Highlights of proceedings in Parliament on Tuesday 20 March, presented by Mandy Baker.
Browse content similar to 20/03/2018. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Hello and welcome to the programme.
there's anger on the Conservative
benches over the Government's
Brexit fishing deal.
That there is no way I can sell the
still in a transitional period as
anything like a success.
amenities and Murray, Stalin or the
I feel their disappointment.
And, the BBC comes under
fire for its treatment
of some presenters.
I feel like I've been hung out to
dry. I feel betrayed and I asked
this, where is their duty of care
For many MPs it felt like a slap
in the face with a wet fish.
The European Union will continue
to set fishing quotas
during the transition
period following Brexit.
That was what was decided on Monday
in an agreement the Government
hailed as a success,
a step forward.
But fisherfolk are furious that EU
trawlers will still have access
to UK waters until the end of that
transition period in December 2020.
A Liberal Democrat MP
had an urgent question
for the Environment Secretary.
The mood in fishing communities is
one of palpable anger. This is not
what we were promised. And the basic
question that the Secretary of State
has to answer today is this, if they
can't let us down like this over the
deal for a transitional period, how
do we know they will not do it again
when it comes to the final deal?
When it comes to it, well they trade
away access or water for access to
markets, or anything else?
thing I will happily acknowledges
that there is disappointment in the
basic amenities. I know as somebody
whose father was a fish merchant and
whose grandparents went to sea to
fish. I understand how fishing
communities feel about the
situation. I shared a
I'm sure the
Secretary of State will understand
that there is no way I can sell this
still in the transitional period of
them and think like a success to
basic amenities and Murray, Scotland
or the UK. But can the Secretary of
State confirm that when we leave the
policy in 2020, we will have full
control over this and vessel access
because the fishing communities that
feel let down and angered at this
government at the moment the debt
I understand my
honourable friend's want and it will
be the case across the Northeast of
Scotland and the United Kingdom,
people will be disappointed that the
proposal that we sought to assure
that would apply for it to the other
19 to apply for that year. It is
also important to recognise that
this is a 12 month additional
extension to the maintenance of the
EU belt and we accept that in order
to secure the greater prize which he
is quite the right to remind the
House. Only available if we ensure
that we leave the common fisheries
policy, take back control and make
absolutely clear to other countries
that access and causes will be in
Conservatives weren't convinced
that the Government wouldn't use
that control to allow EU
fishing in UK waters once
the transition period was over.
Bring forward, with companies are
guaranteed can't you give the
control of ICs will not be
sacrificed in the Brexit?
friend agree that we owe a debt to
our fishing communities? And that we
must not guarantee to the EU any
level of access in favour of a
longer-term trade deal?
But while many Conservative
MPs were disappointed
with the Government's deal,
they still reserved some
anger for the SNP.
I share the disappointment of
Northeast this submit and the
transition to fall short with a hope
for, so can the Secretary of State
guarantee that on the 1st of
January, 2021, we will leave the
common fisheries policy, take back
control over our waters comes at our
own fishery management policies, and
hard quotas, and look at including
that in the history built in if he
should be concerned that I have in
the Scottish fishermen Federation
have that the SNP Scottish
Government will keep us in the
policy and perpetuity and that would
sell Scotland's measurements out!
part, the SNP were up in arms.
With concern is always somebody
else's's file for the Conservatives.
When we joined to the common
fisheries policy, Scotland's
measurements were described as
expendable. So there were use to
Scottish tourist sell-outs, given
the matter of days out even
Scotland's measurement will be
surprised at how quickly that one
was turned around. Will the Minister
tell me at what point are fishermen
became a bargaining chip or has that
been the case all along and does he
agree with me that there are now in
the worst of all worlds that were in
the common fisheries policy but no
say, and Willie also tell me why
over the years, the SNP has proposed
changes to bring greater control
over fishing policies, but they have
been rejected and Jessica grew with
me that that is because there's a
big industry in Scotland imported to
the Scottish Government that means
-- nothing to
us Mr. Mr Speaker, I production
means we discussed somebody else are
talking about yourself. It is
interesting that the Scottish
National Party spokesman to talk
about always blaming somebody else.
And always make somebody else's
fault. For a party that has raised
grievance to an art form, they have
a damn chick making a case.
the assurances I and others over the
last year were given right friend
the Prime Minister down that we
would leave the common fisheries
policy at the end of March 2019, who
actually was negotiating debts and
did they really care about fishing?
The truth that the Tories are
treating this industry as
expendable. The Secretary of State
talked about were viable.
industry cannot revive based on the
status quo that the Government has
delivered on the CFP. Does he
understand what my constituents will
see this as a total sell-out? Would
not even a say at the table for the
next two years.
concerned by my routable friend's on
in relation to the negotiations that
the European Commission would not
allow us something. Surely, it is a
question of what importance we put
on something as to whether we get
it. Therefore I ask my right
honourable friend what did we get in
The bid price that we have
secured is an implementation period
that allows us to prepare for the
benefits. That's what the price that
But the Lib Dem who raised
the question warned Michael Gove
fishermen for granted.
It was reported that the Government
Chief Whip today or yesterday told
his backbenches that it is not like
the fishermen are going to vote
labour. If that is true, every
phrase a certain attitude in the
Secretary of State should not be
complacent, he should not take it
for granted in the future that they
will be voting Tory either.
The draft deal about the transition
period is expected to be signed off
at an EU summit later this week.
And the Prime Minister will make
a statement to MPs on Monday.
People with advanced dementia
are being evicted by some care
providers in England,
on the basis it's too costly
too look after them,
according to Labour.
The accusation came
at health questions.
We have a care system where the hot
hot process that is not sustainably
funded, with the CQC says that one
quarter of care facility in not say
for now. -- where the audit office
says. And when providers cherry pick
an event people with advanced
dementia on the grounds of cost. Can
the care Minister tell us what she
is doing to address these issues and
the sharp decline in which there has
been an public satisfaction with the
social care system?
Mr Speaker, we
know that this sector is under
pressure because of the ageing
population but the Government has
given councils accessed 291 £4
billion more dedicated funding over
the three years.
A Conservative thought the answer
might be working together.
Given that the arithmetic of this
place is so tight, it's clear that
they'll need be some form of
consensus for Crossbar party for
reform. Given that the opposition
appeared to favour a wealth tax, and
are on-site have mooted the idea of
individuals pay more for their own
care,, surely cross party consensus
is within reach. Can I ask the
Secretary of State his view on cross
I think it is very
important in your sixth Earth Offaly
on this matter but it is important
to the social care issues are
something that are going to
continue. -- he always speaks
truthfully on this matter. Unless we
find a solution of both parties will
have to deal with this. In truth,
both parties have made things worse
by politicking in the past whether
it was discussion about a death tax
and 2009, or a dementia tax in 2017.
A Labour MP thought
the problem was simple.
Not much sign of a cross-party
consensus yet then.
The problem is simply this, not
enough money, or quality stuff and
not in a place of. The Government
should be ashamed of itself.
Fardy CBSN of itself are living as
with the financial crisis ten years
ago. That's right it is his party
that should be a shame to miss out.
It has created pressure and health
and social care system. Let me say
to him that yes, in 2010, there were
some cuts in the social care system
but does have changed out and over
this Parliament, the budget is going
up by nine points of additional
resources, which is an increase in
Not much sign of consensus yet.
You're watching Tuesday
in Parliament with me, Mandy Baker.
The BBC has come under fire from
some of its senior broadcasters.
They believe they were forced
into employment arrangements that
could leave them facing huge
and unexpected tax bills.
The Culture committee
is investigating a decision to make
some presenters use personal
service companies or PSCs.
Before the hearing, the MPs released
a dossier showing how some of those
pursued for unpaid taxes suffered
mental health problems and in some
cases considered suicide.
The BBC has established a process
which means the Corporation
could pay a share of bills.
This is an incredibly serious issue
and I think we've all been concerned
to read about the personal
predicament people have been placed
in and the effect that has had on
themselves on their families.
isn't the sort a well played
presenters. Training to companies to
attack. This is the story of the BBC
forcing Asher evidence has shown
hundreds of present is to form
companies and treat them as
freelancers because that gave the
BBC Plex ability. The effect of that
meant the BBC plate last insurance
contributions. Except that was not
its purpose and we accept that but
it did have that effect. And save
millions of pounds a year. The BBC
have avoided other implement cost.
Sickness payments, Secretary pay,
pensions... So on. It could get rid
of any of us on a whim. No
employment rights and assets. The
price was paid by presenters who
were exposed to the risk that when
David HMRC will come to them and
decide it would not freelancers but
were employed in claim that tax
including employers national
insurance. That risk has become
The BBC ended the use of PSCs
because the law changed last year.
It's done in such a candid way that
many people have been faced to the
financial. Double taxation, no pay,
direct of the work and that has led
to that dossier of despair shall I
call it, which was presented to you
and it is sad to us that it took the
publication of that to arouse the
BBC to what say we said last night.
-- to say what he said last night.
Mr Lewis said he'd refused
to set up a company.
But others had.
The BBCpoint of view was nobody was
forced and the evidence is that you
didn't do it, it didn't work. That
was being forced in my view and
people suddenly felt they had no
choice to agree to that.
The MPs then heard from presenters
who felt they had been
compelled to set up a PSC.
I think it is a tragedy that this
mismanagement will lead to millions
of pounds possibly being taken to
the coffers, to rapidly compensate
people who been taken into account
its game or gone to hell, to the
point of nearly taken her own life.
Or have been blotted with the tax
bills. It is not something I want to
be a poster girl. Let's take the
money off of the licence plate. I
resent that. None of this is of our
Another said all her worst
fears had come true.
Not long after I went freelance my
stepdaughter died suddenly, I was
unable to pay per remit leave and I
went back into the show before her
funeral because I had to get money.
-- unable to take bereavement leave.
Two years after that, how was
diagnosed with cancer. I had
surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy,
I work the whole way through. I
entered into this whole arrangement
in good faith. I trusted the BBC and
was proud to be part of the BBC. And
I feel like I've been hung out to
dry. I feel betrayed and I asked
this, where is the duty of care
The people in this
situation and our people, not pounds
of beans, which people seem to
regard the mass, they are stacked to
the local committee and stars, not
being betrayed in some sections of
the media. They trust the BBC
because it is the BBC. They trusted
to look after them in the BBC has
done anything but that. On the eve
of this meeting, where the BBC
decided to take some sort of
modifying action, and come out with
very nice words, I'm sorry but nice
words do not heal broken minds. They
did not heal broken people and that
is with the BBC is dealt with and
they must face up to it.
The government's drawing up plans
to make boardrooms more accountable
when firms go under.
Ministers say the proposals
will give regulators stronger powers
to tackle those who make
We are determined to learn the
lessons from things like really. We
think we can do more teaching than
the Government's framework
He told MPs the consultation
would focus on three areas.
Firstly, the selling
on of businesses that were near -
or in - insolvency.
The Government will consult on
measures to get insolvency
practitioners the additional
necessary powers to claw back for
the benefit of creditors money which
has been siphoned off through
complex financing arrangements.
Thirdly, Mr Speaker, concerns have
also been raised, including by a
number of honourable members, about
the difficulties raised when a
company has been dissolved but is
then found to have outstanding debts
or allegations of directive
misconduct. Often these dissolved
companies will reappear, phoenix
like in a slightly different form in
a slightly different name and start
operating again. At present is,
insolvency services to not have the
powers necessary to investigate
these cases. We are determined that
But Labour argued many of these
powers already existed
and it wasn't clear what these
proposals added - what was on offer
was meaningless platitudes.
The Government is certainly not
known for being proactive rather
always mopping up after the event.
The minute these problems are new.
Companies going insolvent and
leaving pension deficits or assets
strip are not novel. Look at the
case of a DHS. These are problems
the Government should have already
anticipated. I ask the Minister why
hasn't taken the Government till now
to begin to act and only make
The House can be
reassured that this is just the next
step in a robust, detailed, fulsome
review of our corporate government
These proposals are a range
of options available to accompany
becoming insolvent. The proactive
approach can prevent this happening
in the first place. Would he agree
that one way to ensure this would be
for organisations to take profit
warnings seriously and not continue
to hand out contracts to firms who
Can ask the Minister
which currently can do and will in
future be able do with respect to
companies like Toys "R" Us where we
had a management team led by a man
who over a long period of time were
able to loop the company with debt
using complex is written tax havens
and leaving behind the legacy of 580
million pension fund and 3000
redundancies? What can he do?
relation to Toys "R" Us, of course
he recognises, as I said previously,
that that some businesses will
always fail, but this government is
very clear that these sets of
measures, in particular the putting
the emphasis on the
responsibilities, not just of
directors, but also of shareholders,
and I think this is a very important
point, the sharp holders,
institutional shareholders, have a
voice in the way these are run.
A Conservative MP has called
for the introduction of new measures
to make sure residents of high rise
homes are given information
about fire safety,
following the horrific blaze
at Grenfell Tower in London.
Maria Miller said one
of her constituents who lived
in a privately-owned building wasn't
able even to see the fire
Eventually, when I secured a copy of
the fire risk assessments and sent
to my constituent, he was very
concerned. He was concerned to find
out that a number of fire risks had
been raised within the report,
including serious faults on defence
control panel which the report
identified as a hazard for escape
routes and evacuations.
Maria Miller said residents
had a right to know
what the fire risks were.
My bill would make sure that the
responsible person holds it a
residence meeting to go to the fire
risk assessment and review and
report on the measures being taken
to address any risks identified.
She said that after
the Grenfell Tower fire
there was an urgent need
to improve fire safety.
Everyone who lives in a high-rise
building has the right to know if
there are fire issues that have been
identified, how they are being
tackled and most important of all,
what they should do in the event of
a fire. At the moment, there is no
transparency. Patchy at this,
residents deserve better.
The bill cleared its first
but without Government support,
it's unlikely to become law.
There were calls from across
the Commons for the restoration
of power sharing at Stormont.
MPs were debating a bill to give
civil servants in Northern Ireland
the legal authority to carry out
day-to-day spending in the absence
of a devolved government.
Power sharing collapsed
14 months ago.
The Northern Ireland Secretary said
the bill represented the minimum
intervention to ensure public
services could function and it
contained no new money.
I take these measures with the
greatest reluctance. I have deferred
action here until it was clear it
would not be possible for executive
to take this legislation forward. As
we approach the end of the financial
year, it is important we proceed now
to give certainty as the Northern
Ireland civil service was to
continue to protect and preserve the
All of these
places, Northern Northern Ireland's
servants are in a position. They're
taking responsibly for providing
services, making now increasingly
autonomous decisions about services
without really having a political
master to serve for a political
backstop to watch their back if
there is a crisis in any of the
services they're providing.
course we want devolution and of
course average mice to continue to
make sure there is devolution in
Northern Ireland, but in the
meantime, there are communities and
people suffering from a lack of
decision-making and as he has
rightly said, in the meantime, we
must ensure that decisions are made
for the good of everyone.
The DUP's Nigel Dodds.
The Government's been defeated
in the Lords as peers insisted
the UK should not withdraw
from the European nuclear
until a replacement deal
was in place.
The Euratom arrangement covers
issues such as the transport
of radioactive materials,
including those used
in medical treatments,
or in nuclear power stations.
The government was defeated
by 265 votes to 194,
a majority of 71 votes
on the Nuclear Safeguards Bill.
Earlier the topic exercising their
lordships was rubbish - literally.
One Conservative former minister
thought it would be a good idea
to add litter-picking
to the National Curriculum.
And he wasn't mincing his words.
The shocking and disgusting
proliferation of litter in our towns
and countryside frankly seems this
nation. Whilst my proposal might
need some opposition and some people
would understandably be very
concerned about safety and some
teachers might not like it very
much, if it where enacted that all
children spent a couple hours
clearing litter, I believe it might
have a gradual effect on attitudes
are not only that, but it might, in
the long term, have a positive
educational impact. Would my noble
friend please go back and look, in a
very serious matter, at this
proposal or something similar and
take radical action, so we no longer
need to be shaved at the state of
our highways? Tonight at the shape
of our highways?
I agree with my
noble friend with the scourge of
litter which is why the Government
washed it with your strategy last
year. It sets out our aim to clean
up the country and to deliver a
substantial reduction within a
I'm wary of criticising
the noble blood work -- the noble
lord given his service. I'm sure
there are not a few children who are
quite relieved their are left in the
country. I wonder if the noble lord
is aware that it is extreme and
balanced your six curricula and to
not include data that is not a
Given the high rate of
illiteracy and many of our primary
schools and the low rate of humour
and see him as 11 euros, which
really affects the subsequent
education, does the noble would not
agree with me it would be far better
to concentrate on the essentials of
a good education and not expose our
children to unnecessary danger doing
foolish things which are naturally
part the curriculum?
In two weeks'
time, today, it will become a
penalty of £80 on the owner of any
vehicle from which litter is thrown.
This is a big advance because
previously they could ever be
prosecuted. We have now, the
Government has now made it a civil
penalty. Will he equally except that
the penalty for flights if they
aren't completely inadequate and the
enforcement against fly-tipping is
I think it comes
back to my earlier statement that it
is about public responsibility and
duty. I am delighted that the fines
for littering from cars have been
increased and also be aware that
from January of this year, we banned
the use of microbeads in cosmetic
substances, so the whole thrust is
to improve the protection of our
environment and I applauded the most
recent action you referred to.
And that's all we've got time for.
So from me, Mandy Baker, goodbye.