Afternoon summary
- Theresa May, the home secretary, has told the joint committee scrutinising the draft investigatory powers bill that coffee shops running wifi networks may have to retain internet connection records under the legislation.
- Dan Jarvis, the Labour MP seen as a possible future leader, has said the party should publish the internal inquiry into why it lost the election. In an article for the New Statesman he wrote:
Until Labour accepts the lessons of two successive election defeats we will not renew our politics and reconnect with the public. During the election I campaigned up and down the country. People frequently told me that although they knew the Tories were unfair and represented the interests of the better-off, they did not trust Labour with their taxes. We have to win back their trust.
That’s why we need to publish our official party inquiry into why we lost [in 2015]. Once we understand that we have been out of step with the electorate, we can start to build our political recovery and respond to the policy challenges Britain faces.
In a separate article in the Spectator, Tristram Hunt, the former shadow education secretary, attacked the “divisiveness and futility” of Mr Corbyn’s reshuffle. He said:
Fadden was sacked for suggesting that terrorists should be held accountable for their crimes. Shadow defence secretary Maria Eagle was moved for supporting Labour Party policy. And culture minister Michael Dugher got the axe for not living in Islington.
Kremlinologists suggest there is a power struggle going on in Jeremy Corbyn’s office between the Socialist Action Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks of the Labour Representation Committee. But all factions are united in their determination to make it to 2017, and the centenary of the Great October Socialist Revolution.
- Sadiq Khan, the Labour candidate for London mayor, has attacked his Tory rival Zac Goldsmith as a “serial underachiever”.
Sadiq Khan campaign attacks Zac Goldsmith as a "serial underachiever". pic.twitter.com/4yVdFFkJlt
— George Eaton (@georgeeaton) January 13, 2016
- Alex Salmond, the former Scottish first minster, has renewed his spat with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump during the first broadcast of his new LBC radio show. Referring to Trump’s call for Muslims to be banned from the US, he said:
I think it’s a very fair point for people to say, ‘well, just because somebody’s a presidential candidate, are they allowed to say things which would be unacceptable if they were being made by a hate preacher’, which I suspect is why half a million folk have signed the petition [calling for Trump to be excluded from the UK.]
- Government plans to change the way unions can donate money to political parties face a challenge in the House of Lords, after it was revealed that the proposals could reduce Labour party income by £6m. As Frances Perraudin reports, Labour peers have tabled an amendment to the trade union bill which would establish a Lords select committee to examine the proposals to change party funding. The amendment is expected to receive backing from the Liberal Democrats.
That’s all from me for today.
Thanks for the comments.
Asked about the authorisation measures in the draft bill, which say interception warrants would have to be approved by a minister as well as a judge, May cites the case made by Lord Pannick in an article in the Times.
Some campaigners have said that judges will not have a proper veto over these warrants because they will only be able to apply judicial review criteria.
But Pannick rejected this argument in his article (paywall). He wrote:
Andy Burnham and David Davis, the Conservative backbencher with a strong record on civil liberties issues, say that a judicial review test gives judges too little power because it only relates to “process”. But it is well established that judicial review is a flexible concept, the rigour of which depends on the context. The Court of Appeal so stated in 2008 in the T-Mobile case.
The closest analogy to the provisions in the draft bill is judicial review of control orders and Tpims (terrorist prevention and investigation measures). The Court of Appeal stated in the MB case in 2006 that judges applying a judicial review test must themselves consider the merits and decide whether the measure is indeed necessary and proportionate. It is true that the context there involves restrictions that vitally affect liberty — in the sense of freedom of movement. But I would expect the courts to apply a very similar approach in the present context, concerned as it is with the important issue of privacy. So those who are concerned that a judicial review test does not give judges sufficient control should be reassured.
David Anderson has backed this argument.
HSec seems to be adopting the well-known judicial maxim that no one makes a fool of themselves by adopting the submissions of David Pannick.
— David Anderson (@terrorwatchdog) January 13, 2016
@rydermc I think she is saying that it will be for the judges to decide how intrusive their JR scrutiny should be - cf the Pannick approach.
— David Anderson (@terrorwatchdog) January 13, 2016
This is from David Anderson, the government’s independent reviewer of terrorist legislation.
.@LordStras, citing my written evidence (to be published soon), presses Home Sec on the need for operational case for bulk powers in #IPBill
— David Anderson (@terrorwatchdog) January 13, 2016
Strasburger is putting ex NSA man Binney's 'mass surveillance' doesn't work argument to May https://t.co/8I0iDSWlQF #ipbill
— Danny Palmer (@dannyjpalmer) January 13, 2016
May objects to the peer's suggestion that government 'collects all the data, all the time' #IPBill
— Danny Palmer (@dannyjpalmer) January 13, 2016
May suggests that if you don't mass collect data, you'll miss the opportunity to find potential leads #ipbill
— Danny Palmer (@dannyjpalmer) January 13, 2016
'Bulk collection might sometimes be the only means of collecting some communications, especially overseas' May tells @LordStras #ipbill
— Danny Palmer (@dannyjpalmer) January 13, 2016
Now Theresa May discussing haystacks...can't look for the needle if haven't got a haystack, she says...she is told analysts drowning in data
— Alan Travis (@alantravis40) January 13, 2016
Lord Strasburger, a Lib Dem, goes next.
Q: Can bulk collection ever be proportionate?
Yes, says May. That is the position at the moment.
Andrew Murrison, the Conservative former defence minister, goes next.
Q: What are your plans for encryption?
May says some of the commentary on this has not been accurate. Encryption is important, she says. She says the government is not proposing to make any changes in relation to encryption, and the legal position around it.
But where the authorities lawfully serve a warrant on a CSP, and that has gone through the proper steps, the company should take reasonable steps to be able to comply.
That is the position today, she says. She says the bill just clarifies that.
Q: But what if someone is using end-to-end encryption?
May says companies would be expected to take “reasonable steps” to provide the information required.
Q: So you are not asking companies to provide “keys” to information, or a backdoor in.
No, says May. It is just about ensuring that, if companies are required to supply information, they supply it. The government would not need to have the “key” itself.
Lord Butler, the former cabinet secretary, goes next.
Q: If you impose notices on CSPs, will they be confidential?
Yes, says May.
Q: What if someone tries to use the Freedom of Information Act to find out what firms are subject to these notices.
May says there are exemptions to the FoI. She says she will provide the committee with more details.
Matt Warman, a Conservative, goes next.
Q: Will places like coffee shops that have internet networks have to retain internet connection records?
May says that is a possibility.
But it will have to look at necessity and proportionality, and whether this might be feasible.
May says the draft bill published in the last parliament required CSPs to hold third party data that went over their networks. The new bill does not require them to keep this data, she says. She says that is an important change.
This is from my colleague Alan Travis.
T.May seems on rocky ground when questioned whether snoopers charter can be delivered by web companies and within £247m budget
— Alan Travis (@alantravis40) January 13, 2016
David Hanson, the Labour MP and former Home Office minister, is asking questions now.
Q: How much will data retention cost? When will the capability be available? And who will pay?
May says there are some figures in the bill.
£240m, says Hanson.
May says the government will provide “reasonable costs recovery”.
Q: Just four providers told us in evidence that they could spend £240m alone. Will the money be available to pay all providers?
May says the government is talking to providers about these issues. If the committee needs more information, she is happy to provide it.
The Home Office has not just plucked a figure out of thin air.
It has been talking to communication service providers (CSPs). And they have been responsive, he says.
Theresa May says she has tried to make language of snooper's charter bill 'technology neutral' to provide for future developments
— Alan Travis (@alantravis40) January 13, 2016
The Labour MP David Hanson has been asking why the terms in the bill are not clearer, according to Computing News’s Danny Palmer.
May 'completely understands' Hansens requests for reassurance. Says legislation has to operate in fast developing world #ipbill
— Danny Palmer (@dannyjpalmer) January 13, 2016
She argues that terms of the draft Bill are vague because technology and definitions will move too quickly for specifics to be there #ipbill
— Danny Palmer (@dannyjpalmer) January 13, 2016
'The more we try to define things, you're potentially limited,' May responds to @DavidHansonMP who is pressing on privacy concerns #IPBill
— Danny Palmer (@dannyjpalmer) January 13, 2016
'Well intentioned' attempts to make all definitions of technology clear in Bill could hinder authorites, is what May claims #IPBill
— Danny Palmer (@dannyjpalmer) January 13, 2016
This is from the Guardian’s Alan Travis.
Theresa May rejects 'sunset clause' for snooper's charter bill saying it is 'future-proofed' .defence inds said it had 5-7 year shelf life
— Alan Travis (@alantravis40) January 13, 2016
Updated
Lord Murphy, the former Labour cabinet minister, is opening the session. He says this is the last of around 25 hearings the committee has held.
Q: The information commissioner has suggested there should be a sunset clause in the bill. What do you think of that?
Theresa May thanks the committee for its work.
She says some bills do have sunset clauses, like the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act. But that act was passed in a hurry, she says.
But she would expect this bill “to stand the test of time”, she says.
And some parts of the bill place requirements on internet companies. If you put sunset clauses in the bill, that would create uncertainty - and companies might be less willing to comply.
Theresa May questioned on draft 'snooper's charter'
Theresa May, the home secretary, will soon be giving evidence to the joint committee scrutinising the draft investigatory powers bill.
As a reminder, here is a list from Alan Travis of the key points in the draft bill.
• Requires web and phone companies to store records of websites visited by every citizen for 12 months for access by police, security services and other public bodies.
• Makes explicit in law for the first time security services’ powers for the bulk collection of large volumes of personal communications data.
• Makes explicit in law for the first time the powers of the security services and police to hack into and bug computers and phones. Places new legal obligation on companies to assist in these operations to bypass encryption.
• New “double-lock” on ministerial authorisation of intercept warrants with a panel of seven judicial commissioners given power of veto. But exemptions allowed in “urgent cases” of up to five days.
• Existing system of three oversight commissioners replaced with single investigatory powers commissioner who will be a senior judge.
• Prime minister to be consulted in all cases involving interception of MPs’ communications. Safeguards on requests for communications data in other “sensitive professions” such as journalists to be written into law.
• New Home Office figures show there were 517,236 authorisations in 2014 of requests for communications data from the police and other public bodies as a result of 267,373 applications. There were 2,765 interception warrants authorised by ministers in 2014.
• In the case of interception warrants involving confidential information relating to sensitive professions such as journalists, doctors and lawyers, the protections to be used for privileged information have to be spelled out when the minister approves the warrant.
• Bill includes similar protections in the use of powers to hack or bug the computers and phones of those in sensitive professions as well.
• Internet and phone companies will be required to maintain “permanent capabilities” to intercept and collect the personal data passing over their networks. They will also be under a wider power to assist the security services and the police in the interests of national security.
• Enforcement of obligations on overseas web and phone companies, including the US internet giants, in the courts will be limited to interception and targeted communications data requests. Bulk communications data requests, including internet connection records, will not be enforceable.
Updated
Lunchtime summary
- David Cameron has praised the Scotland secretary, David Mundell, after he announced that he is gay. As Nicholas Watt reports, in a heartfelt statement Mundell, 53, said that he had decided to come out after wrestling with “conflicting emotions ... doubts and fears”.
- Cameron has refused to guarantee that council tenants on up to 100 estates set to be bulldozed will be able to stay in the same community. Jeremy Corbyn raised the subject at PMQs, telling Cameron:
You don’t seem to understand the very serious concerns that council tenants have when they feel they are going to be forced away from the community where they live, where their children go to school and their community is so strong ... Instead of building more affordable homes, aren’t you branding more homes as affordable, which is not a solution to the housing crisis.
But Cameron accused Labour of not supporting people who want to live in better homes. But told Corbyn:
Here is the small-c conservative who’s saying to people ‘Stay stuck in your sink estates, have nothing better than what Labour gave you after the war’. We’re saying if you are a tenant, have the Right to Buy, if you want to buy a home, here’s Help to Save, if you’re in a sink estate, we’ll help you out and that’s the fact of politics today. A party on this side of the House that wants to give people life chances and a Labour opposition that says stay stuck in poverty.
- Cameron has said the falling oil price has led to the “complete and utter collapse” of the SNP’s economic policy. He was speaking at PMQs in response to the Conservative former minister (and former oil trader) Sir Alan Duncan who warned that falling prices could have dangerous consequences. Duncan said:
If it goes on like this we risk seeing regimes under pressure, dramatic corporate failures and financial default, enormous financial transfers out of our markets to pay for other countries’ deficits, a possible collapse in share prices and dividends for pensions and a liquidity problem in our banking sector.
Cameron said that low oil prices were good for consumers and that “a low oil price basically is good for the British economy as an economy that is a substantial manufacturing and production economy”. But he went on:
But there are other consequences and he named many of them and we need to look very carefully at how we can help our own oil and gas industry. Of course .... he did actually mention one other calamity that the low oil price brings about which is that it has led to a complete and utter collapse of the SNP’s policy.
-
Cameron has rejected a call from the SNP’s leader at Westminster, Angus Robertson, for a new post-study work visa regime, saying he does not want foreign students to remain in the UK to do “menial” jobs. Cameron said they could already stay, provided they were doing a graduate-level job. Robertson complained that the government ruled out a return of the post-study work visa without stakeholder discussions and before key parliamentary reports. But Cameron said:
We don’t need the world’s brightest and best to come here to study and then to do menial labour jobs, which actually that’s not what our immigration system is for.
- Cameron has rejected calls to give extra financial help to women who feel “robbed and cheated” under moves to raise the state pension age. Responding to a question from the SNP’s Tommy Sheppard, who asked him if he understood “the outrage of a generation of women born in the 1950s who feel robbed and cheated out of their state pension”, Cameron said:
I know this is an issue that many colleagues have been written to and there are some important cases to look at. But what I’d say is we looked very carefully at this at the time and decided no-one should suffer more than an 18-month increase in the time before they were expecting to retire.
And what I’d also say is if you look at what we’re putting in place with the single-tier pension starting at more than 150 a week, combined with the triple-lock that we have, I think we have a very good settlement for pensioners. It’s affordable for the taxpayer and it’s generous into the future.
- MPs have formally backed a proposal from the Labour MP Toby Perkins for England to have its own anthem for sporting occasions. Perkins raised the proposal under the 10-minute rule procedure, which means his bill will not be further debated, or become law, unless the government decides to adopt the plan itself at a later point.
- The Commons work and pensions committee has launched a formal inquiry into intergenerational fairness. This may well lead to a report suggesting spending on pensioners is too high. Launching it, Frank Field, the committee chair, said:
Voters have two priorities for welfare reform: ‘is it fair’ and ‘is it affordable’. Politicians of successive governments have ducked both of these fundamental questions when it comes to the different levels of income afforded to those above and others below retirement age. Is it fair and affordable to divert a large and growing sum of public expenditure toward pensioners – regardless of their circumstances – while mainly poor families with children face year-on-year restrictions on their income? Can the “triple lock” pension increase pledge be sustainable? Or are these policies necessary to guard against pensioner poverty? The select committee hopes to learn from voters of all ages what they believe to be both fair and affordable, so we can propose ways of restoring confidence across all generations in the welfare state.
Updated
Here is the Guardian video with some PMQ highlights.
The House of Commons has been described as “the gayest parliament in the world”. The phrase came from the (gay) SNP MP John Nicolson who told the SNP conference last year that the large contingent of SNP MPs (several of whom are gay) had contributed to making the Commons more gay than any other parliament in the world.
His claim was based on this research saying that 32 LGBT candidates got elected to parliament in May last year (see footnote).
If we add Mundell to that 32 figure, that makes 33 MPs who have come out as gay - 5% of the total.
But the academic Philip Cowley says Nicolson was wrong to say it was the SNP contingent that made the difference. He says the Commons already had a higher proportion of gay members than any other legislature before the 2015 election.
I see the SNP-made-Westminster-'gayest'-parliament thing is going again. Thing is, it already was, *before* 2015: http://t.co/grAvqrztsj
— Philip Cowley (@philipjcowley) October 15, 2015
Updated
And here is some more reaction to David Mundell’s announcement from MPs and MSPs.
From Sajid Javid, the Conservative business minister
.@DavidMundellDCT proud to be your colleague & friend. Very best wishes https://t.co/eNPBgu2g8c
— Sajid Javid (@sajidjavid) January 13, 2016
From Nick Gibb, the Conservative schools minister, who is gay
Congratulations to my colleague David Mundell. Every such decision by a public figure helps others to do the same. @DavidMundellDCT
— Nick Gibb (@NickGibbMP) January 13, 2016
From Ed Vaizey, the Conservative arts minister
What a lovely statement and what a wonderful man you are @DavidMundellDCT https://t.co/mX6ZG3O9Oy
— Ed Vaizey (@edvaizey) January 13, 2016
From James Duddridge, the Conservative Foreign Office minister
Great that David Mundell has come out. Go David. Flying the flag for you at the FCO. pic.twitter.com/zisWKHSQoD
— James Duddridge (@JamesDuddridge) January 13, 2016
From Caroline Dinenage, the Conserative equalities minister
Big respect to my lovely pal @DavidMundellDCT https://t.co/OWBZWETYCt
— Caroline Dinenage (@cj_dinenage) January 13, 2016
From Hannah Bardell, the SNP MP
Congratulations @DavidMundellDCT wishing you all the best with your new start! https://t.co/magwOR4pw6
— Hannah Bardell MP (@HannahB4LiviMP) January 13, 2016
From Stewart McDonald, the SNP MP
Well done @DavidMundellDCT on coming out - I'm sure it couldn't have been an easy decision. https://t.co/HYIYi05K2k
— Stewart McDonald MP (@StewartMcDonald) January 13, 2016
From Ken Macintosh, the Labour MSP
@DavidMundellDCT I don't often retweet Con MPs David but that is a strong, moving and as you say - important message. You have my support
— Ken Macintosh (@KenMacintoshMSP) January 13, 2016
From Martin Docherty, the SNP MP
Full support for @DavidMundellDCT as you take a very important next step in your life! Now back to work! https://t.co/uSmg77a61o
— Martin Docherty MP (@MartinJDocherty) January 13, 2016
Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader, who is also gay, has welcomed David Mundell’s statement.
Really proud of my friend David today. https://t.co/zLLRgNT1lF
— Ruth Davidson MSP (@RuthDavidsonMSP) January 13, 2016
Stonewall, the equality charity, has welcomed David Mundell’s statement.
Congrats to @DavidMundellDCT for stepping up as a role model and coming out publicly as gay this afternoon: https://t.co/7KwjM24t1y
— Stonewall (@stonewalluk) January 13, 2016
Downing Street says David Cameron is pleased David Mundell felt able to come out.
PM's spokesman on David Mundell announces he is gay: "The Prime Minister is pleased. Delighted that he's in a position to take this step."
— Darren McCaffrey (@DMcCaffreySKY) January 13, 2016
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, has sent her best wishes to David Mundell.
.@DavidMundellDCT Good on you, David. Well done & best wishes.
— Nicola Sturgeon (@NicolaSturgeon) January 13, 2016
Mundell has been married, but separated from his wife in the 1980s. They have three children.
One son is a Conservative candidate in the Scottish elections, according to the Scottish political journalist Joe Pike.
David Mundell's son Oliver is contesting the Dumfriesshire seat at May's Scottish elections. He is also No.2 on the Cons regional list.
— Joe Pike (@joepike) January 13, 2016
Updated
Scottish secretary David Mundell comes out as gay
David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, has come out as gay.
He has posted a message on Facebook.
New Year New Start! I have today posted an important message on my website https://t.co/DWEOY2dw3P
— David Mundell (@DavidMundellDCT) January 13, 2016
Here is the statement in full.
New Year, new start! I have already set out my political priorities for the year and now I am setting out my personal one. Having taken one of the most important decisions of my life and resolved to come out publically [sic] as gay in 2016, I just want to get on with it, and now, just like that, I have said it. How can it be both so easy and so hard to say a few short words?
In the end, it took just a couple of taps on a keyboard, yet at some points, in my mind, it was going to be harder than standing for election, speaking in the House of Commons or being cross-examined on television. I still cannot fully rationalise such feelings, but I know they are not uncommon, particularly in men of my age. Of course, everybody who gets to this point, has had their own journey. I have certainly been on mine - conflicting emotions, of doubts and fears, but ultimately positive and uplifting, with an unstoppable direction of travel. Over time, I came to understand that, for me, the only way to be truly happy on a personal level is to acknowledge in public as well as in private, who I am.
I so admire the many people, young and old, who are doing this every day, uncertain of the reaction. I have been very fortunate and couldn’t have had more love and support from my family and friends. However, making this public is something I have had to do myself. I don’t know what the wider reaction will be, but I know it’s the right thing for me to do.
Other than the intensely personal and positive difference it makes to me, and the way I can live my life, my hope is that my coming out doesn’t change anything else about how I go about my work or how people treat me. Gender and sexuality should make no difference whether you are a Cabinet Minister or in any other walk of life and I hope that I can, in my own way, reinforce that message.
Mundell is the first Conservative cabinet minister to come out as gay.
Updated
Perkins says in other parts of the British Isles people think England has taken the national song if they sing the national anthem at sporting occasions.
He says the first team to sing a national anthem before a contest were the Welsh team in 1905, responding to the New Zealand Haka.
He says callers to BBC Radio Northern Ireland seem quite supportive of this idea.
In constitutional matters, it is best to allow the voice of the people to be heard, he says.
He says we need a fresh settlement for Britain, following devolution, to recognise the distinct identities of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
He says it was in 1996 that the flag of St George started to replace the Union Jack as the flag at England matches. Now the Union Jack is rarely seen as an England flag.
He says a poll suggests Jerusalem is the most popular choice as an anthem for England.
With reference to the van driving round Parliament Square (see 11.53am), he says “you cannot always choose your friends”.
He says his bill would require the government to hold a consultation on what the English national anthem should be.
Anthems like “I vow to thee my country” and “There will always be an England” have also been mentioned as options.
Alternatively, a new anthem could be commissioned, he says.
He says he was disappointed to read a friend of the Queen saying she thought the idea was “rude”. This suggests the notion of Englishness has passed her by. (It is not clear if he means the Queen, or her friend.)
Two nations in the UK have already dropped the national anthem as their song as sports events, he says.
Toby Perkins's 10-minute rule bill on an English national anthem
Toby Perkins is making his case for an English national anthem.
There is cross-party support for this, he says. The prime minister supports the idea too.
He says this is an idea that has come. He has spoke to radio stations all over the country about this.
In one area they thought “Heaven knows I’m miserable now” was the best idea. As for which area, they will remain a secret between himself and Radio Humberside.
In response to a point of order from Sylvia Herman, John Bercow, the Commons Speaker, is explaining why, under the new “English votes for English laws” procedure used for the first time yesterday, something was billed as English-only when it had minor relevance to Wales.
The Tory MP David TC Davies posted this tweet earlier.
Lovely to see members of Labour front bench nodding in agreement with PM on importance of nuclear deterrent. Feel free to cross the floor!!
— David Davies MP (@DavidTCDavies) January 13, 2016
PMQs - not a single question on EU talks or Docs strike (but two of course on the poor treatment of Scotland)
— steve hawkes (@steve_hawkes) January 13, 2016
Craig Whittaker, a Conservative, says Calder Valley residents were hit the hardest by the Christmas floods. Will Cameron attend a meeting to discuss the £20m infrastructure work that is now needed?
Cameron says he is happy to have another meeting on this. He expresses his sympathy to those affected, and says the government will do all it can to help people. The army was in faster this time, he says, and money was distributed more quickly.
Sir Alan Duncan, the Conservative, says oil at $30 a barrel is good for consumers, but could cause other problems, including destabilising regimes, and possibly undermining the North Sea oil industry. Will Cameron set up a review to look at this.
Cameron says low oil prices are good for consumers, but he says Duncan raises some good point. The falling oil price has also led to “a complete collapse of the SNP’s policy”.
Jonathan Edwards, the Plaid Cyrmu MP, says the devolution settlement for Wales is not as good as it is for Scotland.
Cameron says the Wales bill offers Wales more devolution, but the government is still listening to ideas about how it can be approved.
James Cartlidge, a Conservative, asks Cameron if he agrees that the mark of a one nation government is how you tackle the causes of poverty.
Cameron says he agrees. Labour just wants to spend money on problems. But the government wants to address the causes of social problems. Labour wants people to stay where they are.
Labour’s Sharon Hodgson says attacks on clean energy hurt companies like Nissan in her constituency.
Cameron says this came up at the liaison committee yesterday. Investment in renewables is going up. This is good news, he says. We have “a genuine claim to be leading a renewables revolution”. But subsidies for these providers put extra money on people’s bills.
Cameron since 2010 64% of the rise in private sector employment has taken place outside London and the south east. This is a balanced recovery, he says.
Paul Blomfied, a Labour MP, says the Tories made no mention in their manifesto of ending student maintance grants. Isn’t it wrong to end them tomorrow, by secondary legislation, without a vote in the Commons.
Cameron says they have been debated. Participation in higher education is going up, he says.
Seema Kennedy, a Conservative, asks what steps are being taken to ensure Iran keeps its side of the bargain in the nuclear deal.
Cameron says Iran has started shipping enriched uranium to Russia. It has granted the International Atomic Energy Agency to its sites. But the government needs to monitor this with “a hard head”.
Dan Jarvis, the Labour MP, says there were 43,000 excess winter deaths last year. These deaths are avoidable, he says.
Cameron says Jarvis is right. The figures are published, and they are a “standing rebuke” to the government. But energy prices are falling, he says. They should go down more. That is why it is right to have a competition commission review. And home improvements can make a difference too.
Philip Lee, a Conservative, invites Cameron to praise the state of the economy. Cameron obliges, with a nod to the long-term economic plan.
Labour’s Barbara Keeley asks why other countries have much better transitional arrangements for women as they raise the pension age.
Cameron says the government has put in place a pensions system that is affordable for the country. The triple lock was never put in place by Labour. The miserly 75p pension increase put in place by Gordon Brown can never happen again.
Tania Mathias, a Conservative, says some parts of London have already exceeded their limit for nitrous dioxide pollution. Will Cameron pledge never to expand Heathrow while this is problem?
Cameron says Mathias is right to raise this. This is why the Heathrow decision has been postponed. The government wants assurances on this.
PMQs - Snap verdict
PMQs - Snap verdict: Corbyn started well, with precise, technical points that put Cameron on the back foot, but Cameron soon got the upper hand with a strong rhetorical point about aspiration (branding Labour as small-c conservatives who would let people stew in stink estates) and a useful statistic about average deposit costs. In truth, the Tory record on home ownership is poor (Cameron ignored the question about rates of home ownership falling), and Corbyn’s success is to a large extent driven by the fury of young people (especially in London) who have no chance of buying a home, but worryingly Cameron comfortably bested him on this topic.
Corbyn says Shelter research found that families on the living wage will be unable to afford their own homes in 98% of areas. Cameron is just branding more homes as affordable, which is not an answer. Will he confirm that house ownership is falling?
Cameron says Corbyn did not answer the question about the 1.3m housing association tenants. Corbyn owns his home, Cameron owns his. Why won’t Labour back others who want to buy theirs.
Corbyn thanks Tory backbenchers for showing their deep concern for the housing crisis (by yelling). Cameron has given no assurances to tenants or leaseholders or people who want their own homes. He asks a question from Linda, a council tenant. She says she will want to downsize. If she does that, she will need a new tenancy agreement. If she stays, she will pay the bedroom tax. What would he advise her?
Cameron says social rents are being cut. And pensioners like Linda do not pay the bedroom tax. Labour have got a defence policy that does not believe in defence, and a housing policy that does not believe in housing.
Corbyn says Cameron did not give an assurance to homeowners on estates. He asks a question on behalf of Daryl. Will tenants be rehoused on the same terms?
Cameron says the government will not be able to renovate estates without the agreement of residents. But who is the small-c conservative? Labour wants people to be stuck in sink estates.
Corbyn says Cameron does not seem to understand people’s concerns. They feel they will be forced away from their communities. The Tory manifesto said people who work hard should be able to own a home. Will families on the national living wage be able to afford one of his starter homes?
Cameron says he hopes they will. There will be shared equity homes. In 2010 someone needed a £30,000 deposit to buy a typical home. That is now down to £10,000 because of government schemes. The government is saying to tenants of housing associations they can buy their homes. Why does Labour oppose that?
Jeremy Corbyn says Cameron belatedly released this week there was a housing crisis. He announced £140m to renovate 100 estates, but that is only £1.4m each. That is a drop in the ocean.
Cameron says the government built more council homes in the last parliament than were built under the last Labour government.
Corbyn says the estates will include people who bought their homes under the right to buy. Will they get homes in the new estates? This has not been thought through.
Cameron says it has not been as thought through as Corbyn’s reshuffles. The details have yet to be worked out, he says. He mentions government housing schemes opposed by Labour. Labour has nothing to say to people trapped in housing estates.
Andrew Griffiths, a Conservative, asks Cameron to say he backs Trident and Nato.
Cameron says both these things have been common ground in the Commons. They are necessary to keep us safe. Labour “has got some very serious questions to answer”.
Cameron at PMQs
Bill Esterson, the Labour MP, asks about cuts to nurses’ student grants. The cuts have been called appalling, he says. Why is the government doing this?
David Cameron says he wants to see more nurses in training, and this change will lead to 10,000 more nurses in the NHS, because more places will become available.
Ayesha Hazarika, the Labour adviser who used to work for Harriet Harman, was written a piece for the Times’ Red Box suggesting Jeremy Corbyn needs to revise his PMQs style. Here’s an extract.
I understand why team Corbyn has pursued the People’s PMQs style and I think it was effective at avoiding early demolition by Cameron.
But the device is now beginning to look tired and a vehicle to hide behind rather than take on Cameron. It should be used, but sparingly and in a powerful way rather than risk it becoming a parody.
Corbyn is also going to have to find a better way to handle the increasingly rowdy chamber. The supply teacher “well they’re not laughing in Pontefract” line is wearing thin.
David Cameron in chamber v early for PMQs. Sitting in Chief Whip's corner seat on front bench during Welsh questions looking through papers.
— joncraigSKY (@joncraig) January 13, 2016
The SNP’s Tommy Sheppard still has not decided what question to ask at PMQs.
Heading in for my first #PMQ - looking forward to it but still mulling over which question to go with. Let's see if he answers.
— Tommy Sheppard MP (@TommySheppard) January 13, 2016
This is intriguing. It’s from ITV’s Paul Brand.
Understand there'll be a very personal announcement from a very senior MP this afternoon. Wishing them all the best and leaving it to them.
— Paul Brand (@PaulBrandITV) January 13, 2016
Ahead of Toby Perkins’ 10-minute rule bill on an English national anthem (see 11.22am), a van has been going around Westminster playing Jerusalem. An aide to Perkins said this was organised by the England In My Heart campaign.
The Labour MP Jon Ashworth, shadow minister without portfolio in the shadow cabinet, is on the Daily Politics (sporting a new Corbynesque beard). He was asked if he agreed with a comment from John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, about Labour now automatically supporting all public sector strikes, but dodged the question.
Andrew Neil, who posed the question, seemed to be referring to this quote from McDonnell at the time of the party conference. McDonnell said:
The view now is straightforward and I tell you this: If there is industrial action taking place then we should automatically now, automatically come alongside our brothers and sisters in the trade unions and support them.
The SNP MP Tommy Sheppard has been tweeting about his chance to ask David Cameron a question at PMQs. (See 11.31am.)
At last, after 8 months as MP, my name has finally been drawn in the ballot for #PMQs. And this is how we hold the government to account.
— Tommy Sheppard MP (@TommySheppard) January 13, 2016
Jeremy Corbyn is in Stylist magazine too (see 9.27am) talking about his ideal bike. His brief comments include a recognition that he won’t be Labour leader for ever.
This aluminium-framed Raleigh Criterium, like my own trusty red Raleigh, is light and therefore fast, but comfortable for longer rides too – I recently rode mine with Olympic gold medallist Sir Bradley Wiggins (shameless namedrop) and it ensured I kept up with him.
This unisex model is a great all-rounder whether you’re a beginner or looking for a new ride, although as I’m a big believer in repairing rather than replacing, I suspect I will have my own long after my leadership.
Here is the list of MPs who have got a question at PMQs.
Here's who has a question at #PMQs today... pic.twitter.com/SE8tZxpW2K
— Amber de Botton (@AmberSkyNews) January 13, 2016
Straight after PMQs the Labour MP Toby Perkins, a former rugby player, will use the 10-minute rule procedure to propose a bill providing for an English national anthem at sporting events. My colleague Frances Perraudin has written it up here.
The issue will only get put to a vote if some MPs object. Normally 10-minute rule bills like this go through on the nod, although normally that is the last that is ever heard of them because they don’t lead to a full debate and they don’t become law.
You can read all today’s Guardian politics stories here.
As for the rest of the papers, here is the PoliticsHome list of top 10 comment articles, and here is the ConservativeHome round up of today’s politics stories.
And here are four stories I found interesting.
The campaign to get Britain out of the European Union has been dealt a blow after Boris Johnson told senior Eurosceptics he does not want to be their leader.
The Daily Express has learnt that the charismatic London Mayor, who steps down in May, held informal talks with a senior Conservative backbenchers before Christmas over the role.
But, in what many will see as a setback to the whole campaign, he made it clear he did not want to lead the Brexit drive.
It is understood he said: “The trouble is, I am not an ‘outer’.” Mr Johnson was widely considered a Eurosceptic.
Sources close to the committee said that several members had expressed concern about the short timeframe given to Lord Murphy of Torfaen, the committee’s chairman. These complaints prompted Lord Murphy to contact the Home Office, but his approach was rebuffed by John Hayes, the security minister, the sources said. One source said that Mr Hayes indicated that the government was keen to push on with other Home Office business.
A member of the committee said: “It’s 300 pages long and has considerably more powers than the last bill. But the last committee had five months [to consider the bill] and we only have two. It’s all being done at breakneck speed. The result will be that the report produced will not be as thorough as it should be.”
Labour MPs are planning to hold a vote on Monday that would force Steve Rotheram, Mr Corbyn’s parliamentary aide, to resign from the party’s national executive committee. Two of Mr Corbyn’s leading critics within the party are being lined up to replace him.
Jess Phillips, the Labour MP for Birmingham Yardley, and John Woodcock, who has led the charge for his party to back Britain’s nuclear deterrent, are both willing to fill the spot.
Ensuring that there are moderate voices on the committee has become a crucial task for Mr Corbyn’s opponents. Some of the Labour leader’s allies have drawn up proposals to hand the NEC more power over party policy, media and even staffing. A majority of committee members support Mr Corbyn.
Many Labour MPs are furious that despite becoming an aide to the Labour leadership, Mr Rotheram, the MP for Liverpool Walton, did not give up his place on the NEC reserved for backbenchers. A motion to be put to a vote at the meeting on Monday states that NEC seats reserved for backbenchers “must immediately be declared vacant” should the person involved become an aide to the leadership.
Updated
In his Times Red Box daily politics email, Matt Chorley reveals how Jeremy Corbyn’s Twitter feed came to be hacked on Sunda.y
Late on Sunday night, the Labour leader’s posted that “Davey Cameron is a pie” and declared: “Here we... here we... here we f***ing go!!!”
My colleague Natasha Clark has been told the mysterious string of four tweets came after a staffer, while on a break in Berlin was called to tweet out a message.
But they accidentally left the account logged in on an open computer at a hostel ... and the rest is history.
William Hague was not exactly a dazzling success in his time as leader of the opposition, but in his Telegraph column today he claims that at least his record was good in one respect; he did not bungle his reshuffles, he claims.
Despite all my other mistakes, I managed to retire a whole generation of Tory leaders and unite their replacements without any reshuffle going awry.
You won’t be surprised to hear that he believes the same cannot be said for Jeremy Corbyn. In a rather good column, he outlines six reshuffle rules (well, five actually, but he includes one of them twice) that he claims Corbyn broke. Here’s an extract.
The second rule is that if any test of strength develops between you the leader and a subordinate, you have to win. If a colleague is immovable don’t try to move them. But once you say they’re moving, they have to go, whatever the cost. This is true even if it brings you down, because otherwise your weakness will make future shuffles impossible and bring you down anyway. In other words, you either pretend to be happy with Hilary Benn or you move him, but you certainly don’t show unhappiness and fail to move him.
The third rule is never to explain in public why you have dismissed any individual. Politicians don’t like being sacked, but on the whole they get over it. They still have hope for the future, and can sometimes be brought back with some gratitude on their part.
But if the world is told that they were sacked for disloyalty or being rubbish, that is something they will never get over. That is particularly true coming from a leader whose career was built on disloyalty. You will change them from being disgruntled to being a sworn enemy for life. And a leader has enough enemies for life without creating more of them. So you absolutely do not send John McDonnell out to explain how dreadful were the people you dismissed.
Updated
David Cameron is tweeting a link to Stylist magazine this morning. He is featured in a (rather dull) day-in-the-life article.
MT @StylistMagazine: A Work Life special: a day in the life of the PM. #MadebyMPs https://t.co/4FXeBBsZp0 pic.twitter.com/mErbsbNori
— UK Prime Minister (@Number10gov) January 13, 2016
It’s relatively quiet this morning, but we’ve got David Cameron and Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs, and then this afternoon there is a key hearing for anyone interested in internet surveillance laws - Theresa May being questioned by the joint committee looking at the draft investigatory powers bill.
My colleague Alan Travis has written a preview story ahead of May’s evidence session. Here’s how it starts.
MPs and peers are to challenge the home secretary, Theresa May, on the privacy implications and detailed operation of her snooper’s charter legislation when she appears before the bill’s parliamentary scrutiny committee.
May’s appearance on Wednesday follows a strong warning from major US internet companies including Facebook, Google and Twitter, that unilateral British demands to access their customer’s confidential data and weaken their encryption could undermine trust in their services.
It also follows the rejection of a Freedom of Information Act request to see the date, time and recipient of every email the home secretary sent, every Skype call she made and every website she visited during October and November last year on the grounds that it was “vexatious”.
The Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, said the rejection showed that the while the government wanted to push through powers in the bill to give the police and security services’ access to everyone’s weblogs, they were not prepared to release the home secretary’s records.
Here is the agenda for the day.
12pm: David Cameron faces Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs.
2.30pm: Lin Homer, the HM Revenue and Customs chief executive, gives evidence to the Commons public accounts committee.
4pm: Alex Salmond, the former Scottish first minister, hosts the first of his new weekly LBC phone-in programmes.
4.15pm: Theresa May, the home secretary, gives evidence to the joint committee scrutinising the draft investigatory powers bill.
As usual, I will also be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I will post a summary at lunchtime and another in the afternoon.
If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on@AndrewSparrow.
I try to monitor the comments BTL but normally I find it impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer direct questions, although sometimes I miss them or don’t have time. Alternatively you could post a question to me on Twitter.
