tv Tuesday in Parliament BBC News April 25, 2018 2:30am-3:00am BST
president trump and france's president macron have agreed to work towards a new deal with iran — an attempt to curb its regional ambitions, as well as its nuclear and missile programmes. mr macron, on a state visit to the us, has urged mr trump to fix rather than reject the deal iran reached with the leading world powers back in 2015. turning his attention to north korea, mr trump spoke about his upcoming summit with the leader, kim jong—un. he described the man he used to call "rocket man" as "very open" and "very honourable". he said he expects a meeting to happen soon and that it will benefit the whole world. in toronto, alek minassian has appeared in court charged with 10 counts of murder. canadian police say he posted a cryptic message on social media suggesting he may have had a grudge against women. the authorities say he has no known links to any terror groups. we are the to the it is just to the post two warning. —— you up—to—date
on the headlines, it is now orjust after 2:30am. it's time for a look back at the day in parliament. hello there and welcome to the programme. coming up in the next half—hour, the government's urged to stop presidnet trump ripping up the iran nuclear deal. when president trump says that iran is not in plans for the agreement, that's incorrect, as the international atomic energy authority have repeatedly certified. the government insists that public services provided by the outsourcing giant capita are safe, after the firm reported a loss of £500 million. the measures that capita announced are designed to strengthen its balance sheet, reduce its pensions deficit, and invest in the core elements of its business. and at the request for the newspaper
editors, the committees of mps is holding an investigation into hate crime. but first, from the white house. two men held talks on trade but also on the iran nuclear deal. mr trump is threatening to scrap the agreement under which tehran curbed its nuclear programme in return for an easing of sanctions. iran has warned of dire consequences if washington abandons the deal. in the lords, a former liberal democrat leader reckoned the uk government should be dealing with the situation more urgently. the truth is that we are witnessing the fabric of nuclear arms control collapsing before our very eyes. why isn't the government more vocal in these issues? the minister said the uk was holding regular meetings with french, german and us partners. the noble lord, in his initial question, mentions a visit of president macron to the united states this week.
later this week, chancellor merkel will be there as well and all will be putting pressure on president trump and the united states administration to get this deal sorted out. it really boils down to a simple question. do we or do we not want iran to develop as a nuclear power with nuclear weapons? and destabilise even further the middle east. we recognise they are doing all sorts of undesirable things in the middle east. but this is the specific question of nuclear proliferation. can we be sure that our ministers and those who are allies will continue to press president trump to revalidate the agreement rather than open up a whole new area of danger in the middle east? my lords, i can assure my noble friend that we're making every effort to put pressure on the united states administration to validate this agreement. and he is also quite right in the proliferation of nuclear weapons. we cannot afford any proliferation of nuclear weapons and i should also add that so far, this deal is working, my lords. iran has given up two thirds
of his centrifuges and 95% of its uranium stockpile. our priority is working with the deal and making it deliver for our shared security interests. what are we doing as a government in terms of supporting our allies? the noble lord, the minister, has referred to the visit of president macron. he's referred to the visit of president merkel. we've just had a meeting of g7 foreign ministers. what is our foreign secretary doing to ensure that we actually have a very clear, common voice to the us president to ensure that this agreement, agreed across the board, is maintained and not unilaterally torn up on the 12th of may? we do expect developments in the coming days and plan to update parliament when we know the facts. but this is unlikely to be before president trump has made any announcements. whilst the deal is probably the best we'll get and it took a huge amount of work to get it, may i counsel the government? not to be starry eyed about iran,
which is currently involved in yemen, syria and in lebanon, causing trouble and mischiefmaking, and we should always hold their feet to the fire and not trust them until we have seen proof that they are to be trusted? the way to get irani and cooperation in other us areas of the middle east is not to start by tearing up an agreement they have signed in good faith themselves. and when president trump says that iran is not in compliance with the agreement, that is incorrect, as the international atomic energy agency have repeatedly certified. one mp suggested the uk should have adopted a different approach to president trump. the country has scored an own goal by refusing to deal with president trump in the way that president macron has. difficult though it may be, it would have been better had we extended more of a hand of friendship and a welcome
to president trump, given the need to influence him regardless of personal feelings. but he said the uk continually engaged with the us and would continue to do so. the academic of the facebook data harvesting row, dr alexander kogan, has told the culture committee that facebook has betrayed him as a rogue agent as part of a pr crisis mode. dr kogan came to public attention when it was claimed that information gathered from facebook for political consultancy cambridge analytica, also known as sco, was used for purposes. cambridge analytical has denied that data was used in the united states elections without people's consent. i think based on the evidence
we received from facebook to the committee, that is surprising. dr kogan set up a company, global science research, through which he created an app for cambridge analytica designed to glean information from facebook users via a personality survey. we use the data to drive predictions about people's personalities, and so for that that they paid us £330,000. and i think thatjustifies it. yes, and that goes to you, your company or the company? there was a lighter moment when ian lucas probed dr kogan‘s name change. you're listed as both alexander kogan and alexander spectre. can you explain that? yes, sir. in 2015, i was married and my wife and i decided that it didn't make
sense for me to take her name, or for her to take my name. so we said let's choose a new last name. and since we're both religious and scientists, we thought the idea of light made a lot of sense. so we were looking for something related to light. then my father was sadly sick at the time and one of his surgeons at the time was named jason spectre. we thought that is a really cool sounding name. it also kneels down the theme of light, because of spectrum. and so we decided on spectre as a derivative of a spectrum, as a symbol going for it as a family. you know that spectre is the evil organisation in the bond film? it's an unfortunate coinicidence. did you know that at the time? i did not. when the controversy broke, facebook described dr kogan‘s worked as a scam and a fraud and asked him to delete the data he's obtained. in my view, facebook's comments are pr crisis mode, right? i think, i don't believe they actually think these things,
because i think they realise that the platform has been mined left and right by thousands of others. and i wasjust the unlucky person that ended up somehow linked to the trump campaign, and we are where we are. i think they realise all this. but pr is pr and they're trying to manage the crisis, and it's convenient to point the finger at a single entity and try to paint the picture this is a rogue agent. the committee asked about remarks made by alexander nix, former chief executive of cambridge analytica. could i just read could ijust read you the questions that i asked of alexander nix and read it answers that he gave? i said to him does any of your data come from global science research? and he said no. as a fabrication. 0k. so i said maybe not now, but they have not supplied to you data or information?
he said no. total fabrication. your data sets are not based with information you have received from them? could be true, depending on what the data sets are now. but previous data sets would have been? sure, yeah. we certainly gave them data. that's indisputable. so as far as you're concerned, he lied. absolutely. dr kogan, who's signed a non—disclosure agreement with facebook, said it had been a painful experience. facebook was a close ally, and i was thinking this would be helpful to my academic career and my relationship with facebook. it has very clearly done the complete opposite. i had no interest in becoming an enemy or being antagonized by one of the biggest companies in the world, that even if it's frivolous, sue me into an oblivion. so we acted entirely as they requested. so going back to this, i know you say you cannot talk about the details of it.
was it only you that was required to sign an nda? were any of your co—directors required? i can't talk about that. ask facebook. now, a minister has insisted that capita, which runs a series of public services, was in a different financial position from that of collapsed outsourcing giant, carillion. on monday, capita reported a £513 million annual loss, as it set out plans to revive its business. 0pposition mps fear capita could go the same way as the government contractor carillion, which collapsed earlier this year. but answering an urgent question, 0liver dowden insisted that public services provided by capita are safe. capita has a very different business model and is a different financial situation to carillion. it has minimal involvement in pfis and the messages that capita announced are designed to strengthen its balance sheet,
reduce its pensions deficit, and invest in the core elements of his business. as i said to the house in february, arguably these are the measures that may have prevented carillion from getting into the difficulties that they did. the mp who'd asked the question said capita had an impact on millions of people through its involvement in everything from the london congestion charge to electronic tagging, assessments for disability benefits, and army recruitment. what steps has the government taken to reform the system of government procurement? so that we do not have companies lowballing to win contracts, which then make losses, and to break up some of these contracts so that we are not overdependent on a handful of financially fragile companies? the minister said the government had a target of awarding a third of government contracts to smaller businesses. in fact, the reason why we're doing that is because we know that outsourcing delivers efficiencies and according to one survey that you get at least 11% efficiencies. if you get those 11% efficiencies, that's more money to spend
on health, more money to spend on education and more money to spend on core services. that's why the labour government did it, the coalition government in which he served did it, and why this government continues to use outsourcing. this latest episode in the scandal of outsourcing channels shows yet again, it is the government's commitment to this practice is indeed nothing more than ideological. despite the danger to public services along with capita staff and subcontractors, the government will not shift from its utilities giant multinational firms should make huge profits from the public purse and so the point that they fold, taking our public services with them. we need a change in direction now. will the minister use this latest episode in capita to finally introduce a presumption in favour of in—house provision of public services? but the minister described that
as "overblown rhetoric". under labour, the current major central government contracts awarded to capita, under labour... that is 20%. under the coalition, 24. that is around 53%. and under the current conservative government, i2, and that is around 27%. this is not a party issue. all three formations of government have decided to use outsourcing of companies. a little earlier, mps heard from the head of the spending watchdog, the national audit office on the collapse of the construction company, carillion. the firm folded under the weight of £1.5 billion of debt. carillion specialised in construction, as well as facilities management and ongoing maintenance. it held many government contracts, from building hospitals to managing schools. its collapse at the start of the year led to fears of thousands ofjob losses, both in the company and in its supply chain. so, where did the head of the nao think it had all gone wrong? it came as a contractor with a substantial amount of debt. they grew their business by buying other businesses,
relatively low margin businesses, also by incurring debt. so what is your reaction to the prime minister's very understandable point, made repeatedly immediately after the collapse of carillion? that the government isjust a customer? no, it's more than that. what is the corroborated that relationship? and contracting as we are discussing it now? i don't think the government is just a customer. i think in some sectors they are either the only customer or their relationship with carillion was that they had it over 40% of the turnover, this list government. so to say that is a bit similar to saying that if you are in the supply change for mns and they are just a customer and they tied up and tell you how your internal design of the building should be
and what levels of hygiene you should have been all those other things, you wouldn't accommodate for many of the customer, but in order to be supplying then you do. similarly with government, government is notjust a customer and if they think of themselves too much, if they minimise their role, is is fist small“ my; as you do if you are a relatively small customer by a long contract for the big supplier for example. when you are a whale in the marketplace, you make the conditions. and the other point is, if you put funny conditions in your contracts, people are going to accept them, or they are more likely to accept them because they realise they want to transact with government. so what they're doing is accepting conditions or accepting low prices and then hoping to get a return by working up the margin over time in the contract. you're watching tuesday in parliament, with me,
alicia mccarthy. mps have clashed with senior figures from two top—selling tabloid newspapers as they continue an investigation into hate crime and its consequences. at the start of the home affairs committee hearing, witnesses were asked if they believed there was a problem in the uk with islamophobia. i think there's always going to be a problem with all kinds of issues against minorities. just how pervasive that is, certainly in the immediate, mainstream media i don't believe it's an issue. if i thought islamophobia was being practised in any way, by newspaperjournalists, i would be deeply concerned. in terms of your sense, your overall responsibility to take these issues seriously, do you think you're getting it right? we go to great lengths to avoid any articles that could possibly contribute to islamophobia. but you still have two report difficult issues. there have been claims
of islamophobia surrounding the reporting of sex grooming gangs in rotherham and elsewhere. you can't, i'm afraid, ignore the fact that these crimes appear to have a cultural background to them. we tried to report them in a way that is evenhanded and sensible. i think the sun has published maybe 82,000 or at least 100 word since april 2015, with about five or six examples put before this committee where they could be accused of inciting hate being a islamophobic.
the vast majority aren't, the articles which we do produce which are actually about building community ties and putting a positive light on an amazing community aren't getting picked up by social media critics. the chair challenge that, referring to a story in the son. you have a cutout and keep guide, here is what terrorists look like and you have a picture of a summer minard, jihadi john and white widow, that's a cut out and keep guide. do you have any anxiety that now? we were looking for the most high—profile terrorists we could think of at the time, these were three extremely high—profile terrorists. i don't think anyone could say some of the modern isn't the world's most famous terrorist. of course, but here's what terrorists, plural, look like. not these particular ones, here's what terrorists look like. we took the criticism but at the time we believed it was perfectly legitimate
and satirical piece to put in. you can see clearly see the faces of all three terrorists. nobody could mistake them for any normal member of the muslim community. you have created a story with a headline that suggests a christian girl being fostered by british citizens who happened to be muslims or actually happened to be pretty good foster carers is not appropriate and not another trial‘s interest, entirely at odds with previous stories you have run many are reversed. now, i'm sorry, i simply don't accept that. this is a surprising story where an adoption, a foster local authority, appears to have adopted a completely different policy to what is currently the understanding policy which is that you don't place children into a family with a different cultural background. that was the reason for doing the story. how can you justify targeting a specific group of people, in this case muslims, knowing full well that headline
was completely inaccurate, and this was actually reflective of non—british muslim populations. this is beyond sensationalism. the sun's editor said the paper had apologised for mistakes in the story. we were not trying to incite hatred or anything like that, we reached out to four different voices in nappies, the mayor of london sadiq khan dead it was clear britain needs to take its head out of the sand and tackle issues of extremism. i am yet to see an apology from the sun which stirred up anti—muslim hatred. would you now apologise? i tell you right now i apologise for any errors in the article. we are sorry if we offended anyone.
back in the main commons chamber, there were fresh appeals to an end to arms sales to saudi arabia following reports that at least 20 people were killed in an air strike on a wedding party in northern yemen. the civil war in yemen has been going on for three years, the rebel houthi movement has blamed the raid on the saudi led coalition, for supporting the yemeni government. asking an urgent question, labour's stephen twigg warned that a military offensive by the coalition could cut off supplies to the country. any military offensive would cause an already catastrophic situation to deteriorate further. can the minister assure the house today that the uk is doing everything it can to prevent such an offensive by the saudi led coalition from taking place? surely if an attack goes ahead, the uk would then have do suspend arms sales to the saudi led coalition. the foreign minister said both sides should stop fighting. we do urge all parties
to the conflict to exercise restraint, to continue to facilitate access for essential imports of food, fuel and medical supplies into the country, including through the ports, and to agree with the point that he makes, that further military action is not the way forward. shockingly, of the 17,000 air strikes since the war started, one third have its non—military targets. this whole house shook quite rightly condemned the saudi arabian coalition for its targeting of innocent people. selling 48,000 i'd suggest you saudi arabia only last month bringing total arms sales to 4.6 billion since the beginning of this war makes the uk complicit in these atrocities. the minister did not reply to that directly,
saying the way to secure peace was through political dialogue. the government has said it won't intervene in the hostile takeover of the engineering firm gkn by melrose. gkn has 260 years of engineering history behind it, in the past the firm has had a hand in making minis and spitfires and is now developing hydrogen storage and f 35 strike aircraft. greg clark made the announcement in a statement to the commons. 0n the basis of the commitments given, relating to national security, the ministry of defence concluded that statutory intervention is not required. this is consistent with the other assessments i've received. 0n the basis of the assessments i've considered and the undertakings that have been entered into, myjudgment is there is not reasonable and proportionate grounds to make a statutory intervention on the grounds of national security. 0pposition mps were dismayed. this is a bleak day for british
industry and british workers, when a 259—year—old icon of british engineering excellence falls prey to a hostile takeover thanks to a hedge fund is moving in to make a quick killing. we will hold ministers to account for the promises they have made. will the secretary of state agree that the time has come for a fundamental review of our corporate takeover regime? the idea that the british national interest can be sold down the river by hedge funds is moving into by 20% of the company is fundamentally wrong. the minister said conservative mps who had gkn's sites in their constituencies had been proactive. my friends have made the effort to meet with the new managements, they have discussed important commitments that they are making
in terms of the undertakings that i have secured, they contribute to the stability of employment. the difference between my honourable friends and the honourable gentleman is that they have rolled up their sleeves and got involved while he has contented himself with slogans from backbenchers. that's it from me for now, join me at the same time tomorrow for another round—up of the day here at westminster including the highlights from prime minister's questions. for now, goodbye. hello there. temperatures continue to creep down day—by—day now, closer to the april norm, but by the end of the week it looks like it could be a little bit cooler than the seasonal average.
the last 24 hours have been pretty cloudy but again quite mild, we saw a top temperature of 18 across the south—east. the cloud thickened up, though, in the west we saw outbreaks of rain associated with this area of low pressure, which continued its journey eastwards, tending to fragment as the night wears on but eventually it will clear the south—east. maybe one or two showers packing into western scotland, the west of northern ireland, but elsewhere it's going to be a clearer and drier start to wednesday. quite a chilly start as well, certainly chillier than the last few nights we've had. across the north—east of scotland, not that far off from freezing. so, a chilly start to wednesday, but it is going to be a day of sunshine and heavy april showers, some of them could be quite intense with some hail and thunder mixed in. we start off, though, on a fine note, lots of sunshine around and the showers across western areas from the word go will continue to spread eastwards, becoming more widespread, and into the afternoon this is when they will become quite beefy with hail and thunder, like i mentioned. not all areas could get them, where you have the sunshine you could get temperatures around 14 or 15.
when the showers arrive, which will be quite blustery, then it will feel quite cool. those showers continue on into wednesday evening and to some extent during wednesday night but the early hours of thursday it looks like most of the showers will be confined to western areas, some drier interludes further east. and again, another cool night to come, temperatures in low single figures for most of us. for thursday, i think it's a better looking day. a tough cooler, though, winds coming in from a west to north—west direction. most of the showers again will be in northern and western areas, again heavy with hail and thunder mixed in, best of the brightness across the south—east although we could see 14 or 15 in one or two places. now, into friday, we look to the south—west for this area of low pressure, some uncertainty as to the intensity of this area of low pressure and how far north it's going to get, but the current thinking is it looks like england and wales will of the rain and the strongest of the winds. scotland and northern ireland, a day again of sunshine and heavy showers. a cooler day still, temperatures of nine to maybe 12 or 13 celsius. that's the trend as we head
on into the weekend. low pressure will always be nearby, so remaining quite unsettled, with outbreaks of rain, showers, some sunny spells too and notice the blue colours associated with the area of low pressure, meaning it's going to be a little bit cooler than average. a very warm welcome to bbc news — broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. our top stories: france and the us agree to work towards a new iran deal. president trump warns tehran of "big problems" if it revives its nuclear programme. if iran threatens us in any way, they will pay a price like few countries have ever paid. but the iranians have responded — warning of severe consequences if the present nuclear deal is not upheld by the us. translation: i am telling those in the white house that if they do not live up to their commitments, the iranian government will firmly react. after the toronto van attack and this dramatic arrest,