Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Attorney General

Oral Answers to Questions

Philip Hollobone Excerpts
Thursday 29th June 2017

(6 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Karen Bradley Portrait Karen Bradley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The manifesto is ensuring that the concessions are available. I would expect that the BBC would continue with the concession post 2020.

Philip Hollobone Portrait Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)
- Hansard - -

Given the grossly inflated salaries the BBC pays some of its top managers and presenters, and the appalling fact that it is still a criminal offence, as opposed to a civil penalty, not to have a TV licence, is not ensuring that over-75s continue to get their TV licences free of charge the very least the BBC can do?

Karen Bradley Portrait Karen Bradley
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. He will know that, from this year, when the BBC accounts are published they will show the salary levels of all talent being paid more than £150,000. That is a welcome increase in transparency.

--- Later in debate ---
Jeremy Wright Portrait The Attorney General
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman will not be surprised to hear that I do not accept that that is what is happening. What I think the Prime Minister was saying is something with which I would expect every Member of the House to agree, namely that human rights involve a balance: there is a balance between the human rights of all the different people in our society. Everyone has the most important human right of all, which is to live their life unabated by those who wish to do them harm through terrorism. What the Prime Minister was saying—rightly in my view, and, I hope, in the hon. Gentleman’s—was that we must ensure that that balance continues to be struck correctly, and that is what we will do.

Philip Hollobone Portrait Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)
- Hansard - -

The Court behind the convention has tens of thousands of cases outstanding, and many of the so-called judges have no legal qualifications at all. Do not those two stark facts undermine the credibility of that organisation in upholding human rights at all?

Jeremy Wright Portrait The Attorney General
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I think my hon. Friend and I would agree that the Court in Strasbourg could sensibly reform and improve, but he will also recognise that we in this country do not rely solely on that Court to protect our human rights. Our Government and our courts do that too, and do it very effectively.