Transcripts For BBCNEWS The Papers 20240714

Of commons when it has been renewed and the question is whether the new chamber will include reclining chairs for the likes of members of the house who need to make themselves comfortable. The question is that this house agrees with the lords in the amendment number one. As many as are of that opinion say aye and to the country no further the ayes have it. With the leave of the ayes have it. With the leave of the house we take lords amendment two to 12 together. Im grateful to the honourable gentleman. As many as are of that opinion say aye. To the country no further up the ayes have it. The ayes have it. I am immensely grateful to the honourable gentleman for the point of order. It has become a fact that the government is seeking to circumvent the release of documents relating to prorogation and operation yellowhammer, can you explain the ways that the government can lay those papers and given that the house has passed us by majority the house has passed us by majority the government should release the information. Im sorry that some people in response to the rising of the honourable gentleman yelled, yawn and i wonder if people observing our proceedings think that isa observing our proceedings think that is a proper weight from one colleague to show respect for another. It is a matter of serious issue raised and responsibility being incumbent upon the chair in this case to seek to respond. It is not yawn but serious politics. In the honourable gentleman raised a very legitimate point in the simple a nswer very legitimate point in the simple answer is that the government must comply with the humble address passed by the house. That is the reality of the matter. The debate has happened, a decision has been made. And it is incumbent upon the government to comply manifestly with what has been decided. The spirit, purpose and content of which are entirely clear. This is not about gameplaying and machination but doing what parliament once which is what most people would expect their elected parliament to do. I do not require any help from people in disregard of the house. If papers are commanded by her majesty to be presented to this house at any time during the existence of a parliament which includes periods of prorogation although not of dissolution, delivery of such papers to the votes and Proceedings Office shall be deemed to all premises that presentation of them to this house. At least to me at this point. That seems clear. I hope it is not beyond the capacities, the very considerable intellectual capacities of some members of the government. Point of order. I was wondering whether you might be able to assist, mr speaker, whether you might be able to assist, mrspeaker, under whether you might be able to assist, mr speaker, under the Civil Service code of conduct for Government Special advisers who are Government Employees paid for by the taxpayer, a special adviser it may not undertake work for a Political Party during office hours. They should also not use official resources for Party Political activities. Based on widespread reports it appears the Prime Ministers chief special adviser Dominic Cummings almost certainly has undertaken work for the conservative party whilst carrying out his duties and with that in mind, i submitted a freedom of information request. It is a perfectly reasonable enquiry, whether it is something upon which i can adjudicate remains to be seen but i will only know that if i hear it and how you meant that more difficult to be heard. With that in mindl difficult to be heard. With that in mind i submitted to freedom of information request to the cabinet secretary on the 13th of august asking for details of Government Special advisers. And in particular who they were employed by and whether they were paid out of the public purse. Were paid out of the public purse. In the case of mr cummings, i asked if he has not paid by public funds, whether he has security access to downing street and is treated in the same way as a special adviser paid out of public funds, this is an incredibly important matter of Public Interest given we are about to parochial and potentially thereafter into an election period. The Cabinet Office when we were doing points of order replied saying they would not provide a response to my freedom of information request which is due tomorrow until december. That is clearly unsatisfactory. I tried to raise it with the chancellor of the duchy earlier. He refused to take any intervention. Given we are about to prorogue forfive weeks, intervention. Given we are about to prorogue for five weeks, what would you advise we do to ensure that public funds are not being misspent as used by conservative Party Purposesin as used by conservative Party Purposes in this way . Im sorry, but i have to resort to my usual advice to critical members in these circumstances, persist, persist. Persist. Right, seeka meeting, press again and again in pursuit of a response to entirely legitimate questions. Do not take no for an answer. It is a very long time since i was answer. It is a very long time since iwasa answer. It is a very long time since i was a special adviser, the rules we re i was a special adviser, the rules were extremely strict then, i had what the honourable gentleman resonates with me entirely. I have iio resonates with me entirely. I have no reason to suppose the rules are changed, i cannot say what is or is not done by way of common contact on the part of particular individuals but that it is a legitimate matter of Public Interest rather than something simply to be treated as the subject of cheap ribaldry is entirely obvious to me. He has a fair enquiry and he should pursue it. Im not put up with those who sneer and smirk and think it is all a jolly wheeze at the game doesnt matter down. It does matter andl doesnt matter down. It does matter and i hope he will pursue it. If there are no further points of order, i there are no further points of order, lam there are no further points of order, i am grateful to the honourable gentleman, i hope you suitably emboldened in pursuit of his efforts, we now come to the motion or on an early parliamentary general election to move the motion, i called the Prime Minister. Thank you, mr speaker. Before i begin, may ijoin honourable you, mr speaker. Before i begin, may i join honourable members you, mr speaker. Before i begin, may ijoin honourable members in thanking you, mr speaker for your long and distinguished service, that we may not have always agreed on everything, i have believed you have a lwa ys everything, i have believed you have always acted in what you judge to be the National Interest. With permission, i beg to move the motion standing in my name, either the fixed term parliaments act. Last wednesday the member for islington north came the first leader of the opposition in the history of our country to show his confidence in her majestys government by declining the opportunity to have an election with a view to removing the government. When he spoke last week it seemed he might recover his nerve tonight, i dont wait to see how he responds. Referring to his starring the bill, he said, i quote, let this bill pass and gain royal assent and then he said we will back an election. The surrender bill has now passed, it has gained royal assent, he has done his level best to wreck their strength of a successful negotiation by his own logic, he must now back an election. I am retaking the motion for a general election, i dont want to, i hoped the step would be unnecessary, but the step would be unnecessary, but the reality is an election is the only way to break the deadlock in the house. And to serve the National Interest by giving whoever is Prime Minister the strongest possible mandate to negotiate for our country at next months european council. Labour also have exhibited this reality. In their own leaflets this weekend. This weekend they say, we need a general election now. We need a general election now, thats what it says. And yet throughout the weekend the right honourable gentlemans cronies together but there of opposition parties have been trying to disguise their preposterous cowardice by coming up with ever more outrageous excuses for delaying an election until the end of october or perhaps november when hale freezes over. In the dither, delle alpi that has become the hallmark of the opposition. Delay. I add a conniving to delay brexit in defiance of the referendum, costing the country next £250 million a week for the privilege . Enough to upgrade more than five hospitals and train 4000 new nurses. The only possible explanation is that they fear that we will win. That i will win it and secure a renewed mandate to take this country out of the european union, a policy they now oppose. That is the sorry tale of this opposition, for the last three years they have schemed to overturn the verdict of the british people, delivered any referendum which any crowning irony almost all of them voted to hold. In fact they didnt just vote to hold it, some of them even, i will give way. Thank you for the Prime Ministerfor even, i will give way. Thank you for the Prime Minister for giving way. Even, i will give way. Thank you for the Prime Ministerfor giving way. I am pleased that he has chosen to give me an intervention. He is reading off the fact that the amount of money being spent going into europe could pay for nurses and operate hospitals, but may i say, nine years of austerity has led to our nhs being. Nine years of austerity has led to our nhs services being failed. Nine years of austerity has led to bohm million children living in poverty, so all you need to do is move forward, because we will have an election when it is time. If that is what she thinks, by doesnt have a word with her right honourable friend i tell him to reverse his absurd policy and spend the extra £1 billion a month, we are spending £1 billion on 20,000 more Police Officers on the streets of this country. But some of them. The liberal democrats also called for a referendum on our membership of the eu. Was they got it, they lost that referendum, they did nothing but try to overturn the results. Giving themselves the authority to decide which elections they respect and which they reject. Now they want a second referendum but they are already planning to campaign against the result. When asked whether she would implement brexit if the people voted for it a second time, the partys new leader replied, no, so every time the liberal democrats lose a referendum they just call for a new liberal democrats lose a referendum theyjust call for a new one over and over again. It turns out that the honourable member for dumbartonshire east is the new leader of the referendum party, the Jimmy Goldsmith of our top. They are models of coherence by comparison with the leader of the opposition. His strategy, mysterious as it is, is that by some process he becomes Prime Minister what he will not have an election because he is against elections, he then goes to brussels and negotiate a new deal, presumably keeping us in the Customs Union and signal market, he then comes back and passes that deal through the house and then takes it to the country in a second referendum whereupon he campaigns against his own deal and urges. That is the plan, isnt it . Party can clarify. Id urges the nation to reject his own handiwork. We know the real reason why labour dont want a general election. We know why they dont want a general election either his leadership. Most of them dont wa nt his leadership. Most of them dont want a general election because they fear that their party will lose. But there is a small, terrified minority of labour mps who do not want an election because aig think he might win. Because they actually as for the Scottish National party, last week the first minister for scotland correctly said, i quote, it is starting to feel like labour doesnt wa nt starting to feel like labour doesnt wantan starting to feel like labour doesnt want an election at all. She has then issued a clarion call to our own assembled armies at westminster, force an election. How do those based on what is of Scottish Nationalism proposed to four that election, by heroically abstaining. The comment thread joy all these parties is that there extraordinary belief that the National Interest requires them pre emptively to protect the british people from the consequences of their democratic decisions. The truth is they only believe in democracy when it delivers the result that they want. Her majestys loyal opposition have a constitutional duty. Noise in the chamber, the decibel level these to reduce. The Prime Minister should not have to shout in order to make himself heard, they say will apply when the leader of the opposition gets to his feet. Mr speaker, her majestys dog like they say they cant hear, how is that . How was that . Cheering her majestys loyal opposition have a constitutional duty. They have a constitutional duty to oppose the government and to seek to replace it. For those task they are handsomely paid to the tune of almost £10 million of taxpayers money. That is what they are paid to do by the taxpayer, the leader of the opposition himself. Point of order. U nfortu nately unfortunately the microphone being placed so close to the Prime Minister means he cannot hear that some of us over here are trying to intervene and. And have something that he and his backbenchers do not wa nt that he and his backbenchers do not want which is a debate, because we all want to know whether he will abide by the law that there parliament has passed. Abide by the law that there parliament has passedlj abide by the law that there parliament has passed. I say as much for the benefit of the watching public as for anybody else, that is an example of what i called the norm. Superficially a point of order but entirely bogus. Although the unborn lady has made her own point in herown unborn lady has made her own point in her own way. Thank you for your impartial in judgments. The in her own way. Thank you for your impartial injudgments. The leader of the opposition, they see set, his party paid £10 million, the leader of the opposition himself is entitled to over £140,000 of taxpayers money, and yet today we have the extraordinary spectacle of the entire opposition collectively deciding to abrogate their most fundamental responsibility. They have theirjob, they know what they should be doing. In this area of creative litigation, are they not grounds for legal challenge to compel them to do the leader of the opposition, honourable members can have their say. Sometimes he says we should leave the eu. Sometimes he says we should have another referendum. Sometimes he says we should negotiate a new deal. Sometimes he says he would accept whatever brussels offers. Over the past few days, the labour party has said that it wants to delay brexit then negotiate a new deal then have another referendum, then campaign against their own deal