:00:37. > :00:38.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:39. > :00:42."Gutless" is the view of one business group at news that
:00:43. > :00:47.a decision on airport expansion has been delayed yet again.
:00:48. > :00:50.Ministers now say they won't make up their minds until next summer.
:00:51. > :00:53."Hopefully", says the Transport Minister.
:00:54. > :00:56.They say the reason for the delay is further environmental study.
:00:57. > :01:02.But might it also have something to do with political calculation?
:01:03. > :01:05.Still no sign of a global deal on emissions at the climate change
:01:06. > :01:13.As negotiators prepare to sail past today's deadline, we'll speak
:01:14. > :01:20.to the UK's former climate negotiatior, John Prescott.
:01:21. > :01:23.Jeremy Corbyn's under pressure - no not from the Blairites,
:01:24. > :01:27.but from hairy MPs after his title of Beard of the Year.
:01:28. > :01:31.We'll have the result live, exlclusively on the Daily Politics.
:01:32. > :01:35.And Donald Trump seems to have much of the country up in arms
:01:36. > :01:37.after his call to ban Muslims from the US.
:01:38. > :01:47.We'll talk to his solitary defender, columnist Katie Hopkins.
:01:48. > :01:51.All that in the next hour, and with me for the duration two
:01:52. > :01:54.journalists that we've tried repeatedly to ban from entering
:01:55. > :01:57.the Daily Politics studio, until we can work what the hell
:01:58. > :02:06.But after an internet campaign by absolutely no-one we've
:02:07. > :02:08.decided to let them in - it's Steve Richards
:02:09. > :02:10.from the Independent and Anne McElvoy from the Economist.
:02:11. > :02:15.Let's start today by talking about Stop the War's Christmas
:02:16. > :02:22.It's not an event which usually excites national media interest,
:02:23. > :02:25.but this three course meal at a Turkish restaurant in London
:02:26. > :02:28.has proved rather controversial because it's going to be
:02:29. > :02:33.He used to chair the group until he became Labour
:02:34. > :02:37.And the reason it's controversial because Stop the War has been
:02:38. > :02:42.criticised after a series of statements that it later disowned.
:02:43. > :02:44.One suggested that France had "reaped the whirlwind" of Western
:02:45. > :02:52.Another compared the Islamic State to the International Brigades
:02:53. > :02:58.that fought against Franco in the Spanish Civil War.
:02:59. > :03:00.Both statements have since been taken down but they've
:03:01. > :03:03.led to calls for Mr Corbyn not to attend.
:03:04. > :03:07.Here's the former Labour minister Emma Reynolds.
:03:08. > :03:11.I hope that Jeremy Corbyn will pull back from the Stop The War dinner,
:03:12. > :03:15.because I believe that the leadership of Stop The War
:03:16. > :03:21.In the immediate aftermath of the brutal Paris attacks,
:03:22. > :03:24.they published an article saying that Paris was reaping the whirlwind
:03:25. > :03:33.They've also recently published an article comparing the brave men
:03:34. > :03:36.and women who went to Spain in the 1930s to fight
:03:37. > :03:40.I think these views are unacceptable.
:03:41. > :03:43.I think this organisation, unfortunately, is disreputable
:03:44. > :03:49.and I hope that our party leader withdraws from the dinner.
:03:50. > :03:57.That's the view of one Labour MP. At either of you going to the Stop The
:03:58. > :04:03.War dinner tonight? Strangely I was not invited. I don't think you have
:04:04. > :04:07.to be. I'm not going but I know the restaurant. I think I have spoken at
:04:08. > :04:12.this restaurant, the acoustics are disastrous. Nobody will be able to
:04:13. > :04:16.hear a word he says. They must be over the moon, look at how much
:04:17. > :04:20.publicity they are getting. It is part of a very complicated story. If
:04:21. > :04:25.you get in the mind of Jeremy Corbyn I can understand completely why he
:04:26. > :04:30.is going. They were part of this campaign to win the leadership
:04:31. > :04:34.contest. Do you, as a leader... This is all about loyalty and who you are
:04:35. > :04:38.loyal to, disown your past and those who got you there? It would be
:04:39. > :04:45.impossible for him to make that mental leap, so I can understand.
:04:46. > :04:49.The problem I can see, and Emma Reynolds put her finger on it when
:04:50. > :04:54.she said district of. That is a certain part of Stop The War who do
:04:55. > :04:59.not like interventions, and that is fairer enough. That is Jeremy
:05:00. > :05:06.Corbyn. Exactly. Why should he go? This muddled history about comparing
:05:07. > :05:10.international brigades to jihadists, it is like a cat 's cradle argument.
:05:11. > :05:17.Everything is the West's fault, never the very silent Russia, for
:05:18. > :05:20.instance in was closer to home and in the Middle East. I think as
:05:21. > :05:25.Labour leader that is the change you does need to make. All of that may
:05:26. > :05:30.be true, but these are the people Jeremy Corbyn has mixed with for
:05:31. > :05:33.over 30 is. He has been chairman of Stop The War, right at the heart of
:05:34. > :05:37.this project. There his kind of people. He is their kind of
:05:38. > :05:42.socialist, why should they not have a Christmas dinner?
:05:43. > :05:50.Maybe over time... It would take a very different character... Neil
:05:51. > :05:52.Kinnock, over time he disowned his support for unilateral disarmament,
:05:53. > :06:00.which early on in his leadership he said if you -- if he disowned it his
:06:01. > :06:07.wife would kick him out of the house. He didn't get kicked out of
:06:08. > :06:10.the house. Heeded. A few months after getting the leadership, partly
:06:11. > :06:18.via the support of groups like this, do not turn up is, I think, just
:06:19. > :06:23.impossible, actually, if you are him. It does not mean everything
:06:24. > :06:32.they say is sensible, but he chaired it. These Labour MPs have said it
:06:33. > :06:36.would be disingenuous. You are suggesting... You use the example of
:06:37. > :06:40.Neil Kinnock. Either he is going to change and become a bigger leader
:06:41. > :06:48.and a more inclusive leader, which he promised to do, he can go to
:06:49. > :06:52.whatever Danae likes, but we are talking about this symbolically, we
:06:53. > :06:55.are not interested in what he eat at the restaurant night. Enough, I am
:06:56. > :06:57.looking forward to it. Turkey is Turkey.
:06:58. > :07:01.The question for today is, what competition have both
:07:02. > :07:03.Samantha Cameron and former Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls
:07:04. > :07:20.or D) Celebrity Great British Bake Off?
:07:21. > :07:28.As every programme now got celebrity in the title?
:07:29. > :07:37.We will get the answer. It has been in all of the papers. It is an easy
:07:38. > :07:39.one. Asking a journalist what has been in the papers! You might even
:07:40. > :07:45.get a mug. David Cameron offered
:07:46. > :07:48.his "guarantee" that the Government
:07:49. > :07:50.would reach a decision on whether to build a third runway
:07:51. > :07:53.at Heathrow by the end of the year. Well, yesterday, he took
:07:54. > :07:57.the decision not to make Instead, the Government kicked
:07:58. > :08:06.the question of if and where to expand airport capacity
:08:07. > :08:08.in the south of the UK back to next summer, pending more work
:08:09. > :08:12.on the environmental impact Let's remind ourselves how this
:08:13. > :08:24.all began. It is a long story so I hope you're
:08:25. > :08:27.sitting comfortably. In 2009, the Labour Government,
:08:28. > :08:34.led by Gordon Brown, said it would build a third
:08:35. > :08:36.runway at Heathrow. In 2010 as head of the new coalition
:08:37. > :08:39.government, David Cameron This was after he made a "no ifs,
:08:40. > :08:44.no buts" pledge that he wouldn't In 2012 David Cameron set up
:08:45. > :08:54.the Airports Commission, chaired by the economist
:08:55. > :08:56.Howard Davies, to consider In July the Commission finally
:08:57. > :09:02.reported, suggesting three options - a third runway at Heathrow,
:09:03. > :09:07.which business groups favour, a second runway at Gatwick Airport,
:09:08. > :09:11.or extending an existing Their preferred option
:09:12. > :09:20.was a third runway at Heathrow. Heathrow says this would
:09:21. > :09:23.contribute ?100 billion But last week a committee of MPs
:09:24. > :09:33.said the airport still needs to prove that a new runway
:09:34. > :09:36.would meet air quality standards. And last night it was announced that
:09:37. > :09:39.no decision would be made until next summer,
:09:40. > :09:40.which would be after This prompted Labour's
:09:41. > :09:50.candidate Sadiq Khan, to claim the Government had
:09:51. > :09:53.stalled in "order to avoid embarrassing their mayoral
:09:54. > :09:58.candidate" Zac Goldsmith. Earlier this morning,
:09:59. > :10:01.the Transport Secretary, Patrick McLoughin, denied
:10:02. > :10:03.the postponement of a decision We have known for a very long time
:10:04. > :10:09.when the mayoral elections were going to be, so if we
:10:10. > :10:13.deliberately wanted to say we weren't going to make this
:10:14. > :10:16.until after the mayoral election, we'd have just set the timetable
:10:17. > :10:19.for another 12 months and we didn't do that, because we have had to come
:10:20. > :10:26.forward with the extra Well, we'll speak to Conservative
:10:27. > :10:42.mayoral candidate Zac Goldsmith this decision on lack of a decision
:10:43. > :10:46.gutless, dilly-dallying, what adjective would you like to add? I
:10:47. > :10:47.think it undermines business confidence in the
:10:48. > :10:52.think it undermines business tough decisions on economic policy.
:10:53. > :10:56.They called in to question the point of asking the airports commission to
:10:57. > :10:58.come forward, and they considered quite a lot of the environmental
:10:59. > :11:05.impact, if you are letting this be subject to political considerations.
:11:06. > :11:09.Why do you think the government in general, Mr Cameron in particular,
:11:10. > :11:13.has done this? I think it goes back a bit further than David Cameron.
:11:14. > :11:19.have had decades of political dithering on a subject to different
:11:20. > :11:20.have had decades of political brings into question if the
:11:21. > :11:24.government is is about its exports target, why isn't it getting on with
:11:25. > :11:27.the decision? target, why isn't it getting on with
:11:28. > :11:33.you. Why do you target, why isn't it getting on with
:11:34. > :11:37.out with this report and it is interesting to see the government is
:11:38. > :11:39.so responsive to a select committee report, it hasn't usually been so
:11:40. > :11:43.quick to jump report, it hasn't usually been so
:11:44. > :11:46.is not for me to speculate on what is dragging them
:11:47. > :11:48.is not for me to speculate on what consideration or another but it is
:11:49. > :11:53.clear there is a role of politics to play here. Is it
:11:54. > :11:58.despite this delay, that Heathrow will in the end be chosen for a
:11:59. > :12:02.third runway? From the Institute of directors point of view the
:12:03. > :12:06.consideration at this point is the lack of decision, lack of action. We
:12:07. > :12:12.cannot forecast weather Heathrow will get the go-ahead or Gatwick or
:12:13. > :12:17.any other option. We want to see a decision taken in the near future
:12:18. > :12:21.because we are at risk of losing ?1.4 million a year in lost trade
:12:22. > :12:23.with rival markets. Thank you very much for that.
:12:24. > :12:25.We're joined now by the Conservative mayoral candidate Zac Goldsmith,
:12:26. > :12:28.he's promised to resign as an MP if the decision is made to build
:12:29. > :12:43.Zac Goldsmith, where you by Downing Street before the
:12:44. > :12:46.announcement last night? No, I have had a one-way conversations at
:12:47. > :12:51.Downing Street for a very long time, but meet them and not the other way
:12:52. > :12:57.round. I had no tip off. When did you last beat to the Prime Minister?
:12:58. > :13:01.I take every opportunity to speak to the prime Chancellor, the front
:13:02. > :13:04.bench and that is what I have done for my five years as an MP. Did you
:13:05. > :13:09.meet David Cameron at three o'clock on Wednesday? I met him earlier in
:13:10. > :13:14.the week, I don't know if it was Wednesday... I don't want to be
:13:15. > :13:17.caught out. We met to talk about housing and policing. Not actually
:13:18. > :13:22.to talk about Heathrow. Did you talk about Heathrow at all? I used the
:13:23. > :13:28.opportunity to repeat my position on Heathrow. So you did talk about it?
:13:29. > :13:32.A one-way conversation. The Prime Minister did not respond me in
:13:33. > :13:36.response to Heathrow. I took the opportunity to put my forward very
:13:37. > :13:41.much on the agenda, in a much broader conversation. Heathrow at
:13:42. > :13:45.the top of the agenda for the moment. Did you tell the Prime
:13:46. > :13:49.Minister again that if he went ahead with Heathrow and an announcement
:13:50. > :13:53.that you would resign your seat? I don't think I did, but I don't think
:13:54. > :13:58.I need to. It was a promise I made, it is not a threat, it is a promise
:13:59. > :14:02.I made eight years ago. I didn't call it a promise or a threat I just
:14:03. > :14:07.said, did you repeat...? I don't think I did, I may have done but I
:14:08. > :14:15.don't think I did. A member of your team. My promise is on record. It is
:14:16. > :14:21.not promise anyone regarded as a bluff and it was not a promise... I
:14:22. > :14:25.am not questioning the integrity of the promise but one member of your
:14:26. > :14:29.team told Sky News that you had effectively held a gun to the Prime
:14:30. > :14:36.Minister's head. My team question mark on very much doubt that. That
:14:37. > :14:42.is what Sky are reporting. There are not going to make it up. You can
:14:43. > :14:46.describe how you want. I think it is a red herring. I have spoken to the
:14:47. > :14:50.Prime Minister about this issue. I lobbied two weeks ago and three
:14:51. > :14:55.weeks before that about the housing bill. You haven't said you would
:14:56. > :15:01.resign over the police budget? My job as an MP and candidate as Mayor
:15:02. > :15:06.of London is to take every opportunity... You said you would
:15:07. > :15:10.cause a by-election over the police budget? You did over Heathrow. This
:15:11. > :15:14.is not an free nude issue, this is something I promised eight years ago
:15:15. > :15:18.to my constituents, before I became an MP. I did so because although
:15:19. > :15:22.they loved what David Cameron was saying in a position, they didn't
:15:23. > :15:31.believe him. -- this is not a new issue. The Prime Minister... This is
:15:32. > :15:37.not a new issue. I am well aware, we have talked about it... It is a
:15:38. > :15:39.longer issue than most, that is part of the problem. The Prime Minister
:15:40. > :15:44.in effect has kowtowed to your point of view? The Prime Minister has
:15:45. > :15:49.reached the right position. I want to make the point, people have said
:15:50. > :15:52.this is a delay, dithering, it is not a delay. It was clear in the
:15:53. > :15:55.airports commission that even if the PM said yesterday we would go with
:15:56. > :15:59.the throat he would have to go through the same process, still have
:16:00. > :16:04.to subject that option to the environmental tests to which his
:16:05. > :16:08.subject in the other options. Of the Prime Minister had said the
:16:09. > :16:15.government's policies to go ahead with Heathrow it would have become
:16:16. > :16:19.the process. It would have begun the process, this delay is a process
:16:20. > :16:24.until the summer at the earliest. I would argue jobs. If he pinned all
:16:25. > :16:27.his hopes on Heathrow expansion, subjected them to airport tests,
:16:28. > :16:30.which we know Heathrow could not pass, we would be back to square one
:16:31. > :16:44.in six months and looking at other options.
:16:45. > :16:53.I don't even get one-way conversations with him??NO SPACE!
:16:54. > :16:56.You do. I am not part of the decision-making process. If, through
:16:57. > :16:59.what I have done, I have managed to influence the debate along with
:17:00. > :17:05.thousands of other residents, I would not apologise for that. That
:17:06. > :17:08.is my job, to campaign and succeed. Should people not be rightly angry,
:17:09. > :17:12.regardless of their views on this issue, that one of the biggest
:17:13. > :17:17.investment decisions facing this country, whether we do or don't, has
:17:18. > :17:22.been hijacked to further Tory electoral ambitions? I don't accept
:17:23. > :17:27.that. The government is doing what it has to do, which is to subject
:17:28. > :17:33.Heathrow and the other options to a test that it was going to have to in
:17:34. > :17:37.any case. The only new thing we heard yesterday was that the other
:17:38. > :17:41.options will be treated on a par with the same testing. For me, that
:17:42. > :17:44.is a good outcome, because it means Heathrow will be removed from the
:17:45. > :17:52.menu because it cannot meet those tests. That is your view. It is not
:17:53. > :17:59.the view of the Davies commission. Any independent authority would
:18:00. > :18:03.agree with me. The Davies commission was independent. You asking our
:18:04. > :18:06.viewers to accept that it is entirely coincidence that the
:18:07. > :18:10.decision has now been postponed until you get through your mayoral
:18:11. > :18:15.election campaign? I am not arguing it it away. I don't know why the
:18:16. > :18:22.decision was made I was not part of the decision-making process. But I
:18:23. > :18:25.am his with where we are. You are wrong about the airports commission.
:18:26. > :18:29.With respect, Howard Davies himself said a few weeks ago that on the
:18:30. > :18:33.back of the VW scandal, the government would now need to satisfy
:18:34. > :18:40.its off-again that Heathrow's plans are considerable -- reconciliation
:18:41. > :18:44.with the law. Let's look at would happen if the government had said,
:18:45. > :18:47.we are going ahead with Heathrow. They would still have more
:18:48. > :18:52.environmental studies to do. You would have resigned your seat and
:18:53. > :18:59.caused a by-election. Would you have remained as Tory mayoral candidate?
:19:00. > :19:02.Yes. So in a sense, the Tories would have gone into the mayoral election
:19:03. > :19:09.with someone who was provoking a by-election. Would you have stood as
:19:10. > :19:12.a Tory? I wouldn't have stood in the by-election. You cannot fight two
:19:13. > :19:17.elections at the same time. The mayoral campaign is not about
:19:18. > :19:23.Heathrow. It is an important issue, but not as important as housing,
:19:24. > :19:30.policing or TfL investments. So I am delighted that Heathrow will not be
:19:31. > :19:37.the dominant discussion. Haven't you fallen into the government's trap,
:19:38. > :19:46.then? What is likely to happen is that after the mayoral election, the
:19:47. > :19:50.government will, if you win, you will be mayor. You will resign as a
:19:51. > :19:54.Tory MP presumably if you win, and the government proceeds with
:19:55. > :20:01.Heathrow. But I don't think that is possible. That would be true if the
:20:02. > :20:04.test that has been set is a false test, but you cannot falsify issues
:20:05. > :20:09.around air-pollution. So if Heathrow is asked a tough question about air
:20:10. > :20:13.pollution, however it is phrased, either account out answer that
:20:14. > :20:18.question. Therefore, Heathrow, logically, is moving close to the
:20:19. > :20:22.exit. The only I would be wrong would be if the test was fraudulent,
:20:23. > :20:29.if Heathrow was able to mark its own homework like VW has been able to.
:20:30. > :20:33.So you are putting everything on it not passing these environmental test
:20:34. > :20:37.is? I would not say that is the only argument against Heathrow expansion,
:20:38. > :20:40.but that is the only point that has been raised by government, and on
:20:41. > :20:44.that point alone, let alone noise and of thing else, on air pollution,
:20:45. > :20:54.Heathrow failed the test. So I am pleased that we are where we are.
:20:55. > :21:01.The right question is being asked. Do you accept that if you win as
:21:02. > :21:09.mayor, and you resign as a Conservative MP... I don't think you
:21:10. > :21:12.can do both. I understand, but is it still possible for the government to
:21:13. > :21:16.come out in favour of Heathrow, leaving you to oppose the government
:21:17. > :21:23.policy as the Mayor of London? Theoretically possible. So in a
:21:24. > :21:26.sense, nothing has changed. I think things have changed. The right
:21:27. > :21:31.question is being asked. We are today where I would like us to be. I
:21:32. > :21:34.was asked months ago, what is the outcome you would like when the
:21:35. > :21:38.government response? It is more or less the decision we had from
:21:39. > :21:42.government yesterday, which is to treat Heathrow and Gatwick on a par
:21:43. > :21:46.and the third option, which I do not think is all that serious com but
:21:47. > :21:51.treat the options on a par and make them answer the same questions. I am
:21:52. > :21:54.as confident as it is possible to be. That was what the Davies
:21:55. > :21:59.commission was meant to do, but it didn't give you the answer you
:22:00. > :22:02.wanted. Are you in favour of Gatwick? If it is a choice between
:22:03. > :22:09.Heathrow and Gatwick, Gatwick is a no-brainer. The question is about
:22:10. > :22:13.monopoly versus competition. Notwithstanding what has been said
:22:14. > :22:17.in relation to Heathrow, there is a good reason why Heathrow's biggest
:22:18. > :22:23.customer is opposed to Heathrow expansion, because they know that
:22:24. > :22:27.monopoly is not good for consumers. But as Mayor of London, if that was
:22:28. > :22:31.to happen, and it is by no means a slam dunk for you, but if it
:22:32. > :22:38.happened, you would not use City Hall to campaign against Gatwick?
:22:39. > :22:43.No. The argument for me is that we must have competition. The arguments
:22:44. > :22:45.in favour of Stansted are as good if not better than Gatwick. The issue
:22:46. > :22:48.for me is that it does not better than Gatwick. The issue
:22:49. > :22:53.such a way that we cobbled together the old monopoly, which serves no
:22:54. > :22:58.one's interests. The first objective is to invest in improving links to
:22:59. > :22:59.and from the quick, to and from Stansted. Allow those apples to
:23:00. > :23:02.compete with each other Stansted. Allow those apples to
:23:03. > :23:07.effectively as they can. Make use of existing capacity. If we
:23:08. > :23:08.effectively as they can. Make use of expand, don't do it at Heathrow.
:23:09. > :23:12.That simply expand, don't do it at Heathrow.
:23:13. > :23:16.which are not in the interests of consumers, the environment or anyone
:23:17. > :23:19.else. When you have one-way conversations with the Prime
:23:20. > :23:22.Minister, who is doing the talking? They are not all one way. But in
:23:23. > :23:26.relation to They are not all one way. But in
:23:27. > :23:28.not respond to what I am saying. He had to wait until the committee
:23:29. > :23:33.reported. had to wait until the committee
:23:34. > :23:41.for a book or a nod. -- had to wait until the committee
:23:42. > :23:42.order. But I am now pleased with where we are.
:23:43. > :23:44.Listening to that from our Nottingham studio
:23:45. > :23:58.What would Labour do? We are keen Lilian Greenwood.
:23:59. > :24:01.What would Labour do? We are keen take a view on proposals when the
:24:02. > :24:05.government brings some forward. But as we saw from the shambolic
:24:06. > :24:06.announcement yesterday, David Cameron is breaking that guarantee
:24:07. > :24:13.you Cameron is breaking that guarantee
:24:14. > :24:17.by the end of the year, and for political reasons, has kicked it
:24:18. > :24:20.into the long grass. This morning, Patrick McLoughlin only says he
:24:21. > :24:24.hopes there will be a decision next summer. Goodness knows when there
:24:25. > :24:27.will be certainty for business and residents close to and Gatwick. So
:24:28. > :24:31.will be certainty for business and you have got an open goal in
:24:32. > :24:40.attacking the government's dithering. Even the Tories have
:24:41. > :24:44.called it a ditherama. Are you in favour or against the Davies
:24:45. > :24:49.commission's conclusions? The Davies commission are right that we need
:24:50. > :24:55.more runway capacity in the south-east. They have made
:24:56. > :24:59.recommendations. I know what their recommendations are, I am asking if
:25:00. > :25:02.you are in favour of them or not. We need to see what proposals the
:25:03. > :25:05.government makes. I did not ask about the government proposals. The
:25:06. > :25:10.Davies commission came to the conclusion that there were three
:25:11. > :25:13.options for more capacity in the south-east. The option it preferred
:25:14. > :25:19.was a third runway at Heathrow. What is your party's view on that? We
:25:20. > :25:25.can't take a position until we see firm proposals for bringing forward
:25:26. > :25:28.that much-needed airport expansion. You can have a view on the
:25:29. > :25:35.commission. The commission demonstrates that there was a need
:25:36. > :25:43.for additional runways. But do you support or are you opposed, as Zac
:25:44. > :25:48.Goldsmith is? Are you in favour of the preferred conclusion of the
:25:49. > :25:51.Davies commission? I cannot take a view on something that is just
:25:52. > :25:56.recommendations from the commission. Why not? Because we need to see what
:25:57. > :26:00.proposals the government is bringing forward. There are a number of
:26:01. > :26:07.things that Davies sets out as being conditions he would like to impose,
:26:08. > :26:16.like the ban on night flights. We know what is in the commission. I am
:26:17. > :26:20.asking you if you agree. Since you cannot answer that or tell me what
:26:21. > :26:25.Labour's policy is, what bit of ditherama should not apply to you
:26:26. > :26:28.and the Labour Party as well? We have clearly set out how we will
:26:29. > :26:34.make a decision on the government's proposals for bringing forward Apple
:26:35. > :26:39.capacity. I am asking you for your view. I am still government. That
:26:40. > :26:43.doesn't matter, you aspire to government. Oppositions take
:26:44. > :26:48.positions all the time on what they would do in government. Let me try
:26:49. > :26:51.one more time so that identify you along with the government and a
:26:52. > :26:57.ditherama. Does Labour have a policy on a third runway at Heathrow or
:26:58. > :27:01.not? Our policy is to subject the actual proposals the government
:27:02. > :27:05.brings forward to full tests around whether it meets the long-term
:27:06. > :27:09.capacity needs of the country, whether it is consistent with our
:27:10. > :27:13.climate change obligations, can it deal with the local environmental
:27:14. > :27:16.impacts in relation to noise and air pollution, and can serve the whole
:27:17. > :27:19.country, not just London and the south-east? As soon as the
:27:20. > :27:25.government wing forward proposals to take forward their policy, we will
:27:26. > :27:28.be able to form a labour view on it. And if the government's policy
:27:29. > :27:33.satisfied you on these considerations, you would be in
:27:34. > :27:37.favour of a third runway? Of course. If they brought forward proposals
:27:38. > :27:41.that satisfied our four tests, we would be able to form a view of the
:27:42. > :27:44.Labour Party. Forming a view is different from telling me if you
:27:45. > :27:49.would be in favour of a third runway. If it passed the four tests,
:27:50. > :27:55.would you be in favour of a third runway? We would have to see the
:27:56. > :28:03.detailed proposals. So you can't even and so that. So N thee for
:28:04. > :28:06.ditherama for you as well. When the government brings forward its
:28:07. > :28:12.proposals, the Labour party will form a view on this. It sounds like
:28:13. > :28:16.you are both useless at coming to a decision. The last Labour government
:28:17. > :28:26.dealt with this issue and we lost the election. You were in favour of
:28:27. > :28:30.the Heathrow runway in 2009. We lost the election in 2010. We called for
:28:31. > :28:38.an independent airports commission. You got that. Eventually, the
:28:39. > :28:43.government agreed to do that, but decided it couldn't report until
:28:44. > :28:48.after the general election. Now they have spent months doing nothing, it
:28:49. > :28:52.seems, since babies reported, only to kick it down the road rather than
:28:53. > :28:57.bring forward information about the environmental considerations --
:28:58. > :29:02.since Davies reported. They are working to their own political
:29:03. > :29:07.timetable. One final point. Your Shadow Chancellor has said it would
:29:08. > :29:16.be an economic disaster to build a third runway at Heathrow. John has a
:29:17. > :29:21.long held view. He is your Shadow Chancellor. It would have a
:29:22. > :29:25.considerable impact on his constituency, but when there are
:29:26. > :29:30.proposals, we have to reach a view as the Labour Party in the interests
:29:31. > :29:34.of the whole country, albeit I understand that individual MPs have
:29:35. > :29:43.individual views, particularly where it impacts their constituency.
:29:44. > :29:48.Thanks for joining us. In years to come, this will be a
:29:49. > :29:56.case study on how not to take a decision. Absolutely. I think I sat
:29:57. > :30:00.here in 2009, having the same conversation. Labour was then
:30:01. > :30:10.divided. Gordon Brown, to his credit, did come to a decision,
:30:11. > :30:15.which was overturned the next year. Zac is a principled opponent. Lilian
:30:16. > :30:20.Greenwood was sitting on the fence. I think that Labour, at the moment,
:30:21. > :30:28.will come out as anti-Heathrow. And yet George Osborne is desperate to
:30:29. > :30:32.expand Heathrow. London business is desperate to expand Heathrow. I know
:30:33. > :30:37.there are other options. But the elephant in the room is that a lot
:30:38. > :30:40.of people who have British business interests at heart really want this
:30:41. > :30:46.to happen. I suspect that is the way it might go. I wonder whether these
:30:47. > :30:50.tests we are arguing about will ultimately be swept aside by the
:30:51. > :30:55.middle of next year. In power, Labour came out in favour of a third
:30:56. > :31:00.runway. Cameron opposed it. Out of power, Ed Miliband as Labour leader
:31:01. > :31:04.opposed a third runway. Bit by bit, the Tory government, under pressure
:31:05. > :31:08.from the Treasury, started to become in favour of it. Now we are in a
:31:09. > :31:14.Mexican stand-off, with both parties unable to tellers their policy.
:31:15. > :31:22.Harriet Harman came out for Heathrow when she was acting leader. It is
:31:23. > :31:25.interesting. You discussed with Zac Goldsmith the political implications
:31:26. > :31:29.for the London election. It is wider than that, it is a reminder this is
:31:30. > :31:34.a government with a tiny overall majority. I remember having a
:31:35. > :31:38.conversation with one of Cameron's senior allies in May when there was
:31:39. > :31:44.this euphoria of the Tory overall majority. He said, we have three
:31:45. > :31:48.very big barriers to overcome. One, tax credits. Another Europe and the
:31:49. > :31:53.third was the airports. They have struggled in all three. They haven't
:31:54. > :32:02.got a big majority to do really tough decisions. I think that is
:32:03. > :32:09.part of it. Cameron has never been gung ho. I think those two factors
:32:10. > :32:16.play in. Enough. We have to go all the way through the summer. We are
:32:17. > :32:18.sorry, Zac Goldsmith, to have held you hostage in the studio as you
:32:19. > :32:19.listened to that. Now, there's been a huge conference
:32:20. > :32:22.on climate change going on in Paris It's meant to lead to the first
:32:23. > :32:27.new global climate deal in 18 years, and the deadline for a deal is 6pm
:32:28. > :32:30.tonight, although when you're trying to get more than 190 countries
:32:31. > :32:33.to agree, it's never a great surprise when the timetable slips
:32:34. > :32:36.and indeed, it is now not expected In the last hour, the UN
:32:37. > :32:45.Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon has put a positive gloss on how
:32:46. > :32:50.the talks are concluding. There are still several outstanding
:32:51. > :32:58.issues, like deforestation or ambitions and climate
:32:59. > :33:03.financing etc. But during many years
:33:04. > :33:05.of negotiations, they have Very good solutions have
:33:06. > :33:18.already been presented. This morning, we have much cleaner,
:33:19. > :33:21.streamlined text, and this is a good Many paragraphs have
:33:22. > :33:42.been dropped and Ban Ki-Moon there, saying there is
:33:43. > :33:48.disagreement, bits in the agreement which have not been written which
:33:49. > :33:48.have brackets which will be fielded later.
:33:49. > :33:57.He represented the British Government at the climate talks
:33:58. > :34:00.in Kyoto back in 1997 and has held various other roles
:34:01. > :34:10.Welcome back to the Daily Politics. We learned last month that China's
:34:11. > :34:15.statistics agency, on its use of coal, 17% higher than the official
:34:16. > :34:18.figures admitted. We know China still has to build a lot of coal
:34:19. > :34:23.fire stations. Even still has to build a lot of coal
:34:24. > :34:28.deal, how do you keep tabs on it? That is an important point, to see
:34:29. > :34:31.of promises made are delivered on. The Kyoto one, it reminds me of a
:34:32. > :34:34.of promises made are delivered on. lot of happen there but the
:34:35. > :34:38.fundamental differences hundred and 90 countries,
:34:39. > :34:44.think the one difference, one interesting point is, at the last
:34:45. > :34:50.hour of Kyoto they broke down the agreement, that it was to be a 5%
:34:51. > :34:54.cut in gas. I said, can you get another agreement. The Americans and
:34:55. > :34:59.the Japanese in the same room, we all went up 1%. That had gone
:35:00. > :35:03.through the night. That is a process, diplomacy by exhaustion. We
:35:04. > :35:07.have exactly the same year now. In regard to the gas issue, the coal
:35:08. > :35:11.issue, that is one of the central features of this organisation. They
:35:12. > :35:15.are moving more and more from coal to renewables and we are going the
:35:16. > :35:19.opposite way in this country. They are reducing the amount from coal.
:35:20. > :35:25.They have a massive programme for renewable energy. That is one major
:35:26. > :35:29.change. You say that, except climate action Tracker, on your side of this
:35:30. > :35:38.argument, has calculated that 2440 action Tracker, on your side of this
:35:39. > :35:45.around the world by 2030. I will say that again, 2440 new coal-fired
:35:46. > :35:50.stations. Yes, and that is one of the distinctive
:35:51. > :35:54.stations. Yes, and that is one of particular agreement. To move from
:35:55. > :36:02.coal, oil and gas to renewables. Most of the countries want the extra
:36:03. > :36:05.money. To transfer its energy requirements, and that is beginning
:36:06. > :36:11.to take place in a number of these countries. That is quite distinctive
:36:12. > :36:14.difference. China is opening a new coal-fired plant every week. Yes,
:36:15. > :36:18.difference. China is opening a new true, but not as fast as it was for.
:36:19. > :36:22.Why is huge, isn't it? India and China, they are still going to have
:36:23. > :36:24.coal in the mix even though they are moving to renewables. To that extent
:36:25. > :36:30.we have a principle which the moving to renewables. To that extent
:36:31. > :36:34.general secretary, general secretary of the UN has pointed out. The
:36:35. > :36:39.principle of the agreement is common but equal differential, but
:36:40. > :36:42.differentials responsibility. If you measure China, more gas than
:36:43. > :36:44.America, but if you did it per capita and tried to get a fairer way
:36:45. > :36:50.of doing it, that is what they are discussing at this present time.
:36:51. > :36:53.What is the fair burden for each country to carry? Not just the
:36:54. > :36:57.absolute output but the proportion you have to take into account.
:36:58. > :37:03.Weather is bearing the burden, whether or not it is distributed
:37:04. > :37:12.fairly, CO2 emissions will be 150% higher under existing plans, 150%
:37:13. > :37:17.higher than is consistent with a 2 degrees target, which is meant to be
:37:18. > :37:24.the limit on temperature rise even in Paris. I don't see how this...
:37:25. > :37:29.Two Celsius or 1.5, maybe the poorer countries are saying, we are already
:37:30. > :37:33.suffering. They want the rich ones to give more resources to reduce the
:37:34. > :37:38.carbon. That is a fair argument. It is how we would use it. If it is
:37:39. > :37:43.business as usual, it is disaster. One thing about this decision here
:37:44. > :37:46.in Paris is different from Kyoto, in Kyoto we argued whether the science
:37:47. > :37:51.was relevant. That was the argument. That is not the case now, they all
:37:52. > :38:02.accept that. You have to reduce the carbon level. If we go to those
:38:03. > :38:07.figures you are talking about, it is concentrating the mind to get the
:38:08. > :38:12.agreement at the last moment as we did in Kyoto. The fifth report of
:38:13. > :38:15.the IPC seat said it could not with confidence established a link
:38:16. > :38:22.between global warming trends and severe weather. It clearly does say
:38:23. > :38:30.there is a connection. Not with confidence. You just put the three
:38:31. > :38:34.words in. I work with the IPC every year. It is not sure severe weather
:38:35. > :38:39.and global weather are linked. We're not sure we will get 2% or 1.5%,
:38:40. > :38:43.that is what these arguments are about now. This is a significant
:38:44. > :38:46.factor, what is important, what governments promised and the
:38:47. > :38:50.results, will they deliver on those bonuses? We have to strengthen
:38:51. > :38:53.national parliaments with a legal framework which we gave with them
:38:54. > :39:01.climate change act, to make sure governments, when they come back
:39:02. > :39:05.here, they carry out what they promise. That has got to strengthen
:39:06. > :39:09.the legislation in national parliament and get legislators now
:39:10. > :39:12.to make sure, when governments get press by powerful interests you
:39:13. > :39:15.don't agree with theirs, begin to depart from what they have promised.
:39:16. > :39:21.I can't even believe what Cameron says about anything. The developing
:39:22. > :39:26.countries in Paris are asking, demanding as part of the agreement,
:39:27. > :39:33.that there is a transfer from the rich world to the developing world
:39:34. > :39:39.of $3.5 trillion by 2030. How can you assure British taxpayers, who
:39:40. > :39:46.are putting up a fair chunk of that, that it will be money fair spent
:39:47. > :39:51.does not well spent? It is a lot of money. It is more than what we
:39:52. > :39:56.agreed to add 100 billion a year, now. Each has to make their
:39:57. > :39:59.contribution. I am asking how can the tax payer, lose money this will
:40:00. > :40:02.be, who are watching the show right now, how do they know that money,
:40:03. > :40:08.their hard earned money will be well spent? Those people in Cumbria at
:40:09. > :40:11.the moment were told there would be one flooding what every 100 years,
:40:12. > :40:17.they are facing the consequences, they know about climate change.
:40:18. > :40:20.Every country is affected, whether in India, China or in the Lake
:40:21. > :40:25.District. We have to find the resources. Developing countries want
:40:26. > :40:28.to switch from oil and gas to renewables. You have to give them
:40:29. > :40:33.the money for the investment in renewables. We all gain from it. It
:40:34. > :40:36.is a change but all the evidence is green growth gives us a better
:40:37. > :40:40.return than we are getting from business as usual. You know what
:40:41. > :40:43.business as usual is, you quoted it. I'm saying, let's doing something
:40:44. > :40:47.about it rather than saying to the people in the Lake District, we
:40:48. > :40:52.cannot do anything about it. As we have you here and you heard the
:40:53. > :40:55.previous conversation. What is your view on airport expansion, briefly?
:40:56. > :41:01.In favour of a third runway at Heathrow or not? Yes, at Heathrow. I
:41:02. > :41:10.looked at this argument as transport Minister. I was in agreement for it.
:41:11. > :41:14.We were divided. Gordon came up with this formula to give it to an
:41:15. > :41:19.inquiry. We had the Davis inquiry. You've had the investigation on what
:41:20. > :41:23.happening now is a purely political calculation about the election for
:41:24. > :41:27.London mayor. I will be attacked the same... This attacks our
:41:28. > :41:31.environmental policies, I was being attacked for that then. You need a
:41:32. > :41:35.balance. I think it is Heathrow. We certainly need a third runway. John
:41:36. > :41:55.Prescott, thank you, good to have you on the programme again.
:41:56. > :41:58.Now, what do Boris Johnson, Muhammad Ali and more than half
:41:59. > :42:00.a million members of the public have in common?
:42:01. > :42:02.Well, they're all united in heaping opprobrium -
:42:03. > :42:05.for Steve and Anne's sake, I should point out that that means
:42:06. > :42:07.they're being critical - on the head of Republican
:42:08. > :42:11.More than 500,000 people have signed a parliamentary petition calling
:42:12. > :42:13.for him to be banned from entering the UK.
:42:14. > :42:15.It stems from his announcement earlier this week that a Trump
:42:16. > :42:18.presidency would see a ban on all Muslim people
:42:19. > :42:21.He was roundly condemned by British politicians and other public figures
:42:22. > :42:24.for that, and in response he tweeted: "The United Kingdom
:42:25. > :42:26.is trying hard to disguise their massive Muslim problem.
:42:27. > :42:31.Everybody is wise to what is happening, very sad!
:42:32. > :42:34.But while the majority of people in British public life joined
:42:35. > :42:38.in the condemnation, he had one champion ? yes,
:42:39. > :42:52.the columnist Katie Hopkins, who said:
:42:53. > :43:04.It turns out Donald is a fan of Katie's. He tweeted:
:43:05. > :43:11.Well, Katie Hopkins, columnist for the Daily Mail online,
:43:12. > :43:13.joins us now from our Plymouth studio.
:43:14. > :43:23.Welcome to the Daily Politics. You supported Donald Trump's worked on
:43:24. > :43:26.this but you also said it was totally impractical to do. How do
:43:27. > :43:30.you square that? I think what I was saying is I
:43:31. > :43:35.support the ideas behind what he is trying to do. Ultimately Donald
:43:36. > :43:41.Trump is trying to show truly do ship. The Americans felt very let
:43:42. > :43:46.down by what Obama said two days after 14 people were gunned down. I
:43:47. > :43:50.think in that kind of vacuum, what you see is Donald Trump stand up and
:43:51. > :43:55.at least say something that sounded like he wanted to protect his
:43:56. > :44:00.nation, protect America. That is what I stand behind. We need strong
:44:01. > :44:04.leadership at these times. I am personally a little tired of your
:44:05. > :44:10.BBC bias, which keeps telling us that most people support banning
:44:11. > :44:16.Donald Trump from the UK. It is only 500,000 people clicking on a mouse.
:44:17. > :44:20.When did I say most people? You went through a long list of
:44:21. > :44:24.Boris Johnson, people clicking on a petition.
:44:25. > :44:30.When did I say most British people? I have no evidence. Let's go back.
:44:31. > :44:35.Let's come back to... What about the people who do support
:44:36. > :44:39.what Trump says. I ask the questions. You said what
:44:40. > :44:45.Mr Trump says is a lot of hot air. Why is that showing leadership West
:44:46. > :44:51.Mark because sometimes, in times of real difficulty and fear what you
:44:52. > :44:54.want from your leadership is to say we're Naghemeh tolerate this, we
:44:55. > :44:57.will protect our country, that is what Donald Trump has done.
:44:58. > :45:01.If you look outside the bubble you are in, people are fearful. I work
:45:02. > :45:05.with people in London that ring their families on a daily basis to
:45:06. > :45:09.check they are OK. My family are not that keen on me going to London
:45:10. > :45:14.right now. My friends won't go there. Paris has taken a 50% cut in
:45:15. > :45:21.its tourist trade. What we see is there is fear on the streets. We may
:45:22. > :45:24.not want to acknowledge it, but why do we talk about the other petition
:45:25. > :45:26.of 400,000 signatures which people say, let's stop migration whilst we
:45:27. > :45:31.think about how we're going to protect our country? One of the
:45:32. > :45:35.things that really me is our Muslim community do not stand up and
:45:36. > :45:40.separate themselves enough for my liking from the very fearful acts of
:45:41. > :45:44.terrorism that are right here on our shores. There have been Muslim
:45:45. > :45:48.demonstrations against what has been happening. There has been Muslim
:45:49. > :45:54.leaders who have stood out and talked about and condemned what they
:45:55. > :45:58.have been doing. You seem to keep an setting a test for them, that they
:45:59. > :46:06.have to keep meeting all the time. If I may. Why is it when two
:46:07. > :46:10.families in Luton disappeared Isis and no one knows anything. Not the
:46:11. > :46:14.imam or the local community, the people they hang out with, nobody
:46:15. > :46:19.knows anything. They just upped and vanished and nobody says anything.
:46:20. > :46:20.Just speak to the police about that, teenagers are disappearing all the
:46:21. > :46:30.time. The British public are disappointed
:46:31. > :46:33.by the lack of pushback from the Muslim community. We don't see
:46:34. > :46:38.people within those communities, when we lose people to Isis, we
:46:39. > :46:42.don't hear them saying, yes, it was a terrible thing, I don't know how
:46:43. > :46:47.they got radicalised. We don't see enough of that. If Mr Trump got his
:46:48. > :46:51.way and Muslims were banned for a period from entering the United
:46:52. > :46:56.States, how would you enforce it? How would you know who was a Muslim
:46:57. > :46:59.and who wasn't? I have been clear in my article in the Daily Mail online.
:47:00. > :47:03.You cannot enforce that sort of thing. You don't have religion and
:47:04. > :47:10.announced in your passport. I said so myself. So your definition of
:47:11. > :47:14.truly do ship is to propose something that is impractical?
:47:15. > :47:16.truly do ship is to propose definition of leadership is able to
:47:17. > :47:26.stand up and say, we will not tolerate that. Of course you cannot
:47:27. > :47:33.cut the specifics, but he has a notion of a nation and he has
:47:34. > :47:36.cut the specifics, but he has a millions of supporters. That
:47:37. > :47:37.cut the specifics, but he has a what I am asking. His poll ratings
:47:38. > :47:41.have risen, and if what I am asking. His poll ratings
:47:42. > :47:44.British public, there are a lot of people behind the kind of sentiment
:47:45. > :47:48.that Donald Trump is expressing, which is that we will not tolerate
:47:49. > :47:51.being taken over by forces that make us fearful of living in our own
:47:52. > :47:55.country. And his answer to that, a us fearful of living in our own
:47:56. > :47:59.man who would be leader of the free world, is to propose something that
:48:00. > :48:04.even new, his greatest riches supporter, admits is totally
:48:05. > :48:10.impractical. I never claimed to be his greatest supporter. I will call
:48:11. > :48:12.you a number of names in return, but I am better than that. I am standing
:48:13. > :48:16.up for British people I am better than that. I am standing
:48:17. > :48:21.some agreement with his sentiment, who are clicking on an alternative
:48:22. > :48:24.petition, which the BBC are not speaking about, which says they do
:48:25. > :48:30.not want any more immigration into the UK until we can control the fear
:48:31. > :48:35.we feel in our own towns and cities. From what we know of British public
:48:36. > :48:38.opinion on this issue, the latest poll suggests that about two thirds
:48:39. > :48:45.of British people do not agree with Mr Trump. Yesterday, I was quoting
:48:46. > :48:52.figures of 25% of British people standing strongly behind him. You
:48:53. > :48:57.are now giving me an extra amount. One third of people stand behind
:48:58. > :49:02.him. That is not how polls work. Two thirds are against him. This small
:49:03. > :49:07.percentage don't know and a smaller percentage are in favour. Just
:49:08. > :49:11.before the general election, your polls told us it was neck and neck
:49:12. > :49:17.and we didn't know who would be in Number Ten. The BBC doesn't have
:49:18. > :49:20.polls. I know you don't like us, but the BBC doesn't have polls. The one
:49:21. > :49:33.poll it did have got the election spot on on the night. I think you
:49:34. > :49:38.need to show balance. You said that we have gone too far in regards to
:49:39. > :49:42.the Muslim population and "We have lost control of vast swathes of our
:49:43. > :49:48.country". Where are these vast swathes? There are plenty of places
:49:49. > :49:53.in the UK that other people can tell you and I can tell you I would not
:49:54. > :49:57.walk through. It is not legally accurate to actually name certain
:49:58. > :50:01.areas. There have been legal issues around that. There are no legal
:50:02. > :50:07.issues. Tell us these vast swathes of our country where we have lost
:50:08. > :50:12.control. If you didn't talk so much, I might be able to, darling. If I
:50:13. > :50:15.was to walk through certain areas of our population, where over 90% of
:50:16. > :50:19.people are Muslim, I wouldn't fare too well. And my friends in Jewish
:50:20. > :50:23.communities have also found they have been spat at and shouted at.
:50:24. > :50:30.They are intimidated. That is terrible behaviour, but it is not
:50:31. > :50:39.losing control. Give me an example of the vast swathes of country.
:50:40. > :50:44.Where the authorities have lost control? I know those places exist.
:50:45. > :50:48.I am later going to my child's nativity play. I am proud that my
:50:49. > :50:52.school has won, because so many don't. These days, all we can have
:50:53. > :50:57.is multi-faith assemblies, which is not something I am proud of. So you
:50:58. > :51:01.can't tell me, so you talk about your child's nativity play. I would
:51:02. > :51:05.welcome the Daily Politics to follow me as I go through some of the areas
:51:06. > :51:10.where I would be shouted at. We can't follow you unless you tell us
:51:11. > :51:16.where they are. Come with me with your cameras and see who tells me to
:51:17. > :51:23.cover up my hair, cover my face. That is not losing control. A large
:51:24. > :51:26.percentage of our population stands behind Donald Trump, and I don't
:51:27. > :51:34.think the BBC are giving that enough airtime. Katie Hopkins, thank you.
:51:35. > :51:41.Are you not amazed at the wake-up's remarks have had such traction and
:51:42. > :51:45.caused controversy in this country? I was in America when he made these
:51:46. > :51:49.remarks, and it obviously dominated there, but I came back here on
:51:50. > :51:54.Wednesday morning and it was like I hadn't left America. It has crossed
:51:55. > :51:57.the Atlantic. If you have any sympathy is with Katie Hopkins's
:51:58. > :52:10.position, not so much the practicality, as you pointed out,
:52:11. > :52:14.but you would say that he allows people to say, yes, I am very
:52:15. > :52:16.worried about what is happening in our communities. The problem that
:52:17. > :52:24.does not address, either here or in the states, as you will know, is the
:52:25. > :52:27.problem you already have to deal with. Your problem is in the
:52:28. > :52:33.communities you have and to what extent be radicalised as --
:52:34. > :52:37.deradicalisation is succeeding. To say, I would not let any more in, as
:52:38. > :52:43.if you weigh Muslims by the tonnage, is not an answer. The problem is in
:52:44. > :52:47.your communities now. That is where you need to focus. It is a red
:52:48. > :52:53.herring to say, let's not let any more in. You have to look at what is
:52:54. > :52:59.going on now. But here is the broader context, on both sides of
:53:00. > :53:03.the Atlantic. Just as Paris wrought together what is a potentially toxic
:53:04. > :53:08.mix of terrorism and immigration, because some of those involved in
:53:09. > :53:14.Paris had come through as migrants into western Europe, so the events
:53:15. > :53:19.in San Bernardino have brought together American citizenship, the
:53:20. > :53:25.Muslim community and Terrell risen. And it opens the door -- it brings
:53:26. > :53:34.together the Muslim community and terrorism. It is a toxic mix, and it
:53:35. > :53:38.is such a highly charged mix. It opens the door to all kinds of
:53:39. > :53:42.emotive arguments, which we have just heard. A lot of people would
:53:43. > :53:46.have nodded along to the views we have just heard. It doesn't mean
:53:47. > :53:57.that any of the policies that arise from that toxic mix, such as banning
:53:58. > :54:07.Muslims from coming in, as Anne points out, there was a problem with
:54:08. > :54:10.the people already here. American citizenship would not be covered by
:54:11. > :54:15.the Trump exclusion order. It is not strong leadership to articulate the
:54:16. > :54:17.range of fears brought about by that toxic mix and then come up with a
:54:18. > :54:25.totally impractical, headline grabbing policy. That is easy. The
:54:26. > :54:28.Economist has written about this. We have said this stands forever thing
:54:29. > :54:33.we don't agree with, but there is a challenge for the political class.
:54:34. > :54:37.You would think with the passion that Katy Holland kins argues,
:54:38. > :54:42.people will be thinking, that says something I feel. It does not tell
:54:43. > :54:45.you anything to do about it that you can deliver, and that is dangerous
:54:46. > :54:48.territory that a lot of politics is getting into. Well, from the sublime
:54:49. > :54:51.to a bit of the ridiculous. Now, we bring you news that
:54:52. > :54:53.Jeremy Corbyn's position has this And it's not his job as Labour
:54:54. > :55:00.leader they're after. No, it's a much more
:55:01. > :55:10.prestigious honour. Mr Corbyn is a five times
:55:11. > :55:17.winner of the award, which is given to the MP
:55:18. > :55:20.with the beard that has made Given that he is now leader
:55:21. > :55:24.of the opposition, he must have But despite shadow cabinet ally
:55:25. > :55:31.Diane Abbott last night urging her Twitter followers
:55:32. > :55:37.to lend him their votes, he was thought to be facing
:55:38. > :55:43.a late surge from rival Well, we're joined now
:55:44. > :55:48.by the man behind the award, the Beard Liberation
:55:49. > :55:50.Front's Keith Flett. And in a Daily Politics exclusive -
:55:51. > :55:53.and on this show, we take our exclusives where we can get them -
:55:54. > :55:57.he's going to reveal So first, Keith, tell us
:55:58. > :56:22.about this late surge Yes, the SNP came within a close
:56:23. > :56:27.shave. Both the SNP and Mr Corbyn's supporters. The elevation of Mr
:56:28. > :56:32.Corbyn to Labour leader must have created more interest in this. It
:56:33. > :56:35.has. I am not sure it did him a favour, because he was behind for
:56:36. > :56:39.most of the poll, until the last minute. I think being leader is
:56:40. > :56:44.different to being on the backbenches. On the backbenches, one
:56:45. > :56:49.does what one likes. Don't tell us who has won yet, but let's build up
:56:50. > :56:56.to it. Are you surprised by the winner? I am a bit, actually. Did he
:56:57. > :57:01.win by a big margin, or was it a close shave? Close shave. Who gets
:57:02. > :57:06.to vote? Anybody can vote in an online poll, but only once. So it
:57:07. > :57:12.could be fixed. We keep a close eye on that. You have anti-corruption
:57:13. > :57:16.policing. The last time I looked, SNP supporters were still tried to
:57:17. > :57:21.vote, but we took the pole down this morning. And before we find out who
:57:22. > :57:30.has won bid of the year, what does the beard represent to you? It is
:57:31. > :57:32.gravitas. It is positive in terms of the appearance. Obviously, we can
:57:33. > :57:37.all think of people where that doesn't apply, so we tend to focus
:57:38. > :57:41.on the more positive side. We will not give it to us on a Bin Laden,
:57:42. > :57:47.who is dead now anyway. He would not appreciated. Are you going to give
:57:48. > :58:00.the envelope to me? The Beard of the Year. It doesn't get better than
:58:01. > :58:09.this. He has done it again, for it is Jeremy Corbyn. Sixth time in a
:58:10. > :58:14.row? Not in a row, but he has won it six times. Very narrow this year.
:58:15. > :58:20.The SNP guy, Stuart McDonald, is another becoming beard. A tip for
:58:21. > :58:25.years to come. The star Corbyn, congratulations. You are the Beard
:58:26. > :58:26.of the Year 2015. Thank you for giving us our first exclusive in 25
:58:27. > :58:34.years. chancellor Ed Balls
:58:35. > :58:36.agreed to take part in? It is the great British bake off,
:58:37. > :58:47.British Bake Off? It is the great British bake off,
:58:48. > :58:52.and Dave is going to get the grease-proof paper when she forgets
:58:53. > :58:54.the eggs and all that. They recorded it weeks ago. I
:58:55. > :58:55.the eggs and all that. They recorded could get another scoop!
:58:56. > :59:00.The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.
:59:01. > :59:05.I'll be back on Sunday with the Sunday Politics.
:59:06. > :59:08.My guests will include former Labour leadership contender