06/12/2017 Wednesday in Parliament

(Music)

Hello and welcome to our round up

of Wednesday in Parliament.

On this programme: There's

conflicting advice for

Theresa May as talks continue

on an interim Brexit deal.

One Labour MP reckons it's time.

She added jobs her redlines, DUP...

But a leading Brexiteer urges

the Prime Minister to stand

firm ahead of the next

round of talks in Brussels.

Was she apply a new coat of paint to

her redlines? Because I fear Monday

we will look a bit pink.

Also on this programme: MPs demand

answers about the promised

Brexit impact assessments.

And: a committee looks

into the extent of sexual

abuse and harassment.

But first: good progress has

been made, but there's

more work to be done.

That was Theresa May's assessment

of the state of the Brexit talks.

The Prime Minister was answering

questions in the Commons

for the first time since

the Democratic Unionist Party,

whose support she needs to win key

votes at Westminster,

objected to a draft proposal drawn

up by the UK and the EU.

The DUP said the plans which aimed

to avoid a hard border by aligning

regulations in Northern Ireland

with the Republic of Ireland,

were not acceptable.

Jeremy Corbyn attacked what he said

was a coalition of chaos.

Two months after the original

deadline, is the Prime Minister now

able to end the confusion and

clearly outline what the

Government's position is now with

regard to the Irish border was

Mac.

I am very happy to talk about the

position. It is the exact same

decision that took in the Lancaster

House speech, that I took and

affords a speech, that we have taken

consistently in the negotiations.

Which is we will ensure that there

is no hard border between Northern

Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

We would do that while we respect

the constitutional integrity of the

United Kingdom. And while we respect

the internal markets and protect the

internal markets of the United

Kingdom. And those Labour members

who shout how? That is the whole

point of the second phase of the

Bush Asians. -- negotiations.

Because we both deliver this. We aim

to deep River this as part of our

overall trade deal between the

United Kingdom and the European

Union.

Jeremy Corbyn turned to

comments for David Davis the Brexit

Secretariat

the Brexit Secretary about analysis

of the impact of Brexit.

he told the programme in June that

it is my job that I do not think

about and I do not make guesses. I

try and make decisions. You make is

based on data, the data has been

gathered. We have 50 nearly 60

sectoral analyses done. This House

voted to see these analyses. But

today, the Brexit secretary told the

select committee that they do not

exist. Well, Candy premise or put us

out of our misery? Due date exist or

don't they? Had they done the work

or haven't they? That is surely one

question she can answer after 18

months.

The House requested as I 58

sectoral impact assessments. There

are no 58 sectoral impact

assessments. There was sectoral

analysis over 800 pages of sectoral

analysis has been published. And

made available to the select

committee. And arrangements have

been made available for members of

this House to see it. We are very

clear that we will not give a

running commentary on negotiations.

But what we will do is work for what

this country wants. We will ensure

we meet the European Union in March

2000 19. We believe the internal

market, we believe the customs union

at the same time. And we will ensure

that there is a hard border between

Northern Ireland and the Republic of

Ireland when we do it.

Well, we'll take a look at exactly

what David Davis said in that

committee in just a moment,

but staying with Prime

Minister's Questions,

plenty of other Mps had questions,

and suggestions, about Brexit.

The clock is ticking and we need a

job that keeps us in the single

market and the customs union. To do

otherwise would devastate the

economy and cost jobs. What the

prime -- with the promise to

recognise that such a deal would

dissolve the average worker

question. Anything less will be a

failure of leadership.

I have to say

to the right honourable General

meant that he could use to park on

the wrong tree. We believe the

single market and the customs union.

A Plaid MP turned to which powers

would go from Brussels to

the nations of the UK after Brexit.

This Scrabble to repatriate powers

from Brussels provides a grubby

excuse to deny our democratic rights

and we'll.

What we will be doing the

movie the European Union is grabbing

powers back from Brussels for the

United Kingdom. And that is exactly

right. And following that, we expect

to see a significant increase in the

decision-making power of default the

ministrations.

The prime Minister

has been unable to provide us with a

present scenario that will meet her

redlines and be except with to her

cabinets, to Ireland, and the DUP.

Is it therefore time that she either

dropped her redlines, DUP, with the

pretence that she can govern this

country?

Before she goes to

Brussels, would she apply new coats

of paint to her redlines? Because I

fear on Monday, they will look pink.

When the British people voted to

lead the European superset, they

voted to end the free movement of

people. To end sending billions

sending billions and billions of

pounds to the EU every year. And

they voted to prevent out was being

judged by our own judges. By Mr,

resell on course to deliver that?

And if we have a problem, would it

help if I came over to Brussels with

you to sort it out?

After something of a pause,

Theresa May said she was always

happy to spend time in Peter Bone's

company and the Government

was on course to deliver

what the people of the UK voted for.

Jeremy Corbyn quoted

one Conservative donor.

MPs, you voted -- voted to release

the press impact studies to show

have 58 different sectors of the

economy would be affected by the EU

-- British exit from the EU. But

when the documents were released,

they turned out to be incomplete.

David Davis was asked to appear

before the MPs to explain just why

that was. And he told them that the

impact assessments was in fact

impact assessments at all.

Dance to

the question is no. The Government

has not undertaken any impact

assessments for leaving the EU. So,

there isn't one for example on the

sector?

On the automotive sector.

No. No map one for financial

services? Note to all of them. Don't

know to all of them. --

Nadal them.

Doesn't it strike you as strange

that the Government undertakes

impact assessments all the time, on

the most fundamental change, that

we're facing as a country, you just

notice of the Government has

undertaken any assessments at all

looking at the impact on individual

sectors?

The first thing to say, Mr

Chairman, is when these sectoral

analyses were initiated, they were

done to understand the effect of

various options. What the outcome

would be. You do not need to do an

impact assessment to understand that

if there is a regulatory hurdle

between our producers and an market,

that they will have an impact. It

will have an effect. The effect of

that -- the assessment of that

effect is not as straightforward as

people imagine. I am not a fan of

economic models because they have

all proven wrong.

And we have been

treated to enormous descriptions of

arrangements, impact assessments,

mathematical purchase, empirical

approaches, broadbrush analysis...

And probably lots more. You could

understand my members of the

committee could feel a little bit

bumpy. Because none of this is an

undertaking it. I think what I'd be

interested to know is how is his

material action being used and shape

in our negotiating strategy?

I had

not use phrases like impact

assessment. That is not my phrase.

Sectoral analysis was used for a

real reason. It is the analysis of

what the sector was like.

Can you

just explain where, in your mind,

this misunderstanding grows from the

House and the public at large who

thought that there were impact

assessments, and yet there weren't

impact assessments. Where did this

misunderstanding come from?

You have

to put that question to the people

would use the passphrase impact

assessment. I am making a fall for

myself or not correcting her when

she was argument impact assessments.

I was assuming she meant sectoral

analyses which is the only phrase I

have used. But in the debate in the

House, I'm sure Walker made that

phrase.

To the Government undertake

an assessment of leaving the customs

union before the Cabinet voted on

decisions?

Not a form one.

So no

formal assessment?

No quantitative

assessment. There is always a

judgement made on qualitative

things, but not a qualitative one.

Isn't that quite extraordinary?

No.

They are phenomenal numbers of

variables in that. At the last thing

I was at when I took you through for

example, and the impact of trade

agreements, and if I said to your

fire member correctly, that the book

trade will increase by 25% after by

40%. And that is the son of

things... They're qualitatively

different. There are three Carrick

-- trading is being carried out by

the European Union who have not been

particularly beneficial to the

United Kingdom. There've been others

for hundreds this was when I've been

much more beneficial. We have to

make judgements about the

effectiveness of ourselves in that

upcoming relationship. The sort of

judgements were taken into account.

You are watching Wednesday in

Parliament with me, Alicia McCarthy.

Still to come in this programme, MPs

continue their detailed scrutiny of

the EU withdrawal bill. Which was EU

law onto the UK statute book.

Time magazine in the United States

has named "the Silence Breakers",

women who spoke out against sexual

abuse and harassment,

as its "Person of the Year".

A decision associated

with the #MeToo hashtag which sprang

up as allegations emerged

against Hollywood producer,

Harvey Weinstein.

Time's move came as the Women

and Equalities Committee looked

into whether or not it should hold

an inquiry into women's

experiences of everyday sexism

and sexual harassment.

Just how prevalent was the problem?

YouGov did a national poll. 64% of

women of all ages have experienced

unwanted sexual harassment in public

places. An additional 35% have

experienced unwanted sexual

touching. 45% had experienced

unwanted sexual touching in other

spaces.

Similar work had been

carried out by the TUC.

Over half of the women polled had

experienced sexual harassment at

some point in their lives. For the

18 to 24-year-old group, it was two

thirds of women who experienced some

form of sexual harassment. This was

all different types of sexual

harassment. Some of those were

serious assaults, some were to do

with jokes and unwanted comments in

the workplace, which is also serious

by different.

And recent events had led

to surveys of peoples views

about sexual harassment:

It was not in line at all with what

the law says sexual harassment is

and actually some quite worrying

findings and lots of things that I

would consider to be very serious

and I am sure it that Mark would

consider to be serious crimes were

not perceived by everybody to be

sexual harassment or to be crimes

and were seen as part of everyday

life.

The basic word for me is

unwanted. It is any conduct that is

unwanted. There for there is an onus

on the person who is committing it

to understand that their behaviour

is either wanted or not. What we are

trying to do then is create an

environment where people who receive

unwanted behaviour have the strength

and support to come forward and

report it. I think seeing more and

more of that but it is very basic.

It is unwanted behaviour.

So what was to be done and how much

of a role did education have?

When we be addressing a significant

part of the Republic we addressed

gender stereotyping?

I think you

need to do both. I do not think it

is either addressing gender

stereotyping in schools and

magically solving this problem,

there will be no more sexual

harassment, these boys will go on to

have much more respectful attitudes

towards women. I think it is part of

a picture. I think it is part of a

series of actions that you might

want to look at and addressing

different acts acts of -- different

aspects of sexism in society. I

think there are correlations between

for instance, very male-dominated

workplaces, making a false

distinction between sexism and

sexual harassment. I think a lot of

the stuff overlaps.

There was a lot

of work on prevention to be done. We

have had workshops on compulsory sex

education but of I were to wave my

wand, it would be up about making it

more compulsory to make sure that

the issues we're talking about here

today are talked about in schools by

experts but there is also a need, I

think, to update some of our laws in

this regard which might then send a

clearer message, which might then

help to bring people together to a

common understanding of what

constitutes sexual harassment and

why it is harmful.

And the focus needed to be

on the harm to the victim:

Sexual assault of young women over

13 is one of the highest

contributors to sexual violence. It

is trivialized but it is one of the

areas in which we are seeing more

and more reports and it is not

always taken seriously and it is not

always treated appropriately come up

but that is on the statute books, so

it is implementation as much as new

laws, that I think we need.

Now back to Brexit.

The independent Northern Ireland MP

Sylvia Hermon has made

a plea for the principles

of the Good Friday Agreement to be

preserved in the EU Withdrawal Bill.

In a powerful speech,

she recalled how the Troubles had

affected her family and community.

She said her amendment was designed

to protect the principles behind

the Belfast Agreement of mutual

respect for all communities.

I grew up not in some stately home.

I grew up on a 50 acre farm west of

the river. Very close to what

unfortunately became known as the

murder triangle for the number of

people who were murdered, both

Catholic and Protestant, by the IRA,

and subsequently by loyalist as

well. Many of our farming neighbours

were attacked on tractors or went

out to a shed and opened the shed

door and there was a booby trap and

had their heads or faces blown off.

-- Hans or faces. I would say ever

so loudly and strongly to senior

members that I do not want to hear

them or see them on television

talking about pushing ahead and no

deal. It is an absolute nonsense. It

is so reckless and so dangerous. In

the event of no deal, we certainly

face a hard border and dissident

Republicans will regard HMRC

officers and other officers and UK

border officials as legitimate

targets. I do not want that on my

conscience. I don't believe for one

moment that the Prime Minister wants

that either.

The Prime Minister, 48

hours ago, reached an agreement

which seems to show that she shared

the honourable Lady's concerns,

because you cannot have an open

border without having some

regulatory conversions, customs

convergence on both sides. That all

came to an end when the DUP vetoed

it, which makes it extremely

important that her amendment is now

put in the Bill to make sure we are

not backsliding but of course, the

DUP can always, actually, rescue

their reputation if they confirm

that their only objection was to not

having regulatory customs

convergence across the whole United

Kingdom, and they were quite

prepared to raise that regulatory

and customs convergence across the

hall of the Republic of Ireland

eight -- the island of Ireland is

certainly in the interests of

inhabitants on both side of the

border.

Thank you. That was really

very interesting. But a point I will

raise there. The DUP will have to

speak for themselves and I'm sure

this afternoon you'll want to

contribute to this debate will stop

can I intervene?

To answer the

question posed by the right

honourable gentleman, when she said,

does she accept as he does that is a

good idea to have regulatory

convergence and common rules between

Northern Ireland and the Republic.

To give a straight answer to that,

because many in Northern Ireland now

view her as being on the side of the

Dublin government.

Thank you so

much. The right honourable member

for North Belfast.

I was moved by

what the honourable Lady had to say

and I think she speaks for many

people in Northern Ireland that I

know and love and it is a shame that

there are not more voices like hers

calling for what, moderation and

focus on what really matters which

is peace and stability.

But the Minister said

the Government would not be

accepting her amendment.

The Government is wholly committed

as my honourable friend have said,

to the Belfast agreement had has

accepted our commitment to that

under international law. Nothing

about our leaving BU will change

that and these are numbered, --

members, well-intentioned as they

may be. -- leaving Viggo.

-- the EU.

This he realised the signal they'll

be sent out in asking artist to vote

against us?

Let me reiterate to the

honourable gentleman that we are

absolutely committed to the Belfast

and Good Friday Agreement.

As the

debate drew to a close, there

appeared to be last-minute

escutcheons between a Minister, Lady

Herman and opposition MPs. --

discussions between the Minister,

Lady Hermon and opposition MPs.

In the end Lady Hermon

withdrew her amendment.

the greater objective is to maintain

the integrity of the Good Friday

Agreement, to make sure that they do

nothing in this House that increases

a risk of terrorism. I will not call

a vote but I will accept the very

nice imitation to table, I want a

commitment from the Minister, to

give me a commitment that the Good

Friday Agreement will be preserved

in some other form, if not today

then in some other form.

That

commitment, the Good Friday

Agreement, is an absolute commitment

that we stand by all stop it will be

preserved. I will work with the

honourable Lady as I have been

invited to do in order to ensure

that the whole of this process we

deliver on the principles.

Debate on the EU Withdrawal Bill

continues next week.

Now recently, MPs heard from people

with disabilities and long-term

illnesses about the problems they've

encountered applying for benefits.

On Wednesday, they questioned

contractors who carry out

the medical assessments on behalf

of the Department of Work

and Pensions, the DWP.

The committee chair asked

if they had ever met the DWP target

for the level of "unacceptable"

assessments, a target of 3%.

Is there a period where you have

ever met the target?

I think the

committees have the data from the

department. Our best performance has

been prepared by percent. That has

been 3.5.

So you have never met the

target.

A similar question, in the

last three months rolling, they have

really lifted which means we have

got some pretty stinky fingers

coming from recent months and at

times you have had dirty percent of

your assessment, an upset but again,

the same question is do you. -- 30%.

We were clear that the contract was

unacceptable and it was an absolute

prime target and prime focus and I

am not happy at all until the cases

are deemed to be acceptable, have

passed the criteria.

Back now to Prime Minister's

questions, where Theresa May said

she'd talk to United States

President, Donald Trump

over his plan to recognise Jerusalem

as Israel's capital.

Mr Trump will also start the process

of moving the US embassy

from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

The decision makes it difficult

for the US to be seen

as a neutral mediator

in the Middle East peace process.

Israel has always regarded

Jerusalem as its capital,

while the Palestinians want

East Jerusalem to be the capital

of a future Palestinian state.

The recognition by Donald Trump of

Jerusalem as the capital of Israel

will do grave damage to the

prospects for a just and lasting

peace settlement between the

Israelis and the Palestinians, which

has been British and indeed American

foreign policy for decades. Was she

consulted about this announcement

and if so, what did she say, and

bushy, here and now, unequivocally

and clearly condemn it? -- will she.

I say to the right orderable

gentleman that I am intending to

speak to President Trump about this

matter, but our position has not

changed. Our position, as he says,

has been a long-standing one and is

also a very clear one the status of

Jerusalem should be determined in a

negotiated settlement between the

Israelis and the Palestinians and

Jerusalem should ultimately form a

shared capital to meet the Israeli

and Palestinian states. That is, we

continue to support a two state

solution, we recognise the

importance of Jerusalem and our

position on that has not changed.

Theresa May.

And that's it from me for now,

but do join me at the same time

tomorrow, when it's environment

questions in the Commons and MPs

debate prison safety.

But for now from me,

Alicia McCarthy, goodbye.