You are up to date on the headlines. Now on bbc news, parliament yesterday. Hello and welcome to tuesday in parliament. Coming up the lords have defeated the government again on its brexit bill, this time over theissue of unaccompanied child refugees. The peer who led the opposition was blunt. Some people have called the government mean and nasty, if the government wants to disprove the accusation that it is mean and nasty then the good thing to do is to accept the amendment. But the government has its defenders. I take the view that we have done very well on child refugees, if its not broke dont mend it. The former Prime Minister, theresa may, asks how could the fire at Grenfell Tower have happened. Despite the regulations, despite all the requirements that were there, we still had this building with this cladding which did not meet the building regulations. And what brought this on . Hear, hear applause no clapping. But first, the governments fourth defeat in the lords on its brexit bill came after a string of peers criticized ministers for their stance on unaccompanied child refugees. A labour peer, lord dubs, is unhappy that the eu Withdrawal Agreement bill gets rid of an existing commitment to allow them to come to the uk to be reunited with their families. Ministers have argued that they dont want to tie their hands in the coming brexit negotiations with the eu. And that child refugees would be protected in an expected immigration bill. But lord dubs, who himself came to the uk as a child refugee fleeing the nazis, wasnt satisfied. Family reunion is one of the basic things we have to believe in. If young people have worked their way, sometimes in hazardous and dangerous conditions from halfway across the world, from war and conflict in syria or afghanistan, and if the incentive is that theyve got family here surely it is likely that we should take note of that and not close the door on them. Lord dubs said unaccompanied children could fall into the hands of unscrupulous people. By giving young people legal routes to safety, we are thwarting the traffickers as well as the being humane in terms of opportunity tojoin family members here. And unfortunately this debate that weve had on this, it sends a dangerous signal to young people particularly in callais and also the greek islands if they can get away from there, they will seek to do what we all do which is to say if we cannot join our relatives legally, well find another way of doing it if we can afford to pay the trafficker. Surely that is not a result which we wish to impose on young people. A crossbench or independent peer confessed he was baffled. I do not understand with the government are planning to do. And i did take part in the Committee Stage and i did speak on this and listen to the minister at second reading and still none the wiser as to why it is here. This debate resonates with the nativity story, a story of a child fleeing persecution. The voices of the children are too often drowned out by conflict and violence, by traffickers and political leaders. Let this house speak on their behalf by voting for this amendment. Children who have come through some of the most difficult circumstances that we can possibly imagine and you have the prospect of being reunited with members of their family because that is the group of children with whom we are dealing here in this amendment. They have that prospect of so much better a life simply seems to many of us on these benches and indeed the cross benches, and im sure probably some noble lords are present, that is not something that we can let go lightly. That we can let go lightly. A conservative defended the government. The government has a very credible re cord the government has a very credible record in allowing child refugees into this country. The only basis on which this amendment can be supported is on the basis that a numberof supported is on the basis that a number of refugees, i think we run third in the eu of countries that have allowed child refugees in, so weve got a very credible record on this, but if this amendment is defeated, the government will stop taking any further child refugees in. Ithink taking any further child refugees in. I think that defies all credibility and i dont think theres any basis that you can possibly support that thesis, and i ta ke possibly support that thesis, and i take the view that we have done very well on the question of child refugees. If its not broke, dont mend it. One of the main issues of the debate became trust in the government after lord dubs made this point. Its difficult to be faced with a question of trust, of course i trust individual ministers but i dont trust the government as a whole if i can draw that distinction. The nature of a lack of trust that is not dependent on political and adversarial positions, but a genuine feeling that we are at a moment in our parliamentary history where weve lost the art of building consensus and taking we have an argument forward with the respect and even affection we have for each other when were outside the debating chamber. And it does seem to me that in this debate we have reached that sort of point. The reason the house is so nervous, not that we dont in any way trust the word of the noble lady the minister, itsjust the pm has a habit of saying one thing on europe and then doing another thing. Its not that the lady, its not the noble lady the minister, its the top of the government that the trust may not emanate from. Its a distressing thing that this house is not prepared to believe what is being said on behalf of the government by a minister on this issue. I think that this is a problem which is somehow or another this house is going to have to come to terms with. Lord kerr summed up the opposition to the governments stance. Of all the issues we are discussing here, some of them constitutionally very important, some of them politically very important, well, of all the issues we are discussing on this bill, this is probably the one which has the most public resonence, that these unfortunate children should be looked after and why the government want to take out the statute book eight commitment to try to look after them is something that the public will not understand. So i strongly urge the government to withdraw this clause if they dont i hope lord dubbs will seek to press this amendment. The minister said the government was committed to protecting vulnerable children. Over 41,000 children have been granted protection in the uk since 2010, most of them under obligations the Refugee Convention and a better commitment to resettlement rather than eu structures. Over 5,000 unaccompanied children are being cared for in england alone. A 46 increase since 4014. And we received over 3,000 asylum claims from unaccompanied children in 2018. The third highest intake of any eu member state. But for the fourth time this week, the government was defeated. They have voted. Content, 300. Not content, 220. So the contents had it. But even before a vote was cast, downing street had announced that the government would overturn this and all the other changes to the brexit bill when the legislation returned to the commons. After the uk leaves the eu on 31st january, for 11 months well be in a transition phase. During that time most things will stay the same as they are now. But one thing will change; the country leaves the eus Common Agricultural policy on brexit day which means payments to british farmers from brussels will stop. Under the scheme, farmers get nearly £3 billion in subsidies. The government wants to make sure those payments arent interrupted. So the environment secretary came to the commons with the solution. To empower the uk government and the devolved administrations to pay basic payments to farmers for the 2020 scheme year. It therefore maintains the status quo for pillar one for this final period before we start to leave the cap behind completely. The core purpose of the bill is enacted by clause one, which puts direct payment legislation for 2020 on the domestic statute book. The opposition parties wont be opposing the bill. This isjust the first rumblings of a stampede of bills thats coming out of defra. We still have the agriculture bill in the fisheries bill and the environment bills to follow, and im pleased the government has accepted that they were right on the previous agriculture bill when we argued repeatedly that we need long term funding for direct payments and that is not materialised in the bills that have been published. These bills form the framework for fishing and farming in the environment for the next 30 years. They come as the planet is on fire, our nation is plunging deeper into Climate Crisis and every one of these bills needs to be an opportunity to protect our planet for the future, to cut carbon in bolder and faster ways and ensure Climate Justice walked hand in hand with social justice so that no one is left behind, whether in towns and cities, coastal or rural communities, and every of these bills falls short. It is great to have continuity. A conservative who chaired the Environment Committee in the last parliament had some questions about the new arrangements. I want to go back to the point the honourable gentleman mage now but the value of the payment because at the moment they are paid in euros and then converted in september, and the payment comes out. So are you actually expecting the payment for this year to be virtually the same as the payment for last year, because it went before it was due to the value of the euro and the time of the payment, i imagine this time it wont be. My honourable friend is correct. Taking over domestic responsibility for these payments means that the currency fluctuation that had such a Significant Impact in past years are not likely to affect the level of payments in the same way. Nonetheless, i would say that we have yet to decide the exact levels of basic payments although the chancellor has set out the overall spending of which to fund such payments. And a former lib dem leader in a rural constituency said questions about how farming would be affected by brexit wouldnt just go away. That doesnt mean i predicted the future government would spend it better but i can see how that could. Important caveat. This bill is of course necessary and providing a modicum of certainty for farmers as we leave the European Union injust a few days time. It permits a small island of temporary predictability in a sea of uncertainty. It kicks the can a few yards down the lane, but it will do nothing to disguise the chasm that is opening up for farmers we leave the eu. To the surprise of nobody, the bill cleared its second reading unopposed. Youre watching tuesday in parliament with me, mandy baker. Dont forget, all editions of the day in parliament are available on the bbc iplayer. The Energy Minister has told the commons that fracking the process of extracting gas by drilling and High Pressure water jets is at an end for now. Fracking was just one of the subjects raised at the first session of questions to the Business Department since the election. Will my right honourable friend agree that the residents that the best way we can tackle Climate Change is to make tracking permanent. Im obviously want to welcome the honourable gentleman to his place, another very successful campaign. What i would like to say about fracking is that the moratorium is what it says, we are stopping it and the only way it can be resumed is by compelling evidence which so far, is not forthcoming, so the moratorium stays and fracking for the time being is over. The business secretary was anxious to put her stamp on the departments green credentials post brexit. As we enter an exciting decade, we are building a stronger, greener United Kingdom and to achieve that, my department is focused on three priorities. First we are leading the world in tackling Climate Change, notjust because its the right thing to do, but because it will create millions of newjobs and skills right across the uk. Second, were solving the challenges facing our society from life at the artificial intelligence, improving life s across the world. Third, we are making the uk the best place in the world to work and to grow a business. But she came under pressure from the scottish nationalists. With the final destination of brexits still vague, its a disgrace the uk government is still failing to give the information we need to navigate brexit. With firms leading more in the chancellor telling them simply to adjust, will she finally accepted the snp and in providing a £750 million 1 stop shop. Im not surprised to hear him still determined to resist brexit but he will appreciate that this government is getting on with it and making sure there is a great deal for businesses. To his point about scottish businesses preparedness, my departments fun unable to various trade bodies and thus scottish fishing trade bodies to receive hundreds and thousands of taxpayers money. A labour mp asked about the National Living wage. The enforcement system isnt working at the moment and still hundreds of well known companies are getting away with not paying their workers the National Living ways. Wage. I welcome the steps the government have already taken but i would hope the minister in her response could talk about some additional actions the government will take to make sure nobody gets away with paying the workers less than what they are owed. I would like tojust be clear, the government will enforce the National Minimum wage. I think it thats been shown by the outcome of the penalties and the rears covered last year. We have doubled the enforcement budget and i remain committed to making sure employers are able to easily comply with the law but where there is any sign of breach, we are enforcing and making sure people get the pay they are entitled to. A conservative mp had a specific example of illegal employment practices. I believe there is approximately 10,000 people in the clothing industry being paid three to £4 an hour. I thank the honourable gentleman for raising this and i would be absolutely happy to meet with him. This is a particular sector that has been under focus, there has been much work carried out by hmrc. And cross border agencies and hmrc e nforce and cross border agencies and hmrc enforce the National Living wage. I would be happy to get any details that he has would be helpful. Kelly tolhurst. The government has insisted it wont drop waiting time targets for accident and emergency units in england until after a review by clinicians. Hospitals must aim to ensure 95 of patients are seen within the time limit, but in november last year every major a e unit in england missed the target. Earlier this month the Health Secretary hinted that the target could be scrapped but a Junior Health minister told peers that the existing four hour target remained in place. Nhs improvement is reviewing access standards in full key areas, four. Including urgent and emergency care. The government will respond to recommendations from the review once it is concluded. In december, the figure of 68. 6 of patients met before our target against the actual target of 95 , thats the worst month ever. The response of the government behind the warm words of the noble minister today is that they want to get rid of the targets. Yet, the Research Published last week by cornell shows the current target saves at least 15,000 lives a year and the Royal College of emergency medicine has said there is no viable alternative to the current target. It says the government should get on with actually getting this target back on track. My lord, will the government do that . The noble lord always asked us to questions. Astute. We really have to pay tribute to the dedicated nhs staff for seeing over 70,000 people every day, the highest number in decemberever. While we have more nhs beds open this winter, our a es have had to train more people in the issue with the a e waiting standard is being considered by clinicians who are considering whether its appropriate giving changes occurred. The five key reasons considered to change away from the standard, whether it does not measure total waiting times, the standard does not differentiate between severity of condition. The current standard measures are single point and often a very complex patient halfway, and there is evidence that processes rather than clinical judgement are resulting in discharge in the immediate period before a patient breach is the standard which is a perverse incentive. The government is not doing anything without court recommendation. No decision will be made until that comes forward. A conservative said the key issue was that a es were under enormous pressure. People find it very difficult, which is why i think we can i , they find it very difficult to see a gp. All welcome the announcement we are going to see more gps and i would like to ask the minister when we might see some progress from the ground . We need to improve access to Community Care to make sure that people are diverted away from inappropriate visits to a e. We said we will recruit over 6,000 doctors in our gp practice. We are working on that as we speak but we are also increasing the number of gp practices which are within a es so that people can be diverted into appropriate care. When they do go inappropriately to ana. When they do go inappropriately to ana. A e. The evidence is that already around 10 attending a and e are streamed into those gp practices and we are trying to increase that at this point. In the first two weeks ofjanuary, there were an average of almost 6,500 people waiting more than 12 hours in emergency departments, having risen from just over 3,800 in october. These long waits represent risks to the health and very lives of these patients waiting. The minister said the review had been under way since 2018 and this winters issues were being addressed urgently. Theresa may has said its crucialfor the inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire to establish why cladding that didnt meet building regulations was installed on the outside walls of the building. The former Prime Minist