25/10/2016 Tuesday in Parliament

Hello and welcome to Tuesday In Parliament,

our look at the best of the day in the Commons and the Lords.

Expansion of Heathrow Airport is given the go-ahead

Heathrow expansion is neithdr possible nor deliverable.

It delivers the greatest economic and strategic

May I congratulate my right honourable friend in taking

the right decision in the interests of the United Kingdom?

The Government should not be in the business

MPs delve into so-called "revolving-door syndrome",

when an ex-Minister gets a job in business after politics.

Can you tell me what you've done in your two years in office

that gives you satisfaction, where you served the public interdst?

I take pleasure in every dax, Mr Flynn, as I'm sure

And the Chancellor sounds a warning on Brexit.

European politicians are very conscious of

the impact of Britain's dep`rture and their political project.

The Government has given its blessing to an expansion

The decision has been long `waited, but it may not be final.

Parliament will vote in a ydar's time on the third runway pl`n.

There could still then be years of legal argument.

Heathrow, Britain's only hub airport,

is currently at 98% capacitx, handling 480,000 flights a xear

That compares with 700,000 flights a year at Amsterdam,

A third runway at Heathrow will cost around ?17 billion.

Construction over the next decade could create 77,000 jobs.

In the Commons, the Transport Secretary said the decision to

go ahead with Heathrow expansion safeguarded the UK's prosperity

Last year, Britain's airports handled

Heathrow is the busiest two,runway airport in the world,

and Gatwick the busiest single-runway airport.

Indeed, the London system whll be almost entirely full by 2030,

with the exception of a small amount of capacity at Luton,

and that will be taken up soon afterwards.

If we do nothing, the cost to our nation is significant,

amounting to more than ?20 billion over 60 years through delays,

fewer flights and passengers having to fly from airports elsewhdre.

In addition, the wider impacts on our economy are in the rdgion

That is why the decision we have reached today is so important

He said the detailed study of the Airports Commission,

led by the economist Howard Davies, recommended a new North-West

The commission's report and the subsequent informathon

formed the basis of the discussion that took place this morning

As a result of that discusshon, the Government have decided

We believe that the expansion of Heathrow airport

and the north-west runway scheme, in combination with a significant

package of supporting measures on the scale recommended

by the Airports Commission, offers the greatest benefit

to passengers and business, and will help us to deliver

the broadest possible benefht to the whole United Kingdom.

It delivers the greatest economic and strategic

It strengthens connectivity for passengers right

It offers a major boost to freight operators.

It can be delivered within carbon and air quality limits

and, crucially, it comes with world-leading measures

to limit the impacts on those living nearby.

There have been recent suggdstions in the media that the process has

Members will remember the s`ga of the planning process

behind Terminal 5, which took years to resolve.

He said a consultation procdss will start in the New year.

The issue of runway capacitx in the south-east has

challenged successive Administrations for decades.

There are strong feelings both for and against

This is not the scheme that was previously promoted in 2009.

It does much more to mitigate environmental impacts,

to compensate communities and to distribute benefits

Today's announcement is not the end of the process,

It beggars belief that it h`s taken Ministers more than a year

since the publication of thd Davies report even to make a start.

Just what have they been dohng for all these months,

apart from worrying about splits in the Cabinet,

and the Foreign Secretary throwing himself in front

of the bulldozers and former mayoral candidates triggering by-eldctions?

There is no justification for dithering on this scale.

He has failed to provide the shorter timescale

for getting to the national policy statement that was set out

The lack of a vote in this House for more than a year will not allow

and the soap opera will therefore continue.

That said, we welcome the announcement of Heathrow

Although airport expansion of this type disproportionately bendfits

the south-east of England, it has strategic consequencds

Mr Speaker, I congratulate ly right honourable friend for taking

the right decision in the interest of the United Kingdom.

Could he remind the House how much passenger traffic

much freight traffic is currently being lost to mainland European

airports as a result of lack of capacity in the south-east?

I believe that this decision is misguided and not ultimately

Will the Secretary of State assure me that in the consultation

and scrutiny to come there will be good and adequate scientific data,

because the evidence will show that Heathrow expansion is neithdr

In the Minister's words, we do not want expansion "at any cost" -

this is the wrong scheme and the price is too high.

The decision to build a new runway at Heathrow is the right ond,

but it is absolutely vital that the Secretary of State delivers

on his pledge to ensure that the benefits of expanshon

are felt in every nation and region of the UK.

As the chair of the Gatwick co-ordination group,

I congratulate my right honourable friend on this announcement and make

with which this somewhat ovdrdue statement will be received

by all the people representdd by colleagues in the group.

The Government have chosen ` course that is not only wrong but doomed.

It is wrong because of the lillion people who will suffer

directly on the back of the environmental harm this

It is doomed because the complexities, cost and legal

complications mean that the project is almost certainly not

I believe it will be a millstone around the Government's neck

for many years to come - a constant source of delay,

Is not the biggest loser from the Tory civil war

over Heathrow neither the Foreign Secretary nor the honourabld

member for Richmond Park but transport everywhere else?

For over five years, there has been an obsessive focus

While welcoming this decision, may I ask the Homd

Counties-based Cabinet to lhsten to what William Hague has s`id

today, and set out in the attumn statement a clear timetable for HS3,

linking Manchester Airport to the great cities of the north?

This is a devastating decishon for the national economic interest

as well as for my constituents, hundreds of whose homes will be

bulldozed, and for the millhons of people affected by the vdry loud

This statement has been long overdue.

Some countries will have developed three entire nuclear power stations

and five airports in the amount of time this has taken to bd kicked

into the long grass by two Labour Prime Ministers and H am

afraid a Conservative Prime Minister too.

I do not share this cosy consensus on airport expansion.

Half the population each year does not fly -

for environmental reasons, I have not flown for several years.

The Secretary of State said today that this expansion would

Because of climate change, the Government should not bd

in the business of encouraghng people to fly and encouraging more

air freight, let alone subshdising increased airport capacity

I urge the Secretary of State and the Government to think again.

Why are the Government disrdgarding "widespread hostility",

and bulldozing through a thhrd runway which will inflict

crippling noise, significant climate change effects,

health-damaging pollution and catastrophic congestion

Because we do not believe that it is going to do thosd

things, because we do not bdlieve that it will create the air

because we do not believe that it will impose

I have already explained the position

relating to public transport access and improved

And there was also plenty of reaction to the Heathrow

expansion announcement over in the House of Lords.

Many young people at the job centres in West London know how important

that skilled employment is at Heathrow.

So I do say, let's get on whth it and make a plea to those people

who are opposed to it to look at the depth and qu`lity

of the evidence in favour from business, from trade unions -

all the trade unions bar one, all of them -

and say this project needs to go ahead.

With all of business crying out for this to happen and yet

all this opposition, there is going to be a lot

Why didn't the Government then go ahead, as my noble friend s`id

earlier, and allow Gatwick and Heathrow to expand?

The Gatwick expansion, wouldn't the noble lord agrde,

Will my noble friend considdr that expanding Heathrow will increase

foreign monopoly and power, and we can airport competithon

It will affect hundreds of thousands more people than Gatwick wotld have,

it will add to safety and sdcurity risks by sending hundreds

of thousands more flights over our most densely populated areas,

it will cost ?8,000 million, at least, more

than the proposed Gatwick option, and it will take longer to build

than the proposed Gatwick option, keeping Britain closed

I must declare an interest as living under the flight path

the Heathrow Association of the Control of Aircraft Noise.

The announcement acknowledgds that the current constraints

by talking about more reliable respite.

The Minister will be aware that the measurements

of noise do not accord with the residents' experience.

I'm sure he will also agree that the best predictor

A Bill designed to help clalp down on money-laundering

and prevent the financing of terrorist activity has bden given

The Criminal Finances Bill hs also aimed increasing the retrieval rate

It creates so-called "unexplained wealth orders" which may repuire

an individual to explain thd sources of his or her wealth.

The Commons has held its first debate

Some of the most expensive properties in the capital

are unoccupied because they have been bought solely for the purpose

So, in 2016, money-laundering is something that is not just

happening in accountancy offices or in the back rooms of banks,

it is happening in plain sight of ordinary Londoners.

Because we see some of the lost expensive domestic propertids

in the world change hands, but remain mysteriously

We should be rightly proud of the UK's status

This is the one of the best places in the world to do business,

but we must recognise the shze of our financial sector and open

economy and the attractivendss of London property market

to overseas investors makes this country unusually exposed

to the risks of internation`l money-laundering.

That is why the Government hs taking action to combat money-laundering,

terrorist finance and corruption here and overseas.

We are sending a clear mess`ge that we will not stand

for money-laundering or the funding of terrorism through the UK.

After the global financial crisis, property in London

has become one of the safest investments in the world,

one which rich criminals and money-launderers attracted

to in just the same way as people who have made their

Put shortly, Londoners want this stain removing from their chty,

We will not trigger a divishon on this Bill this evening,

but we want to reiterate very, very firmly that this Bill does not

go anywhere near far enough in dealing with what I think

is a real and tangible outcry from the public,

given what has happened over the last five, six, seven ydars

If we are serious about maintaining and creating confidence

in the banking system again, which has completely evapor`ted

then we need to tackle this issue head on and do more

You're watching our round-up of the day in the Commons and the Lords.

Still to come: Are too many ex-Government Ministers takhng up

jobs in the business world secured because of their days

The Chancellor has warned MPs not to assume that the negotiathons

on the UK's exit from the European Union will onlx be

Britain's departure, he said, would impact on EU's

He also gave a warning that leaving the European single market

for goods and services - the so-called Hard Brexit option -

could be "quite challenging" for British firms.

The subject was raised by the SNP's spokesman.

What efforts is the Chancellor making to rule out a hard Brexit,

with visas, tariff barriers and an end to the customs union

all of which the Treasury s`ys could lead to the loss

of ?66 billion of revenue, a reduction in GDP of around 7. %

and a threat, estimated conservatively, to

The Prime Minister has been very clear.

We understand the instructions that we have received

from the British people, and within our obligation to deliver

those we will seek to get the very best deal we can

with the European Union that maximises the amount of trade

in goods and services between our companies

and the markets of the European Union, and between European

Financial services are one of the sectors most exposed

to Brexit, but it is not just jobs in Canary Wharf and the squ`re

mile that are at risk; it is jobs throughout the UK,

in Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Edinburgh and beyond.

The messages that the Government have sent so far have been

Firms need assurance that they will get comparable access

to the single market and thd ability to retain EU nationals

Will the Chancellor help finally to put an end to his Governlent s

chaos today and make a promise to deliver both?

The honourable gentleman is right to identify financial

services as one of the areas that is particularly concerned

about the way in which the dxit from the European Union is lanaged,

because the industry is particularly dependent on the passporting

He is also right to draw attention to the often overlooked fact that

75% of financial services jobs are outside London.

This is an important UK-wide industry.

Financial services, he said, would be at the heart

We understand their need for market access.

We also understand their nedd to be able to engage the right

I have said on the record - I am happy to say this again today -

that I do not believe that the concerns the British people

have expressed about migrathon from the European Union rel`te

to those with high skills and high pay.

The problem that people are concerned about relates to those

I see no likelihood of our tsing powers to control migration

into the UK to prevent comp`nies from bringing highly skilled,

Unless, bizarrely, the European Union were to hmpose

trade sanctions on the UK, there would be absolutely nothing

to prevent us from having access to the single market

My honourable friend is right in the sense that every

nation that is a member of the World Trade Organisation

as we are, has the right to access other members' markets on WTO terms.

However, WTO terms would be quite challenging

For example, in the automothve industry, WTO terms imply

a 10% tariff on cars entering other markets.

May I suggest that as there is a large balance of payments

deficit with Europe, specifically in the automothve

sector, it would be in the DU's interest to strike a decent deal

Our intention is to get the very best deal we can with our ndighbours

in the European Union to allow access for our companies

to trade their goods and services into the EU.

However, I would just caution my honourable Friend:

to look at the economic argtments alone is to miss an important point.

There is a political debate going on here in Europe,

and European politicians ard very conscious of the impact

of Britain's departure on their political project.

I do not think we can be certain that economics alone will dhctate

A year ago it was learnt th`t more than a dozen politicians

who were Ministers during the years of the Con-Lib-Dem Coalition

Government had accepted poshtions with companies and charities they'd

come across in their ministerial roles.

The disclosure led to calls for tighter controls on what's known

as the "revolving door" between politics and the business

world, by which ex-Ministers are able to gain employment thanks

to contacts they've made during their ministerial ye`rs.

Already in place is a body called Acoba, or the Advisory Commhttee

But when its chairman came `long to a Commons committee hearhng,

MPs questioned whether Acob` was achieving very much.

We've preferred to Private dye before and in their report, public

servants and private paydays, they said that 367 jobs, which h`ve

sought clearance from Acoba since 2010, zero times Acoba has refused

them. Given that, as evidence of your organisation, how good are you

in policing? We're not a regulatory body, with an advisory body. I have

to cite two things. We had `n advisory body, not a regulatory

body. We don't have the powdr to deprive people of employment, that

is backed up by the restraint of trade law that we have to bdar in

mind. If you're asking me, why don't we just let these things run their

course and go to court as the most certainly would, I suspect

applicants would certainly have .. I think there is indication from

monetary cases we dealt with, would have their financial backing of the

people who wanted to employ them to mount a legal challenge. How many

times have you advised formdr ministers that what they were

proposing to terms of the job was unacceptable? Where would the public

find that information? Everxthing is in the public domain. Most of the

things in the press are onlx there because Acoba has a website that we

publish on. It couldn't be lore transparent. When you say mhnisters,

we obviously apply different rules in individual cases, to Wii make

2-to-1 minister, wait for shx months -- we might see to one minister --

say, wait for six months, that is the way we can get them to lodify

any potential behaviour that they might have had in taking up the

post, but we haven't got thd power to tell somebody they cannot do

they cannot work. They could just shrug their shoulders and s`y OK,

but in the main, people comd to Acoba and they take our advhce.

Isn't it to the ultimate power you have is the same as people who

ignore your together, the stmmit of your powers is to send a letter to

them expressing your disple`sure? We add an advisory committee, not

regulatory. I can't repeat that enough. We had an advisory

committee. I'm well aware of that, but due to years in office, is a

giddy satisfaction to serve the public interest? I take in ht every

day -- I take pleasure in it. We worked diligently and ethic`lly I'm

trying to get to the numbers. Is Acoba doing anything good you said

you have made a lot of defence is about Acoba and the people there and

there are rights of work. How is the public interest being served by

Acoba in preventing the abuse of the revolving door? We have considered

each individual case and those that take up the advice and who take up

the job, we have put that into the public domain. Had we not done that,

if we didn't do that as Acoba, these things would be a secret and down to

investigative journalists to unearth and put them into the public domain.

Investigative journalists don't need to do that, they only have to visit

our website. Earlier this month,

Sir Cliff Richard came to P`rliament to ask MPs and peers to grant

anonymity to people The singer says he fears he will be

forever "tainted" by false allegations made

against him two years ago. In June, the Crown Prosecuthon

Service announced it would bring no charges

after a lengthy police inquhry. In the House of Lords,

a senior Conservative voiced concerns about the ease

with which the reputations of In relation to allegations of sexual

abuse, does my noble friend agree that many people are asking

themselves and Members of both Houses of Parliament

whether the presumption of hnnocence until proved guilty

is still in existence? Is it not our duty to take `ction -

either by instituting anonylity until the point of charge,

as backed by the Director of Public Prosecutions last week,

or by other effective means - to reduce the terrible toll

of suffering caused by falsd and malicious allegations

against innocent people Finally, do the Government `gree

that the institutions of both state and church need to show much greater

concern for the reputations of eminent people from the past

who cannot speak for themselves It is important to say

that there is a very fine The voicing of victims' concerns

and the naming of people in the public interest to allow

further evidence or further victims to come forward needs to be balanced

with the right to privacy and protection of the person

who is suspected. Do join me for our

next daily round-up. Until then, from me,

Keith Macdougall, goodbye.