:00:12. > :00:14.Hello and welcome to Wednesday in Parliament, our look at the best
:00:15. > :00:16.of the day in the Commons and the Lords.
:00:17. > :00:30.It is the Labour Party that is clash over grammar schools.
:00:31. > :00:35.It is the Labour Party that is winning, members of the Labour Party
:00:36. > :00:39.who will take the advantages of a good education for themselvds and
:00:40. > :00:43.pull up the ladder behind them. It is not about pulling up ladders it
:00:44. > :00:44.is providing a ladder for every child.
:00:45. > :00:47.Reflections on what the Chilcot Inquiry report had to say
:00:48. > :00:52.A top senior civil servant faces the questions.
:00:53. > :00:59.What should the Cabinet Secretary do under those circumstances? H do not
:01:00. > :01:00.like hypothetical discussions. It is not, it happened.
:01:01. > :01:02.And just how should the Govdrnment proceed with Brexit?
:01:03. > :01:05.There's no shortage of advice for an EU exiting minister
:01:06. > :01:16.Does he not think a sensibld way to deal with something quite so
:01:17. > :01:19.significant and important to the British economy is to analyse the
:01:20. > :01:21.problem first before coming to a conclusion?
:01:22. > :01:25.the Prime Minister has been put under pressure over the govdrnment's
:01:26. > :01:28.controversial plans to create a new generation of state grammar
:01:29. > :01:30.schools in England as a way of improving youngsters'
:01:31. > :01:32.In strong exchanges at Prime Minister's Questions,
:01:33. > :01:35.the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn accused Theresa May of prodtcing
:01:36. > :01:37.a plan for "segregation for the few" and "second-class education
:01:38. > :01:42.The Prime Minister reminded Jeremy Corbyn, who's spent
:01:43. > :01:47.the summer fighting to retahn the Labour leadership,
:01:48. > :01:49.that he had benefited from a grammar school education
:01:50. > :01:51.First, the Labour leader sahd Theresa May's plans had brotght
:01:52. > :02:06.She has brought about the utility of Ofsted and the teaching unions, she
:02:07. > :02:11.has united former Education Secretary is on both sides of the
:02:12. > :02:17.house and truly brought abott a new era of unity in education thinking.
:02:18. > :02:23.I wonder if it is possible for her this morning within the quidt
:02:24. > :02:27.confines of this House to n`me any educational experts who backed her
:02:28. > :02:33.proposals on new grammar schools and more selection. I want to sde more
:02:34. > :02:37.good school places, a diversity of provision of education so that we
:02:38. > :02:55.seek opportunity for all and young people going as far as talents
:02:56. > :02:58.will take them. The evidencd of the effects of selection is this, in
:02:59. > :03:01.Kent, that has a grammar school system, 27% of pupils on frde school
:03:02. > :03:03.meals get five good GCSEs. Why does the Prime Minister want to dxpand a
:03:04. > :03:12.system that can only let chhldren down? Can I say that he needs to
:03:13. > :03:24.stop casting his mind back to the nineteen fifties?
:03:25. > :03:36.What we will be doing is ensuring we are able to provide good school
:03:37. > :03:42.places for the one and a qu`rter million children who are in schools
:03:43. > :03:46.that are failing, inadequatd, or need improvement. The right
:03:47. > :03:52.honourable gentleman believds in equality of outcome, I belidve in
:03:53. > :04:06.equality of opportunity. He believes in levelling down, we believe in
:04:07. > :04:12.levelling up. Mr Speaker, epuality of opportunity is not segregating
:04:13. > :04:16.children at the age of 11. The Secretary of State for Educ`tion
:04:17. > :04:23.suggested on Monday that new grammar schools may be required to set up
:04:24. > :04:28.feeder primary schools in poorer areas. Will children in these feeder
:04:29. > :04:35.primaries get automatic places in the grammar school, or will they be
:04:36. > :04:40.subject to selection? What we are doing is setting up a diverse system
:04:41. > :04:46.that provides more opportunhties. And what the right honourable
:04:47. > :04:52.gentleman appears to be defdnding is the situation we have where there is
:04:53. > :04:57.selection in our system, but it is selection by house price. I think we
:04:58. > :05:06.want to ensure children havd the ability to go where their t`lents
:05:07. > :05:11.take them. Can I remind the right honourable gentleman, gentlx remind,
:05:12. > :05:20.he went to a grammar school. I went to a grammar school. It is what got
:05:21. > :05:30.us where we are today. My shde might be rather happier about that than
:05:31. > :05:35.his. Mr Speaker, the two thhngs the Prime Minister and I have in common
:05:36. > :05:41.is we can both remember the 195 s and we can both remember gohng to a
:05:42. > :05:47.grammar school. My point is this, every child should have the best
:05:48. > :05:55.possible education they can have. We don't need and never should divide
:05:56. > :06:01.children at the age of 11, where the majority end up losing out. I notice
:06:02. > :06:07.she did not answer my questhon about feeder primary schools. On Londay,
:06:08. > :06:11.the Secretary of State for Dducation said, we have not engaged mtch in
:06:12. > :06:15.the reform of grammars, but the government would now stop the
:06:16. > :06:18.process. Can the Prime Minister confirm whether existing gr`mmar
:06:19. > :06:24.schools like those in Kent `nd Buckinghamshire will be good to
:06:25. > :06:30.widen admission policies by her government? He is right that what we
:06:31. > :06:35.are consulting on is the diversity of provision in education. We want
:06:36. > :06:40.to ensure all grammar schools do the job we believe is important, which
:06:41. > :06:45.is providing opportunities for a range of pupils and there are many
:06:46. > :06:50.examples of different ways hn which that is done through selecthve
:06:51. > :06:56.education. The Labour Party has stifled opportunity, stifled
:06:57. > :07:00.ambition in this country... It is the Labour Party that is willing,
:07:01. > :07:05.members of the Labour Party who will take the advantages of a good
:07:06. > :07:14.education for themselves and pull up the ladder behind them for other
:07:15. > :07:19.people. Mr Speaker, I am sorry the Prime Minister was unable to help
:07:20. > :07:23.anyone in Kent or Buckinghalshire in the answer to my question and
:07:24. > :07:29.presumably she will have to return to it, but it is not about pulling
:07:30. > :07:32.up ladders, it is about providing a ladder for every child. Could I
:07:33. > :07:39.quote the Chief Inspector of Schools, who said this, the notion
:07:40. > :07:44.that the poor stand to benefit from the return of grammar schools
:07:45. > :07:48.strikes me as palpable, tosh and nonsense, isn't this the case of a
:07:49. > :07:54.government heading backwards to a failed segregation for the few and
:07:55. > :08:02.second-class schooling for the many? Can't we do better than this? I
:08:03. > :08:04.recognise this may well be the last time he has an opportunity to face
:08:05. > :08:18.me across this despatch box. Certainly, sadly... Certainly if his
:08:19. > :08:28.members of Parliament have `nything to do with it. I act set he and I do
:08:29. > :08:33.not agree on everything. Actually, we probably don't agree on `nything,
:08:34. > :08:36.but I must say to him he has made his mark. Let's think of sole of the
:08:37. > :08:46.things the right honourable gentleman has introduced. Hd wants
:08:47. > :08:48.coal mines without minding them submarines without sailing them and
:08:49. > :08:55.he wants to be Labour leader without leading them. One thing we know
:08:56. > :08:57.whoever is Labour leader after their leadership election, it will be the
:08:58. > :08:59.country that loses. Theresa May being less
:09:00. > :09:01.than complimentary to Jeremx Corbyn. Well, the SNP focused on Brdxit last
:09:02. > :09:04.Wednesday and did so again this time, following
:09:05. > :09:08.the admission at the weekend by Home Secretary Amber Rudd that
:09:09. > :09:11.paying for visas to travel in Europe might become a possibility
:09:12. > :09:26.for UK citizens once Millions of people from across the
:09:27. > :09:29.UK depend on freedom of movdment across the EU for business `nd
:09:30. > :09:36.pleasure and they face the prospect of having to apply and posshbly pay
:09:37. > :09:42.for visas. Is the Prime Minhster in favour of protecting visa free
:09:43. > :09:46.travel, yes or no? There was a clear message from the British people at
:09:47. > :09:54.the time of the referendum vote that they wanted to see an end to free
:09:55. > :09:58.movement as it operated, thdy want to see control of the movemdnt of
:09:59. > :10:00.people from the EU into the UK and that is what we will deliver.
:10:01. > :10:04.Meanwhile, a plea for the government to come up with a document setting
:10:05. > :10:06.out the UK's options for its future relationship
:10:07. > :10:09.with the European single market in the light of Brexit has
:10:10. > :10:12.It came from Lord Hannay, a former ambassador
:10:13. > :10:14.who was a British Government representative in the EEC
:10:15. > :10:20.Last week, the Brexit Secretary David Davis, was reportedly slapped
:10:21. > :10:24.down by Theresa May's advisdrs for saying it was "very improbable"
:10:25. > :10:28.that Britain could stay as ` member of the single market, which allows
:10:29. > :10:41.My Lords, would the noble lord the bidders to be prepared to s`y
:10:42. > :10:46.whether the government will produce an objective, factual assessment
:10:47. > :10:50.pointing out the substantial differences between being in the
:10:51. > :10:56.single market, being outsidd the single market in free trade, but not
:10:57. > :11:02.free trade in services and not having access free of custols
:11:03. > :11:07.controls and regulatory burdens and the third option being the WTO
:11:08. > :11:11.option and paying the common external tariff on exports? Will be
:11:12. > :11:17.get the facts on that somethme soon? All I have to add to the st`tement
:11:18. > :11:22.of the government last week is the next milestone will be the
:11:23. > :11:28.triggering of Article 50. Wd are looking at all options which the
:11:29. > :11:32.noble lord eloquently outlined. Will he acknowledged there is a
:11:33. > :11:36.difference between access to the single market and membership of the
:11:37. > :11:40.single market and will he rdcognise the fact there are many countries
:11:41. > :11:45.that have increased their exports to the single market more than we have
:11:46. > :11:51.and are not members of the single market? If we are to have a
:11:52. > :11:56.situation in which EU law continues to be applied to companies hn this
:11:57. > :12:02.country which are not exporting to the EU, then brags it will not mean
:12:03. > :12:06.Brexit? He makes a number of good points earned his right to draw the
:12:07. > :12:11.distinction between access `nd membership and I would add that we
:12:12. > :12:15.must never forget we are negotiating from a position of economic
:12:16. > :12:22.strength. The noble lord in his earlier replies said that the
:12:23. > :12:26.government were busy analyshng the advantages and disadvantages in
:12:27. > :12:31.relation to the single markdt. Does he think a sensible way to deal with
:12:32. > :12:34.something significant and ilportant to the British economy is to analyse
:12:35. > :12:41.the problem before coming to a conclusion? We are looking `t a
:12:42. > :12:45.British economy sector by sdctor to see the impact of Brexit and
:12:46. > :12:50.sounding views from across the economy, which seems a perfdctly
:12:51. > :12:55.logical way to approach this. Does he accept that membership of the
:12:56. > :13:00.single market, short of EU membership, let alone access to it,
:13:01. > :13:04.Intel is a severe loss of sovereignty, especially if we leave
:13:05. > :13:10.the customs union, what Nick Clegg said was a potential tsunamh of red
:13:11. > :13:14.tape? Weren't the promises of taking back control and slashing
:13:15. > :13:18.bureaucracy if we left a work of fiction? We are assessing these
:13:19. > :13:22.options and I am not in a position to comment further.
:13:23. > :13:24.You're watching our round-up of the day
:13:25. > :13:29.What are the lessons from the Chilcot Inquiry
:13:30. > :13:32.The government has confirmed that Concentrix, the US firm acctsed
:13:33. > :13:37.of incorrectly withdrawing tax credits from hundreds of cl`imants,
:13:38. > :13:41.The Treasury Minister, Jane Ellison, was called
:13:42. > :13:54.to the Commons by Labour to explain what was happening.
:13:55. > :13:57.The firm had been employed by the government to cut tax credit
:13:58. > :14:02.But the Concentrix contract was not going to be renewed.
:14:03. > :14:07.And tricky point. Concentrix warily pay for making the right decisions.
:14:08. > :14:12.They would not receive monex for taking someone's money away wrongly.
:14:13. > :14:16.And secondly, ton-macro werd not allowed to engage in fishing
:14:17. > :14:19.expeditions to pick on people at random. But where there was evidence
:14:20. > :14:24.to suggest a claim may not be correct, they wrote to people to see
:14:25. > :14:27.further information to confhrm their eligibility.
:14:28. > :14:29.The contract was not going to be renewed.
:14:30. > :14:32.With a high volume of calls in recent weeks, Concentrix have not
:14:33. > :14:36.been providing the high levdls of customer service that the ptblic
:14:37. > :14:39.expect and which are requirdd in their contract. HMRC has thdrefore
:14:40. > :14:45.given note is that this contract will not be renewed beyond ht and
:14:46. > :14:49.date in May 20 17. HMRC is `lso no longer passing new to Concentrix,
:14:50. > :14:53.but is instead working with them as a matter of emergency to improve the
:14:54. > :14:58.service they provide to clahmants and resolve outstanding casds. I can
:14:59. > :15:01.confirm to the house that 140 HMRC staff have been redeployed with
:15:02. > :15:04.immediate effect to help thdm resolve any issues people are having
:15:05. > :15:07.with their claims as quicklx as possible.
:15:08. > :15:12.How many honourable members across the house had been contacted, as she
:15:13. > :15:15.has, by distress and action was considering often hard-workhng who
:15:16. > :15:22.have had their tax credits cut unfairly, pushing them in m`ny cases
:15:23. > :15:26.into extreme hardship. Will the government now commit to an official
:15:27. > :15:31.investigation into Concentrhx's conduct since it was awarded the
:15:32. > :15:35.contract in 2014, so that wd can determine how this situation was
:15:36. > :15:40.allowed to arise? This is a very congregated system
:15:41. > :15:44.that this government and indeed the previous government, inherited. It
:15:45. > :15:48.is the case that long-term, the right answer is to replace tax
:15:49. > :15:51.credits, as is our intention, because it is an unnecessarhly
:15:52. > :15:56.complex system that we were bequeathed. But we must makd it work
:15:57. > :16:01.while it is in operation, and that is now the focus of our acthvities.
:16:02. > :16:05.With regard to the contract and the decision HMRC have taken, I want to
:16:06. > :16:09.reassure the house monitoring has been taking place on a regular basis
:16:10. > :16:13.throughout the contract, and indeed, HMRC have worked closely with
:16:14. > :16:17.Concentrix, but it is the c`se, as is documented in recent weeks,
:16:18. > :16:23.performance has not been right, and that clearly has been something that
:16:24. > :16:27.we have noted and which we `re now taking action on.
:16:28. > :16:30.I have got cases of women who have had their tax credits stoppdd
:16:31. > :16:35.because they have been told that they are living with a man of whom
:16:36. > :16:41.they have never heard, or indeed, the tenant of the property prior to
:16:42. > :16:44.them having occupied it. Thdy have had their benefits withdrawn. What
:16:45. > :16:50.we need to know is how quickly these cases can be reviewed.
:16:51. > :16:53.We're putting significant additional resources, with immediate effect,
:16:54. > :16:58.onto those helplines to makd sure we can resolve that, and I am
:16:59. > :17:03.reassured, and I will obviotsly be talking to HMRC consistentlx on this
:17:04. > :17:08.fact, as soon as we can resolve the fact of a case, we can get loney
:17:09. > :17:12.into people's accounts in a matter of a short number of days.
:17:13. > :17:16.Stuart Jose. I'm delighted that the Concdntix
:17:17. > :17:21.contract is not to be renewdd. That will come as some comforts, at
:17:22. > :17:26.least, to those who have bedn affected then by their activity
:17:27. > :17:31.This contract was designed to save ?1 billion in fraud and overpayment.
:17:32. > :17:36.Minister tells us 300 billion has been saved. How much of the
:17:37. > :17:41.so-called savings work as a result of false accusations by Concentrix
:17:42. > :17:45.against tax credit recipients? And if there were somewhere between 120
:17:46. > :17:49.and perhaps many thousands of people affected, why was this contract not
:17:50. > :17:52.cancelled sooner? Is it not, surely, with this fiasco
:17:53. > :17:57.around this particular contract time for a full review of
:17:58. > :18:01.outsourcing to private comp`nies in the welfare system? And acttally,
:18:02. > :18:04.looking at both whether it hs appropriate at all, or if it is
:18:05. > :18:09.going to continue to be dond, what better provision is done by civil
:18:10. > :18:14.servants to oversee these contracts to ensure this sort of thing never
:18:15. > :18:18.happens again? Well, again, I would urge mdmbers to
:18:19. > :18:26.keep a degree of perspectivd. There are lots of contracts that deliver
:18:27. > :18:29.what we want, and indeed, it is worth noting again, this contract
:18:30. > :18:30.delivered more than ?280 million in savings for the taxpayer.
:18:31. > :18:33.The Education Secretary has said she won't press ahead with plans
:18:34. > :18:35.to scrap the role of parent governors in schools in England
:18:36. > :18:37.Justine Greening told the Education Committee that parent
:18:38. > :18:39.governors played a vital role in school improvement.
:18:40. > :18:45.She said the key aim of her policies was to improve social mobilhty.
:18:46. > :18:49.But that prompted more questions about the controversial plans
:18:50. > :19:05.What is your vision about the purpose of education? What do you
:19:06. > :19:07.think it is? Our Prime Minister has talkdd about
:19:08. > :19:11.making sure that Britain is a country where everyone can be
:19:12. > :19:18.successful, no matter where they starts. And education is cldarly at
:19:19. > :19:25.the heart of how we're going to ensure that happens. I don't believe
:19:26. > :19:29.that anybody starting --'s starting point in life should define where
:19:30. > :19:32.they finish. I didn't accept that for myself, I don't think wd should
:19:33. > :19:36.accept it for anyone else. The key question I want to get
:19:37. > :19:40.straight to is how and why xou think grammar schools will improvd social
:19:41. > :19:43.mobility, when there is a stfficient lack of evidence, and also, the
:19:44. > :19:47.evidence suggests the opposhte in areas such as Kent.
:19:48. > :19:52.For the children in grammar schools, particularly children on frde school
:19:53. > :19:55.meals, their progress comes on in leaps and bounds, and actually, the
:19:56. > :20:01.grammar schools are closing the attainment gap that we have between
:20:02. > :20:04.disadvantaged children, who are on free school meals, and other
:20:05. > :20:08.children, and doing a great job of doing that. So they absolutdly have
:20:09. > :20:11.something to offer, and helping is make sure that children don't get
:20:12. > :20:15.left behind, but if they have been left behind, catch up. I thhnk the
:20:16. > :20:23.real prize is making sure that they do that, but at the same tile, play
:20:24. > :20:26.a role bettering other schools around them as well.
:20:27. > :20:30.That is the real prize. But do you accept that is based on a concept
:20:31. > :20:33.and an idea that there is no evidence to suggest, or to prove,
:20:34. > :20:38.that grammar schools do havd the power to pull up other schools? And
:20:39. > :20:41.what about the stigma and disincentive it causes to those who
:20:42. > :20:44.do not get into the grammar school? Do you worry about that in terms of
:20:45. > :20:48.social mobility? I think there is evidence, `nd a lot
:20:49. > :20:51.of good work of grammar is `lready in working closely with othdr
:20:52. > :20:54.schools. What we want to sed, though, is that become the norm and
:20:55. > :21:02.we want to drive it further, faster, and we want grammars to do lore but
:21:03. > :21:06.we think that there is a successful approach their that we really need
:21:07. > :21:10.to look at. And so we want to get on with it. When Michael Gove would
:21:11. > :21:16.have sat here and talk about what he wanted to do in terms of ac`demies
:21:17. > :21:19.and how much more broadly hd wanted to do that, or indeed, Lord Dennis,
:21:20. > :21:26.those are important steps forward, but I think they are based on a
:21:27. > :21:34.clear sense of how our policies are based on a clear sense of how
:21:35. > :21:38.grammars are doing. 99% of the maggot or outstanding, -- 98% of
:21:39. > :21:41.them are good or outstanding. But we need to make sure all to have access
:21:42. > :21:42.to a good or outstanding school place.
:21:43. > :21:45.The inquiry by Sir John Chilcot and his team into the 2003 hnvasion
:21:46. > :21:47.of Iraq and the aftermath was, to say the least,
:21:48. > :21:52.The Chilcot report ran to 12 volumes and some 2.5 million words.
:21:53. > :21:55.It took a long time coming, but when it was finally
:21:56. > :21:57.published, its conclusion were strong.
:21:58. > :22:01.Chilcot concluded there had been a rush to war without peaceful
:22:02. > :22:03.options looked at and that there had been too little planning
:22:04. > :22:10.A Commons committee is now inquiring into the inquiry.
:22:11. > :22:14.Facing the questions was thd head of the civil service.
:22:15. > :22:21.First, did Chilcot have to take quite so long?
:22:22. > :22:28.I mean, a lot of people think that the breadth of the terms of
:22:29. > :22:32.reference, the fact that thdre was no budget, there was no suggested
:22:33. > :22:36.end date, made it as open-ended as possible, so that the grass should
:22:37. > :22:40.be as long as possible that all these issues were going to be kicked
:22:41. > :22:47.into. And this has not been an exercise that really has improved
:22:48. > :22:52.accountability. All the people that were involved have left polhtics.
:22:53. > :22:55.I think that is a travesty. I think it is a very authoritative `nd brand
:22:56. > :23:00.is a piece of work, there h`s been found to be my most observers. -,
:23:01. > :23:03.Branson. Heitinga characterhsation of the way in which the terls of
:23:04. > :23:06.reference were set out in order to kick this into the long grass is
:23:07. > :23:09.completely wrong. I don't think that's true in the slightest. I
:23:10. > :23:13.think the expectation was that it would not be more than a ye`r or so
:23:14. > :23:18.before it concluded. That w`s the intention. And while I agred with
:23:19. > :23:22.your conclusion that it would have been desirable to have got darlier
:23:23. > :23:28.conclusions, if you like, I don t think you can attribute that to
:23:29. > :23:30.anyone's bad faith. I think the enquiry team work incrediblx hard
:23:31. > :23:32.and produced an outstanding afford. So on to the criticisms
:23:33. > :23:35.in the Chilcot report about a haste within Downing Street to go
:23:36. > :23:42.to war in Iraq. I think a lot of this is not so much
:23:43. > :23:45.a binary question, have you got the right meetings all the right people
:23:46. > :23:49.on the meetings. It is how those meetings operate in practicd, which
:23:50. > :23:53.is a much more subjective and difficult to analyse issue. But it
:23:54. > :23:58.is by far and away the most important thing, in my view, about
:23:59. > :24:01.the whole Chilcott enquiry, is, do you have a culture in which senior
:24:02. > :24:07.officials and ministers meeting around external experts feel that it
:24:08. > :24:12.is possible to offer an altdrnative view to the prevailing wisdom, so as
:24:13. > :24:15.to avoid groupthink. A lot of what went wrong in Iraq is, a genuinely
:24:16. > :24:20.held view about what the intelligence mental what we`pons of
:24:21. > :24:23.mass destruction were there, and which turned out to be wrong. But in
:24:24. > :24:27.the many, many meetings, whdther there were ministers or not, many
:24:28. > :24:31.meetings took place... Yes, but when the Prime Minhster
:24:32. > :24:38.sent another letter to the President of the United States, using those
:24:39. > :24:43.now very famous words, "I whll be with you whatever," he was `dvised
:24:44. > :24:46.by officials that this position should be shared with other Cabinet
:24:47. > :24:51.colleagues before he sent the letter, and he refused to do so
:24:52. > :24:55.What should the Cabinet Secretary do under the circumstances?
:24:56. > :24:58.I don't really like getting involved in hypothetical the sessions.
:24:59. > :25:03.It's not hypothetical! It h`ppened! You are asking me what I wotld do
:25:04. > :25:08.now. What with the Cabinet Secretary do under such circumstances? I think
:25:09. > :25:11.in that situation, the Cabinet Secretary should seek a one,on-one
:25:12. > :25:14.meeting with the Prime Minister to speak to them directly and say to
:25:15. > :25:18.them they really must share this collectively. It is going to become
:25:19. > :25:23.government policy. That is the way the Cabinet works.
:25:24. > :25:27.But officials did that and ht didn't happen.
:25:28. > :25:32.It carried on. I I don't know whether they did they didn't.
:25:33. > :25:36.He was behaving like a preshdent instead of a Prime Minister.
:25:37. > :25:40.I certainly agree with you, but private members to the Primd
:25:41. > :25:41.Minister to the president of the letters they should meet collective
:25:42. > :25:46.approval and would be today. Until then, from me,
:25:47. > :25:53.Keith Macdougall, goodbye.