the prime minister start with the prime minister speaking now.7 so start with the prime minister speaking now? so we'll we'll go straight. >> here we go. >> here we go. >> now to justice, which we also announced a further £350 million to get britain building and deliver 1.5 million new homes our country desperately needs, including more affordable homes. we have slashed red tape that holds businesses and working people back, creating 10,000 more apprentices. this morning i had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. in addition to my duties in this house.i addition to my duties in this house. i shall have further such meetings later today. >> imran hussain. >> imran hussain. >> thank you, mr speaker. i was proud. i've played. >> my. >> my. >> part in helping draft what has now become the. employment rights bill. >> a new poll. shows three. >> a new poll. shows three. >> quarters of the british pubuc >> quarters of the british public backed the stronger rights for. workers in the bill, including better sick pay. >> yet that. >> yet that. >> law over. >> law over. >> there. >> there. >> there. >> the tories. and reform.

disgracefully voted. >> against it. in fact, the. >> against it. in fact, the. >> leader of the. opposition doesn't. >> even believe. >> even believe. >> in maternity. >> in maternity. >> pay or. >> pay or. >> the living wage. mr speaker, our. oui'. >> our. >> statutory sick pay is ranked. >> statutory sick pay is ranked. >> one of the. >> one of the. >> lowest in europe. it needs to be brought. in line. with the living wage. so will the prime minister back my campaign to. strengthen this. >> bill further? >> bill further? >> so sick. >> so sick. >> pay is at. >> pay is at. >> the level that finally stops punishing workers for being sick. >> mr speaker, our plan for change delivers the biggest upgrade in workers rights in a generation through our employment rights bill, ending exploitative zero hour contracts, ending the scandal of fire and rehire, and extending statutory sick pay to 1.3 million employees. of course, that's on top of the pay rise for 3 million of the lowest paid. i would have thought the leader of the opposition might actually sort of support day one protection, employment rights, given where she's going, but she thinks maternity leave is excessive. our plan is

pro—worker and pro—growth. >> leader of the. >> leader of the. >> opposition kemi badenoch. >> opposition kemi badenoch. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> mr speaker, the. conservative government established. >> the ukraine family scheme and in total, over 200,000 ukrainians, mostly women, children and the elderly have found sanctuary in the uk from putin's war. however, a family of six from gaza have applied to live in britain using this scheme and a judge has now ruled in their favour. this is not what the scheme was designed to do. this decision is completely wrong. it cannot be allowed to stand. is the government planning to appeal on any points of law, and if so, which ones? >> minister? >> minister? >> mr speaker, let me be clear. i do not agree with the decision. she is right. it is the wrong decision. she hasn't quite done her homework because the decision, the decision in question was taken under the

last government , question was taken under the last government, according to the legal framework from the last government. but, mr speaken last government. but, mr speaker, let me be clear. it should be parliament that makes the rules on immigration. it should be the government that makes the policy. that is the principle. and the home secretary is already looking at the legal loophole, which we need to close in this particular case. >> mr speaker, he did not answer the question. if he plans, if he plans to appeal, then the appeal may be unsuccessful and the law will need to be changed. and if he does not appeal, the law definitely will need to be changed. he talks about a decision made under the last government. it was not made by the last government. it was made by the courts. the issue we are discussing today is about judicial decisions. we cannot be in a situation where we allow enormous numbers of people to exploit our laws. in this way. there are millions of people all

around the world in terrible situations. we cannot help them all, and we certainly cannot bnng all, and we certainly cannot bring them all here. will he commit to bringing forward that new legislation or amending his borders bill? >> prime minister? well. >> prime minister? well. >> mr speaker, i have already said the home secretary has already got her team working on closing this loophole. we do not need to wait for that. we are getting on with that because we are taking control. they lost control of immigration. we had nearly a million people coming to this country. they had an open borders experiment on a monday of this week. they voted against increased powers to deal with those that are running the vile trade of people smuggling same old tories, open borders, empty promises. >> mr speaker, if the prime minister was on top of his brief, perhaps he would be able to answer some questions. given this crazy decision . and. given

this crazy decision. and. given this crazy decision. and. given this crazy decision and so many others, new legislation is needed to clarify the right to a family life in article eight. i'm not talking about. i'm not talking about what he just said. i know labour, i know, i know labour mps don't understand much of what they're saying, but the prime minister literally wrote a book on the european convention on human rights. this is a situation where we need to put our national interest before the echr. does he agree that we should legislate, even if lawyers warn that this might be incompatible with human rights law? >> prime minister. >> prime minister. >> she complains about scripted answers and questions. her script does not allow her to listen to the answer she. >> she asked. >> she asked. >> the prime minister.

>> the prime minister. >> she asked me if we're going to change the law and close the loophole. in question one, i said yes. she asked me again in question two and i said yes. she asked me again in question three. it's still yes. >> mr speaker. he didn't listen to question one. i asked i asked if he would appeal the decision. he did not answer that. he's not listening. he's too busy defending the international human rights law framework. mr speaken human rights law framework. mr speaker, this case has arisen because a palestinian came to the uk from gaza in two thousand and seven. he is now a british citizen. this is precisely why we need to break the conveyor belt from arriving in the uk, to acquiring indefinite leave to remain, and then a british passport, and now a right to bnng passport, and now a right to bring six family members here as well. just last week, the prime minister bizarrely claimed that a british passport was not a pull factor for those coming to the uk. will he now support our

plans to toughen the process on indefinite leave to remain and make getting a british passport a privilege, not a right. prime minister. >> they presided over record high levels of immigration, reached nearly 1 million. it was a one nation experiment in open borders. and she was the cheerleader. she was the one campaigning for more people to come and thank her own side when they supported her campaign. so before she lectures us, i think she needs to reflect on her own record and our own record here. >> kemi badenoch mr speaker, he is the prime minister. now. the people out there want to know what he is going to do about the situation. he needs to spend less time whining about the last government and do his job. i thought, and actually, i thought, and actually, i thought, mr speaker, that the prime minister and i both agreed that israel had a right to defend herself. yet the judge in this case noted that the family

were facing a humanitarian crisis. and i quote, as a consequence of the israelis, the israeli government's indiscriminate attempts to eliminate hamas and government lawyers accepted this is the prime minister allowing lawyers to change the position on israel. and was this because of advice from the attorney general? and if not, why on earth did government lawyers accept the argument that israeli actions were indiscriminate? >> prime minister. >> prime minister. >> they put the complete opposite argument. she she talks about on top of her brief. she has no idea what she's talking about. i tell her again, we need to change the law. that's why the home secretary is already closing the gap. i know the script does not allow any adaptation, but this is getting tedious. >> kemi badenoch. >> kemi badenoch. >> mr speaker, the prime minister has not read the judgement. i. i suggest that he does. there are very serious questions now. there are very serious questions now being

asked about the attorney general, the prime minister's personal friend and donor. even labour ministers are concerned. one labour peer, lord glasman, has called him the absolute archetype of an arrogant, progressive fool. if we are serious about protecting our borders, we need to make sure we appoint people who believe in our country and everything we stand for. it is not clear the attorney general does. the government is now recruiting a new chief inspector of borders, who lives in finland and wants to work from home. this is not serious. why should the british pubuc serious. why should the british public put up with this. >> prime minister? >> prime minister? >> the individual in question was appointed in 2019 by the last government to a senior position