House of Commons
Parliament

This week’s PMQs is under way. Gareth Thomas, the Labour MP for Harrow West, has the first question to David Cameron - on Sports Direct. He says workers should be entitled to a percentage of its profits. David Cameron says the government has encouraged companies to offer their staff such incentives - and also cites the introduction of the National Living Wage.

House of Commons
Parliament

The DUP's Sammy Wilson asks the secretary of state if she agrees that a vote to leave the EU would help the Northern Irish economy and release £18bn for public services.

Theresa Villiers refuses to be tempted to a response and says that EU membership is a "matter for everyone" in the country to decide when they vote in the referendum.

House of Commons
Parliament

Before Prime Minister's Questions it's time for half an hour of questions to ministers from the Northern Ireland Office.

The SDLP's Margaret Ritchie asks minister Ben Wallace if he agrees Britain leaving the EU would be damaging to economic development in Northern Ireland, and whether he'll encourage Northern Ireland Secretary Theresa Villiers to campaign to stay.

Theresa Villiers is one of the cabinet ministers thought to be preparing to campaign for the UK to leave the EU in the upcoming referendum.

Ben Wallace says a "temptation" has been placed in front of him, but that he believes membership of EU has been good for for Northern Ireland.

House of Commons
Parliament

Business in the House of Commons gets underway at 11:30am with Northern Ireland questions, followed by Prime Minister's Questions at midday.

After that there are two urgent questions, one on the investigation into the death of Poppi Worthington and a second on allegations of mistreatment of asylum seekers.

The main business of the day will be the remaining stages of the Psychoactive Substances Bill, followed by a motion to approve statutory instruments relating to the proceeds of crime.

Select Committee
Parliament

The questioning comes to an end and the Ministry of Justice officials leave the room as the committee adjourns.

Our next live select committee hearing will be this afternoon at 2.15pm with the Treasury Committee's evidence session on its inquiry into the Financial Conduct Authority.

Select Committee
Parliament

Conservative MP Philip Davies asks the witnesses about the recruitment process in the department with what he says is a "cynical view".

Mr Davies says that when the committee held pre-appointment hearings for posts in the MoJ "it seemed to us that the extent of the recruitment process consisted of the Secretary of State picking up the phone to a couple of pals and asking if they wanted the job".

He says that it seems to him that this was designed to put a "patsy" in place who will agree to any protocol that the department wants "because he's a mate"

Ms Morris rejects this claim saying "that's quite a depressing view and not one I recognise".

Select Committee
Parliament

Bob Neill leads questions about appraising the Chief Inspector of Prisons. Mr Neill says that there seems to be "a bit of an impasse" between the Department and Mr Hardwick on the issue.

Mr Heaton says that in any appraisal process "the individual's performance shouldn't apply but there should be an appraisal of the performance of the organisation against its objectives".

"I think the use of the word 'appraisal' is part of the problem," says Ms Morris.

She argues that the process is more about examining the business plan, organisational objectives, and budgeting of an agency rather than on individual performance.

Select Committee
Parliament

Conservative Alex Chalk says that the whole situation was "unseemly and unsatisfactory" and asks both witnesses whether they agree that it is time for there to be a written protocol between the Inspectorate and the department.

"Absolutely" is the response from both Ms Morris and Mr Heaton.

Mr Heaton says he has been involved with several departments and their agencies and says "a framework document is absolutely essential".

"It is slightly surprising and disappointing that we don't have one in place."

Select Committee
Parliament

Indra Morris says that the misunderstanding between the MoJ and Nick Hardwick regarding weekly authorisation for spending came about during a conversation between the two of them regarding a spending query.

She says she was trying to explain the context of his financial queries by saying that there is a weekly process she has to go through on financial decisions.

"That's where I clearly left the impression with Nick that the issue was only resolved for that week," she says.

Ms Morris says that she immediately rang Mr Hardwick to explain that this was not her intention at all.

Select Committee
Parliament

Bob Neill asks straight of the bat - was all of this just a mistake?

"There was quite a significant misunderstanding in the correspondence," Mr Heaton says, but admits that there were emergency spending controls put in place on the MoJ that "did not go down well".

Mr Heaton says the department had "quite a serious predicted overspend" that had to be dealt with.

The permanent secretary says that because of this financial situation all discretionary payments had to be accounted for, a step which he says was "very unusual".

Select Committee
Parliament

Nick Hardiwck and Peter Clarke are thanked for their appearance before the committee as their questioning comes to a close.

We now get to hear the other side of the story from Ministry of Justice officials - Richard Heaton, the Permanent Secretary, and Indra Morris the Director of Criminal Justice at the MoJ.

Select Committee
Parliament

Labour MP Marie Rimmer asks the witnesses how the Prisons Inspectorate should be viewed in the Cabinet Office's review of arms length bodies, external.

Mr Hardiwck says that the review must understand the difference between agencies that work on behalf of a department and those who examine the work of a department itself.

When asked his opinion on the issue, Mr Clarke replies "I don't want this to turn into an 'I agree with Nick session...but I do'," - prompting laughter in the committee room.

"The review from the Cabinet Office must take into account that important difference," he says.

Select Committee
Parliament

Conservative John Howell asks Mr Hardwick how many times a minister managed to change the content of the Inspectorate's policy to which Mr Hardwick responds: "I would say they have never been successful in doing so."

Mr Howell asks him "Isn't that the most important indicator of your independence?"

Mr Hardiwck replies: "I've been able to publish my reports and say what I want to say without any let or hindrance - but that is not the issue."

"The main problem is the controls over how I get to my views and conclusions," he says.

"In order to reach a view I need to be able to apply resources and particular techniques to get there."

Select Committee
Parliament

Nick Hardwick reiterates the need for some form of written public agreement between the Inspectorate and the Department, saying "it doesn't seem to me terribly difficult to achieve".

He says "most of the time you get by on personal relations but when it comes to a 'crunch time' with difficult decisions to be made, the rules of engagement need to be clear".

Select Committee
Parliament

Labour MP David Hanson asks the incoming Chief Inspector Peter Clarke about his thoughts.

"I entirely agree with the principal that a protocol would be most useful," says Mr Clarke, who goes on to tell the committee that during his time on the Charity Commission and Serious Organised Crime Agency, neither of these agencies were subject to financial controls that impinged on operational independence.

"Clearly the very essence of the role is independence," he says.

He tells Committee Chair Bob Neill that it would be "quite wrong and completely impractical to go for some sort of weekly authorisation".

Such a situation "flies in the face of any sort of recognised good practice", he says.