Afternoon summary
- Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, has refused to say whether “jihadi brides” count as innocent civilian when the government is planning using drone strikes to kill terrorists targets. He was giving evidence to the joint committee on human rights about how the government approves targeted killings by drones, and he said the government did all it could to avoid civilian deaths. But Harriet Harman, the chair, said the government was assuming that some people were in a “grey area” because they were not targets, but they were not considered innocent civilians either. Fallon did not dispute this, but he refused to say if a “jihadi bride” would count as someone in this category - ie, someone who might be deemed an acceptable casualty. He told Harman:
I’m sure you can see why it would be extremly dangerous for me to answer that question, to say exactly the circumstances in which we would strike a potential terrorist, and the circumstances in which we would not. I’m obviously not going to answer that question because that would simply enable our enemies to better protect themselves. But I can assure you again we look at these things on a case by case basis, and we do everything possible to minimise civilian casualties, and the action taken must be proportionate.
After the hearing Kat Craig, legal director at the human rights organisation Reprieve, criticised Fallon for refusing to discuss the similarities between British drone policy and US drone policy. She said:
It is hardly surprising Mr Fallon was so reluctant to answer this question, when the UK policy is in effect a carbon copy of the US drone programme. Both are highly secretive, legally dubious, and subject to almost zero accountability either by politicians or the courts. It is bewildering that the UK is following the US lead on a programme which even senior US military figures have described as a ‘failed strategy’ which has not made us safer. At the very least, Mr Fallon should come clean with the public that this is the way the UK government is headed, so we can have a real debate.
- Fallon said that further drone strikes against terrorist targets were being planned.
You are drawing me into the discussion of a particular operation. There are other operations current, there are other operations that may be planned. And it is not really helpful to discuss these things too widely in public.
That’s all from me for today.
Thanks for the comments.
Updated
Lord Woolf goes next.
Q: Has the government any current plans to derogate from article two of the European convention on human rights, covering the right to life?
Fallon says the government has no current plans to do so. But Woolf will be aware of the Conservative party’s manifesto commitment to limit the application of the convention to the armed forces on duty abroad, he says.
And that’s it. The hearing is over.
I will post a summary soon.
Q: Wouldn’t it be better to have a published policy stating what your policy is on targeted killings outside war zones?
Fallon says he has sent the committee a memorandum on this (pdf).
He will consider Harriet Harman’s call for a published policy.
Fallon refuses to discuss whether “jihadi brides” count as innocent civilians when drone strikes planned
Q: Are there three categories? First, a target. Second, innocent civilians, to be avoided. And, third, people who are not targets, but people who are not innocent civilians, “so if they are killed, that’s alright.”
Fallon says he would not put it like that. But the people killed alongside Reyaad Khan were not innocent civilians.
He says, in approving an operation, and assessing collateral damage, he has to decide what is proportionate.
Q: So how do you decide if people like jihadi brides can be killed.
Fallon says he will not discuss in public who are and are not legitimate targets.
Q: But we are talking about people who are not targets, but who are in this “grey area”.
Fallon says this is a fair question. He looks at things on a case by case basis. Does the potential to stop a large loss of life justify the risk of one or two further casualties?
Q: So is there a continuum, with target at one end, and innocent civilian at another?
Fallon says he would not use the term continuum. The government takes all possible steps to avoid civilian deaths. But it is possible Isis fighters will be “caught up” in a strike.
Q: But Isis does not have a uniform. Who is regarded as Isis, for the purposes of your thinking. You must have thought about this. Would a jihadi bride be a fighter, or an innocent civilian?
Fallon says it would be dangerous for him to answer that. If he did, he would make it easier for our enemies to protect themselves.
- Fallon refuses to discuss whether “jihadi brides” count as innocent civilians when drone strikes being planned.
Updated
Harriet Harman goes next.
Q: If a police officer kills someone in the UK, it automatically goes to the PCC. Should there be automatic reviews of targeted killings by drone, which the prime minister said were a new departure?
Fallon says we can rely on the ISC to do its job. Its powers have been strengthened.
Q: So the fact that this is an ongoing operation is not an issue.
Yes, it is an issue, says Fallon.
Q: That could stop the ISC looking at it for years.
Fallon says they are looking into this issue.
Q: You have decided to cooperate with them in this case. But it will be up to you to decide whether not something is an ongoing operation.
Fallon says the government is cooperating with this inquiry. It is for the ISC to decide what it wants to do.
Q: What would happen if the ISC decided a strike was not justified?
Fallon says that is a “purely hypothetical question”.
Buck says the committee has heard evidence that the intelligence and security committee does not count as independent. Its members are appointed by the prime minister.
Fallon says he would not accept that the ISC is not independent.
Labour’s Karen Buck goes next.
Q: What reviews take place after the event?
Buck says operations are reviewed afterwards, to make sure targets are hit.
Q: But is the decision making process reviewed?
Fallon says he is not sure what she means.
The intelligence and security committee is reviewing the intelligence that led up to the August drone strike.
Lord Woolf goes next.
Q: I have this image of you giving your permission on the facts put before you. But there is bound to be a space of time. You are assuming that the fact won’t change before the strike takes place. If the facts do change, does the matter come back to you?
Fallon says that is right.
He says he sometime sets conditions. That might include a time limit. There are some targets that change over days or weeks. The military might have to come back for approval, he says.
Fallon says there are two types of targeting.
Dynamic targeting applies when the RAF are acting in support of ground troops. They act in accordance with rules of engagement.
And there is deliberate targeting. That is when a target gets agreed in advance, he says. He says he has to authorise those strikes.
This is from Donald Campbell from the human rights group Reprieve.
Fallon reacts badly to Qs from @UKParlJCHR on how similar UK & US 'targeted killing' drone programs are. (Prob because the answer is "very")
— Donald Campbell (@dn_campbell) December 16, 2015
Jeremy Lefroy goes next.
Q: In the past an attack was considered “imminent” if it left no room for deliberation. Has the definition changed? Does it cover an ongoing threat?
Fallon says he would not want to rest on the definition Lefroy quoted. You look at these things on a case by case basis. He says it is not possible to have a hard and fast rule as to how you define imminent.
Q: So you authorise a target. But people further down the line have to decide if the tests for an operation have been approved?
Fallon says a decision gets delegated. But it is not for people down the chain of command to “work out” if the tests apply. The rules are clear. People have to comply with them.
Q: You are setting out the tests. But they have to decide if they appy?
Fallon says, in approving a target, the people on the ground would ask for approval, and he, Fallon, then has the task of approving it.
Harriet Harman is asking questions now.
Q: It is not unreasonable for us to know who authorises these strikes? Is it you, or does it go further down the chain of command? We are talking about a loss of life.
Fallon says we are talking about an operation that saved lives.
The authority came from him, he says.
But he says the order was then passed down.
Q: It sounds as if you are saying that the operational decisions were taken further down the line.
That’s not right, Fallon says.
He says he has to be satisfied that the tests are being met: that the action is proportionate; that the use of force is not excessive; that everything is being done to avoid or minimise casualties.
Jeremy Lefroy goes next.
Q: What is the importance of imminence in this context?
Fallon says imminence is one of the conditions that allows states to take action to defend themselves.
There is legal case law around this, he says. But he says members of the committee are probably better qualified to discuss this than him.
Q: Is it the national security council that decides if an individual is a threat? But it is up to you to approve the operation targeting someone? Do you decide the operational moment? Or do you delegate that?
Fallon says he does not want to get into details. It is not just the national security council that assess a threat.
Fallon says further British drone strike targeted killings are being planned
Asked about how the government took the decision to authorise the drone strike that killed two British jihadis in August, Fallon says he is unable to go into details of how that decision was taken.
Q: Did the decision just cover one individual, and whether they were a threat? Or did the decision also cover how the operation proceeded? And, if you did not authorise the operation, who did?
Fallon says he is trying to be helpful. But he is being drawing into discussing a particular operation. Others are being planned, and so it is not helpful to go into this.
Only the defence secretary legally can authorise military action, he says.
He has to be sure the test of proportionality is met.
- Fallon says further British drone strike targeted killings are being planned.
Lord Woolf, the former lord chief justice, goes next. He reads out some of the conditions that must apply for the targeted killings under US terms of engagement. Are the British ones similar?
Yes, says Fallon. The British rules are also grounded in international law.
They specify that a threat must be actual and imminent. The action being used to forestall it must be necessary and proportionate.
Jeremy Lefroy MPs goes first. He asks what the government’s policy is on targeted killings out of war zones.
Michael Fallon says there is no particular policy for targeted killings. The policy in terms of responding to imminent threats is the same, regardless of what weapons are involved.
Q: What is the difference between our policy and the US policy?
Fallon says there are differences. But he does not want to comment on what the Americans do.
Here are the committee’s terms of reference for this inquiry.
And here is an excerpt.
The prime minister’s statement to the House of Commons on 7 September, concerning a drone strike in Raqqa, Syria on 21st August which killed three people, including two British citizens, indicates a very significant change of the UK government’s policy on the use of drones for targeted killing. The prime minister himself described it as “a new departure”: “the first time in modern times that a British asset has been used to conduct a strike in a country where we are not involved in a war” ...
The government has not published any formulated policy on the use of drones for targeted killing. As a result there is a lack of clarity about the policy; about whether and how the legal frameworks of international humanitarian law, international human rights law and ordinary criminal law apply; and about the relevant legal tests and principles that apply to the use of lethal force in such circumstances.
It is not clear how the relevant decision-makers test the sufficiency of evidence, who checks that the tests are satisfied, and what the framework of accountability is. The uncertainty not only makes accountability difficult, it potentially exposes front line personnel to criminal liability for the unlawful use of lethal force.
Michael Fallon questioned by human rights committee on targeted killings by drones
Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, is about to give evidence to the joint committee on human rights on targeted killings by drones. The committee is chaired by the former Labour deputy leader, Harriet Harman.
Umunna accuses May of acting like a 'Nigel Farage tribute act'
Chuka Umunna, the Labour MP and former shadow business secretary, was criticising Theresa May over what she said in her speech to the Conservative party conference. He said:
In 2002 you lectured your party to stop demonising minority groups in society and you complained that people called your party the nasty party. And then you give this speech 13 years later that reinforced those stereotypes. Simon Walker, the head of the Institute of Directors, described your comments and the overall tone of that speech as irresponsible and pandering to anti-immigrant sentiment. He’s right.
You’re not some Nigel Farage tribute act. You are the home secretary. And the language you used in that speech, and the tone of it, I don’t think was responsible or temperate. And that’s what people expect of a home secretary. They might not expect it of Nigel Farage. They expect it of you.
May said she did not accept this description of the speech.
Chuka Umunna accuses Theresa May of behaving like "some Nigel Farage tribute act" with her anti immigration speech at the Tory conference
— Jack Blanchard (@Jack_Blanchard_) December 16, 2015
There is a vote in the Commons, so the committee is adjourning to let members vote. It will start again in about 10 minutes.
CORRECTION: In the lunchtime summary (see 2.26pm) I originally said that Philip Hammond told MPs that civilians had died as a result of British air strikes against Isis. In fact, he said that no civilians had died. I am sorry about that. It was a straightforward mistake, leaving out a word. I’ve corrected that now.
Home Secretary Theresa May on @realDonaldTrump’s infamous comments: "They were divisive, they were unhelpful and they wrong"
— Sebastian Payne (@SebastianEPayne) December 16, 2015
Theresa May on Donald Trump's comments about the police: "He is quite wrong. This just shows he does not understand the United Kingdom."
— Jack Blanchard (@Jack_Blanchard_) December 16, 2015
Theresa May tells MPs that Donald Trump was talking absolute nonsense in claiming there were Muslim no-go areas for British police
— Alan Travis (@alantravis40) December 16, 2015
Theresa May questioned by home affairs committee
Theresa May, the home secretary, is giving evidence to the Commons home affairs committee. It is a general hearing, covering various aspects of Home Office business.
Keith Vaz, the committee chair, started by asking why George Osborne and David Cameron have both said Donald Trump should not be banned from the UK when this is a decision for May.
May condemned what Trump said about wanting to stop Muslims entering the UK.
But she said she could not comment on a particular case.
She would make any decision at the time, she said.
Lunchtime summary
- Philip Hammond, the foreign secretary, has told MPs that no civilians have died as a result of British air strikes against Islamic State (Isis) according to reports received by the government. (UPDATE: I’ve corrected this sentence, because originally the word “no” was left out by mistake.)
- Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, has accused Cameron of forgetting the problems of the NHS as hospitals are forecasting a £2.2bn deficit and could be heading towards a winter crisis. At PMQs Corbyn accused Cameron of presiding over a “false economy” of cutting social care funding through reductions in local government grants, putting more pressure on hospitals. But, as the Press Association reports, Cameron said the government was spending £19bn more on the NHS than Labour proposed in 2010, that it was following the plan drawn up by the NHS England chief executive Simon Stevens, and that councils now have the power to add up to 2% to council tax to raise extra money for social care.
- Cameron said the government was considering ensuring more police officers are equipped with tasers. Asked about a stabbing attack in Abingdon Poundland at PMQs, he said:
I also think with that attack and also the Leytonstone attack, although unrelated, it is right also to look at the resources that our police have in terms of the equipment they have. There’s a very different usage pattern for Tasers, for instance, across the country and this is something the home secretary and the Metropolitan Police and I are discussing.
- Cameron has condemned Donald Trump’s call for Muslims to be banned from the US as “divisive, stupid and wrong”, but said he would not ban Trump from the UK. In response to a question from Labour’s Tulip Siddiq, he said:
Let me join you in being proud of representing a country which I think has some claim to say we are one of the most successful multi-racial, multi-faith, multi-ethnic countries anywhere in the world. There’s more to do to build opportunity and fight discrimination. I agree with you it is right that we exclude people when they are going to radicalise or encourage extremism.
I happen to disagree with you about Donald Trump. I think his remarks are divisive, stupid and wrong and I think if he came to visit our country I think he’d unite us all against him.
- Cameron has defended the government’s decision to scrap a planned £1bn carbon capture and storage project at Peterhead. When the SNP’s Callum McCaig suggested this was a “betrayal of the entire planet”, Cameron replied:
In government you have to make tough choices, you have to make decisions about technology that works and technology that isn’t working. And we are spending the money on innovation, on energy storage, on small nuclear reactors, on other things, on energy heat systems for local communities that will make a difference.
To govern is to choose and we made the right choice.
- Cameron has backed the use of e-cigarettes to help people quit smoking - while hinting that he has not fully given up himself. Asked to back e-cigarettes, he said:
Certainly as someone who has been through this battle a number of times, eventually relatively successfully, lots of people find different ways of doing it and clearly for some people e-cigarettes are successful ...
But it is promising to see more than a million are estimated to have used e-cigarettes to help them quit or have replaced smoking with e-cigarettes completely.
- Wage growth across the economy has slowed to 2%, underlining the financial challenges facing households in the run-up to Christmas. But unemployment has fallen to its lowest level since nine years. John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, said:
Everyone welcomes a drop in unemployment. But if you look at the types of job being created - we now have 800,000 people on zero-hours contracts or working part-time and large numbers underemployed. This is not the high-wage, high-skill economy that George Osborne promised us.
- Alex Salmond has stepped up his war of words with Donald Trump, describing the US billionaire as a “three-time loser” after his latest court case was thrown out.
- Jane Ellison, the public health minister, has apologised for the fact that the government’s consultation on reforming support for victims of the contaminated blood scandal has been delayed. In response to an urgent question from Labour’s Diana Johnson, Ellison said:
I recognise that I have committed in earlier debates to consult on proposals to reform the current payment schemes before the end of the year. And despite our best efforts to meet this commitment we are unfortunately not yet ready to publish this before recess. However, I can confirm today that the consultation will be published in January.
The delay I know will be disappointing for many who are anticipating this consultation before the end of the year and I do want to apologise for the delay.
Updated
Donald Trump, the US presidential candidate, has lost a case in the supreme court today which involved him trying to stop windfarms being built near his golf course in Scotland.
Here’s Owen Bowcott’s story.
The decision has generated a remarkable war of words between Alex Salmond, the SNP MP and former Scottish first minister, and Trump himself.
In a statement, Salmond says that Trump’s behaviour, over this and other matters relating to his golf course, has been deeply damaging to the Scottish economy. He suggests the Scots Americans should refuse to vote for him. Here’s an extract.
This delay in the offshore wind demonstrator is deeply damaging to Scotland’s hopes of being on the cutting edge of that new technology. It would have been great for the North East to have that new string to our bow at this time of low oil prices. Trump has delayed that opportunity.
His behaviour and comments are unlikely to attract the votes of many Mexican Americans or Muslim Americans. Given his treatment of Scotland, Scots American are likely to join the ever growing list of people alienated by Trump.
The Trump organisation has hit back, describing Salmond as “a has-been and totally irrelevant”.
#Trump organisation statement pic.twitter.com/aVMIWLhh2c
— James Matthews (@jamesmatthewsky) December 16, 2015
PMQs - Verdict
PMQs Verdict: Jeremy Corbyn is trying to beat the Tories on the NHS. And David Cameron is trying to beat Labour over the economy (and, failing that, Christmas greetings.) That’s a summary of today’s PMQs.
Corbyn devoted all six of his questions to NHS-related questions and they were all finely-honed and relevant. He was particularly good when he taunted Cameron about the government’s decision to cut back on the amount of NHS data it is publishing this winter, contrasting this with what Cameron used to say about the importance of transparency. Often the choice of topic determines who “wins” at PMQS, and the Labour leader almost always has the advantage of health, but nevertheless Corbyn was solid and effective. He continues to show little interest in the mocking, rhetorical flourishes opposition leaders usually deploy at PMQs, and this means there is always something a bit understated about his performances, but there is so much hyperbole in politics that understatement comes as something as a relief. And, to his credit, Corbyn is raising concerns about the NHS without scaremongering. In the past some Labour figures have found it hard to talk about the winter crisis without making predictions so doom-laden that patients are left pleasantly surprised when they find a hospital actually open.
Cameron did have answers on the NHS, but they weren’t especially good. He quoted figures about the growing volume of NHS activities, but the number of operations and appointments is almost always going up. He said the government was giving councils the power to raise extra money for social care, although most experts think the revenue raised will not be enough to pay for the services required. And he criticised Labour for not committing itself to funding the Simon Stevens plan at the time of the last election. But this rebuttal line was particularly poor; no one can plausibly hold Corbyn to account for anything that the Labour leadership said in the spring.
So Cameron resorted to making repeated attempts to talk about the economy and the employment figures instead. This was entirely understandable, and polls suggest people trust Cameron much more than Corbyn with the nation’s finances, but in this exchange his comments sounded like a transparent attempt to change the subject.
The oddest moment came when Cameron implied that Corbyn was wishing people “season’s greetings”, not Happy Christmas. You can see why the Tories are so keen to frame Corbyn as some Islington, atheist leftie out of tune with the nation’s cultural traditions (it worked well over anthemgate), but today, given that Corbyn had just a few seconds earlier wished everyone a “Happy Christmas”, this was a hopeless miss. At the time I thought it might be a reference to Corbyn sending out a non-Christian, “season’s greetings” Christmas card, but Corbyn didn’t do that. His Christmas card very clearly says “Merry Christmas” on the front. And it’s a lot more festive too than Cameron’s, which just features a picture of Cameron and his wife outside Number 10.
Updated
Sue Hayman, the Labour MP, asks about flooding, and says some of her constituents who have been flooded are being asked to pay excesses of up to £10,000 which they cannot pay.
Cameron says the government’s compensation scheme will be able to help some families in this situation.
And that’s it. PMQs is over. I’ll post a full verdict shortly.
Sir Gerald Howarth, a Conservative, asks Cameron to send out a message of support to Christians around the world. Britain is fashioned by its Christian heritage, he says.
Cameron says we should do everything we can to defend the rights of Christians the world over.
He says he thinks Britain is a Christian country.
The fact we understand the place of faith in national life makes us more tolerant, he says.
Cameron says the SNP do not want a partnership between nations. They want separation. But one of the good things about the UK is that it has shown people can have multiple identities; they can be Scottish and British.
Nicola Blackwood, a Conservative, asks about an attack in Poundland in Abingdon. Will the government make it harder for people to get hold of knifes?
Cameron says it is right to look at this issue. The government is also looking at whether the police need more equipment. For example, the use of tasers varies considerably between police forces around the country.
Marion Fellows, the SNP MP, says her constituents in the steel industry are starting to receive redundancy payments. Will Cameron ensure the EII [energy intensive industry] scheme is activated?
Cameron says the government is working around the clock to try to ensure this EU scheme comes into force.
Douglas Carswell, the Ukip MP, asks if Cameron is still committed to including social provision in his EU renegotiation.
Cameron says he finds it hard to please Carswell. Carswell joined the Tories when they were not committed to an EU referendum, and left after they did back one. He is glad Carswell is giving his new leader as much trouble as he gave Cameron.
Cameron says the government has met its commitment to resettle 1,000 Syrian refugess by Christmas. It hit its target after charter flights arrived yesterday. Another flight arrives today.
Updated
Gisela Stuart, the Labour MP, quotes a speech from the outgoing director of the British Museum. Does Cameron agree that museums need to continue to be funded properly?
Cameron pays tribute to Neil MacGregor, the outgoing director. He took Angela Merkel to an exhibition there, and then Germany poached MacGregor. The British Museum got a good funding settlement in the autumn statement, he says.
Alison Thewliss, the SNP MP, says she has repeatedly asked who the government will ensure that ‘no child tax credit cuts for a third child’ rule will apply to women who give birth afte being raped.
Cameron says there is no question that women in that situation will not lose benefit. But it is right to keep the welfare bill under control, he says.
Nigel Adams, a Conservative, says Britain’s last deep coal mine is closing in his constituency this Friday. Will Cameron thank miners for their work.
Cameron does thank miners for their work.
Labour MPs shout at Cameron. It’s all very well, he says. Can he tell them something? Labour’s policy is to keep fossil fuels in the grounds, and also to re-open coal mines. So presumably they will re-open them, then do nothing. What a metaphor for Labour.
Cameron says, with regard to carbon capture and storage, the government has to decide what works and what does not.
Snap PMQs Verdict
Snap PMQs Verdict: A comfortable win for Corbyn. It is unusual for Labour to lose on health at PMQs, but Corbyn was well beyond competent. His questions were sharp and relevant, he used humour well and he responded graciously to a jibe from Cameron about his supposedly not being able to wish people Happy Christmas. Cameron does have answers on the NHS, although his figures for the increasing volume of NHS activity are really just a recognition of growth (the volume of NHS activity is almost always going up), Corbyn is right about the problems with the social care precept, and Cameron’s repeated attempts to change the subject, onto unemployment, came across as symptomatic of weakness, not strength.
Corbyn says he has a question from Abbie who wants to train as a midwive. She already has a debt of £25,000 from her first degree. Other people on her course have debts too. Will the government cancel the cuts in the nurse bursary scheme?
Cameron says he wants Abbie to train, and the funding will be there. Today two out of three people who want to train as nurses cannot get a place. The reforms will change that. All of this is happening because the economy is growing. You can fill up a tank of tank at less than £1 a litre. Wages are going up, because the economy is growing too.
Corbyn says social care is the responsibility of central government. NHS trusts face a £2.2bn. And, as head of the Oxford anti-austerity movement, Cameron will be worried his trust faces a £1.7m deficit.
Cameron says Corbyn cannot complain because Labour would not commit to funding the Stevens plan. Local councils will have more to spend. How do we pay for this? With more jobs. Will Corbyn welcome that, or does he not care about the fall in unemployment?
Corbyn says the NHS Confederation said this morning that cuts to social care will continue to pile more pressure on hospitals. The autumn statement announcement falls “well short” of what is needed.
Cameron says he is glad Corbyn listens to the Today programme; he might want to go on it, because a bit of transparency would be good. He quotes what the Local Government Association said about the social care precept. And Corbyn still has not welcomed the unemployment figures, he says.
Corbyn asks Cameron if he agrees that cutting social care services is a false economy.
Cameron says the government has given council a precept so they can raise more. And Corbyn mentioned the Simon Stevens plan, he say. The government is backing the Stevens plan. None of this would be possible without the growing economy.
Corbyn says, if Cameron is so happy about the NHS, why has he decided to cancel the publication of NHS data. Cameron used to be in favour of transparency. He quotes from Cameron saying “information is power”. Has Cameron decided not to publish information because the number of patients on trolleys has risen four-fold.
Cameron says on an average day there are 4,400 more operations than when he took power. And the number of appointments is up too, he says.
Jeremy Corbyn starts by wishing the Speaker, all MPs, all staff and Major Tim Peake, who is not on the planet at this time - that generates much laughter - a happy Christmas.
He says the number of patients kept in hospital because they cannot be discharged has doubled since Cameron came to office. Can he promise there will be no winter crisis?
Cameron says the average stay in hospital has fallen since he became PM, from five and a half days to five days.
Richard Graham, a Conservative, says stalking is a horrible crime. He mentions the case of a constituent who suffered dreadfully. The judge said he would have given a higher sentence if the maximum was not five years. Will the government raise the maximum sentence?
Cameron says the government has already introduced two new stalking offences. He will arrange for a meeting with the justice secretary.
David Cameron starts by wishing Major Tim Peake well for his stay in the space station. He is proud the government funded the trip, he says.
Seems Cameron will confirm at #pmqs that UK has met its target of resettling 1,000 refugees from Syria by year end (target is 20k by 2020)
— Chris Ship (@chrisshipitv) December 16, 2015
Speaker thinks MPs are having "animated conversations about Christmas shopping" ahead of #PMQs
— PARLY (@ParlyApp) December 16, 2015
In international development questions Justine Greening said a moment ago that David Cameron would “shortly” give an update on how many Syrian refugees have been accepted by the UK. So it sounds as if that will come up at PMQs.
Both @David_Cameron and @jeremycorbyn in their seats early today for last #PMQs before #Christmas
— Ben Glaze (@benglaze) December 16, 2015
PMQs
The Commons rises for the Christmas recess tomorrow, so this will be the last PMQs of the year. It starts in 10 minutes.
Seema Malhotra, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, gave a speech this morning to the Social Market Foundation saying the Treasury was “not fit for purpose”. She based her claim on reports from the Commons public accounts committee in March saying the Treasury gives business tax reliefs worth around £100bn but does not monitor them properly.
Malhotra said George Osborne, the chancellor, was “remarkably uninterested in what [business tax reliefs] cost and whether they work”.
The chancellor hasn’t the faintest idea whether the array of tax reliefs for business meet their goals and whether they are value for money for the taxpayer. George Osborne is not interested in evidence that conflicts with his own political prejudices.
Here is the news release from the public accounts committee summarising those reports. And here’s an extract.
HM Treasury and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) do not keep track of those tax reliefs intended to influence behaviour. They do not adequately report to parliament or the public on whether reliefs are working as intended and what they cost and whether they represent good value for money. While HMRC is accountable for implementing and monitoring all tax reliefs, its statements about the extent of its responsibilities are inconsistent with its actual practices. HMRC accepts it has a role to assess, evaluate and monitor reliefs, but is unable or unwilling to define or to categorise reliefs by their purpose.
Jon Trickett, the shadow communities secretary and one of the few members of the shadow cabinet who backed Jeremy Corbyn for the Labour leadership, has been put in charge of the party’s local election campaign for 2016, the Daily Telegraph reports.
The Times (paywall) reports that the government has definitely decided not to go ahead with part two of the Leveson inquiry, the bit that was supposed to examine the specific phone-hacking allegations relating to the News of the World and other papers. As Elizabeth Rigby and Frances Gibb report:
There will be no investigation into police corruption in the wake of the phone hacking scandal after the government quietly decided to shelve the second part of the Leveson inquiry.
Senior government and judicial sources told The Times that the second part of the inquiry into press and police corruption would never see the light of day amid limited political appetite for another lengthy and expensive judicial inquiry into Fleet Street and the Met ...
Sources said yesterday, however, that the government had no appetite to launch formally the second part, given the costs involved, and a consensus that this ground had been covered during the criminal trials.
Michael Dugher, the shadow culture secretary, has described this as a “betrayal of victims”. In a statement he said:
David Cameron made clear promises to the British public, to parliament and directly to the victims of phone hacking that he would fully implement the cross-party agreement on Leveson’s recommendations and then proceed with the second part of the inquiry once criminal proceedings into phone hacking had finished.
The government is not only shelving a central plank of the Leveson recommendations, which would incentivise publishes to sign up to a Royal Charter-backed regulator, but it is now reported that David Cameron will not proceed with the second part of the Leveson Inquiry.
David Cameron must stand by all his promises to the victims of phone hacking. Anything else would be a betrayal of the phone hacking victims and their families and it would mean turning a blind eye to allegations of possible high-level police corruption.
Here’s some Guardian audio with an extract from Sir John Major’s interview.
Here is some reaction to the unemployment figures. (See 9.51am.)
From George Osborne, the chancellor
Today’s record employment figures, alongside unemployment and youth unemployment rates at a nine-year low, mean more people than ever before have the security of a job and regular pay packet so they can provide for themselves and their families.
From Laura Gardiner, a policy analyst at the Resolution Foundation
Britain’s jobs recovery continues to impress, with strong growth among both employees and the self-employed. But the pay rebound we’ve enjoyed throughout much of 2015 appears to have weakened, despite inflation remaining at historically low levels.
With many expecting the Fed to raise interest rates later today, the focus will soon shift onto when the Bank of England will make a similar move. But with rising inflation likely to slow the pace of Britain’s pay recovery in 2016, the first move may remain a little way off.
From John Philpott, director of the Jobs Economist consultancy
The UK jobs boom is back in full swing with 207,000 more people in work compared with the previous quarter and total hours worked in the economy topping 1 billion for the first time ever. It’s also hooray time as unemployment at last returns to the pre-recession rate of 5.2%.
But after a year of much better news on pay, the rate of average regular weekly wage growth (i.e. excluding bonuses) for employees has fallen sharply to just 2%. There is thus a palpable sense of ‘payje vu’ in the labour market, a reminder of the initial phase of the economic recovery characterized by a jobs boom alongside weak productivity and pay growth.
What’s most surprising it that for all the talk of mounting skills shortages employers appear perfectly capable of hiring at will without having to hike pay rates. This will please jobseekers and Bank of England rate setters even though it means employees are now enjoying real wage gains only because almost zero consumer price inflation is nowhere near the Monetary Policy Committee’s target rate of 2%.
Vote Leave accuses Major of 'talking Britain down'
Vote Leave, which is campaigning for an Out vote in the EU referendum, has dismissed Sir John Major’s arguments about the EU. This is from Robert Oxley, a Vote Leave spokesman.
John Major thought the ERM would be great for Britain but it was actually a disaster - causing one of worst recessions in our history. He was wrong then and is wrong now. It is disappointing that a former prime minister is now resorting to talking Britain down by suggesting that we could not stand on our own two feet in the world.
David Cameron’s renegotiation is trivial and will not deliver the change the British people want to see - the only way to take back control is to Vote Leave.
Unemployment falls to seven-year low
Unemployment has fallen to a seven-year low, the Press Association reports.
The government has been given a pre-Christmas boost on the jobs front after new figures showed record numbers in work and unemployment falling to a seven-year low.
More than 31m people are in work, the highest since comparable records began in 1971, giving an employment rate of almost 74%.
Unemployment fell by 110,000 in the quarter to October to 1.7m, the lowest since the spring of 2008.
The claimant count - those on jobseeker’s allowance and the out of work element of Universal Credit - increased by 3,900 last month to 796,200, today’s data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showed.
Total hours worked per week topped one billion in the latest quarter, the first time it has passed this mark.
ONS statistician David Freeman said: “This results from the number of people in work continuing to increase, as average weekly hours per person are fairly stable.
“Earnings continue to grow in real terms, although at a slower rate than we have seen in recent months.”
Average earnings increased by 2.4% in the year to October, 0.6% down on the previous month.
Unemployment has fallen by almost a quarter of a million over the past year, giving a jobless rate of 5.2%, the lowest since the start of 2006.
Here is the Office for National Statistics news summary. And here is the statistical bulletin with the full details (pdf).
Sir John Major's Today interview - Summary and analysis
Mostly Sir John Major’s intervention will be welcomed in Number 10. David Cameron wants Britain to vote to remain in the EU, and Major put the case for staying in strongly. As I said earlier (see 8.50am), his willingness to talk about his own frustrations with the EU makes him a more plausible advocate than the uber-Europeans, like Paddy Ashdown or Peter Mandelson, for example.
But Major did not just say that leaving the EU would be a mistake. He explicitly said that “flirting with leaving” was dangerous, implying that David Cameron was wrong to even raise this as an option.
Here are the key points. I have taken some of the quotes from the Press Association and from PoliticsHome.
- Major said that leaving the EU would be very bad for Britain and that even “flirting with leaving” was “very dangerous and against our long-term interests”.
If there is anyone in the UK who ought to be anti-European and thoroughly frustrated with them then perhaps it ought to be me. Now, I am not a starry-eyed European, I did after all say no to the euro currency in the early 1990s, I said no to the single market and in 1996 I said no to joining Schengen when it began. So I am sceptical of a great deal of European Union policy.
But flirting with leaving, at a moment when the whole world is coming together, seems to me to be very dangerous and against our long-term interests.
We see America and Japan and other countries forming a trans-Pacific partnership. Of course, that’s trade, but it is also common standards, bringing people together. The whole world is coming together. And for the United Kingdom, 67m out of a world population of seven billion, to break off and head into splendid isolation, doesn’t seem to me to be in our interest now or, perhaps more important, in the interests of our children and our grandchildren and future generations.
Whatever the frustrations are and whatever comes out of these negotiations, we are going to be able to continue to try and influence the European Union while we are in it.
- He said leaving the EU would probably lead to the break-up of Britain, because it might result in Scotland voting for independence.
If we left there must be a high probability that Scotland will have another referendum and leave the UK. The UK would be fractured, that would be very damaging – our international prestige, I think, would suffer.
- He said that if Britain voted to leave, the exit negotiations would be “very acrimonious”.
They say we can easily negotiate entry to the singe market. That’s very disingenuous – if we leave the European Union it won’t be a friendly departure, it will be very acrimonious. Negotiations with an irate ex-partner could be very difficult. We may get a very sub-standard deal to enter the single market.
- He said anti-Europeans were wrong to claim that leaving the EU would save the UK a great deal of money.
People say we can save all our net contribution – not true. We would have to pay at least half and possibly more of it simply for entry to the single market.
- He said leaving the EU would not necessarily end the problems with immigration.
They say we can control our borders and we will have no immigration. I don’t think that’s so. In or out we can’t keep the world at bay. And if we were out one question arises: in present circumstances would France be holding so many immigrants at Calais, or would they not? And if not they would be heading here.
- He said leaving the EU would not boost parliamentary sovereignty.
We are told our parliament would be sovereign. Well that of course is total nonsense. In order to trade with the European Union we would have to accept their regulations. We would have no possibility of an input into those regulations or changing them. The Prime Minister will have to go to parliament and say: ‘here are some regulations the European Union have passed. We must pass them without change or we cannot trade with Europe.’ So much for parliamentary sovereignty.
- He said that Britain should stay in the EU regardless of what Cameron’s renegotiation achieved. “My view is that this renegotiation is important, but that it shouldn’t decide whether or not we remain inside the European Union because of the importance of the issue.”
- He refused to say whether he believed that Cameron was sincere in suggesting that he could recommend an Out vote if he does not get what he wants in his renegotiation. “I can’t put myself inside David Cameron’s mind,” Major said. (Most Westminster observers do not believe that Cameron would ever back the Out campaign, although periodically Number 10 manages to get newspapers to report these threats seriously. When asked, Cameron says he would “rule nothing out” if he does not get what he wants in his renegotiation, but he is never any more specific than that, suggesting some reluctance to make the threat explicit.)
James Naughtie was interviewing Major, on his last day presenting the Today programme after 21 years. Major ended with a tribute to him. He told Naughtie.
And like millions of other people I have found you and John Humphrys my daily diet for a very long time, So if I may grab the airwaves for a moment I would like to say I will miss you. And I think a lot of other people will in the morning. And I will do so because generally you have asked the right questions. Mostly you have listened to the answers, but you have done it in an extraordinary professional way. So I hope you as you leave you are proud of what you have done and whatever you do now – I don’t know what you are going to do now – but good luck with it and I hope our paths will cross.
After 21 years presenting the Today programme, Jim Naughtie just signed off for the last time. https://t.co/3cUgoVRvbM
— BBC Radio 4 Today (@BBCr4today) December 16, 2015
Updated
One of the peculiarities of politics is the way a leader can get booted out of office as a discredited failure, only to pop up a few years later as an immensely authoritative and credible spokesman for a particular cause. It happened to Gordon Brown when he emerged as the lead champion for keeping the union, and now Sir John Major, the former Conservative prime minister, may end up as the EU referendum’s In campaign’s best hope.
Major was on the Today programme this morning and made a strong case for staying in the European Union. As an advocate, he was all the more plausible because he was quite open about how he found it frustrating at times, and about how much damage Europe did to his party when he was prime minister.
Here are the key points he made.
- Major said that flirting with the idea of leaving the EU was “very dangerous”.
John Major on EU membership: "Flirting with leaving when the whole world is coming together seems very dangerous". #r4today
— George Eaton (@georgeeaton) December 16, 2015
- He said if Britain did leave the EU, Scotland would probably end up voting for independence.
- He said that, if Britain voted to leave, the exit negotiations with EU partners would be very difficult.
Major: Negotiations with an irate ex partner could be very difficult; in or out we can't keep the world at bay
— Ross Hawkins (@rosschawkins) December 16, 2015
- He refused to say whether he thought David Cameron was sincere when he indicated he could recommend an Out vote if he did not get what he wanted in his renegotiation.
I will post more from the interview shortly.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: Unemployment figures are published.
10.30am: John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, visits a community solar project.
12pm: David Cameron faces Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs.
12.30pm: Philip Hammond, the foreign secretary, gives a Commons statement on the military campaign against Islamic State.
Afternoon: John Swinney, Scotland’s finance minister, delivers his budget in the Scottish parliament.
2.15pm: Lord Hall, the BBC director general, gives evidence to the Commons culture committee on BBC charter renewal.
2.45pm: Theresa May, the home secretary, gives evidence to the Commons home affairs committee.
3.30pm: Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, gives evidence to the joint committee on human rights on drone attacks.
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 after PMQs and another in the afternoon.
If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
Updated
