mental Health Act in itself is not the entire answer. That's why we
0:17:08 > 0:17:12have this annual inspection from the sea QC and we will act on it.
0:17:12 > 0:17:18Central to the work that Simon Wesley is leading is identifying
0:17:18 > 0:17:23exactly those things which are known legislative that we can take action
0:17:23 > 0:17:29and to make the system work better and again we are involved in many
0:17:29 > 0:17:31cross government initiatives to do exactly that.
0:17:31 > 0:17:33Meanwhile in the Lords, peers demanded to know
0:17:33 > 0:17:35what the Government was doing about eight hunger strike
0:17:35 > 0:17:39at the arts would detention center.
0:17:39 > 0:17:41The Independent online says more than 100 women at the immigration
0:17:41 > 0:17:43removal center have gone on hunger strike over inhumane
0:17:43 > 0:17:47conditions at the facility.
0:17:47 > 0:17:49They're said to be concerned about health provision
0:17:49 > 0:17:55and uncertainty over how long they are to be held.
0:17:55 > 0:17:57A liberal Democrat said there were around 400 people
0:17:57 > 0:18:03held at Yarl's Wood, the majority of them women.
0:18:03 > 0:18:06One Algerian woman came to this country at the age of 11, has been
0:18:06 > 0:18:11here for 24 years and it wasn't until she applied for a passport and
0:18:11 > 0:18:16found she was undocumented that she was been detained and so far she has
0:18:16 > 0:18:19been there for three months. What the Minister not agree that one of
0:18:19 > 0:18:22the main reasons for the hunger strikes is that people are being
0:18:22 > 0:18:28detained unfairly, unreasonably and indefinitely? One woman has
0:18:28 > 0:18:32described it as like being kidnapped. Not knowing what it's
0:18:32 > 0:18:34going to and are what's going to happen to her.
0:18:34 > 0:18:38He said one person had been detained for four and a half years.
0:18:38 > 0:18:44With the Minister not agree that it is time to introduce a 28 day limit
0:18:44 > 0:18:56on immigration detention?The reasons for refusing food and fluid
0:18:56 > 0:19:02are not for just one reason, there may be for a multitude of reasons.
0:19:02 > 0:19:06They may be an protest against their detention that they may also be for
0:19:06 > 0:19:16other reasons such as dietary and religious reasons. It's true. It is
0:19:16 > 0:19:20not a simple issue. In terms of indefinite attention, the noble lord
0:19:20 > 0:19:30did point out that detention for the particular case that he outlined was
0:19:30 > 0:19:33not indefinite but in fact the lady had been detained for three months.
0:19:33 > 0:19:42Every four months a detainee is reassessed for immigration bail and
0:19:42 > 0:19:48is actually quite fair to say that most people in detention, 92%, to
0:19:48 > 0:19:53not stay and attention for more than four months.What the Government not
0:19:53 > 0:20:01reconsider looking at the mechanisms used in the Scandinavian countries
0:20:01 > 0:20:07where workers done within the community to encourage and
0:20:07 > 0:20:10successfully to get people to leave when they have no right to be there
0:20:10 > 0:20:15and apply a more humane and frankly more effective policy such as the
0:20:15 > 0:20:23ones we see in those countries.I don't have concerns that the
0:20:23 > 0:20:26Government's policy is not working. The reason that someone may remain
0:20:26 > 0:20:37in detention for longer than they might have done... Is because they
0:20:37 > 0:20:46made themselves... The reasons for detention are many and complex but
0:20:46 > 0:20:52the purpose for detention is for swift removal.Do you agree that we
0:20:52 > 0:20:56need up bit of balance on this subject? In particular does she
0:20:56 > 0:21:00agree that the credibility of the immigration system depends on being
0:21:00 > 0:21:04able to remove people who no longer have a right to be in this country?
0:21:04 > 0:21:07Clearly there will be difficult cases and clearly they must be dealt
0:21:07 > 0:21:11with in the best possible way but fundamentally, we have to be able to
0:21:11 > 0:21:19remove or the entire credibility of the system is removed.The noble
0:21:19 > 0:21:22lord is absolutely right. That is the purpose of detention for
0:21:22 > 0:21:31necessary removal and I do also take his point that while we do need to
0:21:31 > 0:21:35deal with people sensitively who perhaps are traumatised or have
0:21:35 > 0:21:39mental health problems or other reasons for rich they may be
0:21:39 > 0:21:53vulnerable, the ultimate aim at the detention centre is for removal.
0:21:59 > 0:22:01According to the Office for National Statistics,
0:22:01 > 0:22:047.6 million people smoke in the UK am and that number is falling.
0:22:04 > 0:22:072016 saw the highest proportion of smokers who quit
0:22:07 > 0:22:10since their records began.
0:22:10 > 0:22:14Nearly 3 million people now use e-cigarette.
0:22:14 > 0:22:18But researchers and producers said that number was battling.
0:22:18 > 0:22:22The producers wanted to stress the benefit compared with smoking.
0:22:22 > 0:22:30The research is very similar to that that the Public Health England have
0:22:30 > 0:22:37reviewed and that you find far fewer toxicants and emissions from that is
0:22:37 > 0:22:41cigarettes, the toxicological impact of those omissions is much lower
0:22:41 > 0:22:47than with cigarette smoking.The results showed that the reductions
0:22:47 > 0:22:51and exposure so exposure to harmful chemicals comes close to that seen
0:22:51 > 0:22:54in those who stop smoking altogether for the duration of the study so
0:22:54 > 0:22:56very encouraging.
0:22:56 > 0:22:58But there were claims from researchers of a dearth
0:22:58 > 0:23:01of information about he cannot burn products which contained tobacco
0:23:01 > 0:23:02but have fewer risks than traditional cigarettes
0:23:03 > 0:23:09because the tobacco doesn't combust.
0:23:09 > 0:23:14Interns of heeding not burn, 350 degrees down to 30 degrees, we know
0:23:14 > 0:23:19in birth circumstances there is no combustion but you will still be
0:23:19 > 0:23:23releasing some potentially harmful chemicals albeit in smaller amounts.
0:23:23 > 0:23:26Actually does comparative studies have been done or they have been
0:23:26 > 0:23:30dubbed the methodology is so desperate that it's very difficult
0:23:30 > 0:23:32to compare one study with another.
0:23:32 > 0:23:37What about the chemicals and e-cigarette?
0:23:37 > 0:23:39Compared to conventional cigarettes the levels are much lower. We
0:23:39 > 0:23:52haven't done an exact comparison but they are much, much lower. It's that
0:23:52 > 0:23:59those that's important. We don't know at this stage, maybe others do,
0:23:59 > 0:24:03I'm not sure there is a cut off we can say this level will translate
0:24:03 > 0:24:09into development of cancer. We don't know over the longer term what kind
0:24:09 > 0:24:12of levels of repeated exposure are going to have an impact on health
0:24:12 > 0:24:13risk.
0:24:13 > 0:24:16Both researchers and producers agree more long-term studies were needed
0:24:16 > 0:24:20into exactly the potential risks were, but all of them stress
0:24:20 > 0:24:25the risks compared with traditional cigarettes were much lower.
0:24:25 > 0:24:27Finally, Tuesday cut off to a slightly spiky start
0:24:27 > 0:24:29with the Minister getting into trouble with the
0:24:29 > 0:24:34Speaker John Bercow.
0:24:34 > 0:24:36The Treasury Minister Liz Truss with the Chancellor Philip Hammond
0:24:36 > 0:24:39sitting alongside her on the front bench was answering a question
0:24:39 > 0:24:41about funding for local councils.
0:24:41 > 0:24:44And took the opportunity to give examples of where she thought
0:24:44 > 0:24:48they'd wasted money.
0:24:48 > 0:24:51But as she expanded on her thing, the Speaker John Bercow barely
0:24:51 > 0:24:53reckoned she had strayed too far from her job, talking
0:24:53 > 0:24:59about government responsibilities.
0:24:59 > 0:25:06So, for example, momentum supported... Which cost the taxpayer
0:25:06 > 0:25:17£40,000 per day. Reading...Resume your seat Minister. You answer for
0:25:17 > 0:25:20government policy. You don't waste the time of the House by launching
0:25:20 > 0:25:25into rants about policies of other parties. I've made the point. If the
0:25:25 > 0:25:31Chancellor is confused about it, he really is underinformed.
0:25:31 > 0:25:33The Speaker John Bercow delivering his on Arctic blast
0:25:33 > 0:25:34at Treasury questions.
0:25:34 > 0:25:38And that's it from us for now.
0:25:38 > 0:25:41Do join me at the same time tomorrow for another round up
0:25:41 > 0:25:43of the day here at Westminster, including the highlights
0:25:43 > 0:25:44from my Ministers questions.
0:25:44 > 0:25:48But for now, from me Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.