Author Archives: HM Government

Mr Speaker, I will now update the House on the two rounds of negotiations with the EU which took place in July and August.

While at times these negotiations have been tough, it is clear that we have made concrete progress on many important issues.

I would like thank all our officials who have been working hard both at home, as well as out in Brussels, to make this happen.

Colleagues will have received my letter following the July negotiating round dated 9 August. I set out the dynamics of that round in some detail.

These rounds were not at this stage about establishing jointly agreed legal text. They were about reaching a detailed understanding of each other’s position, understanding where there might be room for compromise and beginning to drill down into technical detail on a number of issues.

During both rounds discussions took place on all four areas including the specific issues relating to the rights of citizens on both sides, Northern Ireland and Ireland, the question of a financial settlement and a number of technical separation issues.

I will speak briefly about each in turn.

Citizens’ rights

Making progress on citizens’ rights has been an area of focus for both negotiation rounds and we took significant steps forward in both July and August.

We have published a joint technical paper which sets out our respective positions in more detail, updated following the August round. This underlines both the significant alignment between our positions and also provides clarity on areas where we have not as yet reached agreement.

In July we achieved a high degree of convergence on:

• The scope of our proposals on residence and social security;
• The eligibility criteria for those who will benefit from residence rights under the scope of the withdrawal agreement;
• A shared commitment to make the citizens’ rights application process as efficient and streamlined as possible.

In August we agreed:

• To protect the rights of frontier workers;
• To cover future social security contributions for those citizens covered by the Withdrawal Agreement;
• To maintain the right of British citizens in the EU27 to set up and manage a business within their Member State of residence, and visa versa; and
• That we should at least protect existing healthcare rights and arrangements for EU27 citizens in the UK and UK nationals in the EU. These are the European Health Insurance or ‘EHIC’ arrangements.

These areas of agreement are good news. They may sound technical but they matter enormously to individuals.

The agreement on health care rights, for example, will mean that British pensioners living in the EU will continue to have their health care arrangements protected, both where they live and when they travel to another Member State, where they will still be able to use an EHIC card.

On mutual recognition of qualifications, we have made progress in protecting the recognition of qualifications for British citizens resident in the EU27 and EU27 citizens resident in the UK. In fact, each one of these areas of agreement is reciprocal, they will work for Brits in the EU and the EU27 in the UK.

These areas of agreement help provide certainty and clarity for EU27 citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU27. They will make a tangible difference to these people’s lives. I hope everyone recognises the importance of that.

The outcomes of these discussions demonstrate that we have delivered on our commitment to put citizens first and to give them as much certainty as early as possible in this process.

Of course, there remain areas of difference which we continue to work on.

For example, we will need to have further discussions on the specified cut-off date, future family reunion and the broader issue of compliance on enforcement. Progress on these areas will require flexibility and pragmatism from both sides.

During the Summer negotiating rounds a number of issues emerged in the EU offer that will need further consideration.

For example, the EU does not plan to maintain the existing voting rights for UK nationals living in the EU. We have made it clear that we will protect the rights of EU nationals living in the UK to stand and vote in municipal elections.

Similarly, the EU proposals would not allow UK citizens currently resident in the EU to retain their rights if they move within the EU.

Even in areas where there has been progress, more is needed. While the EU has agreed to recognise the qualifications of UK citizens resident in the EU, and vice versa, we believe this should go much further.

This recognition must extend to students who are currently studying for a qualification, it must apply to onward movement by UK citizens in the EU and it should extend more broadly to protect the livelihoods of thousands of people which depend on qualifications which will be gained before we exit the EU.

In these areas the EU’s proposals fall short of ensuring UK citizens in the EU and EU citizens in the UK can continue to live their lives broadly as they do now.

Separation issues

On separation issues, a very technical area, we have established a number of sub-groups. They made progress in a number of specific areas, and drew on papers the UK published ahead of both rounds.

I am pleased to say that we are close to agreement on our approach to post-exit privileges and immunities – on which we have published a position paper – which will benefit both the UK and EU to maintain after we leave.

We have agreed on our mutual approach to confidentiality requirements on shared information post-exit.

With respect to nuclear materials and safeguards, we held discussions on the need to resolve issues around the ownership of special fissile material and the responsibility for radioactive waste and spent fuel held both here and there.

We reiterated a strong mutual interest in ensuring that the UK and Euratom Community continue to work closely together in the future as part of comprehensive new partnership.

With respect to legal cases pending before the Court of Justice, the ECJ, the parties discussed and made progress on the cut-off points for cases being defined as ‘pending’. There was also progress in discussions concerning the UK’s role before the Court whilst these pending cases are being heard.

With respect to judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters, and ongoing judicial cooperation in criminal matters, we made good progress on the principles of approach and the joint aim of providing legal certainty and avoiding unnecessary disruption to courts, businesses and families.

With respect to goods on the market, both parties reiterated the importance of providing legal certainty to businesses and consumers across the EU and UK at the point of departure.

In this area, in particular, we emphasised that the broader principles outlined in the UK’s position paper seek to minimise the type of uncertainty and disruption for business which we are all working to avoid.

We remain committed to making as much progress as possible on those issues which are solely related to our withdrawal, but our discussions this week have exposed yet again that the UK’s approach is substantially more flexible and pragmatic than that of the EU as it avoids unnecessary disruption for British business and consumers.

I have urged the EU to be more imaginative and flexible in their approach to withdrawal on this point.

Ireland/Northern Ireland

On Northern Ireland and Ireland, I’m pleased to report there has been significant, concrete progress in this vital area. The negotiation Coordinators explored a number of issues, including both the Belfast or Good Friday Agreement and the Common Travel Area. In August, the group also had detailed discussions on the basis of the UK position paper.

As both Michel Barnier and I said at last week’s press conference, there is a high degree of convergence on those key issues, and we agreed to work up shared principles on the Common Travel Area.

We also agreed to carry out further technical work on cross-border co-operation under the Belfast Agreement.

Of course, as I have said all along, the key issues in relation to cross-border economic co-operation and energy will need to form an integral part of discussions on the UK’s future relationship with the EU.

Financial settlement

Finally on the financial settlement.

We have been clear that the UK and the EU will have financial obligations to each other that will survive our exit from the EU.

In July the Commission set out the European Union position. We have a duty to our taxpayers to interrogate that position rigorously. That is what we did, line by line.

At the August round we set out our analysis of the EU’s position. We also had in-depth discussions on the European Investment Bank and other off-budget issues.

It is clear that the two sides have very different legal stances. But as we said in the Article 50 letter, the settlement should be in accordance with law and in the spirit of the UK’s continuing partnership with the EU.

Michel Barnier and I agreed that we do not anticipate making incremental progress on the final shape of a financial deal in every round.

Generally we should not underestimate the usefulness of the process so far. But it is also clear that there are still significant differences to be bridged in this sector.

Governance and dispute resolution

Initial discussions were also held on governance and dispute resolution.

These provided an opportunity to build a better, shared understanding of the need for a reliable means of enforcing the Withdrawal Agreement and resolving any disputes that might arise under it.

The future partnership

Alongside the negotiations, we have also published a number of papers which set out our thinking regarding our future special partnership with the EU.

These future partnership papers are different from our papers that set out our position for the negotiations under our withdrawal agreement.

Our future partnership papers are part of a concerted effort to pragmatically drive the progress we all want to see.

All along, we have argued that talks around our withdrawal cannot be treated in isolation from the future partnership that we want.

We can only resolve some of these issues with an eye on how the new partnership will work in the future.

For example, on Northern Ireland it would be helpful to our shared objectives on avoiding a hard border to be able to begin discussions on how future customs arrangements will work.

Furthermore, if we agree the comprehensive free trade agreement we are seeking as part of our future partnership, solutions in Northern Ireland are of course then easier to deliver.

A second example is on financial matters.

As I have said, the days of making vast yearly contributions to the EU budget will end when we leave.

But there may be programmes that the UK wants to consider participating in as part of the new partnership that we seek.

Naturally we need to work out which of those we want to pursue. We need to discuss them as part of talks both on our withdrawal from the EU and our future as their long-standing friend and closest neighbour.

A third example is on wider separation issues.

While we are happy to negotiate and make progress on the separation issues, it is our long-term aim that ultimately many of these arrangements will not be necessary.

With the clock ticking Mr Barnier, it would not be in either of our interests to run aspects of the negotiations twice.

Last week, as we turned our heads to the next round of talks, my message to the Commission was: Let us continue to work together constructively to put people above process.

To that end my team will publish further papers in the coming weeks – continuing to set out our ambition for these negotiations, and a new deep and special partnership the UK wants to build with the EU.

Ultimately, businesses and citizens on both sides want us to move swiftly on to discussing the future partnership, and we want that to happen after the European Council in October if possible.

As colleagues know, at the start of these negotiations, both sides agreed that the aim was to make progress on four key areas: citizens’ rights, the financial settlement, Northern Ireland and Ireland, and broader separation issues.

We have been doing just that.

No one has ever pretended this will be simple or easy. I have always said this negotiation will be tough, complex and, at times, confrontational.

So it has proved.

But we must not lose sight of our overarching aim — to build a deep and special new partnership with our closest neighbours and allies, whilst also building a truly global Britain that can forge new relationships with the fastest growing economies around the world.

read more

Thank you, Mark, for inviting me to today’s meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Learning Disability. As the Minister responsible for elections, it is very important to me that everyone who is eligible to vote is able to do so.

To play their part in choosing the person whom they believe will best represent their interests, whether as their Member of Parliament or local mayor or councillor or head of their police force. A thriving democracy depends upon the participation of all eligible electors.

To meet this important aim I have visited every region and nation of Great Britain to learn about the barriers that prevent certain groups in society including people who have a disability from participating in the democratic process. I want to find out how these identified barriers can be best overcome.

I have been very impressed by the enthusiasm for voting and level of understanding of its importance that has been told to me, including when I met with organisations who represent the interests of people who have a learning disability. These have included Mencap and, last month when I visited Brighton, Speak Out.

As a direct result of this wide engagement I have been able to push changes to improve the accessibility of elections.

At my request the Department of Health has recently made changes to the Certificate of Visual Impairment so it can now be used by local authorities to support blind and partially sighted people to vote at elections, once their consent has been provided.

The government is also making the process easier for disabled people to register to vote by undertaking an accessibility audit of the website, so the process for online registration is as user friendly as possible. This will include considering providing a facility to request that election materials are available in alternative formats from local authority electoral service teams.

I want to go further to strengthen our democracy and to ensure future elections are even more accessible to disabled people, and this is why today I have launched a Call for Evidence.

The Call for Evidence is asking for people to provide information that will:

• enhance the government’s understanding of the experiences of disabled people in registering to vote and casting their vote.
• help identify if current mechanisms to support disabled people to participate in the democratic process are sufficient; and
• identify examples of good practice provided by Electoral Service Teams to disabled people at elections.

In partnership with the members of the Cabinet Office Accessibility Working Group which includes Mencap, the Association of Electoral Administrators and the Electoral Commission the Government will review the evidence we receive and produce a report of key findings and recommendations.

I would warmly welcome responses from all here today to this Call to Evidence – which is available in alternative formats including Easy Read – as part of the process to help ensure that every disabled person is able to have that equal chance, that equal right, to participate in our democracy, and to have their say.

read more

Thank you for inviting me to join you today.

First of all, I would like to pay tribute to Mr Herbert, I can’t believe I’m the only person in the room that thought that was an incredibly powerful and moving account, which starkly brings home the devastating consequences for both the person in a mental health crisis, their loved ones and the professionals working in that environment, when systems just don’t get it right and work as we all would wish.

And also to our keynote speaker, His Royal Highness, Prince William. Both himself, and his brother, have been highly influential in breaking taboos by speaking out about mental health and I think their willingness to talk openly about mental health issues is illustrative of a wider trend in society to tackle misplaced stigmas; helping individuals to seek help; and galvanising all of our commitment to improving responses to all those people suffering mental ill health.

I also commend the organisers of this event, for their hard work in putting all this together, enabling us to reflect on recent developments and some successes, but clearly as we heard so well this morning, there remains many challenges I know we would all want to face honestly, openly with vigour and work together to take on.

Now every day I know there are many, many police officers who refuse to turn their backs on those in need. I have seen this for myself out on the beat with officers in my own constituency. They work professionally and humanely to help individuals to the best of their ability – often going well beyond what might reasonably be expected of traditional police

Sometimes police will have to be involved in incidents involving mental ill health. Mental health conditions, often in combination with other issues such as substance misuse, can cause people to act irrationally and out of character, and it is very difficult for the police in that situation to identify what is going on and that at the root of that behaviour that person is actually very unwell. And it is very difficult for police officers to know what to do for the best in such circumstances both to protect the individual and the community.

It is not necessary to be an expert in this field to be aware of the very high, and increasing, demand for mental health services of all types. Members of this audience will know only too well, that the police can be asked to deal with a wide variety of cases involving people who are unwell and in distress.

We have taken a number of steps to better equip the police and criminal justice system in this regard – we’ve heard this morning of improvements to the Liaison and Diversion schemes for example. But the pressures on front line officers to make quick judgements and act appropriately cannot be overestimated.

As the Prime Minister has repeatedly said – we are clear that the police should not be expected to act in the stead of health professionals. They cannot be expected to do that satisfactorily – and it takes them away from their primary function of tackling crime. Nor can it be in the best interests of the people affected, who need quick access to professional mental health assistance.

There clearly remains much more to do to get this balance right. However, recent years have seen huge progress in the way in which we respond to those in crisis. In many cases the police have acted as a catalyst for changes that have occurred. And at local level they are often at the vanguard in driving innovation and solutions to local issues.

We’ve seen for example, seen dramatic reductions in the use of police cells as places of safety in the last few years, and a commensurate rise in the use of health based places and this has largely been achieved through determined, joint working at local level between the police and health partners. According to the 2015/16 police figures on the use of section 136, a handful of police areas have already managed to eliminate entirely, or almost so, reliance on police cells as places of safety and we expect further encouraging progress when the 2016/17 figures are published later this autumn.

To help maintain this, the government has already provided some £15 million of funding to 88 projects in local areas to invest in increasing the numbers of suitable places of safety. We have committed a further £15m to continue this work, and to explore innovative local ideas for maximising the provision of suitable safe places, working with a range of partners, including community and voluntary groups.

Changes to mental health legislation in the Policing and Crime Act – which we expect to come into effect before the end of the year – are also designed to further improve our response to those in crisis. They offer local areas greater flexibility to adapt and cater to local needs, while reinforcing good practice. The goal is simply to ensure the most appropriate course of action in each case, and to achieve better outcomes for those in crisis as a result.

As we have heard today, amongst the more significant changes are the banning of the use of police cells as places of safety for those under 18 years of age, and there will be severe restrictions on their use in the case of adults.

We are also reducing the periods for which people may be detained pending a mental health assessment. And we are making more explicit the freedom of local areas to work creatively and in collaboration with a range of partners to develop networks of suitable places of safety – including outside traditional health settings.

We have heard of some great examples today of innovation and all local areas will need to take a careful look at their local provision, in the light of the new legislation, to ensure that it is good enough. They may also need to refresh their local joint working practices to reflect the need to act more quickly and collaboratively to provide the most appropriate help for people in crisis.

In the meantime, we do not count this as a ‘job done’. The government has made a clear commitment to continuing to improve mental health services – including but not limited to:

• investing a billion pounds in mental health services by 2020 to improve mental health support in the community; in Accident and Emergency Departments, and in crisis provision and treatment options both for adults and children

• implementing the recommendations of the Mental Health Taskforce review and its five year forward look

• and, will be reviewing the Mental Health Act as committed to in the Queen’s speech

As we all know, legislation alone is not the answer to the complex series of challenges posed by mental ill health. Nor can these be dealt with by any single organisation. In addition to personal health and well-being issues, mental ill health can affect matters as diverse as employment, having a decent home, education and family life. It can also increase an individual’s vulnerability to crime, illness, and social isolation.

Providing effective interventions and support in that context can be challenging, and they demand a partnership approach.

Effective multi-agency working is therefore vitally important in seeking to identify and iron out problem issues. Meaningful change is achieved by committed and dedicated leaders at local level being willing to grapple with the challenges, and work collaboratively to overcome them. I have said before that ‘leaders’ are not just the people in charge, not just the people at the top of organisations. Anyone in an organisation can be a systems’ leader and effect change from within, and often in my experience this comes from those closer to the front line.

Now the Crisis Care Concordat has been mentioned several times this morning, and it has proved to be a really strong way of driving better change and led to far better working between the police and mental health professionals. I can assure you that it remains an important body. We will continue with this work, which is looking at what works locally as well as sharing practice, but also looking at what more we need to do at a national level.

To conclude, I would like to assure you that I and the government will continue to do all that we can to ensure that you are properly supported in this vital area of work. And that we will move to a future where the response to those with mental health issues are delivered by the right agency at the right time.

In the meantime, I would like to extend my most sincere appreciation and gratitude for all that you do. Whether responding to individual cases; challenging the status quo; or driving innovation and change – you are consistently setting the highest standards of public service and I thank you.

read more

The Committee is currently gathering evidence and views as part of its review on the intimidation of Parliamentary candidates.

read more