tv Tuesday in Parliament. BBC News July 18, 2018 2:30am-3:00am BST
at a summit with vladimir putin on monday. he told journalists he does accept the american intelligence community's conclusion that russia meddled in the 2016 us elections which brought him to power. he said he misspoke at the meeting in helsinki. the british government has narrowly survived another challenge to its brexit plan. conservative mps, who favour a soft brexit, failed to push through an amendment which would have kept britain in a customs union with the eu, if no deal on trade could be agreed by late january. the exiled president of yemen has admitted that he did not expect the saudi—led military intervention in his country to take as long as it has. however, abd rabbu mansur hadi told the bbc he did not believe that efforts to defeat houthi rebel fighters had reached a stalemate. you're up to date with headlines. now on bbc news, it's time for tuesday in parliament. hello and welcome to the programme.
coming up... the government narrowly avoids a defeat on a key part of the brexit trade bill, as rebel mps lick the wounds from monday. i think yesterday was the worst experience in politics i've had in eight years, and i am sorry that it has changed the dynamic. one prominent rebel has a suggestion for ministers. i really hope that they go away for the summer, have a good rest, perhaps lie in a quiet, dark room at some stage, and come back and tell us how exactly they do intend to negotiate these serious matters for the future of our country. and there's more anger in the commons, as vote leave is found to have broken electoral law. we cannot have confidence that this referendum was secure, and it should be rerun. the government has suffered a defeat on its crucial trade bill
at the hands of pro—eu conservatives. mps voted in favour of a move to keep the free flow of medicines between the eu and the uk. but the rebels failed to win a key vote on a future customs union with the eu. the government's tight timetable for this last day for the trade bill in the commons meant there were only 35 minutes left to debate a number of important issues. the conservative stephen hammond led the calls for the uk to stay in a customs union with the eu, if the brexit talks failed to come up with anything else by january the 21st next year. but as he was speaking, there was a development. what causes the government some kind of, or indeed a number of people in this house, concern is the word union. i'll give way to the minister, of course. i am very grateful to the honourable gentleman for giving way. perhaps it would help if i could advise the house that in recognition of contributions made by the honourable, and indeed right honourable members today, it is my intention to bring forward an amendment in the other place that takes... if i may...
thank you... it is my intention to bring forward an amendment in the other place that takes in the essence of new clause 18, but removes the defective elements relating to the customs union. the government amendment will restate our intention thank you... it is my intention to bring forward an amendment in the other place that takes in the essence of new clause 18, but removes the defective elements relating to the customs union. the government amendment will restate our intention to establish a customs arrangement with the european union. a generous offer from the front bench, and one that i am tempted to accept, but i'd say to him, let's do this the other way round. i'll make you a generous offer.
why don't you accept new clause 18 today and then amend it in the lords? and at i'll tell you... it is the policy of the government that we should not remain part of a customs union. that is why we cannot accept the amendment today. i say to him again, i stood on the conservative manifesto that said we were leaving the customs union. this doesn't commit us to the customs union. it commits us to a customs union, which is a customs arrangement, or a customs partnership. a slight deviation in definition. one veteran conservative hadn't forgotten what had happened the day before. they actually whipped my party to defeat the government's policy as set out in the white paper. today we have amendments which are entirely consistent, for the reasons explained, with the government's white paper. they are so terrified of the daily mail, the daily telegraph and the european research group they are now applying a whip to try and defeat it and i really hope that they go away for the summer, have a good rest, perhaps lie in a quiet, dark room at some stage, and come back and tell us how exactly they do intend to negotiate the serious matters for the future of our country.
but one tory euro—sceptic didn't see the need for a customs unions. it is the modern world, it's electronic, there are computers, there is off—site settlement of taxes, there is off—site settlement of customs, the wto knows about this, it would be a great future for us but we must have that freedom to have our own international trade policy, our own agreements with countries other than the eu, and our ability to settle our own laws and spend our own money. the british public will expect no less from this parliament. but a remain—backing conservative called for mps to put party politics aside. we give the prime minister space for those negotiations, but it is very clear that in this house there is a majority for a customs union to safeguard
business and jobs and the financial security of our constituents in the future. when it came to the vote, the government won by majority of six. but ministers weren't victorious on the issue of the movement of medicines. if ever there were an example of an ideology getting in the way of common sense, it would be a hard brexit attitude to literally physically place itself in the way at the border of the free flow and ability of those medicines to cross. we have to do more to publish the contingency planning and the consequences of not maintaining a line so the public can see this. phillip lee, who's a gp, recently resigned his ministerial post over brexit. some of the treatments used for the victims of last year's manchester bombing were stocked in amsterdam. we got them straightaway because there are no borders or checks. after brexit we could in effect create a hard border so this would not be so easy. and he summed up his week.
i think yesterday was the worst experience in politics i've had in eight years, and i am sorry that it has changed the dynamic. i started the week intending to support our prime minister in her deal, and the white paper. yesterday changed that. when it came to the vote the government lost by 305 to 301 — a majority of four. westminster woke up to the news that the brexit campaign group vote leave has been fined more then £60,000 and referred to the police. the electoral commission said vote leave exceeded its spending limit by funnelling money through a pro—brexit youth group called beleave, breaking electoral law. in the commons, there was clear anger. and calls for the referendum to be re—run. does the minister agree with me that we cannot say with confidence that this foul play did not impact on the results? he questioned the role of the leading leave campaigner,
michael gove. he, along with the former foreign secretary, was part of a core group of that committee that met on a daily basis to ensure the campaign was on track. as such, either the environment secretary knew what was going on, which is a very serious matter, or if he didn't, how can we have any confidence that he is capable of overseeing his department? the minister replied that the report only investigated specific organisations. i'm not going to enter discussions of other named individuals. i am simply not going to. nor am i going to enter into discussion of ongoing investigations, whether those be in terms of police or in terms of courts. i hear honourable members, mr speaker, asking me why not? do we really need to begin by asking ourselves why the government should not interfere in independent investigations and police examinations? there were strong words from many on the conservative side. one of the great glories of this sadly now diminished country was our electoral and democratic system. and this example today is gross. and i say to her that if we are to retain the integrity and the trust of the voting public,
the whole damn thing needs to be blown up and started all over again. she should not let the government's commitment to delivering on the referendum result to obfuscate from the real questions that are being raised here. there have been a series... this has not come out of the blue. there have been a series of accusations and suggestions not just in this campaign, but in others, but protecting the valid confidence that the public needs to have in our elections every time is absolutely vital. another country, let's be honest, russia, exercised its influence to undermine this country's democracy, and indeed this country's security, as they have a long history of doing. i say to the minister, please, this is not a party political matter, it is nothing about delivering brexit,
it is about democracy. consequences must follow. we cannot have confidence that this referendum was secure, and it should be rerun. mr speaker, this report is very clear that consequences do follow. the electoral commission has issued fines and referred both vote leave and the beleave founder to the police. that is what i refer to when i say consequences and punishments are following. many opposition mps were even angrier. i never thought i would see the day when a government minister would come to this house and seek to downplay one of the most serious attacks on our democracy in history. this isn'tjust about overspending, as important as that is, this is about dark money, this is about foreign interference
in our democracy, and this is about serious misuse of data. ijust wonder whether she could tell us, given her complacent demeanour today and her complete lack of acknowledgement about how serious this issue is, quite how big a scandal would have to be before she actually reacted to it appropriately. i'm sorry the right honourable lady has felt the need to get quite so personal. i am not complacent. she will have heard me, if she was listening carefully, say these issues are very, very serious. what i'm also saying... what i am also saying is the government respects the work of an independent regulator and does not comment on its ongoing investigations, but will wish, of course, to look in and around at the result of all of those investigations that are ongoing. the minister's responses are woefully inadequate. we need to know if the government will draw a line between itself and the people implicated in this illegality. if it does not do so, then it will lose any respect and integrity it has left. so i would like an assurance from the minister now that anyone who was involved in working for vote leave or on its board
will cease to hold office in government or cease to be on the government payroll. chloe smith said she would not make that commitment because investigations were still going on. but the minister did have her defenders. the faux outrage we are hearing today from members on all sides of this house, some of whom have now left, is nothing to do with a breach of the rules by the leave campaign, it is due to the fact that they lost, they are not representing the people, they lost that referendum despite the fact that they overspent themselves by millions of pounds. the liberal democrats wondered if michael gove and borisjohnson would be liable for the vote leave fine. can the minister confirm whether the members for surrey heath, uxbridge and others involved are going to be jointly liable for the vote leave fine, and can she confirm that
of course this strengthens immeasurably the case for there to be a final say on the deal and a chance to exit from brexit? mrspeaker, no, i'm not going to be in a position to comment on individuals. i have already said that very, very clearly. what i will say again, for the benefit of the liberal democrat party, is that we are going to be delivering the referendum result and we do not intend to hold a second referendum. chloe smith. you're watching tuesday in parliament with me, mandy baker. the defence secretary has been pressed by mps to explain where the money is to come from to pay for a new £2 billion fighter jet for the raf. gavin williamson was at the farnborough airshow to unveil a model of the proposed aircraft, the tempest, the eventual replacement for the existing typhoon fighter jet. the defence secretary said the new aircraft would provide both economic and strategic benefits.
in this, the 100th year of the royal air force, this demonstrates that we can achieve anything. britain is a world leader, not only with our armed forces but with the fighting machines that we can produce. this strategy demonstrates that britain will retain its world leadership in this sector, having the greatest fighter aircraft of any nation in the world. this strategy has been published at a time when there is a great amount of uncertainty within the aerospace industry about the impact of brexit. so does he agree with the assessment of industry, the trade body ads, and members from across the house that the uk must be in a customs union in order to guarantee the industry's future success? i don't think that we should actuallyjust look to europe in terms of future partnerships. far too often we have been bound and thought that we could only look to other european union nations. the time is now to look to the whole globe, see what other nations we can partner with and make sure
that we build strong and new alliances. the combat air strategy signals the secretary of state's commitment to the importance of conventional armed forces in the future. how is his combat ground strategy going in persuading the treasury to pay for it? having looked through this, the scottish national party broadly welcomes this new strategy but one overarching question is... 0ne overarching question is where on earth is the money coming from? because with the £20 billion funding gap in the procurement budget, surely that is dragging many of the aspirations in this to the ground. gavin williamson is locked in a struggle with the treasury over his demands for a big boost in defence spending. but this is a great opportunity for the whole of the uk. we are a world leader in this. countries turn to us for leadership and that is what we are providing and that is what we are going to
deliver, and we are going to provide the jobs and prosperity that will bring that with it. i warmly welcome his commitment to our future air defence. but will my right honourable friend say a little about affordability? it is important that we have cutting—edge units but it's equally important we have sufficient room in the budget to buy enough of them. whilst i welcome the combat air strategy, does he agree with my constituent who wrote to me yesterday to say how on earth can the uk alone afford this project? this can only be delivered as part of a collaboration, preferably a european collaboration as we have done with typhoon, and it will also require export orders. britain alone cannot afford this project. the honourable gentleman was demanding a combat air strategy and calling for this type of investment and this type of leadership, and we actually deliver it, and then he starts saying that actually we need to be looking to others. we can lead. we have always led in this field. we have the world's greatest technology. and to show that leadership means that other nations will come and be
part of that project. will he tell us exactly who is going to fund it, how it is going to be funded, who are these new partners he's thinking about outside of europe? if he is thinking about the united states, i'm sure a lot of people in the defence industry will tell him we always come off second best when we're up against them. we are looking at a whole range of different international partners and we see this as an opportunity of offering something that is different and alternate to the united states's offerings that they have traditionally brought forward. we see this as an opportunity to collaborate with new nations that haven't usually been involved in such collaborations before, and the initial indications are exceptionally positive. gavin williamson. now, what prompted this observation in the commons? it's exceedingly annoying, apparently, after a short period of time. just like listening to certain members of this house. bit harsh. he was talking about
devices called mosquitoes. as colleagues may know, these devices, which have also been referred to as anti—teenager alarms, or teenager repellants or ultra sonic teenage deterrents, make a pulsing sound, which i am told sounds something like an alarm buzzing in one's ears. my daughters tell me that it's like a prolonged beep akin to tinnitus. giles watling is trying to introduce a law to regulate the devices, which he says discriminate against people under 25 — because only they can hear them. the people who use these devices neglect the effect on very young children, babies and animals, they neglect the effect on children with preexisting conditions that make them especially sensitive, like autism. they neglect the effects both mental and physical on children who cannot avoid long—term exposure, because of where they live or the schools to which they go. the bill got the initial backing of mps, but it's unlikely to progress any further.
planet earth is not just for human beings. that was the message from lord hague during the first lords debate on the ivory bill. the bill is designed to ban the buying or selling of ivory in the uk. but the former conservative leader said it wasn't just about elephants. this is part of that effort, one aspect of it on ivory, and we should renew our determination on every other aspect because the rhinos are being driven to extinction by beliefs about the properties of their horns, which are utter drivel. and that hundreds of thousands of pangolins, as the noble lady has just mentioned, are trafficked and killed. it is sad testimony to the fact that even though we think we live in an age of enlightenment in the human race, we actually are surrounded still by a great deal of selfishness and stupidity and greed. and if we have any right to live
on it, so do all the other species of the earth. and it is a moral and ethical outrage that so many species are driven to extinction while inadequate steps are taken to address it. the situation of the african elephant is now an emergency, an emergency that has developed in the last decade as rising prosperity in the east has brought new demand for ivory items. any british people would be astonished to discover that the united kingdom is now probably the largest legal ivory market in the world. that has to be brought to an end. and here is the crux of the argument for this bill. we have to persuade people in china, in vietnam, in thailand and elsewhere, that seeking products made of ivory is no longer socially acceptable, that they are not to be regarded of value, that they are not a symbol of luxury but a symbol of cruelty, and that seeking their acquisition is not a sign of wealth but a sign of ignorance. lord hague. the government has been pressed to change the way it tackles domestic abuse, to recognise that it mainly affects women. giving evidence to the home affairs select committee, two domestic violence groups said a gender neutral approach was leading to funding cuts for women's services. once you gender neutralise an issue,
what you tend to do is you tend to respond to anyone‘s perception that they are a victim of domestic violence, so in an incident where, for example, a woman might call a police officer and complain that the perpetrator, husband or partner, is abusing her, he makes a cross allegation saying, "no, she's abusing me", and the police then record both of them as victims, and that then feeds into statistics, which are skewed because both are recognised as victims. there are men who are victims of domestic violence. are you saying they should be cast aside? not at all. and i totally accept that there are men who are victims of domestic violence, but there is also the need to recognise that the overwhelming majority are women and girls. the key thing is this gender issue and recognising the gendered nature of domestic abuse in that definition. without that, we think it will pose huge challenges. just an example of what we see
on the front line happening, what our member services report back to us all the time, is that kind of trickling down of the gender neutralisation of domestic abuse to how services have been commissioned and funded, so we know that the domestic abuse sector at the moment, services for women are chronically underfunded. 60% of referrals to refuges are being turned away. that's about 94 children and 90 women every day being turned away from services at their point of need, so when they're desperate to flee abuse. the government is drawing up a new bill, which it says will transform how domestic abuse is tackled. our services are there to provide that specialism, to provide somewhere to go for women when they've exhausted all their other options. and i think without having that sustainable framework in place i think the bill risks being hugely undermined, really, because we know a key aim of the bill is to get more women coming forward,
more reports of domestic abuse, a belief in a system that is going to protect and support survivors. and without there being those services there to protect and support women, to keep them safe when they come forward, this bill is going to fail. i think we need to stop domestic abuse happening in the first place, and the way that you do that is through education. we now have two generations of children and young people who've been brought up on a diet of hardcore internet pornography, who don't understand what a healthy, respectful relationship looks like, and i think it's beholden upon us to make sure that young men and young women understand what that looks like. every police force has committed increased resources to their public protection teams, who tend to deliver the specialist response to domestic abuse. but with an increase in reporting of 88% since 2010, at a time when police resources are facing greater stretch because of the increase
in reporting of child abuse, child sexual exploitation, honour— based abuse, modern—day slavery, a lot of these things have had increasing recognition and understanding but also a significant increase in expectation of the response from the police service and other agencies. what we've seen is a more than 90% increase in the number of children that are on child protection plans, over recent years. and what that looks like on a day—to—day basis is 500 child protection enquiries are started every single day in england and wales, and 182 children and their families are placed on a child protection plan every day in england and wales. set against a backdrop of dramatically declining central government funding, that is a huge issue for us. finally, if you can't wait for your summer holiday. neither, it seems, can ministers. they suggested the commons starts its summer break early, this thursday, instead of next tuesday. but the idea provoked a furious reaction, not least among conservatives.
the government have announced in a more than usually bovine —— unusually announcement that they intend to adjourn the house on thursday. mr speaker, you are the guardian of the rights of the backbenchers. this decision will bring this whole house into opprobrium. there is important backbench business on monday and tuesday. there are questions on local government and health and social care. and can you advise me, mr speaker, what advice you can give the leader of the house to rescind this idiotic and bad news statement? this government is currently engaged in the most important set of negotiations in our country's peacetime. it seems to me extraordinary that they should want to bring parliament into disrepute by sending us scuttling to our constituencies and suspending our deliberations several days early. later in the evening,
the suggestion had become motion 13 on the order paper. the leader of the house, or someone on her behalf, to move. not moved. thank you. and if the motion‘s not moved, mps are not moving either, at least not till next tuesday, as planned. two extra days in parliament — hurray! that's all we've got time for. so from me, mandy baker, goodbye. hello there. well, depending on how you look at it, some lucky gardens have received some rainfall during monday and tuesday, but the vast majority of the country on tuesday was dry with plenty of sunshine around, some glorious sunset scenes up
and down the country. there were a few heavy showers around across northern scotland. this is a weather watchers view looking out off the coast of peterhead, with some downpours there across the water. these showers will continue to fizzle out during the early part of wednesday and then, generally speaking, most places will end up being dry first thing. variable amounts of cloud, some clear spells. quite a warm one across southern areas, but across scotland and northern england, a few chilly spots. certainly out to towns and cities. to wednesday, starting off on a larger dry note. again, for most places, it will be a dry afternoon as well. shower clouds will bubble up across northern and western areas, and like tuesday, some of the heaviest ones could be across parts of scotland. maybe in the north and the south, somewhere here at risk of seeing a thundery downpour. maybe a few showers for northern ireland and a few as well across western england into wales, but the vast majority will be dry.
plenty of sunny spells with light winds. it's going to feel a little bit warmer than it did on tuesday. across england and wales, generally around 23 to maybe 26 celsius in the south—east, closer to 18—21 celsius for scotland and northern ireland. 0n into thursday, another largely dry day, good spells of sunshine and it is going to feel a bit warmer, but more of a breeze and cloud picking up across scotland and northern ireland ahead of this weather front, which will be slowly moving south its way eastwards. notice the deep orange colours building there across england and wales, temperatures will be significantly higher than at the start of the week, with perhaps one or two places in the south—east totalling 29 or 30 celcius. this is the weather system i was talking about. a tangle of weather fronts mixed in with it, it will bring more cloud, outbreaks of rain to the north—west of the uk, slowly sinking its way south eastwards, but it will be a weakening feature. more cloud across the northern half of the country with outbreaks of patchy rain into northern england and wales, weakening as it does so, but then we could see maybe a few heavy showers moving into the south—east from the near continent.
some of these could be thundery, so you have to keep tuned to weather forecasts. still a bit of uncertainty about this. quite warm in the south, fresher across the north, 18—20 degrees. that weather front, a weakening feature continues to move southwards during the weekend. generally speaking for the weekend, it's high—pressure that will be exerting its influence again. most places dry with a few patches of rain around and there should be plenty of sunshine around once again. welcome to bbc news — broadcasting to viewers
in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. our top stories: backtracking on russia — president trump says he misspoke about interference in american elections. i said the word would instead of wouldn't. the sentence should have been i don't see any reason why i wouldn't, or why it wouldn't be russia. after 300 deaths in 3 months, the un calls for an immediate end to the political violence in nicaragua. we have a special report from yemen where the civil war is killing one child every ten minutes. and astronomers discover another 12 moons orbiting jupiter, including one on a collision course