tv Monday in Parliament BBC News March 19, 2019 2:30am-3:01am GMT
crisis after the speaker welcome to bbc news, of the house of commons blocked broadcasting to viewers a possible vote on the prime in north america and around the globe. my name is mike embley. minister's brexit deal. our top stories: john bercow said theresa may's deal a major blow for the british governmentjust ten days before can't be put to a vote by mps again, brexit. unless there's a substantial change. britain's due to leave the eu theresa may's told she can't ask in just ten days' time. mps to vote on her deal new zealand's prime minister, for a third time. jacinda ardern, has urged her fellow citizens never to utter the name what the government cannot of the gunman who killed fifty legitimately do is to resubmit to the house the same proposition people at mosques in christchurch. or substantially the same speaking in parliament, proposition as that of last week, she said he was a terrorist, criminal and extremist who sought notoriety. thirty people who were injured in attack on friday remain in hospital. which was rejected by 149 votes. dutch police have arrested a turkish man in the city of utrecht, where 3 people as new zealand mourns, were killed in a shooting attack the country's prime minister on a tram on monday morning. condemns the gunman who killed fifty people as a terrorist, five people were wounded, criminal and extremist. speak the names of those who were lost, rather than the name some seriously. of the man who took them. now on bbc news,
monday in parliament. hello, and welcome to monday in parliament, our look at the best of the day in the commons and the lords. on this programme, just when you thought brexit couldn't get more chaotic, it does... what the government cannot legitimately do is to resubmit to the house the same proposition or substantially the same proposition as last week, which was rejected by some 149 votes. also on this programme, should british people who left the uk to join islamic state in syria and iraq be allowed back to the uk? some mps say definitely not. i believe that those who are enemies of our country should not be allowed back into our country.
more annoyance in the lords over the behaviour of cyclists. what is the government going to do to protect disabled people, vulnerable pensioners, mothers with babies in buggies and many others from these hoodlums in lycra? and the moment when a minister realised she was reading the wrong speech. i have got my speeches... the right speeches in the wrong order. but first, there's been another major twist in the brexit deadlock, with the uk's original scheduled departure date just ten days away. john bercow has said there cannot be another commons vote on the government's brexit agreement if the proposal before mps was "substantially the same". the commons speaker told mps parliamentary conventions dating back to 160a meant they could not be asked to vote again on precisely the same subject. injanuary, mps rejected theresa may's withdrawal agreement by a huge 230—vote margin.
when the agreement was put to mps again last tuesday, it was rejected again, this time by 149 votes. he said decisions of the house mattered and had to be respected. the speaker noted that two meaningful votes had taken place. members on both sides of the house and indeed on both sides of the brexit argument have expressed their concerns to me about the house being repeatedly asked to pronounce on the same fundamental proposition. the 24th addition of erskine may states on page 397 that, and i quote, "a motion or an amendment which is the same in its substance as a question which has been decided during a session may not be brought forward again during that same session."
it has been strongly rumoured, though i have not received confirmation of this, that third and even possibly fourth meaningful vote motions will be attempted. hence this statement, which is designed to signal what would be orderly and what would not. this is my conclusion. if the government wishes to bring forward a new proposition that is neither the same nor substantially the same as that disposed of by the house on the 12th of march, this would be entirely in order.
what the government cannot legitimately do is to resubmit to the house the same proposition or substantially the same proposition as that of last week, which was rejected by 149 votes. we are in a constitutional crisis. i'm to seek your advice as to how we can convey to the government that the issue of leadership is now most important and indeed imperative. and what can we do to avail of the prime minister that she must immediately call a meeting of all opposition leaders in order that we can react to this crisis and find a way ahead. this is what happens when you don't seek consensus and compromise from the beginning, but you lay down red lines and you doggedly stick to them with stubbornness and brinkmanship that has brought us to this point. mr speaker, this has to be unprecedented, the crisis that is now upon the country.
we are due to leave the european union in 11 days and there is no plan, there is no certainty and this country is crying out for it, especially business. the fact of the matter is what you said today has great repercussions for the business of the house, and what is the advice from the chair or could we have an early statement clear mack unless there is a substantial difference it must follow that what you have said in an important statement make an enormous amount of sense that it just wonder one thing in regard to the president of 1604, is there any connection between that and shortly after that, the gunpowder plot? well, the honourable gentlemen is a far superior historian. he may know. i will not say. and i appreciate also his sense of humour on what is no less an extremely important occasion.
can i welcome your reaffirmation of the rule of law in this house and the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty? given the gravity of the situation, could you enlighten the house as to whether erskine may makes any provision for a speakers conference to bring together all parties in this house under your chairmanship, sir, try to find a way forward? the new leader of the house or relatively new leader of the house, who has been a notable reformer in other respects, will be seized by the salience of what the right honourable gentleman has commended to the house and will feel that she could have a key role in initiating such an important constitutional development. and if she did, i would be willing to play ball with it. i have no idea. it's not something she and i have discussed, but you never know, never know. point of order, the leader of the house. ijust want to be very clear, lam indeed a reforming leader
of the house of commons. and for me, treating colleagues with courtesy and respect is at the forefront of that reform. and any speakers council would have to have that at its heart, and i certainly would not be confident that that will be the case. well, so be it. i treat the house with respect, i treat all members with respect. i chaired a previous speakers conference and there was no criticism of the way in which i did so. one reason why was precisely to avoid the kind of spectacle that we have been witnessing in this last few months. so will he take the government's own behaviours, ignoring the votes of parliament, making a decision between votes which somehow are binding and nonbinding, refusing to grant opposition days, beginning not to vote in opposition days and to ignore those issues that are actually passed by this house which have devalued
parliament's opinion? you helpfully reminded us of the beginning of your statement of the size of the majority against the vote which took place last week. i think most observers would feel that in order for that to be turned around and for the motion to pass, it would require a significant change. and as i understand it from your movement this afternoon, if perhaps the european council in a few days' time issues a certificate change, could be achieved, then you would allow a further meaningful vote on that basis. the right honourable gentleman is very fair—minded and what's more, he is perceptive. the prime minister of new zealand, jacinda ardern, has promised gun law reforms in her country within days following the horrific events at two mosques in christchurch at the end of last week. 50 people died in the mass shootings. 50 more were injured.
a 28—year—old man has been charged with murder. as the gunman opened fire, he filmed the entire crime and livestreamed it directly to facebook. the shocking footage was shared widely in the hours following the attack. this has focused attention on the regulation of social media platforms, particularly in regard to far—right extremism. and it was an issue taken up in the commons. because social media platforms should be ashamed that they have enabled a terrorist to livestream this evil massacre and spread this mantra of hate to the whole world. as the home secretary has made clear, enough is enough. we have been clear that tech companies need to act more quickly to remove terrorist content and ultimately prevent new content being made available to users in the first place. this must be a wake—up call for them to do more.
there can be no safe spaces for terrorist to promote and share their sick views. an attack on anyone of faith is an attack on all peoples of faith and nonbelievers, too, for lawful and peaceful, for business. the harrowing livestreaming of events in christchurch on the other side of the world raises questions on the role of social media platforms in facilitating a growing extremism. and whilst a white paper on online harm is of course welcome, does the minister now accept the time has come that when asking online platforms to act is not enough and we need a new regulator with strong powers to penalise them if they do not curb harmful content? as a muslim who has the largest muslim constituency in the uk, i have spent the weekend reassuring not only the constituents, but my own muslim family. i can tell you how islamophobia happens. it happens because it goes unchecked.
it happens because people in politics have responsibilities that they do not meet. we have seen the rise of anti—migrant sentiment, and anti—muslim sentiment, anti—community sentiments, in the uk, not only in europe, not only in america, also in australia. the politiciansm media, online as well as print and others, newspaper models, editors, like fox news under rupert murdoch, daily express, the sun and others have consistently ran lies and lied about all of these communities. to show leadership and a step forward, a proper legislation and regulation because not only should no family lose a loved one is such horrific circumstances,
they should not have to then find out that the brutal murder of a loved one was streamed online for 17 minutes and is still going around online now. i hope the honourable lady, when the whatever comes —— i hope the honourable lady, when the white paper comes out is not disappointed. if everybody moves is there sites to places like cuba and nothing can change. next, it was back to brexit as mps grappled with the implications of the speaker's announcement earlier in the day. the brexit minister kwasi kwarteng declared that, as an optimist, he thought there was still a chance that theresa may's brexit deal could be approved by parliament. these further exchanges came during an urgent question from the conservativejustine greening on delaying the uk's departure from the eu. i believe it has been frustrated time and time again by this government, wasting time bringing back a deal that has still not passed instead
of allowing this place through three votes to reach a consensus on what we do feel would be an appropriate way forward. that takes time. we do not have much time. what is the government's approach in order to allow us to ensure we do not crash out again? the no deal voted cleared the house but we inadvertently leave at the end of next week. she said that stephen barclay should not be involved in negotiations after voting last week to keep no deal on the table. he voted to leave, come what may. i take a different view to him. the house ta kes a different view to him. the house takes a different view to him. it is not appropriate or credible for him to be the lead person negotiating on this country's behalf with the european union. the minister said he voted against delaying brexit. as you all know, as you know and as members of the house know, the house did vote to extend article
50 and his accounts was of that, i set out very clearly in my statement the process that would be followed in that event. as i have said, we would as soon as possible following agreement at the eu level and that we would bring forward the necessary domestic legislation to amend the definition of exit day. that legislation will take the form of a statutory instrument and affirmative to the tour which will be laid after the agreement with the eu next week. he like the secretary of state voted against the government's motion on thursday. he has not reconsidered over the weekend and he comes before us to glorify in the fact that he opposes the government's stated policy which is to seek an extension to article 50. and i wonder can he even tell us, does he agree with what he hasjust read out
from the despatch box today? the honourable gentleman suggested that i did not agree with the statement, i fully agreed with the statement. that is for his instruction. his instruction. order! division! very amusing interjections. there is the vote only three days away. one — how long an extension will we ask for, or has olly robbins not told the cabinet yet? two, what is the purpose of the extension? and three — will the si be debated on the floor of the house rather than upstairs in committee? is it true they are trying to replace the prime minister with a leader who can make some attempt to
win the election? will the prime minister be pending a letter of resignation? you're watching our round—up of the day in the commons and the lords. still to come, should people who fled the britain tojoin is be allowed back? now, cycling is usually seen as a healthy thing to do, but in the house of lords, that view isn't always the case. one estimate recently put the number of people in england engaging in cycling activity at 3.8 million, and the figure is rising. but do cyclists sometimes get in the way of motorists or pedestrains? the labour peer lord winston, well—known to viewers of tv science programmes, suggested adults who venture on to the roads on their bikes should be made to have a cycling licence and insurance. most cyclists are of course
conscientious and law—abiding, but an increasing number are extremely aggressive and avoid one—way streets, pedestrian crossings and red lights and traffic lights. and from time to time, they collide with pedestrians. in lieu of the fat the government encourages cycling, and i agree with that, does the lady not think the government should consider its obligation to improve public safety and therefore implement some of these measures or others which are similar? the devil will be aware that a review was taken of cycling and walking safety. and as part of that, both licensing and insurance were considered, but over 3 million new cycles are sold each year, licensing insurance will require the establishment of a register and the government view is that this would be very cumbersome and expensive to administer.
there is evidence from other countries who have trialed these schemes and withdrawn them. should we not consider whether we wish to encourage cycling for the health benefits that it gives and indeed the advances to reducing congestion or whether we should deter cyclists and i declare an interest in the former chairman, deter cyclists with unnecessary regulation to keep the police busy for the next 100 years? my lords, the minister will be aware that 20 years ago, fixed penalty notices were introduced precisely to deter irresponsible cyclists from cycling on payments. the minister may not be aware that in 2017—18, freedom of information requests have shown that out of 38 police forces, 30 of them issued fewer than five fixed penalty notices and 12 of them issued no fictional seat notices at all. does the minister really think
that there is a little irresponsible cycling on payments, and if she doesn't think that, what is a government going to do to protect disabled people, vulnerable pensioners and others with babies and many others from these hoodlums in lycra? laughter. i hear the noble lord's concerns. i have to say, i didn't anticipate the popularity of this topic. the government takes these issues extremely seriously, but there are small minorities of motorists, cyclists
and dare i say what are known as smombies, which are smartphone zombies, including pedestrians, who do cause danger on our roads, but a tiny percentage of accidents are caused by cyclists. and so the government is seeking to have a proportionate response that upholds the law but also encourages cycling and walking. the arguments over cycling. an epetition saying that british people who signed up to islamic state should be banned from returning to the uk has been supported by more than 500,000 people. the recent case of the teenager shamima begum has focused attention on the issue. the home secretary stripped shamima begum of her british citizenship on advice that she qualified for bangladeshi citizenship through her mother. the teenager then suffered the loss of her baby in syria. herfather said that she had made a mistake when she became an islamic state bride. the question of whether people signing up to is should be allowed back has been debated in westminster
hall. the home secretary recently stated that as many as 900 people who have been deemed to be a concern to our national security have travelled to syria and iraq to joint terrorist organisations. some of those have been killed on the battlefield, 40% remain there and 40% return to the uk full so that means around 350 people who are deemed to be a security concern have travelled to iraq and and since returned some of those not under people, only 100 have been deprived of their british citizenship. will my honourable friend give way? happy to give way. over 11,000 constituents sign this petition. i believe that those who are enemies of our condition not be allowed back into our country, but does my honourable friend agree
with me that the british citizenship not be taken for granted and the decision not to allow bias and reflective of this country will act as a deterrent against others think about betraying our country? we must be able to defer the mentorship of terrorist organisations forwarded under any circumstances, and provide a great attempt to people because of her in the possibility of becoming foreign fighters. however, this can only be effective if part ofa government from working for attacking these issues head—on and confronting problems at an earlier stage. during the bacon, or anyone else in similar offences, has broken the law, of course they should be allowed to return but they should be investigated and interrogated and if appropriate prosecuted. they are the responsibility of the british government. we are talking about british citizens. if shemima begum or anyone else is identified as representing a threat, ourjudicial system is there to deal with it.
no—one who has fought for or assisted the terrorist group will ever face a assisted the terrorist group will everface a warm assisted the terrorist group will ever face a warm welcome. in the name ofa ever face a warm welcome. in the name of a fascist ideology. of that, there can be no doubt. it is vital that we recognise that if a uk citizen becomes isolated from society and susceptible to radicalisation, it is our society as a government that has failed to prevent this. removing individual's british citizenship is a weighty decision and for that reason, it is a matter reserved to the home secretary. however, he takes these decisions in light of careful considered advice prepared by officials and law. however, each decision does also have a statutory right of appeal attached to it. that individuals can and do exercise. so that the courts can review the appropriateness of data revision decision independently.
finally, it was eric morecambe who referred to playing all the right notes in the wrong order. in the house of lords came a variation of the famous line, when a home office minister realised she wasn't quite in tune with events. lady williams was reading out a speech during a debate on a technical aspect of brexit only to discover it was the wrong speech. the instrument makes a number of transitional and savings provisions. i think it's the other instrument. ah. my lords, on the date when you have got three statutory instruments, an urgent question, a question, a speech to the lgbt conference, this is what happens. so i do apologise to the noble lords that i have gotten my speeches, the right speeches in the wrong order. laughter. if that's a fair point to make.
oh, dear. a thankless task, sometimes, being a minister. and that brings me to the end of my final stint. it's been great to present the round—up programme over the last 17 years. do please keep watching the day in parliament, brought to you each day by our excellent reporting team. but from me, keith macdougall, for the last time, goodbye. hello there. last week, we were bombarded by deep areas of low pressure, bringing gales and heavy rain, but i'm thankful to say this week is looking much quieter. we've got high pressure, i think, in the driving seat for many of us, so it'll be a lot more settled and quite mild. although we'll have quite a bit of cloud around, where you get the sunshine,
it'll feel very springlike indeed. this is the area of high pressure which will be dominating the weather for us throughout this week. but we've still got a few weather fronts to contend with in the short term. so it does look like, early on tuesday, quite a lot of cloud around, some showery bursts of rain across northern and western areas, and it will be breezier here as well. so with all the cloud cover, i think, and even the rain and the breeze, it's not going to be a particularly cold start to tuesday. but there will be quite a bit of cloud around. sunshine will be limited. i think probably the best of any, if you get some, will be the north—east of scotland, perhaps some spots across eastern england. but elsewhere, quite a bit of cloud, thickest across the north—west, where we'll see further outbreaks of rain, and it'll be breezier here too. so 11—14 celsius for scotland. further south, 12, 13 degrees, maybe 14 celsius in the south—east, which is actually pretty mild — a little bit higher than what we should be looking at this time of year. but things are set to turn even milder midweek onwards. this big wedge of air will move in off the atlantic. the orange and yellow colours denote that. then it does look like, if we get some sunshine
across the eastern side of the country, then those temperatures will shoot up. but again, another very cloudy day, i think, across northern and western areas. thickest of the cloud across the west of scotland, where it'll be quite breezy. 13, maybe 14 degrees here. but across the south and the east, given some sunshine, we could be looking at 16 or 17 celsius. we've still got high pressure with us, dominating the scene, i think, for much of england and wales. this weather front will bring thicker cloud, outbreaks of rain to scotland and then to northern ireland later in the day, and it will become quite windy here too, as well, so a bit of a different feel to the weather here. further south, though, largely settled, variable cloud, a little bit of sunshine, and again very mild, with temperatures reaching 15 or 16 degrees. something a bit cooler behind this weather front — nine or 10 celsius there, lower for stornoway. this weather front begins to slip south—east, but fizzles out as it does throughout friday. so we'll see outbreaks of rain for scotland and northern ireland, then into north—western parts of england and north—west
wales later on. those temperatures dropping a little bit here, but still very mild, with some sunshine across the south and the east. now, it looks like that weather front will slip southwards during friday night, and then for the weekend, something a little bit cooler, as you can see. temperatures down a notch, but it looks still largely settled, with variable cloud, a bit of sunshine.