22/12/2017 Westminster in Review

Good evening. Theresa May...

That is

good news for those who voted leave,

good news for those who voted

remaining.

Facing claims that they

are pushing people into poverty and

destitution ministers made changes

to the welfare benefits, Universal

Credit.

Nor benefits system is perfect, nor

motion is perfect, but we have

worked together to make this better.

And in his budget the Government

announced a boost for house-building

and first-time buyers. Opposition

MPs reckon it is cold comfort.

Before the wins of Brexit hit as the

starting position for millions of

people is that by then we will have

been struggling with nine years of

austerity.

With every passing day

the UK inches closer to Brexit. With

the deadline approaching MPs have

spent the term trying to pin down

some pretty big questions such as,

what role will Parliament have, what

will the final deal with like, what

will that UK's relationship be with

you that after we have left.

Meanwhile the Prime Minister has

faced the task of trying to push

Brexit through the Commons, hold

opposing factions in her own party

together, and keep sweet Northern

Ireland's DUP. Talks over the summer

to move Brexit/ Shaun Russell

success so Theresa May travels to

Florence in September two make a

speech. -- to move Brexit ahead had

shown little success.

At the conference the Prime Minister

had a cough, and was in front of a

disintegrating back down. There was

plenty to talk about when Parliament

returned in the autumn.

A new deep and special partnership

between a solvent United Kingdom and

a strong and successful European

Union is our ambition and our offer

to our European friends. Achieving

that partnership will require

leadership and flexibility, not just

from us, but from our friends, the

27 nations of the EU.

The Florence speech demonstrated the

scale of the mess began with a

sneaking of these negotiations. 15

months on from the referendum we are

still no clearer what the future of

this country will look like. Just at

the moments when Britain needs a

strong negotiating team have a

cabinet at each other's throats.

Half of the Conservative Party wants

the Foreign Secretary sacked, the

other half want the Chancellor

sacked.

But Theresa May ridiculed what she

reckoned was Labour's shifting

approach to Brexit.

They said they

wanted to leave the single market,

now they say they might stay in the

single market, they said that

staying in the customs union was not

attractive, now they want to stay in

it forever, they used to be against

a second referendum, now they have

refused to rule it out, with such a

confused edition on Brexit no wonder

people say there will be a run on

the pound if they get into power.

When Theresa May returned to the

comments if you days later the

conflicting demands on the Prime

Minister were on show. A leading

remainder urged her to keep up the

conversation with the European Union

to stop the UK dropping out of the

EU with no Deal, Sokol hard Brexit,

and relying on world trade

organisation rules.

Can she says she

will not listen to those who want

talks to stop and as to go on to WTO

rules?

Well she sticks to her guns.

The only people undermining her from

this site are those threatening to

go into the lobby with the Labour

Party.

When will the Prime Minister

face down the ideologues and her

party who from the safety of the

stately homes, their trust funds,

their inherited wealth, clamour for

a zero deal that they know will do

huge damage to the just about

managing, leave the UK weaker, and

leave our position in the world much

smaller?

Businesses need certainty,

we need to know the details of our

future trading relationship and any

transition deal before the end of

the year. It is critical that we

stay in the single market and the

customs union.

Did she hear the

Foreign Secretary's attempts to be

helpful by quoting Shakespeare,

including, there is a tide in the

affairs of men which taken at the

Flood leads on to fortune, from

Julius Caesar, I Brutus, who went on

to stab his leader, and came to a

sticky end himself. Is that a

perfect metaphor for her

predicament?

I always welcome the

literally and classical references

that my right honourable friend

brings to bear on his statements. He

and I are both working to get the

right deal for the United Kingdom

when we leave.

Theresa May was not the only member

of the Government facing conflicting

pressures. Brexit secretary David

Davis was pushed to give more

information to Parliament. At the

start of November MPs back the

Labour move. The report related to

50 different sectors including

tourism and the NHS. Ministers had

resisted publishing the study saying

that would damage the UK's

negotiating position but Labour use

an obscure parliamentary procedure

to make the Government released the

papers.

Looking at the list which I

have here, two things are obvious.

The first is that in many ways but

is not remarkable and could and

should have been published months

ago. The second is, that the wide

range of sectors analysed Dennis at

why it is so important for members

of this House to see the impact

assessment.

After a great deal of

debate the information was released

but in an incomplete form so David

Davis was asked to appear before the

committee, revealing that the impact

assessments were not in fact impact

assessments before.

The answer is

no. The Government has not

undertaken any impact assessments

for different sectors of the British

economy. There is not one on the

automotive sector. Is there one on

area space? No. No to all of them.

Doesn't it strike you as rather

strange, given experience that you

have, but Government undertakes

impact assessments on things all of

the time but on the most fundamental

change that we are facing as a

country you have just told us that

the gamut has not and that they can

any impact assessment at all.

The

first thing to say, when these

analyses were issued, the work done

to understand the effect of various

options, what the outcome would be.

You do not need to do a formal

impact assessment to understand that

if there is a regulatory hurdle

between our producer and a market

that that will have an impact, and

effect. The assessment of that

effect, I have said to you before,

is not as straightforward as people

imagine. I am not a fan of economic

models because they have all proven

flawed.

Away from Westminster the Brexit

talks continued. In mid-October at

the EU chief legal shooter said not

enough progress had been made to

move on to the second phase of the

Brexit talks which would affect our

future trading relationship amongst

other things.

-- chief negotiator. But how to

avoid the return of a hard border

between the Irish Republic and

Northern Ireland? It was thought the

deal had been done at the start of

December but those hopes were

torpedoed by the DUP Leader Arlene

Foster who made it clear to Theresa

May at the last and that she would

not accept a deal which appeared to

a life in Northern Ireland's trading

rules with the Irish Republic

instead of this EU -- instead of the

UK. A compromise was reached in the

early hours of the morning, Theresa

May appeared alongside the European

Commission President to announce

that an interim deal had been struck

a loving progression to these two.

Returning home Theresa May need a

long-awaited statement saying that

Britain's negotiators had argued

robust before the outcomes

achievement.

A fair and reciprocal

deal for the 3 million EU citizens

living in the UK and 1 million UK

nationals living in the EU, they can

carry on living their lives as

before. A fair settlement of the

accounts, meeting our rights and

obligations as a departing state in

this that of a future partnership,

and a commitment to maintain the

Common Travel Area with Northern

Ireland, uphold the Belfast

Agreement and pull, and avoid a hard

border with Northern Ireland and

Ireland whilst maintaining economic

integrity of the entire UK.

She

warned that nothing would be agreed

until everything was agreed that

this was good news all round.

This

is good news for the people that

voted leave, but were worried that

we were so bogged down in the

negotiations it would not happen,

good news for those who voted to

remain, worried he would clash out

without a deal. We are going to

leave but we are going to do so in a

smooth and orderly way, securing a

new, deep and special partnership

with our friends, while taking back

control of our borders, money and

was once again. That is my mission,

this is the Government's mission,

and on Friday we took a big step

towards achieving it and I commend

this to the House.

18 months on from

the referendum result the Prime

Minister has scraped through phase

one of the negotiations. Scraped

through after 18 months. Two months

later than planned with many of the

key aspects of fees one still not

clear. This weekend 's Cabinet

members have managed to contradict

each other. Indeed some have managed

to go even further and contradict

themselves.

Last week we had that humiliating

scene of the Prime Minister being

forced out of the original deal by

the DUP, rushing back to London, the

Government had to rewrite the

Agreement, so as to reach that DUP's

approval. We really had to wonder

who is running the UK? Is it Arlene

Foster or the right honourable

member for Maidenhead?

Which she

confirmed that the text of this

Agreement is now makes clear that in

the event of a deal Northern Ireland

will not be separated politically,

economically, or by any regulation

from the rest of the UK, along with

no hard border, but in the event of

no deal, nothing is agreed?

Can I

suggest to the Prime Minister that

in order to strengthen her cleavage

in the next stage of negotiations

she might want to suspend tribal

politics -- strengthen her leverage

in the next stage. They agree on the

fundamentals despite tactical

differences.

Has captivated the house with the

lows also be regular tour the

issues. The Brexit secretary

contradicted him at the weekend

saying the conditions on the trade

deal. Her deal with the Taoiseach,

promising fool alignment, he has

dismissed as a statement of intent.

If she can't even get her Brexit

secretary to agree with her, how one

anything she going to get a good

deal that protects jobs and

investment in our country? Phase one

of the dogs concluded, but can

Theresa May talk them up as the

triumph?

# Talks. Chris Mason will be joining

me to the programme. I pleased will

she be with what she has got out of

this? . But if you tilt at your year

in the direction of Downing Street

from wherever you were watching, you

would be able to hear the sighs of

relief, because there was a huge

sense they were getting to the point

about moving into phase two was the

key thing they have always wanted to

do by Christmas.

There was a huge

amount of noise around that aborted

trip to Brussels and the phone call

from Arlene Foster. And then there

is a week of telephone diplomacy

from getting out there and getting

the deal. Then there was the

embarrassment in the defeat in the

Commons vote. As she said in the

newspaper at article before

Christmas, she got to where she

wanted to at the outset. She will be

relieved.

But, and it is a big but,

it did take ages to get there. What

did that tell us?

It took longer

than originally thought. October is

the first date in the diary. Not

everything in those discussions is

resolved. The barrier is sufficient

progress. It doesn't mean it is all

done. There are still huge

questions. There is an agreement

that the border should be soft, but

there isn't much of an agreement

about exactly how you go about

achieving that. What does all of

this tell you? It is very competent

leader trying to not a that has gone

back generations. -- complicated

relationship trying to untie. That

is before starting negotiations to

see they can get what they want to

achieve.

Are we any closer to

knowing what Theresa May really want

out of all of this?

I am not sure

that we are. The argument you hear

from the Prime Minister's supporters

is that she's being the ultimate

pragmatist. She is absorbing the

views in the party and the country

to come up with a solution that the

country can accept. The tricky

thing, and this is the essence of

the whole thing, is that referenda

divide, people are forced onto one

side or the other. The politics

after a referendum is the return of

degree. The task is to try and find

some sort of solution around Brexit

that is acceptable to those who

voted for it that isn't seen as a

watering down of what they would

want and is acceptable to those on

the losing side. That is hard,

because compromise guarantees some

people will be disappointed.

Thank

you very much indeed. Let's look at

some other stories from around

Westminster in brief. It's been

described as the tragedy

unprecedented in modern times, the

fire that swept through Grenfell

Tower in west London in June left 71

people dead. It is thought that the

blaze began accidentally in the

kitchen of a flat on the fourth

floor. At its height, 250

firefighters across London were on

the scene. In the immediate

aftermath, the community rallied

round to provide shelter and relief

centres were set up to provide for

those who flooded in. A memorial

service was held at St Paul's

Cathedral in London, attended by the

Prime Minister and members of the

Royal family.

The council has been

tasked with finding places for

people to live for 200 and doing 750

people. I have always been very

clear that we should move at pace of

the families involved, and that's

nobody should be rushed pushed into

making a decision about where to

live. But to have some a families,

including some children still living

in Nortel 's and other accommodation

six months after the tragedy is

simply not good enough. -- in Nortel

's. The use of tax havens hit the

headlines with the Government

accused of failing to crack down on

the biggest tax scandal of the

generation.

It followed revelations

by the BBC's panorama programme of

leaked documents could be paradise

papers showing many being sheltered

and taxes avoided overseas.

Does the

Government not recognise that the

ordinary tax payer listening today

is utterly outraged that if your

Rectory business then you can avoid

tax, there are schemes on an

industrial scale and we are

protected by lack of transparency.

A

Government commissioned review

concluded it was conceivable that

the bombing of a pop concert at

Manchester Arena inmate could have

been avoided. The Home Secretary

Amber Rudd told MPs that the man

responsible for the attack had been

a former subject of interest. Nine

other attacks have been adverted

since March. The Government have

rejected calls to ban surgical mesh

implants. They are offered to men

and women to treat a number of

conditions such as internal origin

prolapse and other conditions. Many

women have come forward saying the

procedures have twisted or degraded

and left them in debilitating pain.

One person came forward to explain

the problems. Once stopped, the

message is never fully removed and

the mesh will Hughes, road and stick

to organs, nerves and blood vessels

creating lifelong injuries.

It is

still the best product for treating

stress incontinence... But the

evidence regarding prolapse is

rather mixed. I can give that advice

to members today.

And the health

minister is back in the Commons

weeks later to tell MPs a cap on

social care costs in England you to

come into effect in four years' time

is to be scrapped. The cap of

£72,500 on an individual's care

costs was brought in following

recommendations in 2011 and had

already been put into an Act of

Parliament, but there will now be a

fresh consultation on the future

system of social care.

We will not

be taking forward the previous

Government's plans to implement a

cap on care costs in 2020.

It's no

good to see that the Government are

consulting on this cap. They

consulted on this in a general

election and their proposals were

rejected by the electorate.

I am 53.

Will my Georgia be suffering the

same level of misery about my care

costs in the next 30 years? Water

back in the absence provisions I

might make and I might be encouraged

to make, is it reasonable for me to

expect from a social care costs be

paid for by the state and yet my

areas to inherit my substantial

housing assets?

I think my

honourable friend in a Nacho

actually summarises neatly one of

the debates that we have to have in

this space, which is how about we

ensure that people can achieve care

when you need it and that it will be

paid for a well the same time

achieving intergenerational

fairness?

No to an issue that

rumbles on all hot as MPs demanded

the Government make changes to

Universal Credit. It replaces six

existing working age benefits with

the aim of simple binary system and

making it easier for people to get

into work. But whilst many MPs

supported the idea, there was a

growing chorus of concern about the

six-week wait before claimants

received their first claim. It was

pushing people into debt and rent

arrears. Jeremy Corbyn took up the

tide at Prime Minister's Questions.

The roll-out of Universal Credit is

already causing debt, poverty and

homelessness. Does the Prime

Minister accept it would be

irresponsible to press on

regardless? Book-mac to a explained

why it had been introduced.

We want

the welfare system that provides a

safety net for those who need it,

healthy but Aaron Maurer, and to

provide for themselves and their

families.

With discontent growing,

later called a debate demanding a

pause in the benefits roll-out, but

the Conservatives the suggesting

that his party did not understand

the problems that people face.

We

had bailiffs on the doors, my father

died at an early age, there wasn't

any support. We do understand the

importance of providing opportunity.

That's what drove me into politics

and that's why I support Universal

Credit, I know to see it being

paused, because it does offer an

opportunity for people.

I want to

genuinely say the benches of the

set, none of us are lying about our

experiences here, we're not making

things up, we are coming to you with

genuine problems here that the

Government is failing to address.

MPs were also worried about change.

One young mum was with her disabled

son. She was moved on to Universal

Credit and waited seven weeks. She

told one by clergy she took paper

napkins from Donald because she was

unable to afford toilet paper. Her

son Paul is like a condition means

that he wears nappies that she was

unable to afford. Can any of us here

imagine the stress and indignity of

such a situation?

The MPs will

deliver the Government to cut the

waiting time for payments, although

MPs from the Government's side

didn't take part in that vote. The

Work and Pensions Secretary said

that in future money could be paid

to landlords and to be paid more

slowly.

We now offer a balanced

package of approval which puts money

into claimants earlier and shows

extra support to those who need it

most.

Whilst those changes were

welcome, the MPs said that... A

leading campaigner reminded MPs why

he had fought for the policy to be

changed.

On Friday, Birkenhead,

which is the most brilliant but

ought to be unnecessary organisation

reported a family coming in of

husband, wife and young child. The

child was crying with hunger. The

family was fed. The father said it

had been a lucky we cry him because

neighbours had taken pity and

invited him to a funeral is that

they could finish off the field

after the other funeral guests had

been fed.

I don't know where to

start after that. I am humbled by

the words from my honourable friend

from Birkenhead. No Government is

perfect. No benefit system is

perfect. No debate or motion is

perfect, but by God we were together

and make this better.

With Brexit

dominating the agenda at

Westminster, are issues like

Universal Credit slipping under the

major politicians and pundits? I am

pleased to see Chris Mason is back

with me. Either a long list of

policies aren't getting through?

I

think there are. There is a

fascinating game at play. What would

really talking out if Brexit wasn't

happening? There would still have

been a row about our place in the

European Union because the

referendum results would have been

equal but opposite. There would have

been a chunk of the population

arguing our relationship had to

change. But it wouldn't have been a

big moment as it was. What is

striking is to the extent that

within this postcode, politicians,

advisers and journalists,

collectively, the vast majority of

our headspace is taken up by Brexit,

day in and out. That means allsorts

of other issues, the rich power play

of discussion we are used to barely

get any coverage. Universal Credit,

a huge and radical and controversial

reform of the welfare system is

exactly one of those issues. We saw

it briefly at the retail end of the

year making some headlines, but

nowhere near I would have thought

the Mount of headlines it would have

made simply because Brexit is the

default topic that Westminster talks

about at the woman. There is a

bigger challenge journalist at the

frost covering it. On the one hand,

this is under library if asked the

important your defying moment. On a

day-to-day sense, it can often be a

little bit dull. Often from the

perspective of the viewer or

listener, it doesn't seem to move

very far in the course of the day.

That is a big challenge and when I

speak to MPs there is a real

frustration from some. Is sure that

there are plenty of other topics

that matter to people every day,

whether it be schools or schools or

hospitals or whatever it might be

that aren't getting the amount of

attention either journalistically or

in terms of legislation.

Thank you,

Chris.

You are watching Westminster in

review. You can find a daily

round-up of all the goings on in the

comments, Lawrence, committees,

every week night, or you can catch

up with BBC iPlayer.

Now to one of Parliament's set piece

events, the budget. The Autumn

Statement came against the backdrop

of Brexit and murmurings about

divisions in the cabinet with

suggestions that the position of the

Chancellor was under threat. Budget

day began with Philip Hammond taking

the traditional foresaw call outside

number 11. He was flanked by his

junior ministers as he stepped into

Downing Street holding aloft the

budget box containing that

all-important speech. After smiles

and photos it was into the official

car for the short journey to the

Commons to unveil his plans. The

Chancellor spoke for nearly one hour

with announcements on health

spending, Universal Credit, and

stamp duty, but he began with the

preparations for Brexit.

We have

already invested almost £700 million

in the Brexit preparations as today

I am setting aside over the next two

years another £3 billion, and I

stand ready to allocate further sums

if and when needed.

But the Chancellor finds time for a

well set up joke as he drank a glass

of water, and made reference to

Theresa May troubled conference

speech when he had handed her a

lozenge to help with a persistent

cough.

I took the precaution of

asking my right honourable friend to

bring a packet of cough sweets, just

in case.

Conservative MPs roared, but the

next section of the speech was less

light-hearted, as the Chancellor

revealed figures from the Office for

Budget Responsibility addicting

slower growth in the coming years.

Regrettably our productivity

performance continues to disappoint.

The old BR has assumed at each of

the last 16 fiscal events, that

productivity growth would return to

his precrisis trend of about 2% per

year, but it has remained stubbornly

flat. Today the revised downwards

the outlook for productivity growth,

business investment, and GDP growth

across the forecast period.

That one

surprise announcement came and

Philip Hammond said there would be

44 billion to meet a target of

building 300,000 new homes per year

by the middle of the next decade.

With effect from today for all

first-time buyer purchases up to

£300,000 I am abolishing stamp duty

altogether.

And when the din had

died down he said that would be a

cut for 95% of all first-time buyers

to pay stamp duty but the measure

does not apply in Scotland.

That is down to the Leader of the

Opposition, not the Shadow

Chancellor, to reply to the budget.

What little time to absorb the noted

that is seen as one of the toughest

parliamentary occasions. Jeremy

Corbyn said the test of any budget

was how it affected people's lives.

P is now lower than it was in 2010

and Regis are now falling again. --

Pay is now lower. Economic growth is

the slowest of the major economies

in the G7.

Jeremy Corbyn said over a

1 million older people were not

getting what they needed and he

reacted and lead to a heckle from a

Conservative MP.

Over 6 billion will

have been cut from social care

budgets from next March, I hope the

honourable member begins to

understand what it is like two weeks

for social care, stuck in a hospital

bed, while other people are happy to

give up their work to care for them.

And on housing Jeremy Corbyn

reckoned he had heard it all before.

Big Government promised 200,000

starter homes to be usable, not a

single one has yet been built in

those three years. We need a large

scale publicly funded house-building

programme, not this Government's

accounting tricks and empty

promises.

The SNP Westminster leader

reckons people in Scotland would be

worse off.

Before the winters Brexit

hurt as the starting position for

millions of people is that by then

we will already have been struggling

with nine years of austerity. The

cats being imposed on public

services meaning that service

delivery is being impacted and

public service workers in particular

are feeling the squeeze. This is a

budget that shows the Chancellor is

either blind to what is going on, or

that he is behaving like a

frightened rabbits caught in the

headlights.

Many a decent budget has

unravelled in the days after the

Chancellor's speech, and whilst this

one contained huge attic headlines,

it did for the most part stick

together, no doubt to the relief of

Theresa May and her party managers.

Where does that leave Philip Hammond

who many thought was in danger of

being reshuffled?

How safe is the

Chancellor? It has been an

extraordinary year for a Philip

Hammond because he is probably one

of the few Conservatives who can

point to how the general election

was good news for him because the

widespread feeling before the

election was that Philip Hammond

would be quietly shuffled out and

we'd disappear, would be fired

basically. He'd barely featured at

all on the campaign trail, much of

his public frustration as he

acknowledged afterwards, he felt the

Conservatives should have pushed a

strong hand on the economy during

the campaign. That did not happen

and he was parcelled up and be saw

the light of day. But he survived as

Chancellor. What was striking in the

build-up to the budget as it was

pretty easy to find Conservative

MPs, not just those who disagree

with him on Brexit where he is

instinctively keen for a close

alignment with the EU, but there

were quite a few Conservative MPs

who just felt that he was, to borrow

a phrase used by David Cameron used

about Gordon Brown, an analog

Chancellor and a digital age. But

along came that budget, unlike a

tedious George Osborne budget, or a

previous Philip Hammond budget, this

one seems to hold water politically,

even although the overall message

around the numbers, as far as the

economy is concerned, were pretty

grim.

I was going to come to that.

It is one of the great offices of

state but in the current pilot who

would want the job?

Exactly. Here

you are having a discussion around

the economy that is still shipped by

something that happened in political

terms a long time ago, 2008, the

financial crisis. The sense that

that is still a huge driver and the

way that people perceive politics,

standard of living, the gamut is

still living the on its means,

spending more every year than it is

bringing and in taxes. That issue

around the deficit is still there

and all of the targets that first

the Coalition and then the

conservatives set out to eradicate

keep getting pushed further and

further back. And yet, therefore,

the Chancellor still has an issue

where he cannot splash the cash.

Somewhat grudgingly we assume,

having to put aside a shed load of

money for Brexit.

Yes and said in

the budget that millions of pounds

would be set aside for a Brexit. It

will potentially be quite an

expensive business. The item and

from the Government is that that is

a pragmatic thing to do and it will

not this Ali had to be spent but

that has to be parcelled up for

Brexit expenditure. -- it will not

necessarily have to be spent. But

Brexit, yet again, even though it is

a conversation about the budget, or

about Universal Credit, Brexit is

the topic that keeps into every

discussion about politics.

We will

be back with you one last time in

the programme, for now, thank you.

Philip Hammond is not the only one

making a budget statement of this

autumn, the Scottish Parliament has

increasing power over how money is

spent and for the last year has had

the ability to view the levels of

income tax. The finance sectors of

the outlined his own plans to help

first-time buyers. But the most

eye-catching announcement was

proposal to increase taxes for

higher earners, raising over £160

million to help fund public sector

Pay rises and health expenditure.

This enables me to reverse the real

terms cut that Westminster has

imposed on a resource budget next

year whilst ensuring that Scotland

is not just the fearless taxed part

of the UK but for the majority of

taxpayers, the lowest taxed part of

the UK.

The message of this budget is simply

this. Do not be ambitious, do not be

hard-working, do not be six this

will in the SNP's Scotland because

we will penalise you for our failure

to grow the Scottish economy.

The

truth is Scotland needs real and

radical change, not tinkering around

the edges. And it should be based on

the principle of from each according

to the means, to each according to

their needs, a penny on the top

rates just does not do that.

By

adding new bands we sure that we can

raise additional revenue for public

services while reducing tax at the

bottom end of the income scale, not

at the top end as the conservative

UK Government seem to continue to

want.

This budget does not do enough

to meet the long-term needs of the

economy, it does not include the

transformational investment in

education that we are good for.

Now

News in brief. The International

Development Secretary resigned over

unauthorised meetings with Israeli

officials. She was ordered back from

an official trip to Africa by the

Prime Minister and driven straight

to Downing Street to explain

herself. She had already apologised

for holding an authorised meetings

in August with Israeli politicians

including the Prime Minister of

Israel but it later emerged she had

two further meetings without

Government officials present. She

resigned saying it had been a

privilege to work as International

Development Secretary.

Britain has flowed of its special

relation ship with the United States

but the election of President Trump

has caused a few bumps around the

roads. The President recognised

Jerusalem as the capital of Israel

reversing decades of US policy and

outraged many MPs who said it could

set the Peace Process back by

decades. And as the tooting of an

anti-Islamic video by a UK far right

group led many to demand that a

future visits the Koltsov.

He was

wrong to retweet videos. When we

look at the wider picture, the

relationship between the UK and

America, I know how valuable the

friendship is between our two

nations.

One of the key dangers of a

state visit is that we have no idea

of what the President will see or

Tweet next. What does he need to see

or Tweet before the idea of a state

visit is ditched once and for all?

An invitation for the visit has been

extended and accepted but the dates

and precise arrangements had yet to

be agreed.

President Trumppos-macro in the

world came up again when North Korea

announced it had fired a missile

over Japan and successfully tested a

weapon that could be loaded on to a

long-range missile.

I disagree with

the Government cosying up to Donald

Trump but if there is to devalue in

those actions the Foreign Secretary

should uses influence to get Donald

Trump to use his phone for talking

instead of sending inflammatory

Tweets into an inflammatory

situation.

I really must disagree

powerfully with the honourable lady

's assertion that this crisis has

somehow been whipped up by the

Americans or by the White House,

when you look at the history, not

just in the last year, the last ten

years, 30 years, this has been a

movement towards the acquisition of

thermonuclear weapons by a rogue

state.

There is still no Northern Ireland

De Ceglie after the power-sharing

executive collapsed in January.

Talks to end the deadlock failed

again in November causing the

Northern Ireland Secretary James

Brokenshire to intervene and set a

budget, although he stopped short of

reimposing direct rule.

Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale

took people by surprise when she

announced she was stepping down

after two use in the job. She later

got into hot water with her party

after swapping Edinburgh for

Australia to take part in the TV

show, I'm a celebrity get me out of

here. She was replaced by

left-winger Richard Leonard. Labour

is now the third largest party at

Holyrood behind the SNP and the

Conservatives.

Westminster once again found itself

at the centre of scandal in the

autumn as allegations of sexual

harassment and inappropriate

behaviour emerged. Several MPs find

themselves under investigation by

the parties, and in some cases the

police. An early casualty was the

Defence Secretary Michael Fallon. He

quit in November seeing his

behaviour may have fallen short of

the standards expected by the UK

ability. He said what had been

acceptable ten years ago is clearly

not acceptable now.

The Prime Minister and later

announced there will be a grievance

procedure to deal with harassment.

The working group has agreed that a

new system should provide support,

advice and action on a wide spectrum

of complaints around bullying and

harassment. We will do everything in

our power to insure the solution is

transparent, fair and effective.

Just before Christmas, Theresa May

suffered another blow when she lost

her third Cabinet minister in three

months. She sacked her closest

political ally after a Government

enquiry found the twice made

inaccurate and misleading statements

about the discovery of pornography

on his parliamentary computer. He

denied downloading pornography but

admitted he should have been clear

that the police had spoken to him

and his lawyers about the material.

Let's go back to Brexit. We saw

earlier in the programme the

delicate balancing Act the Prime

Minister was trying to strike to

keep her party together and make

progress in talks with the rest of

the EU, but there was an equally

tricky high wire Act to navigate in

Westminster itself as ministers

tried to push through the Great

Repeal Bill, which is now called the

EU withdrawal Pearl. It repeal the

Act which triggers into the EU in

1972 and sets up the process to

transfer current EU laws into UK law

so that the legal system doesn't

collapse after Brexit. When the Bill

had its first full debate in the

Commons, the Minister explained why

it was needed.

Put simply, this Bill

is essential. Was it does not take

us out of the European Union, that

is matter for Article 50, it doesn't

show that on the day we leave,

businesses know where they stand.

Workers' rights are upheld and

consumers remain protected. This

Bill is vital for ensuring that as

we read we do so in an orderly

manner.

Are you keen to portray this

Bill as a technical exercise without

raising any serious constitutional

issues about the role of Parliament.

Nothing could be further from the

truth.

This Bill is utterly

incompatible with the idea of

parliamentary sovereignty. It is not

taking back control for those

nations of the UK, this role will

hold a straight once and for all.

The truth is, this Bill was always

ring to be a sows ear because the

Government side of the negotiations

without clear objectives or outcomes

and therefore the Bill to cater for

any eventuality, any scenario, the

all or outcomes and therefore the

Bill had to cater for any

eventuality, any scenario, the law

no deal.

Cutting and pasting laws

from the EU bit into the UK one

simply isn't enough, because laws

are only as effective as the

mechanisms to implement them in

practice. In the absence of

mechanisms to replace the laws, we

are effectively going to be left

with zombie legislation. It is not

enforceable.

The arguments that have

been made against this Bill say that

this is... It is quite clear from

what the ministers have said, from

what the legislation has said, from

the restrictions placed on minister

is that that is not the case...

First of all it enables the EU law

to be brought into the sphere of

this Parliament were eventually if

it is not appropriate it can be

amended.

As the Bill moved into

scrutiny, there were two or three

issues that bubbled to the surface.

As we thought earlier in the

programme, one of the key sticking

points was how to deal with the

border between Northern Ireland and

the Irish Republic. As MPs got down

to the detail of the EU withdrawal

Bill, one Northern Ireland MP made a

plea for the principles of the Good

Friday Agreement to be preserved.

Any powerful speech, she recalled

how the Troubles had affected her

family and community, and put

forward an amendment that she said

was designed to protect the

principle of mutual respect for all.

I grew up not in some stately home,

I grew up on a 50 acre farm in

County Tyrone. Very close to what

unfortunately became known as the

murder triangle for a number of

people who were murdered with

Catholic and Protestant by the fiery

and subsequently... -- by the IRA.

Are opposed and was murdered at the

end of our lane. Many of our family

members were attacked on their

tractors or went out to be shared

and opened it and there was a

booby-trapped and had their heads or

faces blown off. In the event of no

deal, we certainly face a hard

border and dissident republicans

will regard each variety offices, UK

border officials, as legitimate

targets. I don't want that on my

conscience and I don't believe one

moment that the Prime Minister wants

that either.

Well ministers were

able to offer assurances on that

point, they weren't able to persuade

MPs, including some of their own, on

another. In October, David Davis

told the committee that scrutinises

his apartment but a parliamentary

vote on the exit deal might not come

until after March 2019, the UK's

intended exit date. The ensuing

outrage prodded a compromise with

David Davis telling the Commons he

would bring forward a separate Bill

implementing for a final Brexit deal

and giving MPs a chance to go

through it in detail. That still

wasn't enough some of his own side.

During detailed scrutiny of the EU

withdrawal Bill, a Conservative

former minister put down an

amendment demanding and meaningful

vote be put into law. Parliament

should have a say on how we left the

EU.

The most worrying aspect of the

debate as far as I can see is how we

have become polarised that we have

failed to look at means, we look at

the top of the mountain and not

where we are going to put our foot

next.

The board has got to take

place before it the British

Government has committed itself to

the terms of the treaty agreement

that is painted into the other

members.

The reality of this Bill is

that it would allow ministers to

start implementing a withdrawal

agreement entirely through secondary

legislation and would indeed allow

ministers to do so even before

Parliament has its Intourist

agreement.

We are recovering from a

situation where as memories of the

European Union we have handed all

these decisions over to European

Union. This is a massive improvement

and to address this attempt to rid

their specs it...

THEY SPEAK OVER EACH OTHER

In favour parliamentary sovereignty

is nothing but cant.

Oh my what

Stalin as is this that somehow any

attempt to disagree with the way in

which this Bill is drawn up is

somehow a betrayal of Brexit. What

rubbish!

And other Conservative

fears parliamentary votes on the

detail would drag the process out.

If the treaty isn't right in the

Ayes of this Parliament, a couple of

months could turn into a couple of

years, indeed some people would like

it to be a couple of decades. When

she talks about a meaningful vote,

what about the meaningful vote of

the people in this country who last

June voted to leave the European

Union? Surely we need to get that

done as quickly as possible to

deliver what the British people

voted for?

CHEERING

The Government did offer a

last-minute concession to come back

from the issue of the next stage of

the Bill's consideration, but it was

too little and too late for the

rebels and so the Government

suffered its first defeat on the

Bill by just 4-mac votes.

CHEERING

And so the Government headed into

the Christmas recess with a

legislative hangover which they will

try to cure in the New Year. So what

does all this tell us about the

state of Westminster's biggest

parties? Much of the focus has been

on the internal divisions of the

Conservative Party, meaning Labour's

policies haven't come in to any

detailed scrutiny. Chris Mason is

here one last time. Labour has come

to a position on Brexit, hasn't it?

-- Labour has struggled.

It has. It

is going to divide political parties

which are inevitably broad churches.

We have seen that with Labour as

well spending much of the year,

senior figures contradicting one

another and sometimes contradicting

themselves about their outlook on

Brexit. What was striking was that

during the general election

campaign, broadly speaking, they

seem to be able to profit from

sounding a little warmer towards the

European Union than the

Conservatives work, even though

there are internal contradictions

you can point to in Labour as you

can with the Conservatives. That was

possibly a factor in helping them

along to gain some seats in the

election, but after that and indeed

before it, they managed to benefit

from one of the few joys of

opposition which is that you don't

get as much scrutiny as the

Government, particularly if the

Government is trying to execute

something you are defining and when

the Government is full of its own

divisions.

Doesn't matter if

Labour's position is constantly

shifting given that they are not in

power had the Government is

struggling to come to a point that

it is happy with?

It doesn't matter

as much. But as Labour spokesmen

will point out, given the power of

state on the Government in terms of

numbers, given that Theresa May is

reliant on the DUP to get softer in

Commons, that means occasionally you

lose votes, it's not impossible to

imagine a scenario where in 2018

there is a general election. It's

also not impossible looking at

opinion polls, Labour are not bills

ahead, most polls are pretty close,

but it's entirely possible that

Jeremy Corbyn could be Prime

Minister and in that instance it

would matter.

Let's talk about

Jeremy Corbyn and his position and

the amazing transformation over the

last 12 months. You say is possible

he could be Prime Minister, is it

just taking that his position as

Labour leader is unassailable now?

Quarterback yes. The fact I have

been able to answer that with one

word. Comparing the Conservative

Party conferences between last year

and this year. Jeremy Corbyn with

the butt of the joke last year. 2017

he was a genuine threat and fear

that he was going to be the next

Prime Minister, which is the

ultimate compliment friends from

them. -- for him from them. He has

been transformed. He appears more

confident. He and his team got they

would do better than many people

thought they would, but this still

outperformed what they thought they

would achieve at the general

election. He is going nowhere as

Labour leader until he decides he

doesn't want to do the job. Theresa

May looks anything apart from strong

and stable.

It has been a horrible

year politically for her. The

biggest political gamble she has

ever taken backfired. The results

went backwards instead of a big leap

forwards. What is useful is that she

has got to the point in Brexit

negotiations that she promised she

would and there is no obvious

successor. That put the

Conservatives off having a

readership vote coupled with the

fact that if they did at the moment

they would be doing so in a middle

of Brexit negotiations. Both of

those factors could be remarkably

important in keeping Theresa May as

Prime Minister for quite a while

yet.

Thank you very much indeed for

joining us throughout the programme.

Finally for now, there was one piece

of news on which politicians on all

sides were able to unite and offer

the very best wishes, the news that

Prince Harry had becoming gauged to

American actor Meghan Markle. The

couple made their announcement at

the end of November. -- had become

engaged. And that happy news brings

us to the end of this addition of

the programme. Do join us on the 8th

of January when Parliament returns.

We will be back with our daily

round-up of life here at

Westminster. For now, with best

wishes for all of us for the New

Year and from me, goodbye.