the week in parliament. hello again, and welcome to the week in parliament, a week when mps hoped the killing of sarah everard would be a watershed moment to help prevent violence against women. too many of us have clutched our keys in our fist in case we need to defend ourselves. and that is not ok. but ministers face complaints about police tactics and a lack ofjustice. i have parliamentary privilege. i can name the men who have hurt me. but millions of women in this country don't even have that. a victim of stalking shares her experience. he dropped the letters through my letterbox, just so i knew that he knew where i lived. and elsewhere in westminster, a controversial figure returns to haunt the government. in spring 2020, the situation got to where the department of health was just a smoking ruin in terms of procurement to ppe. but first, sarah everard's killing prompted widespread public anger and calls for action to do more to protect women and girls. hundreds gathered on clapham common in south london to lay flowers and pay their respects to sarah, who went missing while walking home from a friend's house. a police officer has been charged with her kidnap and murder. the clapham common vigil led to clashes with the police, with some women forcibly removed. an independent inquiry is under way. the liberal democrats say the metropolitan police commissioner, cressida dick, should resign. when the home secretary arrived in the commons to update mps, she said she understood the public anger, but warned against protests while covid restrictions are in place. mr speaker, i would like to take a moment to acknowledge why sarah's death has upset so many. my heartache and that of others can be summed up in just five words — she was just walking home. too many of us have walked home from school or work alone only to hear footsteps uncomfortably close behind us. too many of us have pretended to be on the phone to a friend to scare someone off. too many of us have clutched our keys in our fists in case we need to defend ourselves, and that is not ok. laboursaid a time of national grief must become a time of change. it cannot be right that so many women continue to fear for their safety on a daily basis, whether on the streets or at home. and whilst the event was a vigil, not a protest, the scenes from clapham should be a red warning light to the government that ministers should not be rushing through laws cracking down on protest. the truth is, mr speaker, this government is failing to address violence against women and girls, and ministers even want to curtail their right to protest about it. if we're going to eradicate violence against women and girls, it is about teaching young men and boys about respect for women and about what is or is not acceptable in a relationship. the public health crisis has l made restrictions necessary. so while the police make - difficult decisions every day, it is impossible to watchl the footage of the events at the common without shock. and concern the police appeared heavy— handed - and disproportionate. the mp whose constituency includes clapham common said her constituents were angry. what happened this weekend is a reminder of what happens when police try to completely bypass the views of the communities they serve. does the home secretary recognise the police�*s approach got the balance between public safety and the right to protest completely wrong? does the home secretary agree that the police heavy—handed treatment of female protesters was wrong? mr speaker, the scenes of women being forced to the ground, restrained and arrested simply for holding a peaceful vigil in memory of sarah everard, and in condemnation of violence against women and girls, were utterly disgraceful. of course the met commissioner must resign. mr speaker, i believe- that it is highly regrettable that members of the opposition demand that the first _ female commissioner- of the metropolitan police resign in this situation. i'm shocked at the way in which saturday night's vigil was policed. the situation demanded sensitivity and compassion, something which was evidently lacking. but i'm also shocked that what started as a peaceful and important vigil turned into a protest with photographs showing acab science, which stands for "all cops are bastards". madam deputy speaker, i'm concerned that a young woman's murder could be hijacked by those who would seek to defund the police and destabilise our society, making it even harder for women to come forward and report assaults. she's made a very, very important point that a peaceful vigil on saturday turned into some pretty ugly scenes, so we'll wait for the report and there's no question that where there are lessons to be learned, they will be learned. priti patel. the calls for tougher action to protect women and girls came as mps began debating the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill. it's a wide—ranging piece of legislation covering everything from attacks on statues and memorials to sentencing rules. labour voted against it on the grounds that it doesn't do enough to stop violence against women and it restricts people's ability to protest. at prime minister's questions, the labour leader, sir keir starmer, said the death of sarah everard was one of those tragedies that, like the murder of stephen lawrence, demanded both justice and change. now, the awful events of the last week have lifted a veil on the epidemic of violence against women and girls. this must also be a watershed moment to change how we as a society treat women and girls and how we prevent and end sexual violence and harassment. he is right, frankly, that unless and until we have a change in our culture that acknowledges and understands that women currently do not feel they are being heard, we will not fix this problem. and that is what we must do. we need a cultural and social change in attitudes to redress the balance, mr speaker. there was, initially at least, an unusually consensual air to the exchanges. both leaders agreed rape prosecution statistics were shocking. and as for sentencing, keir starmer highlighted three cases where rapists received what he thought were lenient sentences. does the prime minister agree we need urgently to look at this and to toughen sentences for rape and serious sexual violence? prime minister. mr speaker, wouldn't it be a wonderful thing if there was a bill going through the house of commons which would do exactly that? as it happens, there is such a bill before the house. i think it will be a great thing if the right honourable gentleman actually had voted for it. he still has time. he can lift his opposition. he actually voted against it, mr speaker, on a three line whip, and i think it was crazy. keir starmer. mr speaker, he mentions the bill last night. that provided for longer maximum sentences for damaged memorials than the sentences imposed in the three cases of rape i've referred the house to, all of those sentences less than ten years. borisjohnson accused him of trying to misrepresent what the bill set out to do. ministers were trying to stiffen sentences, he said, and to accelerate the criminaljustice process. until we sort out that fundamental problem, until women feel that they are being heard and voices are being heard and their complaints are being addressed by society, we will not fix this problem, and i warmly welcome what he suggests about wanting to fix it together and i hope that in that spirit, he can bring himself to vote for the tougher sentences that we set out. another labour mp pursued keir starmer�*s point. i have parliamentary privilege. i can name the men who have hurt me, but millions of women in this country don't even have that. stuck between a criminal system where only 1.4% of reported offences result in charges being laid and where too many survivors who speak out pursued through the civil courts by their abusers to silence them. can the prime minister advise how women are meant to get justice? mr speaker, i'm afraid that she's completely right and i know that she speaks for many people and many women up and down the country. we have to address the fundamental issue of the casual everyday sexism and apathy that fails to address the concerns of women. that is the underlying issue. the prime minister. now, cast your mind back. do you remember this man? we last saw dominic cummings leaving downing street with a cardboard box under his arm. but boris johnson's former chief adviser is back in town and spoiling for a fight, telling mps about the "disaster" of events during the pandemic and how the department of health had been a "smoking ruin". he was supposed to be talking to the science and technology committee about the creation of a new agency, aria, to fund cutting edge science projects, but also gave a revealing insight into life inside government. the prime minister came to speak to me the sunday before he became prime minister and said would i come to downing street to help sort out the huge brexit nightmare. i said yes, if first of all, you're deadly serious about actually getting brexit done. secondly, double the science budget. third, create some entity. and fourth, support me in trying to change how whitehall works and the cabinet office work because it's a disaster, sir. and he said, "deal." where did you say deal? where were you when that was concluded? in my living room the sunday before he became prime minister. just you and him or were there others there? just me and him. he said that once lockdown was over, parliament should take an urgent, hard look at what went wrong and why. it's not coincidental that the vaccine programme worked the way that it did, to do that, we had to take it out of the department of health. we had to have it authorised very directly by the prime minister and say strip away all the normal nonsense that we can see is holding back funding... you said we took it out of the department of health. who's we? number ten took it out. in spring 2020, we had a situation where department of health was just a smoking ruin in terms of procurement and ppe and all of that. and as for his supposed £45,000 pay rise, the media had got that wrong. when i arrived, i was put on the normal pay grade for my position of 140—something—thousand. i said i didn't want that and i only wanted to be paid what i was paid at vote leave. ifigured i should be paid the same to sort out the brexit mess as i've been paid for voting leave, so i asked for a pay cut, which is what happened in summer2019. for some reason, this appeared in the media as if i got a pay rise after covid, but that didn't happen. when we were all rehired in the day after the election, then i moved back onto the normal pay grade for my position. dominic cummings explaining how he ended his short downing street career earning rather more than when he began it. now, the continuing row over the scottish government's handling of sexual harassment allegations against alex salmond has reached westminster. the conservative mp david davis revealed text messages which he says demonstrated that key officials in the scottish national party interfered improperly in the investigation against the former first minister. i have it on good authority that there exists, from the 6th of february 2018, the 6th of february 2018, an exchange of messages between civil servantsjudith mackinnon and barbara allison suggesting "the first minister's chief of staff is interfering in the complaints process against alex salmond". the investigating officer complained, and i quote, "liz interference v bad." i assume that means "very bad". if true, this suggests the chief of staff had knowledge of the salmond case in february, not in april, as she has claimed on oath. david davis's allegations were dismissed by nicola sturgeon at first minister's questions two days later. but having david davis, a tory mp, reading out in the house of commons, under the protection of parliamentary privilege, his old pal alex salmond's conspiracy theories about the sexual harassment allegations against him must be the very epitome of the old boys' club. that failed to convince the scottish tories. the evidence does mount up, - as do the government's excuses. but nothing can excuse the way the women at the heart - of this were failed, nor the taxpayers'l money that was wasted. and the one thing that's not happened is anyonej in this government taking the responsibility- that they should. the circumstances demand that somebody loses - theirjob over this. could be the permanent secretary, could be - the first minister's chief of staff, it could be - the first minister herself. but really shouldn't it be all of them? l well, of course, in just a few weeks' time, i will put myself before the verdict of the scottish people. that's the ultimate accountability, the accountability ruth davidson is running away from and never let us forget that. nicola sturgeon has also announced that lockdown restrictions will start to be lifted from the beginning of april. hairdressers will open their doors from the 5th of april, gyms and nonessential shops to follow a week later, with cross—border travel and self—catering holidays at the end of the month. at stormont, the first minister, arlene foster, also announced the lifting of some restrictions. northern ireland's four main churches will be able to have public worship for easter, opening their pews from good friday, the 2nd of april. now, at westminster, labour, in opposition, have been pushing for a timetable for a public inquiry into the pandemic, something the conservative government here has been resisting. funnily enough, in wales, the conservatives, in opposition, want a public inquiry as soon as possible. labour, in power, say not yet. confused? this is what happened during first minister's questions in the virtual senedd. i want to see a public inquiry as soon as possible make progress, and rather than loop it in a wider uk public inquiry, have a wales—specific public inquiry. could you clarify your remarks so that we can understand exactly when you believe that a public inquiry should start and that you agree that it should be a stand—alone welsh public inquiry looking at the measures that welsh government have control over, rather than submerged into a wider uk inquiry? well, i believe that an inquiry will be a necessary and important part of the way that we learn the lessons of the extraordinary 12 months that we have lived through. i did not say yesterday that i thought it should wait until coronavirus was over. i said i thought it should wait until we are all confident coronavirus is in the rear—view mirror. and he thought it should be a uk—wide rather than welsh inquiry. there's been mixed news on the vaccine front across the uk. the good news is that more of us have had the jab. the bad news that 5 million doses of the oxford/astrazeneca jab produced in india have been held up by a month. the health secretary said all adults would still get their first dose by the end ofjuly, but he told mps that vaccine supplies went up and down. in the last week, we've had a batch of 1.7 million doses delayed because of the need to retest its stability. events like this are to be expected in a manufacturing endeavour of this complexity, and this shows the rigour of our safety checks. many key workers under the age of 50, like teachers and police officers — who through the nature of their work are not at home, they are going out, they're more exposed to risk — had been hoping that vaccination for them was not far away. so, we understand why there will be delays in supply. of course we understand that, but this is not fantastic news. jonathan ashworth. now, what does global britain look like after brexit? dominic cummings' old boss tried to tell us, but his blueprint for an integrated foreign, defence and security policy prompted anger from mps over the uk's links with china and cuts to overseas aid. the prime minister said the aim of the most comprehensive review since the cold war was to make the uk stronger, safer and more prosperous. that may result in a bigger stockpile of nuclear weapons, as well as a new counterterrorism operations centre. the truth is that even if we wished it, and of course we don't, the uk could never turn inwards or be content with the cramped horizons of a regionalforeign policy. for us, there are no far—away countries of which we know little. global britain is not a reflection of old obligations, still less a vainglorious gesture, but a necessity for the safety and prosperity of the british people in the decades ahead. the labour leader said borisjohnson left some questions unanswered amid reports the army could lose 10,000 troops. prime minister, will there be further cuts to the strength of our army and our armed forces? _ the british army is already 6000 below the minimal level set out in the last review. it's been cut every year for the last decade. the snp weren't impressed either. mr speaker, today's statement is one more insight intojust. how hollow the brand - of global britain actually is, because the prime minister's rhetoric always fails to come | close to reality. several mps highlighted plans to cut the share of national income spent on overseas development. reneging on the commitment to retain 0.7% of gni on development spending is a short—sighted mistake, and the prime minister's promise that it will be just temporary isn't good enough. after all, he said he wouldn't cut it in his own pa rty's manifesto. weasel words on aid won't wash. some conservatives were unhappy about the prospect of deeper links with china. doesn't that unfortunately- demonstrate that the grasping naivety of the cameron—osborne years still lingers on in some - departments of state ? there is a balance to be struck, because after all, we have a strong trading relationship with china worth about £81 billion. china is the second—largest economy in the world and a fact of our lives. and i think we must accept that fact in a clear—eyed way. and he said the uk continued to call out china for what was happening to the uighurs in xinjiang. time now for a brief look at what else has been going on around westminster. matt hancock has defended the government's decision to recommend a pay rise of 1% for most nhs workers in england. appearing before mps on the health committee, the health secretary was challenged by his predecessor. how did your department come to recommend just 1% given the incredible pressure the staff have been under during the pandemic? the nhs was carved out of the pay freeze that's been applied due to the enormous pressure on the public finances that's been applied to everybody else in the public sector. and we put in place evidence reflecting what is affordable, and of course we'll study what the pay review body says. the widow of the former home secretary, leon brittan, told mps on the home affairs committee that it was "extraordinary" that a fantasist�*s claims of a vip paedophile ring were ever believed. lady brittan said that she hadn't heard the precise details about the false claims against her husband until after his death in 2015. it was only later when i - realised that the presumption of innocence had not been given to these men, and then also - i realised reading the report that all sorts of things - which had happened which perhaps shouldn't have . happened, if the policing had been a little bit less... - ..put it this way, - in favour of the person who was doing the complaining. the government suffered more defeats in the house of lords over its domestic abuse bill. in one, peers backed proposals for tougher supervision and monitoring of serial domestic abusers and stalkers. a lib dem peer shared her own experience at the hands of a stalker. he dropped letters through