to monday in parliament. coming up: the health secretary comes under fire after it's revealed hundreds of thousands of patient letters were put into storage instead of being posted. two months and 2017 and the health secretary bakshi is from one crisis to another. there is no evidence so far that any patient safety has been put at risk. peers begin their detailed scrutiny of the brexit triggering bill. and the speaker pays tribute following the death of the commons‘ longest—serving mp, sir gerald kaufman. it was that fidelity to principle, that commitment to causes, that insistence on doing his duty by his constituents, by his party and by his country. but first, the health secretary has told mps some 500,000 documents containing medical information, including cancer test results, were mistakenly put in storage rather than being sent to the gp orfiled in the patients‘ records. the error occurred when a mail redirection company — nhs shared business services — hired by the health service failed to pass on documents that had either been incorrectly addressed or needed re—routing because the patient had moved to a new gp surgery. patients in the east midlands, the south west and north east london were affected. the health secretary confirmed that 2,000 of the higher risk cases had now been reassessed by doctors — at a cost of £2.2 million — with no harm detected. the remaining 500 are still being assessed. jeremy hunt explained in total more than 700,000 items had been invovled. 200,000 pieces were temporary residence forms and further 500,000 pieces assessed as low risk. a first triage identified a further 2,500 items which had potential risk of harm and needed further investigation but follow—up by local gps has already identified nearly 2,000 of these as having no patient harm. the remainder are still being assessed but so far no patient harm has been identified. he explained why he hadn't gone public with the information sooner. publicising the issue could have meant gp surgeries being inundated with enquiries from worried patients which would have prevented them from doing the most important work, namely investigating the named patients who were potentially at risk. this is a catastrophic breach of data protection. over half a million patients' data, including blood test results, cancer screening results, biopsy results, even correspondence relating to cases of child protection, all undelivered. they were languishing in a warehouse on the secretary of state's watch. it's an absolute scandal, mr speaker. time and time again, this health secretary promises us transparency. well, today he stands accused of a cover—up. two months into 2017 and the health secretary lurches from one crisis to another. hospitals are overcrowded, waiting lists out of control, he can't deliver the investment our nhs needs. he can't deliver a social care solution. he can't deliver patient safety and now he can't even deliver the post, mr speaker. he has overseen a shambles that puts patient safety at risk. patients deserve answers and they deserve an apology. there is no evidence so far that any patient safety has been put at risk. the secretary of state stated with great authority that no patient data was lost. i'd be interested to know how he could be so certain, given that all of this data was missing for a long time without anybody noticing? what controls are in place now that weren't in place then that means he can make that statement with such confidence? can i welcome her to this house? i don't know she's done a health question before but let me say to her that we are assured that the data was not lost, it was kept in secure setting which means that it was safe. it wasn't breached or accessed by anyone else. i used to work in a pathology lab and it absolutely pains me to think that those results generated by the hard—working pathology staff were languishing in a warehouse somewhere unseen by anybody. i know what gps will do if they don't get lab results. they will ring the laboratory and ask for them. so has the secretary of state made any estimate of the amount of time wasted on phone calls from gp surgeries to pathology labs? regrettably, i'm sure that because of what happened extra work was created for gps but what i will say to the honourable lady is it is because of gp‘s commitment to their own patients that it appears that in the vast majority of cases patient harm was avoided because, when results don't come through that a gp is expecting, the gp chases those results. my constituents in kettering will be amazed that for five years no—one spotted that 700,000 records had gone missing. can i ask him how was it discovered and why is it that in these three areas such a large amount of data effectively disappeared from public view? i wish i could give him the answer to that question. i do think it is completely extraordinary that for such a long period of time it wasn't noticed that this data had gone missing. it was discovered towards the end of the sbs contract. i think there are lessons in the nhs which relate very closely to what the other members of said about the dangers of overreliance on paper rather than electronic systems, where it is much, much easier to keep track of what's happening. let me say to the gentleman opposite as he continues to make comments from a sedentary position, when it comes to making the nhs electronic, i think people will compare his government's record and ours and see which is better. jeremy hunt. in the lords, peers were beginning their detailed scrutiny of the bill paving the way for theresa may to trigger the uk's exit from the eu. by tradition, peers don't vote on amendments at committee stage, keeping their powder dry until later in the legislative process. but a labour peer and former cabinet mininster, peter, now lord hain, pushed his amendment arguing that the uk should stay in the single market. leaving the single market will cause untold harm to the economy and people's jobs which will be felt most keenly in the already disadvantaged nations and regions where i live, wales for example. a hard brexit will therefore have damaging consequences for the union of our united kingdom and also for the island of ireland. what's at stake is jobs, living standards and rights. bear that in mind, we are playing poker if we go down the government route with people's livelihoods on a very big scale. are we likely to get that comprehensive free trade agreement within two years? i've not met anybody yet to knows anything about trade negotiation to think that's the case. nobody is arguing, i don't think, i've never met anybody who says we shouldn't have access to do business with the single market. in the same way as they will want to do business with us. the question is whether we want to be members of it. they've accused my right honourable friend the prime minister of opting for a hard brexit. my lords, i submit that is nonsense. the prime minister has not opted for a hard brexit or a soft brexit or any sort of squishy brexit, she is merely attempting to carry out the wishes of the people to leave the eu. and that automatically means leaving the single market. because if we stay in the single market we are still in the eu to all intents and purposes. if we believe that no deal was better than a bad deal then we are gambling millions of manufacturing jobs, 10% of our gdp. of course the single market is not perfect. notably in its coverage of all services. but almost half of british trade in goods and services takes place in the european market. almost half. and it should be an absolute priority therefore for us to secure the continuity of that trade we already have. but labour's front bench said it couldn't back peter hain‘s amendment, saying it had to be... 0ur task is to persuade the government that they have set their sat nav for the wrong destination and that is where our energies must go. giving people the unrealistic hope that staying in the single market, despite the referendum and our exit is a possibility is, i think, and unfair thing to make them think could happen. we need to continue to trade as freely as possible with the eu. though we have to leave. and for that reason we are not able to support this amendment. what i would ask is that those of your lordships who, like me, voted to remain stop fighting the battles of the campaign but come together to help us think of ways we can continue to thrive, trade and overcome these challenges. the issue raised by this amendment are indeed worthy of debate but, with the greatest of respect, this amendment has no place in this bill and would undermine the expressed intent of the british people which is to leave the eu. my criticism is for my party leader. because i think he will be judged by history as being on the wrong side of this argument. of forcing us to do something in the labour party that we do not actually in our hearts really believe in. i do not lightly go against my party whip. in my 26 years in parliament, in the commons and in here, i have only ever done this once or twice but this for me is a matter of absolutely crucial importance to this country and to the future of people, theirjobs and prosperity and the truth is the minister, with all due respect, is doing a greatjob on a sticky wicket but the truth is he hasn't a clue and the government hasn't a clue where we are going. they have no idea where they are taking us. i think for the sake ofjobs, prosperity, businesses, it is important to pass this amendment and i therefore wish to divide the house. but when it came to the vote, peers rejected the amendment to keep the uk in the single market. my lords, they have voted content — 136, not content — 299. the not contents have it. you're watching monday in parliament, with me, alicia mccarthy. a fund intended to ease the pressures on adult social care services and hospitals in england has been described by mps as a "bit of a fraud" and "window dressing". the watchdog the national audit office has said the £53 billion better care fund has not succeeded in keeping patients out of hospital or saved any money, although the nao said it had helped join up health and social care in some areas. appearing before the public accounts committee senior health figures argued that the fund was working, but it was too soon to judge its full impact. it's not working, is it? no, it's not... in your report, it says it's not working. i think you would agree with that. what i want to say... this is an incredibly complex... we know... i'm aware we have limited time today. we could go round the houses on the challenges, but this report says that the better care fund, the integration that it was supposed to achieve, the safe admissions to a&e that it was supposed to achieve, it hasn't delivered and it has actually cost money. do you agree with me? not entirely, of the contrary, no. so... do you agree with the nao report? i agree with the nao report and i thought it set out very fairly where the better care fund has made progress, and it has in some important respects, and where it has not... i think my answer to the question was i agreed with the rather more nuanced picture the national audit office presented of where things have improved and where they have not. we think, and this is shown in the national audit office, that local areas report that the better care fund, in the vast majority of cases, is driving better joint decision—making. it has shown improvement across two of its... you... and not in others. were you overoptimistic in setting the targets and savings that were achievable through this? no, and i... and we talked about this back in december 2014, didn't we? yeah. and i think we had quite a frank exchange at that point. the better care fund mark one, which is what i regard this, was an initiative by the government to transfer funding from the nhs to social care, in recognition of the great pressures raised on social care, so, did it achieve its intended aim of increasing the funding available to local authorities for social care in 2015—16? yes, it did. so, in that sense, it has been a success. it didn't actually achieve anything in reducing the number of emergency admissions to a&e, did it? well, i don't think it was ever likely to, as of some sort of magic between march 31 2015, and april 1 2015. in fact, i think that's what i laid out for you in 2014. if you could actually also... you laid it out rather nicely, better care fund maths and real—world maths, i think injune last year, which we thought summed it up perhaps quite well. yes. actually, so, really, it was all a bit of a fraud, wasn't it? the money was going to go from your budget to the local government budgets, but it wasn't actually going to achieve anything to reducing costs to the nhs, which was one of the longer—term aims of this. well, it was supporting social care financing. mm—hmm, to help save pounds in the nhs. well, to help social care funding pressures. i think the underlying problem is the shortfall of funding for adult social care. it's not... the better care fund is an attempt to put some more money in. the new better care fund is an attempt to put a bit more in. it will help. social care would have been cut by more without the nhs transfer of funds, definitely, because it was used to prevent cuts. so, what you're really saying is, actually, this isn't really much in the way of more money. this is window dressing. it's just moving money from pot a to pot b. the problem with always thinking that by putting some money in, we'll get some improvement and some better things — it's just plugging a gap of money that has been taken away, while demand is rising, so the population 65—plus has gone up by 15% in the period we are talking about, and, actually, over 40% of adult social care budgets isn't spent on older people at all. it's spent on people aged 18 to 64. 35% is spent on people with learning disabilities alone, where the pressures are equally great, so there is a huge set of issues here, and, although i wouldn't dismiss bcf or improve bcf as an unwelcome resource, it's not getting to the nub of the problem. the question is to what budget a council but to its social care services, and that's obviously tied up with the whole bigger national debate about local authority financing and local democracy. a short time later in the commons, mps debated the next round of funding for health and social care in england. the idea that we have an nhs that is on a sustainable footing is, i am afraid, simply not the case. i ask ministers to be realistic about the current position, and i ask our chancellor, in his forthcoming budget, to address this matter by urgently giving a lifeline to social care, because that will benefit notjust social care, but the nhs. she called for a joined—up approach for the future — a call echoed by the chair of another influential committee. we do need a long—term generational shift in how we are going to deal with this matter. we cannotjust keep lurching from crisis to crisis and funding situation to funding situation. the day in the commons began with tributes following the death of the labour mp sir gerald kaufman. sir gerald was the oldest mp, and also held the title "father of the house", as he had the longest unbroken service as a member of the commons, being elected in 1970. he famously called his party's left—wing 1983 election manifesto "the longest suicide note in history". the speaker, john bercow, led the tributes, saying he would be sorely missed. i will not pretend that he was always the easiest of colleagues. if you were lauded or praised by gerald, you doubtless took delight in the experience. if you were attacked or denounced by sir gerald, you could be in no doubt on the matter. but there was that fidelity to principle, that commitment to causes, that insistence on doing his duty by his constituents, by his party, and by his country. gerald will be mourned very widely indeed. mps will get the chance to pay their tributes later in the week. meanwhile, in the lords, cross—party tributes have been paid to the former lords leader and home secretary lord waddington, who died last week. david waddington served in margaret thatcher's cabinet during the final year of her premiership from 1989—90. he was appointed as leader in the lords byjohn major. a man of principle and grit. a tenacious, and committed servant to the british public, who are affected real change, leading the charge from the backbenches on major legislation such as the amendment he carried to the criminaljustice and immigration bill in 2008. i think it's fair to say that he wasn't one of life's natural liberal democrats. laughter but my colleagues did cheer when, as home secretary, he referred the case of the birmingham six to the court of appeal, where, of course, their convictions were eventually quashed. in some ways, he wrote his own obituary when in an interview for the house magazine some years ago he said, with disarming self—deprecation, i think he was having a joke, but, i would like to be remembered as a decent local buffer who wasn't all that clever but, in his own way, tried to do his best. the number of assaults carried out on nhs staff in england by patients or members of the public is rising and now stands at close to 200 a day. such is the concern that a petition launched by the radio dj nick ferrari calling for such attacks to be made a specific criminal offence has attracted nearly 117,000 signatures in a debate in westminster hall, mps told horror stories of some of the violence nhs workers had suffered. i‘ll draw members‘ attention to one example i was given of a 35—year—old ambulance technician from cornwall, who was punched in the face by a drunk, aggressive woman whilst at work. she sustained a broken jaw and she‘s had at least 12 surgical procedures since then, and is still suffering from symptoms. she had a titanium jaw implant put in back in september 2016, but since then she has had to have two further procedures, and cannot open her mouth wider than a finger width at the moment. she was attacked in 2006. that‘s over a decade of agony and suffering. we owe it to people like her, and everybody else attacked just doing theirjob, to stand up and send a message that attacks on nhs staff are contemptible and we will do everything in our power to stop them. one piece of testimony from an nhs staff nurse describes how in her, quote, 20—year nursing career, i have been spat at, punched, kicked, verbally abused, and even had a cardiac monitor thrown at my head. another talks about how she works, quote, in an a&e department as a staff nurse. on a daily basis, i see some sort of aggression, whether this is physical or verbal, towards staff. i can't recall a day that has gone by when we have not had to have security or police in the department. but perhaps even more worrying than this is evidence given to this petitions committee by the royal college of nursing, which suggests that there is a dangerous perception that some female nurses fear that they are seen as, quote, fair game for sexual assault. now i am quite sure that members will find this quite appalling. it is undeniable that our nhs staff are under a great deal of pressure at the moment, with long waiting lists, patients waiting on trolleys in corridors, and having to deal with angry relatives because of this. the government, with their current handling of the nhs, appear to be creating a perfect storm of unrest and discontent amongst patients and relatives, which is likely to exacerbate tension and ill feeling, and the government must take some responsibility for this. i am the daughter of a retired police sergeant and a nurse, and both parents... hear, hear. thank you very much. and both parents were subject to abuse as part of their roles as public servants, and so this is an issue that i feel very strongly about. if you are under time pressure, as, of course, we‘ve seen in this winter in accident and emergency, actually that just pours petrol on the flames, because someone is going, excuse me, excuse me, can i speak to you? my wife is ill, or my child is ill. and people are running past all the time, and then eventually a gasket blows. so, this is not always someone who is coming in with the tattoos, you know, "love, hate" or whatever, making it obvious that they are troubled. it is someone who is frightened, but to de—escalate that requires training. it requires support. it requires back—up and, more than anything else, it requires time. but the minister thought the penalties already available to the courts were sufficient. given the current offences framework and sentencing guide, which, as i say, makes provision for an increase in sentence to be considered where the victim of an assault is a public sector worker, i am not persuaded that there is a need to create a specific offence for this particular group of workers. the new mp for stoke—on—trent central has taken his seat in the commons. gareth snell held the seat for labour in last week‘s by—election. he won the seat with a majority ofjust over 2,500 — ukip‘s leader paul nuttall came second — on a turnout of 38%. i, gareth craig snell, do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that i will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her majesty queen elizabeth, her heirs and successors according to law. hear, hear! the by—election was caused when the previous mp tristram hunt decided to stand down from parliament to run the victoria and albert museum. and that‘s it from me for now, but do join keith macdougall at the same time tomorrow for another round—up of the best of the day here at westminster, but until then, from me, alicia mccarthy, goodbye. if the truth were known, i could have put up any variety of globes you might have liked to try to describe just how varied the weather has been, as we start the new weather week. but, as ever, our weather watchers have captured it for us. and you‘ll notice here that monday ended on quite a wintry note across parts of scotland. when you see the big picture, you will understand, i hope, just why we‘ve got such a variety of weather on offer at the moment — low pressure never very far away. even in the mist of all that unsettled weather, the sky is a subtle ieee quite a problem, and especially on untreated surfaces at the start of the day. —— ice could be. some winteriness about. this will extend into northern ireland and it is on the move. so although i‘m showing some dry, bright weather across the greater part of england and wales, say for maybe one or two showers, don‘t bank on it saying that way, because this weather feature is on the move. away from scotland and down into wales. that is how some of that range ‘s wintry there across the peaks that range ‘s wintry there across the pea ks of that range ‘s wintry there across the peaks of the pennines coming down to the parts of wales. that sums into wales, the east anglia and the midlands. it with fairly miserable up there. the best of the sunshine north of this bell. 0n tuesday wednesday, that band of whether will move away and skies we i’e whether will move away and skies were clear again. ross could be another problem, ice and other problem, as we start the new dale wednesday. but again, a lot of dry, bright weather. but again, don‘t be full by that. across the southern pa rt full by that. across the southern part of britain, this band of bladder ram will move north. by thursday, we will see a little ridge of high—pressure try to settle things down across the heart of the bridge aisles. the same time, and notice we have that line of blue. —— british isles. as there could be better day for some, but on friday and into the weekend, things will look unsettled again. and that is the balance we have throughout the rest of the week. there will be day today changes, some rain and sunshine, but a risk of snow to the north. —— welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. i‘m mike embley. our top stories: president trump calls for a 10% rise in american military spending and cuts elsewhere to pay for it. a 70—year—old german is beheaded by rebels in the philippines, the third westerner to be killed in a year. an amazing escape for these bus passengers as sudden floods bring destruction in peru and chile. and the multiple gold—winning gymnast 0lga korbut sells most of her 0lympic medals at auction for more than $200,000. hello. president trump has promised what he‘s calling a a historic