04/11/2015 Wednesday in Parliament

This is Wednesday in Parliament, our look at the day at Westminster.

On the programme, the Government unveils proposals to help combat

It will give the men and women of hours security and intelligence

agencies and our law enforcement agencies who do so much to keep a

safe and secure the powers they need to protect our country.

The Prime Minister tackles questions on tax credit cuts and the NHS

We suffered a defeat in the House of Lords, so we have taken the tax

credit proposals are away and are looking at them.

And MPs expressed concern about the future of policing.

I believe this government is about to cause serious damage to our

police service. But first, the Government has

unveiled its latest proposals to help the police and security

services tackle criminal and terrorist activity

online. The draft Investigatory Powers Bill

contains more safeguards, after a previous attempt to update

the law in 2012 was dubbed who argued it was too intrusive

and had to be abandoned. The Home Secretary said law

enforcement and intelligence gathering had become a lot more

difficult in the digital age. It is right, therefore, that those

who are charged with protecting us should have the powers they need to

do so, but it is the role of Government and Parliament to ensure

that there are limits to those powers. Let me be clear: the draft

Bill we are publishing today is not a return to the draft communications

data Bill of 2012. It will not include powers to force UK companies

to capture and retain third party internet traffic from companies

based overseas; it will not compel overseas communications service

providers to meet our domestic retention obligations for

communications data; and it will not ban encryption or do anything to

undermine the security of people's The Home Secretary said law

enforcement agencies would not have access to people's full internet

browsing history, and an internet connection record

would only demonstrate which social media sites

had been accessed. And for communications to be

intercepted, there would need to be a warrant from the Home Secretary

formally approved by a judge. It will provide safeguarding

powers. It will give the men and women of our intelligence agencies

and our line force and agencies who do so much to keep us safe and

secure the powers they need to protect our country.

The issues the proposed legislation seeks to tackle go way beyond party

politics. Any Government will face a difficult task in balancing the

security of the nation with the privacy and liberties of individual

citizens. As someone who was in the Home Office on 7/7, I know that that

challenge has got harder in recent years. We will examine carefully the

detail of the draft Bill and seek to improve the safeguards to build

trust. Having listened carefully to what the Home Secretary has said

today, I believe that she has responded to legitimate concerns and

broadly got that difficult balance right.

Her last Bill on this fraught but important subject hit the buffers.

The current Bill is a much improved model, although I have the feeling

that, under the bonnet, it retains some of the flaws of its

predecessor. The Home Office has clearly put in a lot of work, which

I welcome, as I do the dropping of some of the key provisions on

We are concerned that a hybrid system-involving both political and

judicial authorisation-might add an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy and

lead to error and delay in urgent situations. Can she give us any

We have every confidence that the process will not add greater

bureaucracy, but will add the necessary independent judicial

authorisation. In emergency warrant cases, the Secretary of State will

be able to authorise a warrant immediately, but that will be

followed by a speedy review by the judge to ensure there is still

However much we all agree that action is necessary to combat

terrorism and other forms of criminality, I remain concerned,

even if I am one of only a few who do, about the excessive powers that

will be given to the security authorities in addition to what they

already have, although judicial involvement is better than no

The Home Secretary said the bill strengthens safeguards.

The bill is still in draft form and can be amended,

even before it begins its journey through Parliament.

At PMQs this week, both the Prime Minister and the Labour Leader

began their stint at the dispatch box by marking Remembrance Sunday,

paying tribute to those who lost their lives in conflict.

Last week, Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn used all of his allotted

Last week I asked him the same question six times. Now he has had a

week to think about it. Canny guarantee that next April nobody

will be worse off as a result of cuts to working tax credits. Let me

be clear. There lobby and 11,000 personal allowance, so you can earn

?11,000 before you pay tax. There will be a national living wage of ?7

20, giving the lowest paid in our country at ?20 per week pay rise. We

suffered the defeat in the House of Lords, so we have taken the

proposals away, we're looking at them, we will come forward with new

proposals in the Autumn Statement. At that point in three weeks' time I

will be able to answer his question. The Prime Minister said that if

the Labour Leader wanted to ask the he was sure he would find that

very entertaining and interesting. This isn't about entertainment, Mr

Speaker. A serving soldier, a private in the Army with two

children and a partner with us over ?2000 next April. I ask a question,

surely that is the whole point of our Parliament, that we are able to

put questions to those in authority? So I have a question from Kieran, a

veteran of the first Gulf War. His family are set to lose out. He

writes, it is a worry to the family, this fear and trepidation,

about whether we are going to be able to get by. Is this how the

government treats veterans of the armed services? All soldiers will

benefit from the ?11,000 personal allowance, so they will be able to

earn more money before they even start paying tax. What I say to the

serving soldier is that he is now dealing with an opposition party the

leader of which said he couldn't see any use for UK forces anywhere in

the world at any time. That serving soldier wouldn't have a job if the

honourable gentleman ever got anywhere near power. We remember all

sacrifices from the past and present conflict. We sure our respect to

service men and women and their families. Many service widows

continue to be deprived of their forces pensions if there is a change

in their personal circumstances. Does he agree this is a clear breach

in the spirit of the military covenant? We made a big change last

who had remarried were able to get who had remarried were able to get

their pensions. That was a big step forward, welcomed by the British

Legion. If there are further steps we need to look at, I am happy to

look at them and see what can be done.

The Prime Minister answering SNP's

Did he use all the questions on the issue of tax credits?

No, he moved on to ask the prime about the NHS.

I quote Doctor Clive Mantle, the president of the Royal College of

emergency medicine, who said this winter will be worse than last

winter. Last winter was the worst winter we have ever had in the NHS.

Can the Prime Minister guarantee there will be no winter crisis in

the NHS this year? Jeremy Corbyn began

his questions saying he was awaiting details on the proposals for pay

for junior doctors. When it comes to the Royal College

of Emergency Medicine, the support what we're saying a 7 day NHS and

the junior doctor. I would urge all junior doctors who are watching this

to go on the Department of Health website and look at the pay

calculator, because they will be able to see there that no one

working legal hours will lose out in any way at all. This is only 11%

basic pay rise and pottable deliver is a stronger and safer NHS.

As for the state of our NHS more generally, it is benefiting from the

?10 billion that we are putting in-money that the Labour party at

the last election said it did not support. I believe the NHS has the

resources that it needs, and that is why we are seeing it treating more

patients, with more treatments, more drugs being delivered and more tests

being carried out. It is a much stronger NHS, and the reason is

You are watching Wednesday in Parliament.

The Home Secretary announces ways to tackle online crime

Still to come... There is no place like home.

Could prefab buildings provide the houses of the future?

Now, when are three runways quieter than two?

A committee of MPs found the answer when they met

Heathrow Airport bosses and Sir Howard Davies,

the man who chaired the commission which backed the idea of building

a new third runway at Heathrow. Sir Howard was giving evidence

to the Environmental Audit Committee, when Labour's

Geraint Davies posed the question, how could a third runway

On some noise measures, a new three-runway airport would,

in fact, be less irritating than an existing two-runway

airport, partly because of the different configuration

of the flights. You could put them further to the north and over-flying

fewer people. You have got flights coming in at a higher level.

Some of the flights coming in low over central London in the

morning would not be coming in low over central London

in the morning. They would be coming in over the less-populated areas

a bit further to the north and they would be higher.

So, for some of the measures, a three-runway airport

is less noisy than a two-runway airport, at that time.

Earlier in the session, Heathrow chief executive,

John Holland-Kaye, outlined to the committee how successful

he believed the airport can be at limiting sound pollution.

And he was pushed on limiting night flights

It is something we need to keep working on. We need to discuss it

with airlines and the government. We will make our statement on that in

due course. When is that? When we have concluded the agreement. We are

not in a position to do that at the moment. With regard to what John

said about Nate flakes, the fourth runway as a matter for government. I

realise this is an easy of great controversy, but I have to as people

watching in the public gallery not to intervene. Please, beer weathers,

listen to the evidence. My apologies. I am interested in your

views on the fourth runway. The session last year, you said the

succession of a third runway would pave the way for the campaign for a

fourth runway. What we have said is that Heathrow is capable of

expanding, if that were the case. That is entirely a question for the

future. On the specific question, this is for the government to

decide. The government has said it

will make a decision on whether to go ahead with expansion

at Heathrow At Lords' Question Time,

Liberal Democrat peer Lord Marks asked a question on the current

policy towards the treatment of transgender individuals

In the criminal justice system. Prison rules say that prisoners

should be placed according to their gender,

as recognised by UK law, usually, as stated on

their birth certificate or, if a person has a gender

recognition certificate, giving them a new birth certificate

in their acquired gender. The National Offender Management

Service Policy on the care and management of transexual

prisoners states that prisoners are normally placed

according to their legally-recognised gender.

The guidelines allow, however, some room for discretion and,

in such cases, senior prison management will review

the circumstances with relevant experts,

to protect the prisoner's safety and well-being and that

of other prisoners. Tara Hudson, a woman after

six years of gender reconstruction, was originally imprisoned

at HMP Bristol - a tough prison for 600 men,

causing her great distress. She was moved to a women's

prison only after the judges considering her case appeal

suggested that the prison service reconsider. How can prison

allocation be so insensitive to transgender offenders,

particularly in light of the noble lord's answer?

And will the noble lord's department ensure that,

in the future, if a transgender offender

is at risk of a custodial sentence, then full and careful

thought should be given to allocation before sentence,

rather than after placement? It is the policy of the Ministry

of Justice Executive Agency But I can, however, without

breaching any of the obligations, assure the House that she is being

held in an appropriate environment and is receiving the care

that she needs. There is deep concern about

treatments within the criminal justice system.

There are, however, good works being undertaken,

such as at HMP Stafford. Will he commit and reassure

the House that there is ongoing training and awareness-raising

on the issue of transsexuality, particularly when the criminal

justice aspects are outsourced? There is an emphasis on the prison

officer training, which has been extended in its length

and its content refreshed. It is all about respecting the needs

and the rights of each individual prisoner in their care

and there is a component of the mandatory training which

addresses the Equality Act, and the nine characteristics

protected under that legislation. The minister seem to suggest that it

was at the point of prison Surely, when a person is

leaving court, they need to be in the right van to go to the correct

person. So, should the decision not be taken earlier, before they leave

court? And can he assure us that the staff there are properly trained

and a decision is taken My noble lady makes an

important point. The National Offender Management

Service is currently looking at ways of facilitating the proper

recording of this information, through the introduction of an

equalities self-declaration form, to be completed by all defendants

who are adjourned for Labour has predicted

a dangerous future for policing if the government proceeds with

funding cuts. Shadow Home Secretary Andy Burnham

warned that, if cuts went beyond 10%, public

safety would be put at risk and some But Home Secretary Theresa May

insisted that communities in England and Wales were safer than ever

and accused Labour When the Home Secretary gets it

right, she will have my support. I have just offered her that

on the Investigatory Powers Bill. But where she

and the government get it wrong, then, Madam Deputy Speaker,

I am not going to hold back from saying so, particularly where public

and community safety is at risk. I believe this government is

about to cause serious damage to I spoke to my Police

Crime Commissioner yesterday. He confirmed to me, and I quote,

"We are in a strong position to face future financial challenges, whilst

maintaining frontline services." Does he agree with me, that many

factors influence performance, That may well be the case,

Madam Deputy Speaker. But could I gently point out to her

that it is not the case everywhere. I would refer her to

the comments made by the Chief Constable of Lancashire

yesterday, before the Home Affairs Select Committee, when he said,

"Going forward, if the cuts come through, people in Lancashire will

not be as safe as they are now." Three weeks from now,

the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be standing at the dispatch box

announcing his spending review. If he follows through

on what he said at the Budget, the country will soon have

a very different police force, providing a much-reduced service

from the one he has just described. As it stands, like other unprotected

departments, the Home Office is in line for cuts over the next five

years of between 25-40%. If we assume the government are

working towards keeping it at the lower end of that spectrum, that is

still a massive hit on resources. As I understand his position,

he is saying that cuts of up to 10% could safely be made now, because

he accepts, in the terms of this motion, that further efficiencies

could be made in the police budget. Therefore, by definition,

he has accepted the efficiencies that have been made so far have not

damaged policing - by definition. If further cuts can be made,

up to 10%, he therefore accepts that the reductions which have been made

to date have not damaged policing. Is it not, therefore,

not extraordinarily that the Labour Party opposed those

reductions in spending, said that Is it not the case that they are

saying exactly the same thing now? I am glad the honourable

gentleman has intervened. I am not saying anything

of the kind. I am not saying that

the cuts they have managed, to date, I have just been describing how

functions as important as I have also pointed to

the fact that crime is rising. These reforms are working

and crime is falling. This government has achieved

something that no other We have proved that it is possible

to improve services and maintain public trust and confidence, whilst

saving money for the taxpayer. It is with some dismay that I see

the party opposite making exactly the same mistakes as they did

in 2010 - misusing statistics, worrying decent members of the

public and wilfully ignoring the I am really surprised to hear

her say that crime is falling. In Cleveland, we have seen

an increasing in crime of 21% - that includes a 77% increase

in violence against the person. That does not accord with what

she says about crime falling. Under the last Labour government,

crime fell by 43%. We are very proud of that record

and it is disappointing to see this I think I am right in saying that

the figures she quotes for crime falling under the last Labour

government were from exactly the same basis as the figures I have

quoted for crime falling over the last five years -

namely the Independent Crime Survey. Now, could prefab buildings be

the solution to Britain's housing They were the answer to many

of the housing problems after World War II and they conjure up

images of flat-roofed, wooden-clad, In Westminster Hall,

Conservative MP Damian Collins said new techniques and technologies

for building homes and factories While the number

of finished new homes was increasing at 130,000 per year, he says it

remains below the target figure. Modern prefabrication could be

the solution. The warrant prefabrication conjures

up images for many overs of the post-World War II situation, brought

into solve the huge housing need we were faced with. But on-site

manufacturer assembly have transformed the application for a

modern housing. A project in Islington Manchester can pre-order

and design their own home before it is assembled. It can be assembled

on-site at a lower cost than would normally be the cost for standard

construction. Other companies will have similar schemes. I think we are

having an exciting new technology which will revolutionise

house-building in this country. The Local Government minister,

Brandon Lewis, was similarly optimistic

about the possible solutions offered We need to build more homes in our

country. We need to build them in our communities. We all appreciate

the high quality, thoughtful design and built quickly in the right

places. Fast housing manufacturer can achieve all this. It has a

normal potential for new growth as the factory industry. I would

recommend that we look at this more often. And finally, what do you do

in the absence of the front bench spokesman? This was faced by the

Melbourne-based Deputy Speaker. We now come, I am purposely speaking

rather slowly. We know come to the opposition Day motion in the name of

the leader, I cannot go much more slowly than this. Some filling and

was provided by an honourable member from the Conservative benches. On a

point of order, obviously, the house is in anticipation of important

papers. What procedures are in place if someone does not cannot? The

honourable gentleman makes an excellent and most immediate point.

All is well that ends well. Just as I was looking for a solution, the

passion of a certain member of a person appearing at the door, I no

longer need to consider that solution. We know come to the

opposition day motion, to be moved. Thank you very much and I beg to

move the motion in my name and those of my right honourable and

honourable friends. Why see a little out of breath? That is all for me.

Thank you for watching. Goodbye.