The main news from westminster. Fears over job losses after the sale of vauxhall to a french car manufacturer. Our Employment Laws make it easier to sack workers in the uk compared to those who work in france and germany which puts them at an immediate disadvantage. Advice for the Culture Secretary after she raises concerns about a Takeover Of Sky By 21st fox. A Successful Company that should not be persecuted a Successful Company that should not be persecuted because the left doesnt like it. Office dress codes for women such as high heels have objected and ridiculed. Working in flat shoes does not make me reach for the smelling salts. I imagine clients will be spectacularly unbothered by the heel height of anyone in attendance. The House Of Commons was today dominated by two begged business deals, the first the sale of vauxhall. General motors is selling its american arm for £1. 9 billion. European arm. The buyer is a french firm, psa, which owns peugeot. They have promised to Return Vauxhall to profit but workers are concerned to secure theirjobs will be especially after leaving the European Union. That the company will honour the agreement they have with the vauxhall workforce. That Vauxhall Pensions will be in at least as good a position as they are today. That the treatment of the uk division will be equal to those of other countries within the vauxhall group. That the identity of vauxhall will continue to be distinct and prominent. That the strategy of the new company be one of the building on existing strengthss and not closures. Strengths and committments. Although i welcome the promise to one of existing contracts, i am deeply concerned about the 40,000 currently employed in luton and in the wider supply chain who will be worried about the future of theirjobs today. Can be Secretary Of State confirm what assurances he has personally received of the future of vauxhalls plants and the wider uk workforce beyond existing contracts . Can the Minister Confirm what support has been offered to psa following britains exit from the European Union . We welcome nissans decision to stay in the uk as a result of assurances provided by this government, has psa been offered the same deal . If so, would not make sense for the government to set out its strategy for the sector as a whole than enlightening businesses one crisis at a time. I am grateful for the questions. These have been worrying times for the workforce over the last two weeks and i think the statements made by both parties today have been welcomed, notjust by me but by the speed unions as being very much steps in the right direction. Trade unions. It is very important that we should hold the company to account for this. In terms of the points mentioned, the company has said that it will honour the agreement they have with the company and with the unions. The extent to at least 2021. I have constituents who work in the Ellesmere Port plant who are reliant on the local supply chains, so this is causing huge worry in the area. What can he say to reassure my constituents about the future, particularly given that our Employment Laws make it easier to sack workers in the uk compared to those who work in france and germany, which puts them at an immediate disadvantage . And what can he say to reassure them about the fact that we are leaving the European Union and the Single Market and that again puts them potentially at a disadvantage in the competition that is to come. What i would say is first of all the reason that we have a successful record in this country is that our car plants and their workforces are highly efficient and we shouldnt forget that. I cant help feeling the minister being little complacent. Much of the exporters left for europe. Would it really makes sense for peugeot to continue left hand drive production outside the eu . And not in poland or germany . The minister doesnt seem to be answering the questions on brexit head on. Many of my constituents are worried about this. Given the thousands of high skilled jobs in the future and the importance of the risk of them going and the importance to the regions economy, what is he going to do to ensure future eu Market Access for this and other very Important Industries . The head of psa said today that brexit offers some opportunities, but she can have my assurance that i will do everything within my power to make sure that the Terms Of Trade that we have through negotiations are as advantageous as possible. After those exchanges on vauxhall, mps turned their attention to the attempt by 21st century fox, owned by Rupert Murdoch, to take over the broadcaster sky. At the end of last year fox and sky announced they had reached a deal. Rupert murdoch has agreed to pay nearly 12 billion to gain full ownership. The Culture Secretary came to the commons to up date mps about hard position on the bed. On the bid. I can confirm formal notification for the proposed merger was lodged with the European Commission on friday to march. March 3. I, on friday, wrote to the parties to inform them that i am minded to issue a European Intervention notice on the basis that i believe there are Public Interest considerations, as set out in the enterprise act 2002, that may be relevant to this proposed merger that warrant further investigation. She said she was concerned about Media Plurality. My concern is the merger will bring under common or increased control a number of significant news sources and News Corporations newspapers. As a result i have told parties i am minded to ask for a report from off, the impact of the merger on Media Plurality before considering the matter further. Ofcom. She also said she had concerns about Broadcasting Standards. I am concerned about the number of breaches of Broadcasting Standards by 21st century fox as well as the behaviour and Corporate Governance failures of News Corporation in the past. In light of those matters i am minded to intervene on these grounds and to ask of com to investigate them further. Robert murdoch attempted to take over sky five years ago but it was derailed by the outcry over Phone Hacking at one of his newspapers. The Company Names may have changed since the previous bed for sky was withdrawn in 2011 but we are still dealing with Media Plurality, misconduct and the murdochs. Previous bid. The Secretary Of State has said that she is minded to intervene first on Media Plurality grounds. The bid would put an even greater amount of media power in the uk in the hands of the murdoch family. It makes the Murdoch Empire even better. Bigger. We might call at empire 2. 0. The most troubling issues raised are not about the content of James Murdochs programming but about the content of his character. The Secretary Of State has rightly referred to feel years of Corporate Governance during the Phone Hacking scandal but it is not clear that these failings all strictly speaking under the heading Broadcasting Standards, even though they are central to whether this merger should be approved. Failures of governance. The measure is likely to increase the influence of Rupert Murdoch and his family in the media in the uk, and fox already have a controlling interest in sky. News corporation runs newspapers throughout uk and radio stations. At a time when smaller titles are struggling with poor circulation numbers, and established newspapers are having to rethink their Business Models to survive, giving yet more power to the already dominant media giant seems counterintuitive. What i want to ask is whether she will be certain not to involve herself in the socialist witchhunt against Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation, fox news, which has done so much, both through newspapers publishing and through the launch of sky news, to increase plurality in the media in this country, a wonderfully Successful Company that should not be persecuted because the left doesnt like it. We already know that underjames and report murdochs readership, Rupert Murdochs leadership. The companies they controlled bride and bullied their way around british politics. They Poison The Well of british political engagement. They used Anti Competitive Practices at every possible turn to try to destroy competitors and they made it impossible for Media Diversity to flourish in this country, so why on earth would anybody think they were fit and proper people to take over . Theyre only excuse, when they like their way through evidence in parliament, was that their company was far too big for them to possibly know what was going on in some outpost in the United Kingdom . That doesnt suggest they would be any good at running this now. The honourable gentleman has been on the record on several occasions on his views on these matters and i am sure his points will be heard. Last week, the House Of Lords voted for the eu citizens to be given a guaranteed right to stay in the uk. Regardless of brexit negotiations, and on sunday, the Commons Committee on exiting the eu also declare the government should get people from other eu countries a legal like to remain. The government is resisting such a move but at question time some mps apply further pressure. A legal right. We cant even deport convicted criminals. The reality is that even if we wanted to, which we dont, we are not going to deport a single eu national. It seems to me we might as well acknowledge this fact now while reserving the right, if in the extremely unlikely possibility of our eu partners reporting in the uk citizens, which they wont, we can change our minds, but lets at least reassure these people know. My honourable friend makes a very feared observation about the reality of the situation. I would however point out to him that as he seeks the assurance and the certainty that the eu citizens want, i see could also for the uk citizens in other parts of the European Union, because it is a priority. The Prime Minister has said she will move onto that as soon as negotiations begin. The Home Secretary talks about reciprocal arrangements but when she gets round to reading the report of the select committee, she will see that representatives of uk citizens living abroad, to a man and woman, gave evidence to the committee that they want the British Government to give a unilateral guarantee to eu citizens living here because they think it will benefit them. Will she listen to the voices of uk citizens abroad and get that unilateral guarantee . There are overi million living in the European Union. They are not all represented by the groups who gave evidence at the brexit committee. I care about every one of those uk citizens and i repeat that i think it is incumbent upon this government to protect their possession as we protect eu citizens. You are watching monday in parliament. Decisions are being made too quickly and money is being wasted. That was the consensus of witnesses to the work and Pensions Committee which is looking at how outsourced companies are assessing people for personal independence payment. Pip is a benefit paid to people with disabilities. It was prompted by Government Plans to restrict the eligibility criteria. Currently the dwp are using policy. Policy as law. Their policies are continuously harming people and every time i approach the dwp in individual cases, our policy is this, i then take it to tribunal. The policies are absolutely blown out the window. Until they start adhering to their own guidelines, and to the letter of the law, which each tribunal represents, to prevent miscarriages ofjustice, this is never going to be conducive. I dont think it is the worst part of the process but it is where it says, please provide Contact Details for your Health Care Professionals, the impression is given to claimants that the dwp will contact those Health Care Professionals and get evidence, and in all the cases we have worked on we have never seen a case where the Assessment Provider has actually requested evidence from the Health Care Professionals. The Committee Chair suggested there was an element of Self Selection going on. One thing when somebody comes to my surgery, nobody says actually this is working really well. It is not working well. It is impossible that the government does sometimes check up on those Health Professionals but they are not the people who come to us or to you. The department. Because it went well in the proper decision was made. I can say i went for the very first time to a Pip Assessment last week and there was a combination of both mental and physical disabilities, it was somebody who was previously on disability living allowance. They thought they had it for life but unfortunately they were at two years too young for that, but i have to say that the examination was really good. I went there thinking it was going to be absolutely appalling but i was surprised how they took two hours and there was also a physical examination, because one of the issues we have is that when we see the Appeal Papers comes through, there is a very detailed muscular skeletal report and it says this person can move their arms 50, 60 degrees or whatever, and people tell us there is no examination, it doesnt happen. We have challenged them about that, and atos have said that the best of the observation is that it is a casual observation, which is not an examination that can give you such specific results. We checked about it with the local surgeon and they said it would be impossible to actually get that level of detail unless it was a guided and instructed formal examination. We need a place in the system that requires the dwp to look at a decision. Before, you would get Appeal Papers which was the dwp looking at their decision. Mandatory consideration gave us some hope that stage of the process would be given more time and attention, but on the ground thats not consistent. We dont see when its successful, we see when it goes wrong, but i would say it goes wrong too often. We go to appeals regularly. Whats really frustrating is that the dwp have the right to send a presenting officer. We never see them. There were announcements made in parliament and we saw somebody once the next day. I honestly think that if the dwp observed the tribunals, and had to in some way justify their decisions, they would feed that back up the line and we may get better quality decisions. The government has called on employers to look at their dress codes to make sure they dont discriminate against women. It follows a Petition Calling for a ban on firms making women wear high heels at work. 15,000 people signed the Petition Set Up by Nicola Thorpe after she was sent home for refusing to wear high heels. Mps heard similar stories from hundreds of women. We found attitudes that belonged more, i was going to say in the 1950s, but probably the 1850s might be more accurate, than in the 21st century. Women, especially young women in vulnerable employment, were exploited at work. Threatened with dismissal if they complained. They were forced to bear pain all day, or to Wear Clothing that was totally unsuitable for the tasks they were asked to perform, or to dress in a way that they felt sexualised their appearance and was demeaning. It was time for action. We are calling on the government to start a campaign particularly targeted at areas where people are most vulnerable, like in hospi