0:00:37 > 0:00:39Morning, everyone.
0:00:39 > 0:00:41I'm Sarah Smith, and welcome to The Sunday Politics,
0:00:41 > 0:00:44where we always bring you everything you need to know to understand
0:00:44 > 0:00:45what's going on in politics.
0:00:45 > 0:00:49Coming up on today's programme...
0:00:49 > 0:00:51The Government says
0:00:51 > 0:00:53the international trade minister Mark Garnier will be investigated
0:00:53 > 0:00:56following newspaper allegations of inappropriate behaviour
0:00:56 > 0:00:58towards a female staff member.
0:00:58 > 0:01:04We'll have the latest.
0:01:04 > 0:01:07The Prime Minister says she can agree a deal with the EU and plenty
0:01:07 > 0:01:13of time for Parliament to vote on it before we leave in 2018. Well
0:01:13 > 0:01:21Parliament play ball? New evidence cast out on the
0:01:21 > 0:01:23Warnings of a new health scandal affecting thousands
0:01:23 > 0:01:24of women in our region.
0:01:24 > 0:01:27Labour calls for an enquiry.
0:01:27 > 0:01:29And should taxpayers' money be used to buy Teesside airport?
0:01:29 > 0:01:31on from the abortion act white MPs are lobbying the Home Secretary to
0:01:31 > 0:01:38stop the alleged harassment of women attending abortion clinics.
0:01:38 > 0:01:40All that coming up in the programme.
0:01:40 > 0:01:43And with me today to help make sense of all the big stories,
0:01:43 > 0:01:47Julia Hartley-Brewer, Steve Richards and Anne McElvoy.
0:01:47 > 0:01:49Some breaking news this morning.
0:01:49 > 0:01:51The Government has announced that it will investigate
0:01:51 > 0:01:53whether the International Trade Minister Mark Garnier broke
0:01:53 > 0:01:55the Ministerial Code following allegations
0:01:55 > 0:02:00of inappropriate behaviour.
0:02:00 > 0:02:04It comes after reports in the Mail on Sunday which has spoken to one
0:02:04 > 0:02:05of Mr Garnier's former employees.
0:02:05 > 0:02:07News of the investigation was announced by the Health
0:02:07 > 0:02:09Secretary Jeremy Hunt on the Andrew Marr show earlier.
0:02:09 > 0:02:13The stories, if they are true, are totally unacceptable
0:02:13 > 0:02:15and the Cabinet Office will be conducting an investigation
0:02:15 > 0:02:18as to whether there has been a breach of the ministerial code
0:02:18 > 0:02:19in this particular case.
0:02:19 > 0:02:21But as you know the facts are disputed.
0:02:21 > 0:02:24This is something that covers behaviour by MPs of all parties
0:02:24 > 0:02:27and that is why the other thing that is going to happen
0:02:27 > 0:02:30is that today Theresa May is going to write to John Bercow,
0:02:30 > 0:02:34the Speaker of the House of Commons, to ask for his advice as to how
0:02:34 > 0:02:40we change that culture.
0:02:40 > 0:02:44That was Jeremy Hunt a little earlier. I want to turn to the panel
0:02:44 > 0:02:49to make sense of this news. This is the government taking these
0:02:49 > 0:02:52allegations quite seriously.What has changed in this story is they
0:02:52 > 0:02:57used to be a bit of delay while people work out what they should say
0:02:57 > 0:03:02about it, how seriously to take it. As you see now a senior cabinet
0:03:02 > 0:03:06member out there, Jeremy Hunt, with an instant response. He does have
0:03:06 > 0:03:10the worry of whether the facts are disputed, but what they want to be
0:03:10 > 0:03:15seen doing is to do something very quickly. In the past they would say
0:03:15 > 0:03:20it was all part of the rough and tumble of Westminster.Mark Garnier
0:03:20 > 0:03:24does not deny these stories, which is that he asked an employee to buy
0:03:24 > 0:03:29sex toys, but he said it was just high jinks and it was taken out of
0:03:29 > 0:03:32context. Is this the sort of thing that a few years ago in a different
0:03:32 > 0:03:38environment would be investigated? Not necessarily quite the frenzy
0:03:38 > 0:03:46that it is nowadays. The combination of social media, all the Sunday
0:03:46 > 0:03:48political programmes were ministers have to go on armed with a response
0:03:48 > 0:03:56means that you get these we have to be seen to be doing something. That
0:03:56 > 0:04:00means there is this Cabinet Office investigation. You pointed out to us
0:04:00 > 0:04:04before the programme that he was not a minister before this happened. It
0:04:04 > 0:04:08does not matter whether he says yes, know I did this or did not,
0:04:08 > 0:04:13something has to be seen to be done. Clearly ministers today are being
0:04:13 > 0:04:17armed with that bit of information and that Theresa May will ask John
0:04:17 > 0:04:21Bercow the speaker to look into the whole culture of Parliament in this
0:04:21 > 0:04:27context. That is the response to this kind of frenzy.If we do live
0:04:27 > 0:04:30in an environment where something has to be seen to be done, does that
0:04:30 > 0:04:36always mean the right thing gets done?Absolutely not. We are in
0:04:36 > 0:04:40witch hunt territory. All of us work in the Commons over many years and
0:04:40 > 0:04:45anyone would think it was a scene out of Benny Hill or a carry on
0:04:45 > 0:04:50film. Sadly it is not that much fun and it is rather dull and dreary.
0:04:50 > 0:04:55Yes, there are sex pests, yes, there is sexual harassment, but the idea
0:04:55 > 0:04:59this is going on on a huge scale is nonsense.Doesn't matter whether it
0:04:59 > 0:05:06is a huge scale or not? Or just a few instances?Any workplace where
0:05:06 > 0:05:11you have the mixing of work and social so intertwined and you throw
0:05:11 > 0:05:14a huge amount of alcohol and late night and people living away from
0:05:14 > 0:05:21home you will have this happen.That does not make it OK.It makes sexual
0:05:21 > 0:05:25harassment not OK as it is not anywhere. This happens to men as
0:05:25 > 0:05:30well and if they have an issue into it there are employment tribunal 's
0:05:30 > 0:05:34and they can contact lawyers. I do not think this should be a matter of
0:05:34 > 0:05:40the speaker, it should be someone completely independent of any party.
0:05:40 > 0:05:45People think MPs are employees of the party or the Commons, they are
0:05:45 > 0:05:48not.Because they are self-employed to whom do you go if you are a
0:05:48 > 0:05:54researcher?That has to be clarified. I agree you need a much
0:05:54 > 0:06:00clearer line of reporting. It was a bit like the situation when we came
0:06:00 > 0:06:05into the media many years ago, the Punic wars in my case! You were not
0:06:05 > 0:06:13quite sure who to go to. If you work worried that it might impede your
0:06:13 > 0:06:18career, and you had to talk to people who work next to you, that is
0:06:18 > 0:06:22just one example, but in the Commons people do not know who they should
0:06:22 > 0:06:26go to. Where Theresa May might be making a mistake, it is the same
0:06:26 > 0:06:30mistake when it was decided to investigate through Levinson the
0:06:30 > 0:06:36culture of the media which was like nailing jelly to a wall. Look at the
0:06:36 > 0:06:39culture of anybody's job and the environment they are in and there is
0:06:39 > 0:06:44usually a lot wrong with it. When you try and make it general, they
0:06:44 > 0:06:50are not trying to blame individuals, or it say they need a better line on
0:06:50 > 0:06:54reporting of sexual harassment, which I support, the Commons is a
0:06:54 > 0:06:58funny place and it is a rough old trade and you are never going to
0:06:58 > 0:07:02iron out the human foibles of that. Diane Abbott was talking about this
0:07:02 > 0:07:07earlier.
0:07:07 > 0:07:10When I first went into Parliament so many of those men had been to all
0:07:10 > 0:07:17boys boarding schools and had really difficult attitudes towards women.
0:07:17 > 0:07:21The world has moved on and middle-aged women are less likely
0:07:21 > 0:07:30than middle-aged men to believe that young research are irresistibly
0:07:30 > 0:07:36attracted to them. We have seen the issues and we have seen one of our
0:07:36 > 0:07:42colleagues been suspended for quite unacceptable language.
0:07:42 > 0:07:46That is a point, Jarrod O'Mara, a Labour MP who has had the whip
0:07:46 > 0:07:51suspended, this goes across all parties.The idea that there is a
0:07:51 > 0:07:56left or right divide over this is absurd. This is a cultural issue. In
0:07:56 > 0:08:01the media and in a lot of other institutions if this is going to
0:08:01 > 0:08:05develop politically, the frenzy will carry on for a bit and other names
0:08:05 > 0:08:09will come out over the next few days, not just the two we have
0:08:09 > 0:08:16mentioned so far in politics. But it also raises questions about how
0:08:16 > 0:08:21candidates are selected for example. There has been a huge pressure for
0:08:21 > 0:08:26the centre to keep out of things. I bet from now on there will be much
0:08:26 > 0:08:31greater scrutiny of all candidates and tweets will have to be looked at
0:08:31 > 0:08:37and all the rest of it.Selecting candidates is interesting. Miriam
0:08:37 > 0:08:41Gonzalez, Nick Clegg's wife, says that during that election they knew
0:08:41 > 0:08:46about Jarrod O'Mara and the Lib Dems knew about it, so it is difficult to
0:08:46 > 0:08:52suggest the Labour Party did not as well.There is very clear evidence
0:08:52 > 0:08:56the Labour Party did know. But we are in a situation of how perfect
0:08:56 > 0:09:03and well-behaved does everyone have to be? If you look at past American
0:09:03 > 0:09:07presidents, JFK and Bill Clinton, these men were sex pest
0:09:07 > 0:09:11extraordinaire, with totally inappropriate behaviour on a regular
0:09:11 > 0:09:15basis. There are things you are not allowed to say if you are feminists.
0:09:15 > 0:09:20Young women are really attracted to powerful men. I was busted for the
0:09:20 > 0:09:24idea that there are young women in the House of commons who are
0:09:24 > 0:09:31throwing themselves at middle-aged, potbellied, balding, older men. We
0:09:31 > 0:09:37need to focus on the right things. When it is unwanted, harassing,
0:09:37 > 0:09:40inappropriate and criminal, absolutely, you come down like a
0:09:40 > 0:09:44tonne of bricks. It is not just because there are more women in the
0:09:44 > 0:09:48Commons, it is because there are more men married to women like us.
0:09:48 > 0:09:51We have to leave it there.
0:09:51 > 0:09:53As attention turns in Westminster to the hundreds
0:09:53 > 0:09:56of amendments put down on the EU Withdrawal Bill, David Davis has
0:09:56 > 0:09:59caused a stir this week by saying it's possible Parliament won't get
0:09:59 > 0:10:02a vote on the Brexit deal until after March 2019 -
0:10:02 > 0:10:04when the clock runs out and we leave the EU.
0:10:04 > 0:10:06Let's take a look at how the controversy played out.
0:10:06 > 0:10:11And which point do you envisage Parliament having a vote?
0:10:11 > 0:10:12As soon as possible thereafter.
0:10:12 > 0:10:15This Parliament?
0:10:15 > 0:10:17As soon as possible possible thereafter, yeah.
0:10:17 > 0:10:18As soon as possible thereafter.
0:10:18 > 0:10:20So, the vote in Parliament...
0:10:20 > 0:10:21The other thing...
0:10:21 > 0:10:22Could be after March 2019?
0:10:22 > 0:10:24It could be, yeah, it could be.
0:10:24 > 0:10:26The...
0:10:26 > 0:10:27It depends when it concludes.
0:10:27 > 0:10:29Mr Barnier, remember, has said he'd like...
0:10:29 > 0:10:32Sorry, the vote of our Parliament, the UK Parliament, could be
0:10:32 > 0:10:33after March 2019?
0:10:33 > 0:10:35Yes, it could be.
0:10:35 > 0:10:37Could be.
0:10:37 > 0:10:38The thing to member...
0:10:38 > 0:10:40Which would be...
0:10:40 > 0:10:42Well, it can't come before we have the deal.
0:10:42 > 0:10:45You said that it is POSSIBLE that Parliament night not vote
0:10:45 > 0:10:48on the deal until AFTER the end of March 2019.
0:10:48 > 0:10:50I'm summarising correctly what you said...?
0:10:50 > 0:10:51Yeah, that's correct.
0:10:51 > 0:10:54In the event we don't do the deal until then, yeah.
0:10:54 > 0:10:56Can the Prime Minister please explain how it's possible
0:10:56 > 0:10:58to have a meaningful vote on something that's
0:10:58 > 0:11:03already taken place?
0:11:03 > 0:11:07As the honourable gentleman knows, we're in negotiations
0:11:07 > 0:11:09with the European Union, but I am confident that the timetable under
0:11:09 > 0:11:13the Lisbon Treaty does give time until March 2019
0:11:13 > 0:11:15for the negotiations to take place.
0:11:15 > 0:11:18But I'm confident, because it is in the interests of both sides,
0:11:18 > 0:11:21it's not just this Parliament that wants to have a vote on that deal,
0:11:21 > 0:11:23but actually there will be ratification by other parliaments,
0:11:23 > 0:11:28that we will be able to achieve that agreement and that negotiation
0:11:28 > 0:11:32in time for this Parliament to have a vote that we committed to.
0:11:32 > 0:11:34We are working to reach an agreement on the final deal
0:11:34 > 0:11:37in good time before we leave the European Union in March 2019.
0:11:37 > 0:11:39Clearly, we cannot say for certain at this stage
0:11:39 > 0:11:41when this will be agreed.
0:11:41 > 0:11:44But as Michel Barnier said, he hopes to get a draft deal
0:11:44 > 0:11:49agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim is well.
0:11:49 > 0:11:53agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim as well.
0:11:53 > 0:11:55I'm joined now by the former Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary
0:11:55 > 0:11:57Benn, who is the chair of the Commons Brexit Committee,
0:11:57 > 0:12:01which David Davis was giving evidence to.
0:12:01 > 0:12:07Good morning.When you think a parliamentary vote should take place
0:12:07 > 0:12:12in order for it to be meaningful?It has to be before we leave the
0:12:12 > 0:12:15European Union. Michel Barnier said at the start of the negotiations
0:12:15 > 0:12:20that he wants to wrap them up by October of next year, so we have
0:12:20 > 0:12:23only got 12 months left, the clock is ticking and there is a huge
0:12:23 > 0:12:27amount of ground to cover.You do not think there is any point in
0:12:27 > 0:12:38having the vote the week before we leave because you could then not go
0:12:38 > 0:12:41and re-negotiate?That would not be acceptable. We will not be given a
0:12:41 > 0:12:44bit of paper and told to take it or leave it. But the following day
0:12:44 > 0:12:48Steve Baker, also a minister in the department, told our committee that
0:12:48 > 0:12:51the government now accepts that in order to implement transitional
0:12:51 > 0:12:55arrangements that it is seeking, it will need separate legislation. I
0:12:55 > 0:12:59put the question to him if you are going to need separate legislation
0:12:59 > 0:13:04to do that, why don't you have a separate bill to implement the
0:13:04 > 0:13:06withdrawal agreement rather than seeking to use the powers the
0:13:06 > 0:13:11government is proposing to take in the EU withdrawal bill.If we stick
0:13:11 > 0:13:15to the timing, you have said you do not think it is possible to
0:13:15 > 0:13:19negotiate a trade deal in the next 12 months. You say the only people
0:13:19 > 0:13:24who think that is possible British ministers. If you do not believe we
0:13:24 > 0:13:29can get a deal negotiated, how can we get a vote on it in 12 months'
0:13:29 > 0:13:33time?If things go well, and there is still a risk of no agreement
0:13:33 > 0:13:48which would be disastrous for the economy and the country, if
0:13:52 > 0:13:55things go there will be a deal on the divorce issues, there will be a
0:13:55 > 0:13:57deal on the nature of the transitional arrangement and the
0:13:57 > 0:14:00government is to set out how it thinks that will work, and then an
0:14:00 > 0:14:03agreement between the UK and the 27 member states saying, we will now
0:14:03 > 0:14:05negotiate a new trade and market access arrangement, and new
0:14:05 > 0:14:07association agreement between the two parties, and that will be done
0:14:07 > 0:14:09in the transition period. Parliament will be voting in those
0:14:09 > 0:14:14circumstances on a deal which leads to the door being open.But we would
0:14:14 > 0:14:19be outside the EU at that point, so how meaningful can vote be where you
0:14:19 > 0:14:24take it or leave it if we have already left the EU? Surely this has
0:14:24 > 0:14:30to happen before March 2019 for it to make a difference?I do not think
0:14:30 > 0:14:34it is possible to negotiate all of the issues that will need to be
0:14:34 > 0:14:39covered in the time available.Then it is not possible to have a
0:14:39 > 0:14:50meaningful vote on it?Parliament will have to have a look at the deal
0:14:50 > 0:14:53presented to it. It is likely to be a mix agreement so the approval
0:14:53 > 0:14:55process in the rest of Europe, unlike the Article 50 agreement,
0:14:55 > 0:14:58which will be a majority vote in the European Parliament and in the
0:14:58 > 0:15:01British Parliament, every single Parliament will have a vote on it,
0:15:01 > 0:15:06so it will be a more complex process anyway, but I do not think that is
0:15:06 > 0:15:12the time to get all of that sorted between now and October next year.
0:15:12 > 0:15:16Whether it is before or after we have left the EU, the government
0:15:16 > 0:15:21have said it is a take it or leave it option and it is the Noel Edmonds
0:15:21 > 0:15:28option, deal or no Deal, you say yes or no to it. You cannot send them
0:15:28 > 0:15:32back to re-negotiate.
0:15:32 > 0:15:38If it is a separate piece of legislation, when Parliament has a
0:15:38 > 0:15:43chance to shape the nature of that legislation.But it can't change
0:15:43 > 0:15:47what has been negotiated with the EU?Well, you could say to the
0:15:47 > 0:15:52government, we're happy with this but was not happy about that chukka
0:15:52 > 0:15:57here's some fresh instructions, go back in and...It seems to me what
0:15:57 > 0:16:01they want is the maximum access to the single market for the lowest
0:16:01 > 0:16:06possible tariffs, whilst able to control migration. If they've got to
0:16:06 > 0:16:10get the best deal that they can on that, how on earth is the Labour
0:16:10 > 0:16:14Party, saying we want a bit more, owing to persuade the other 27?We
0:16:14 > 0:16:18certainly don't want the lowest possible tariffs, we want no tariffs
0:16:18 > 0:16:22are taught. My personal view is that, has made a profound mistake in
0:16:22 > 0:16:28deciding that it wants to leave the customs union. If you want to help
0:16:28 > 0:16:32deal with the very serious question of the border between Northern
0:16:32 > 0:16:36Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, the way you do that is to stay in
0:16:36 > 0:16:41the customs union and I hope, will change its mind.But the Labour
0:16:41 > 0:16:45Party is simply saying in the House of Commons, we want a better deal
0:16:45 > 0:16:52than what, has been able to get?It depends how the negotiations unfold.
0:16:52 > 0:16:57, has ended up on the transitional arrangements in the place that Keir
0:16:57 > 0:17:03Starmer set out on behalf of the shadow cabinet in August, when he
0:17:03 > 0:17:06said, we will need to stay in the single market and the customs union
0:17:06 > 0:17:10for the duration of the transition, and I think that is the position,
0:17:10 > 0:17:14has now reached. It has not been helped by differences of view within
0:17:14 > 0:17:18the Cabinet, and a lot of time has passed and there's proved time left
0:17:18 > 0:17:24and we have not even got on to the negotiations. -- there's very little
0:17:24 > 0:17:29time left.On phase two, the labour Party have set out six clear tests,
0:17:29 > 0:17:34and two of them are crucial. You say you want the exact same benefits we
0:17:34 > 0:17:38currently have in the customs union but you also want to be able to
0:17:38 > 0:17:42ensure the fair migration to control immigration, basically, which does
0:17:42 > 0:17:45sound a bit like having your cake and eating it. You say that you will
0:17:45 > 0:17:49vote against any deal that doesn't give you all of that, the exact same
0:17:49 > 0:17:53benefits of the single market, and allowing you to control migration.
0:17:53 > 0:17:57But you say no deal would be catastrophic if so it seems to me
0:17:57 > 0:18:00you're unlikely to get the deal that you could vote for but you don't
0:18:00 > 0:18:05want to vote for no deal?We absolutely don't want a no deal.
0:18:05 > 0:18:11Businesses have sent a letter to the Prime Minister saying that a
0:18:11 > 0:18:14transition is essential because the possibility of a no deal and no
0:18:14 > 0:18:17transitional would be very damaging for the economy. We fought the
0:18:17 > 0:18:20general election on a policy of seeking to retain the benefits of
0:18:20 > 0:18:24the single market and the customs union. Keir Starmer said on behalf
0:18:24 > 0:18:29of the shadow government that as far as the longer term arrangements are
0:18:29 > 0:18:32concerned, that should leave all options on the table, because it is
0:18:32 > 0:18:36the end that you're trying to achieve and you then find the means
0:18:36 > 0:18:41to support it. So we're setting out very clearly those tests.If you
0:18:41 > 0:18:44were to vote down an agreement because it did not meet your tests,
0:18:44 > 0:18:50and there was time to send, back to the EU to get a better deal, then
0:18:50 > 0:18:52you would have significantly weakened their negotiating hand
0:18:52 > 0:18:57chukka that doesn't help them?I don't think, has deployed its
0:18:57 > 0:19:01negotiating hand very strongly thus far. Because we had a general
0:19:01 > 0:19:04election which meant that we lost time that we would have used for
0:19:04 > 0:19:08negotiating. We still don't know what kind of long-term trade and
0:19:08 > 0:19:15market access deal, wants. The Prime Minister says, I don't want a deal
0:19:15 > 0:19:19like Canada and I don't want a deal like the European Economic Area. But
0:19:19 > 0:19:23we still don't know what kind of deal they want. With about 12 months
0:19:23 > 0:19:27to go, the other thing, needs to do is to set out very clearly above all
0:19:27 > 0:19:32for the benefit of the other 27 European countries, what kind of
0:19:32 > 0:19:35deal it wants. When I travel to Europe and talk to those involved in
0:19:35 > 0:19:41the negotiations, you see other leaders saying, we don't actually
0:19:41 > 0:19:44know what Britain wants. With a year to go it is about time we made that
0:19:44 > 0:19:50clear.One related question on the European Union - you spoke in your
0:19:50 > 0:19:54famous speech in Syria about the international brigades in Spain, and
0:19:54 > 0:19:58I wonder if your solidarity with them leads you to think that the UK
0:19:58 > 0:20:01Government should be recognising Catalonia is an independent state?
0:20:01 > 0:20:06No, I don't think so. It is a very difficult and potentially dangerous
0:20:06 > 0:20:11situation in Catalonia at the moment. Direct rule from Madrid is
0:20:11 > 0:20:16not a long-term solution. There needs to be a negotiation, and
0:20:16 > 0:20:20elections will give Catalonia the chance to take that decision, but I
0:20:20 > 0:20:27am not clear what the declaration of independence actually means. Are
0:20:27 > 0:20:31they going to be borders, is they're going to be an army? There will have
0:20:31 > 0:20:34to be some agreement. Catalonia has already had a high degree of
0:20:34 > 0:20:39autonomy. It may like some more, and it seems to me if you look at the
0:20:39 > 0:20:44experience here in the United Kingdom, that is the way to go, not
0:20:44 > 0:20:47a constitutional stand-off. And I really hope nobody is charged with
0:20:47 > 0:20:51rebellion, because actually that would make matters worse.
0:20:51 > 0:20:55Now, the Government has this week reopened the public
0:20:55 > 0:20:58consultation on plans for a third runway at Heathrow.
0:20:58 > 0:21:00While ministers are clear the £18 billion project
0:21:00 > 0:21:02is still the preferred option, new data raises further questions
0:21:02 > 0:21:03about the environmental impact of expansion,
0:21:03 > 0:21:06and offers an improved economic case for a second
0:21:06 > 0:21:07runway at Gatwick instead.
0:21:07 > 0:21:10So, with opponents on all sides of the Commons, does the Government
0:21:10 > 0:21:12still have the votes to get the plans off the ground?
0:21:12 > 0:21:21Here's Elizabeth Glinka.
0:21:26 > 0:21:28The debate over the expansion of Heathrow has been
0:21:28 > 0:21:29going on for decades.
0:21:29 > 0:21:31Plans for a third runway were first introduced
0:21:31 > 0:21:33by the Labour government in 2003.
0:21:33 > 0:21:37Then, after spending millions of pounds, finally, in 2015,
0:21:37 > 0:21:42the airport commission recommended that those plans go ahead,
0:21:42 > 0:21:45and the government position appeared to be fixed.
0:21:45 > 0:21:48But, of course, since then, we've had a general election.
0:21:48 > 0:21:52The Government have lost their Commons majority.
0:21:52 > 0:21:55And with opposition on both front benches, the Parliamentary
0:21:55 > 0:21:59arithmetic looks a little bit up in the air.
0:21:59 > 0:22:02A lot has changed since the airport commission produced its report,
0:22:02 > 0:22:05and that don't forget was the bedrock for the Government's
0:22:05 > 0:22:07decision, that's why the government supposedly made the decision
0:22:07 > 0:22:08that it made.
0:22:08 > 0:22:11But most of the assumptions made in that report have
0:22:11 > 0:22:13been undermined since, by data on passenger numbers,
0:22:13 > 0:22:16on economic benefits, and more than anything, on pollution.
0:22:16 > 0:22:19There's demand from international carriers to get into Heathrow.
0:22:19 > 0:22:22More and more people want to fly.
0:22:22 > 0:22:25And after the referendum, connectivity post-Brexit
0:22:25 > 0:22:29is going to be absolutely critical to the UK economy, so if anything,
0:22:29 > 0:22:35I think the case is stronger for expansion at Heathrow.
0:22:35 > 0:22:37A vote on expansion had been due to take place this summer.
0:22:37 > 0:22:39But with Westminster somewhat distracted, that didn't happen.
0:22:39 > 0:22:42Now, fresh data means the Government has had to reopen
0:22:42 > 0:22:48the public consultation.
0:22:48 > 0:22:51But it maintains the case for Heathrow is as strong as ever,
0:22:51 > 0:22:57delivering benefits of up to £74 billion to the wider economy.
0:22:57 > 0:22:59And in any case, the Government says, action must be taken,
0:22:59 > 0:23:04as all five of London's airports will be completely
0:23:04 > 0:23:08full by the mid-2030s.
0:23:08 > 0:23:10Still, the new research does cast an alternative expansion at Gatwick
0:23:10 > 0:23:14in a more favourable economic light, while showing Heathrow
0:23:14 > 0:23:22is now less likely to meet its environmental targets.
0:23:22 > 0:23:26Campaigners like these in Hounslow sense the wind is shifting.
0:23:26 > 0:23:29We're feeling encouraged, because we see all kinds
0:23:29 > 0:23:31of weaknesses in the argument.
0:23:31 > 0:23:34Certainly, quite a few MPs, I think certainly Labour MPs,
0:23:34 > 0:23:37are beginning to think perhaps it's not such a great idea
0:23:37 > 0:23:39to have a third runway.
0:23:39 > 0:23:41Their MP is convinced colleagues can now be persuaded
0:23:41 > 0:23:44to see things their way.
0:23:44 > 0:23:46The Labour Party quite rightly set four key tests
0:23:46 > 0:23:49for a third runway at Heathrow.
0:23:49 > 0:23:52And in my view, Heathrow is not able...
0:23:52 > 0:23:56The Heathrow option is not able to pass any of those.
0:23:56 > 0:23:59So, I see a lot of colleagues in the Labour Party around
0:23:59 > 0:24:01the country beginning to think twice.
0:24:01 > 0:24:07And if you look at the cross-party MPs supportin this anti-Heathrow
0:24:07 > 0:24:10And if you look at the cross-party MPs supporting this anti-Heathrow
0:24:10 > 0:24:13protest this week, you will see some familiar faces.
0:24:13 > 0:24:15You know my position - as the constituency MP,
0:24:15 > 0:24:16I'm totally opposed.
0:24:16 > 0:24:19I think this is another indication of just the difficulties
0:24:19 > 0:24:21the Government have got off of implementing this policy.
0:24:21 > 0:24:23I don't think it's going to happen, I just don't think
0:24:23 > 0:24:24it's going to happen.
0:24:24 > 0:24:27So, if some on the Labour front bench are, shall
0:24:27 > 0:24:30we say, not supportive, what about the other side?
0:24:30 > 0:24:33In a free vote, we could have had up to 60 Conservative MPs
0:24:33 > 0:24:35voting against expansion, that's the number that is normally
0:24:35 > 0:24:36used and I think it's right.
0:24:36 > 0:24:38In the circumstances where it requires an active rebellion,
0:24:38 > 0:24:40the numbers would be fewer.
0:24:40 > 0:24:43I can't tell you what that number is, but I can tell
0:24:43 > 0:24:46you that there are people right the way through the party,
0:24:46 > 0:24:48from the backbenches to the heart of the government,
0:24:48 > 0:24:49who will vote against Heathrow expansion.
0:24:49 > 0:24:53And yet the SNP, whose Commons votes could prove vital,
0:24:53 > 0:24:55are behind the Heathrow plan, which promises more
0:24:55 > 0:24:56connecting flights.
0:24:56 > 0:25:00And other supporters are convinced they have the numbers.
0:25:00 > 0:25:03There is a majority of members of Parliament that support Heathrow
0:25:03 > 0:25:06expansion, and when that is put to the test, whenever that will be,
0:25:06 > 0:25:08I think that will be clearly demonstrated.
0:25:08 > 0:25:11Any vote on this issue won't come until next summer.
0:25:11 > 0:25:13For both sides, yet more time to argue about weather
0:25:13 > 0:25:20the plans should take off or be permanently grounded.
0:25:24 > 0:25:25Elizabeth Glinka there.
0:25:25 > 0:25:28And I'm joined now by the former Cabinet minister Theresa Villiers,
0:25:28 > 0:25:30who oversaw aviation policy as a transport minister
0:25:30 > 0:25:37under David Cameron.
0:25:37 > 0:25:42Thanks for coming in. You have made your opposition to a third runway at
0:25:42 > 0:25:46Heathrow consistently clear. , have reopened this consultation but it is
0:25:46 > 0:25:50still clearly their preferred option?It is but what I have always
0:25:50 > 0:25:53asked is, why try to build a new runway at Heathrow when you can
0:25:53 > 0:25:56build one at Gatwick in half the time, for half the cost and with a
0:25:56 > 0:26:00tiny fraction of the environment will cost average is that true,
0:26:00 > 0:26:04though? Private finance is already to go at Heathrow, because that's
0:26:04 > 0:26:07where people want to do it and that's where the private backers
0:26:07 > 0:26:11want to put it. It would take much longer to get the private finance
0:26:11 > 0:26:16for Gatwick? Part of that private finance is passengers of the future,
0:26:16 > 0:26:21but also, the costs of the surface transport needed to expand Heathrow
0:26:21 > 0:26:29is phenomenal. I mean, TfL estimates vary between £10 billion and £15
0:26:29 > 0:26:32billion. And there's no suggestion that those private backers are going
0:26:32 > 0:26:37to meet those costs. So, this is a hugely expensive project as well as
0:26:37 > 0:26:41one which will create very significant damage.Heathrow is
0:26:41 > 0:26:44ultimately where passengers and airlines want to go to, isn't it?
0:26:44 > 0:26:49Every slot is practically full. Every time a new one comes up, it is
0:26:49 > 0:26:54up immediately, it's a very popular airport. Gatwick is not where they
0:26:54 > 0:26:58want to go?There are many airlines and passengers who do want to fly
0:26:58 > 0:27:02from Gatwick, and all the forecasts indicate that a new runway there
0:27:02 > 0:27:06would be full of planes very rapidly. But I think the key thing
0:27:06 > 0:27:11is that successive elements have said, technology will deliver a way
0:27:11 > 0:27:17to resolve the around noise and air quality. I don't have any confidence
0:27:17 > 0:27:22that science has demonstrated that technology will deliver those
0:27:22 > 0:27:26solutions to these very serious environmental limbs which have
0:27:26 > 0:27:28stopped Heathrow expansion for decades.Jim Fitzpatrick in the film
0:27:28 > 0:27:33was mentioning that people think there is a need for even more
0:27:33 > 0:27:36collectivity in Britain post-Brexit. We know that business has been
0:27:36 > 0:27:40crying out for more routes, they really think it hurts business
0:27:40 > 0:27:44expansion that we don't get on with this. More consultation is just
0:27:44 > 0:27:48going to lead to more delay, isn't it?This is a hugely controversial
0:27:48 > 0:27:51decision. There is a reason why people have been talking about
0:27:51 > 0:27:55expanding Heathrow for 50 years and it is never happened, it's because
0:27:55 > 0:27:59it's a bad idea. So, inevitably the legal processes are very complex.
0:27:59 > 0:28:04One of my anxieties about, pursuing this option is that potentially it
0:28:04 > 0:28:07means another lost decade for airport expansion. Because the
0:28:07 > 0:28:13problems with Heathrow expansion are so serious, I believe that's one of
0:28:13 > 0:28:16the reasons why I advocated, anyone who wants a new runway in the
0:28:16 > 0:28:20south-east should be backing Gatwick is a much more deliverable option.
0:28:20 > 0:28:26Let me move on to Brexit. We were talking with Hilary Benn about a
0:28:26 > 0:28:29meaningful vote being given to the House of Commons chukka how
0:28:29 > 0:28:32important do you think that is?Of course the Commons will vote on
0:28:32 > 0:28:38this. The Commons is going to vote on this many, many times. We have
0:28:38 > 0:28:41also had a hugely important vote not only in the referendum on the 23rd
0:28:41 > 0:28:45of June but also on Article 50.But will that vote allow any changes to
0:28:45 > 0:28:51it? Hilary Benn seemed to think that the Commons would be able to shape
0:28:51 > 0:28:55the deal with the vote. But actually is it going to be, saying, take it
0:28:55 > 0:29:00or leave it at all what we have negotiated?Our Prime Minister
0:29:00 > 0:29:05negotiates on our behalf internationally. It's
0:29:05 > 0:29:07well-established precedent that after an agreement is reached
0:29:07 > 0:29:13overseas, then it is considered in the House of Commons.What if it was
0:29:13 > 0:29:17voted down in the House of Commons? Well, the legal effect of that would
0:29:17 > 0:29:20be that we left the European Union without any kind of deal, because
0:29:20 > 0:29:25the key decision was on the voting of Article 50 as an irreversible
0:29:25 > 0:29:30decision.Is it irreversible, though? We understand, may have had
0:29:30 > 0:29:34legal advice saying that Yukon stopped the clock on Article 50.
0:29:34 > 0:29:38Would it not be possible if the Commons voted against to ask the
0:29:38 > 0:29:41European Union for a little bit more time to try and renegotiate?There
0:29:41 > 0:29:49is a debate about the reversibility of Article 50. But the key point is
0:29:49 > 0:29:55that we are all working for a good deal for the United Kingdom and the
0:29:55 > 0:29:59I'm concerned that some of the amendments to the legislation are
0:29:59 > 0:30:02not about the nature of the deal at the end of the process, they're just
0:30:02 > 0:30:09about frustrating the process. I think that would be wrong. I think
0:30:09 > 0:30:12we should respect the result of the referendum.Will it be by next
0:30:12 > 0:30:15summer, so there is time for Parliament and for other
0:30:15 > 0:30:18parliaments?I certainly hope that we get that agreement between the
0:30:18 > 0:30:23two sides, and the recent European summit seemed to indicate a
0:30:23 > 0:30:27willingness from the European side to be constructive. But one point
0:30:27 > 0:30:31where I think Hilary Benn has a point, if we do secure agreement on
0:30:31 > 0:30:34a transitional deal, that does potentially give us more time to
0:30:34 > 0:30:39work on the details of a trade agreement. I hope we get as much as
0:30:39 > 0:30:43possible in place before exit day. But filling out some of that detail
0:30:43 > 0:30:51is made easier if we can secure that two-year transitional deal.
0:30:51 > 0:30:58That is interesting because a lot of Brexiteers what the deal to be done
0:30:58 > 0:31:06by the inflammation period, it is not a time for that.I fully
0:31:06 > 0:31:11recognise we need compromise, I am keen to work with people across my
0:31:11 > 0:31:14party in terms of spectrum of opinion, and with other parties as
0:31:14 > 0:31:19well to ensure we get the best outcome.Let me ask you briefly
0:31:19 > 0:31:23before you go about the possible culture of sexual harassment in the
0:31:23 > 0:31:29House of commons and Theresa May will write to the Speaker of the
0:31:29 > 0:31:32House of Commons to make sure there is a better way that people can
0:31:32 > 0:31:37report sexual harassment in the House of commons. Is that necessary?
0:31:37 > 0:31:42A better procedure is needed. It is sad it has taken this controversy to
0:31:42 > 0:31:47push this forward. But there is a problem with MPs who are individual
0:31:47 > 0:31:52employers. If you work for an MP and have a complaint against them,
0:31:52 > 0:31:55essentially they are overseeing their own complaints process. I
0:31:55 > 0:32:00think a role for the House of commons authorities in ensuring that
0:32:00 > 0:32:04those complaints are properly dealt with I think would be very helpful,
0:32:04 > 0:32:08so I think the Prime Minister's letter was a sensible move.So you
0:32:08 > 0:32:12think there is a culture of sexual harassment in the House of commons?
0:32:12 > 0:32:19I have not been subjected to it or seen evidence of it, but obviously
0:32:19 > 0:32:22there is anxiety and allegations have made their way into the papers
0:32:22 > 0:32:26and they should be treated appropriately and properly
0:32:26 > 0:32:28investigated.Thank you for talking to us.
0:32:28 > 0:32:30Thank you for talking to us.
0:32:30 > 0:32:32Next week the Lord Speaker's committee publishes its final report
0:32:32 > 0:32:34into reducing the size of the House of Lords.
0:32:34 > 0:32:37With over 800 members the upper house is the second largest
0:32:37 > 0:32:39legislative chamber in the world after the National People's
0:32:39 > 0:32:40Congress of China.
0:32:40 > 0:32:43The report is expected to recommend that new peerages should be
0:32:43 > 0:32:46time-limited to 15 years and that in the future political peerage
0:32:46 > 0:32:50appointments will also be tied to a party's election performance.
0:32:50 > 0:32:53The government has been under pressure to take action to cut
0:32:53 > 0:32:56members of the unelected chamber, where they are entitled
0:32:56 > 0:33:00to claim an attendance allowance of £300 a day.
0:33:00 > 0:33:03And once again these expenses have been in the news.
0:33:03 > 0:33:06The Electoral Reform Society discovered that 16 peers had claimed
0:33:06 > 0:33:08around £400,000 without speaking in any debates or submitting any
0:33:08 > 0:33:12questions for an entire year.
0:33:12 > 0:33:15One of the Lords to be criticised was Digby Jones,
0:33:15 > 0:33:18the crossbencher and former trade minister, he hasn't spoken
0:33:18 > 0:33:21in the Lords since April 2016 and has voted only seven times
0:33:21 > 0:33:25during 2016 and 2017.
0:33:25 > 0:33:28Yet he has claimed around £15,000 in this period.
0:33:28 > 0:33:31When asked what he does in the House he said,
0:33:31 > 0:33:34"I go in and I will invite for lunch or meet with inward
0:33:34 > 0:33:35investors into the country.
0:33:35 > 0:33:38I fly the flag for Britain."
0:33:38 > 0:33:41Well, we can speak now to Lord Jones who joins us
0:33:41 > 0:33:45from Stratford Upon Avon.
0:33:45 > 0:33:50Thank you very much for talking to us. You provide value for money in
0:33:50 > 0:33:57the House of Lords do you think? Definitely. I am, by the way, very
0:33:57 > 0:34:02keen on reform. I want to see that 15 year tide. I would like to see a
0:34:02 > 0:34:07time limit, an age limit of 75 or 80. I would like attendants
0:34:07 > 0:34:11definitely define so the whole public understood what people are
0:34:11 > 0:34:18paying for and why. The £300, as a crossbencher I get no support, and
0:34:18 > 0:34:26nor do I want any, speech writing, secretarial assistance, none of
0:34:26 > 0:34:30that, and the £300 goes towards that.Whilst you are in there
0:34:30 > 0:34:35because we will talk about the reform of the Lords in general, but
0:34:35 > 0:34:39in terms of you yourself, you say you invite people in for lunch, is
0:34:39 > 0:34:42it not possible for you to take part in debates and votes and ask
0:34:42 > 0:34:48questions at the same time?Have you ever listened to a debate in the
0:34:48 > 0:35:00laws? Yes, many times.Yes, many times. You have to put your name
0:35:00 > 0:35:08down in advance and you have to be there for the whole debate.You have
0:35:08 > 0:35:11to be around when the vote is called and you do not know when the book is
0:35:11 > 0:35:15called, you have no idea when the boat is going to be called.This is
0:35:15 > 0:35:22part of being a member of the House of Lords and what it means. If you
0:35:22 > 0:35:25are not prepared to wait or take part in debates, why do you want to
0:35:25 > 0:35:30be a member? It is possible to resign from the House of Lords.
0:35:30 > 0:35:34There are many things members of the Lords do that does not relate to
0:35:34 > 0:35:39parrot fashion following somebody else, which I refuse to do, about
0:35:39 > 0:35:44speaking to an empty chamber, or indeed hanging on sometimes for
0:35:44 > 0:35:49hours to vote. There are many other things that you do. You quote me as
0:35:49 > 0:35:53saying I will entertain at lunchtime or show people around the House,
0:35:53 > 0:35:57everything from schoolchildren to inward investors. I will meet
0:35:57 > 0:36:00ministers about big business issues or educational issues, and at the
0:36:00 > 0:36:05same time I will meet other members of the Lords to get things moving.
0:36:05 > 0:36:09None of that relates to going into the House and getting on your hind
0:36:09 > 0:36:13legs, although I do go in and sit there and learn and listen to
0:36:13 > 0:36:19others, which, if more people would receive and not transmit, we might
0:36:19 > 0:36:23get a better informed society. At the same time many times I will go
0:36:23 > 0:36:28after I have listened and I am leaving and if I have not heard the
0:36:28 > 0:36:34debate, I will not vote.Voting is an essential part of being part of a
0:36:34 > 0:36:39legislative chamber. This is not just an executive committee, it is a
0:36:39 > 0:36:45legislature, surpassing that law is essential, is it not?Do you really
0:36:45 > 0:36:49believe that an MP or a member of the Lords who has not heard a moment
0:36:49 > 0:36:55of the debate, who is then listening to the Bell, walks in and does not
0:36:55 > 0:36:59know which lobby, the whips tell him, they have not heard the debate
0:36:59 > 0:37:04and they do not know what they are voting on and they go and do it?
0:37:04 > 0:37:10That is your democracy? Voting seems to be an essential part of this
0:37:10 > 0:37:14chamber, and you have your ideas about reforming the chamber. It
0:37:14 > 0:37:18sounds as though you would reform yourself out of it. You say people
0:37:18 > 0:37:22who are not voting and who are not taking part in debate should no
0:37:22 > 0:37:28longer be members of the House.I did not say that. I said we ought to
0:37:28 > 0:37:33redefine what attendance means and then if you do not attend on the new
0:37:33 > 0:37:37criteria, you do not have to come ever again, we will give you your
0:37:37 > 0:37:42wish. I agree attendance might mean unless you speak, you are going.
0:37:42 > 0:37:47Fair enough, if that is what is agreed, yes. Sometimes I would speak
0:37:47 > 0:37:53and sometimes I would not. If I did not, then off I go. Similarly after
0:37:53 > 0:37:5915 years, off you go. If you reach 75 or 80, off you go. Why do we have
0:37:59 > 0:38:0592 members who are only there because of daddy.You are talking
0:38:05 > 0:38:08about hereditary peers. You would like to reduce the House to what
0:38:08 > 0:38:15kind of number?I would get it down to 400.You would get rid of half
0:38:15 > 0:38:18the peers there at the moment? You think you are active enough to
0:38:18 > 0:38:26remain as one of the 400?No, I said that might well include me. Let's
0:38:26 > 0:38:31get a set of criteria, let's push it through, because the laws is losing
0:38:31 > 0:38:35respect in the whole of the country because there are too many and all
0:38:35 > 0:38:39these things about what people pay for. I bet most people think the
0:38:39 > 0:38:44money you get is paid. It is not, it is re-funding for all the things you
0:38:44 > 0:38:49have to pay for yourself. But I understand how respect has been lost
0:38:49 > 0:38:54in society. Let's change it now. Let's get it through and then, yes,
0:38:54 > 0:38:59if you do not meet the criteria, you have got to go and that includes me.
0:38:59 > 0:39:01Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.
0:39:01 > 0:39:04Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.
0:39:04 > 0:39:06It's coming up to 11.40, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
0:39:06 > 0:39:09Coming up on the programme, we'll be talking to the former
0:39:09 > 0:39:12business minister and Conservative MP Anna Soubry about the Brexit
0:39:12 > 0:39:22negotiations and claims of sexual harassment in Parliament.
0:39:22 > 0:39:27Hello, and the warmest of welcomes to your local part of the show.
0:39:27 > 0:39:30Coming up, MPs warn of a new health scandal
0:39:30 > 0:39:38affecting tens of thousands of women.
0:39:38 > 0:39:40I'll be asking Labour's public health spokeswoman, Wearside MP
0:39:40 > 0:39:44Sharon Hodgson, why she believes an independent enquiry is needed.
0:39:44 > 0:39:45And taxpayers' money was used to buy this
0:39:46 > 0:39:47airport in Scotland.
0:39:47 > 0:39:49So should the same happen to Durham Tees Valley
0:39:49 > 0:39:50Airport?
0:39:50 > 0:39:52Well, the Tees Valley Mayor Ben Houchen, thanks so.
0:39:52 > 0:39:54He's here with me in the studio today.
0:39:54 > 0:39:56But first, there's been the first rise
0:39:56 > 0:39:58in spending on social care for the elderly in seven years.
0:39:58 > 0:40:00Yet the region's councils say they are
0:40:00 > 0:40:03still struggling to provide personal help or places in care homes for all
0:40:03 > 0:40:04of those who need them.
0:40:04 > 0:40:06Unless this problem is sorted out there are fears
0:40:06 > 0:40:09the frail and elderly could get stuck in hospital beds creating a
0:40:09 > 0:40:12winter crisis for the NHS.
0:40:12 > 0:40:14Sharon Hodgson, there is more money available, partly from the
0:40:14 > 0:40:16Government, partly it has to be said from
0:40:16 > 0:40:17the council taxpayer across the
0:40:17 > 0:40:18region as well.
0:40:18 > 0:40:21Is that going to help a council like Sunderland in
0:40:21 > 0:40:23your area to cope better this winter?
0:40:23 > 0:40:26Well, we're not going to say no to any extra help but it's a drop
0:40:26 > 0:40:29in the ocean to the size of the cuts for Sunderland.
0:40:29 > 0:40:32My local authority, that had cuts of £15 million since
0:40:32 > 0:40:372010, which is 20% of their social care budget so any money that comes
0:40:37 > 0:40:41in, yes, it is desperately needed but it really is a drop in the ocean
0:40:41 > 0:40:45because it is not enough.
0:40:45 > 0:40:47Ben Houchen, the Prime Minister says,
0:40:47 > 0:40:51they are looking for a long-term solution to this but Sharon Hodgson
0:40:51 > 0:40:54said a lot of the councils say that there's immediate need for even more
0:40:54 > 0:40:56money to help councils across the north east.
0:40:56 > 0:41:03What would you say to that?
0:41:03 > 0:41:06The Government and the Chancellor committed £2 billion up
0:41:06 > 0:41:09to 2020 of new money to social care funding and there is an immediate £1
0:41:09 > 0:41:10billion package available in 17-18.
0:41:10 > 0:41:12So there's immediate funds available.
0:41:12 > 0:41:15But I think there's a wider issue here we need to look at.
0:41:15 > 0:41:16Some fundamental reforms to social care.
0:41:16 > 0:41:20We have a more elderly population.
0:41:20 > 0:41:24We have people with more complex needs.
0:41:24 > 0:41:26The consultation that the Government has currently put out to
0:41:26 > 0:41:29look at this is extremely important on a wider discussion we have to
0:41:29 > 0:41:30have on social care.
0:41:30 > 0:41:32Presumably not the revival of that plan that was
0:41:32 > 0:41:35the manifesto that would involve lots of people not keeping their
0:41:35 > 0:41:36houses?
0:41:36 > 0:41:38Not if I have anything to do with it.
0:41:38 > 0:41:45OK.
0:41:45 > 0:41:47Your counterpart in Manchester has powers over some
0:41:47 > 0:41:49aspect of health and social care, the mayor there.
0:41:49 > 0:41:52Would that help if you had that power in Teesside, or
0:41:52 > 0:41:54would you rather steer clear of responsibility
0:41:54 > 0:41:56for something that is a very difficult policy area?
0:41:56 > 0:41:58It is a very difficult policy area and we
0:41:58 > 0:42:00see in Manchester they are struggling with the concept of
0:42:00 > 0:42:02devolved health and social care as their responsibility.
0:42:02 > 0:42:04I am very much concentrating on economic
0:42:04 > 0:42:07regeneration and job creation which is the portfolio that I've been
0:42:07 > 0:42:08given.
0:42:08 > 0:42:10Would it be better if you were across all authorities?
0:42:10 > 0:42:13In the long term that is something that may come along.
0:42:13 > 0:42:15We are talking about a second devolution deal,
0:42:15 > 0:42:25with Government, social care and health care
0:42:29 > 0:42:31care are not in that at the
0:42:31 > 0:42:34minute.
0:42:34 > 0:42:37Because of the maturity of the organisation we have.
0:42:37 > 0:42:40But central government and local politicians are very aware of this
0:42:40 > 0:42:43as a long-term journey and ideally we want to get to a point where we
0:42:43 > 0:42:46are ready to take on those responsibilities but I do think it
0:42:46 > 0:42:48is some way in the future.
0:42:48 > 0:42:49OK.
0:42:49 > 0:42:51Sharon Hodgson, this is such a serious problem.
0:42:51 > 0:42:53At the moment there is a danger that Labour just plays
0:42:53 > 0:42:56politics, and of course calls an opposition debate this week,
0:42:56 > 0:42:57to try and embarrass the Government.
0:42:57 > 0:42:58Politicians do that.
0:42:58 > 0:43:00But actually what the public want is a long-term
0:43:00 > 0:43:01solution to this.
0:43:01 > 0:43:04They want you and the other parties to sit down and
0:43:04 > 0:43:06come up with a solution you can all agree on.
0:43:06 > 0:43:08Well, yes, that would be great.
0:43:08 > 0:43:09And we have got a plan.
0:43:09 > 0:43:11We have said in our manifesto and since
0:43:11 > 0:43:15we would put an extra 8 billion into social care with all the other,
0:43:15 > 0:43:17have a real national health and social care service.
0:43:17 > 0:43:20Given the Government's changes why don't you to sit down with the
0:43:20 > 0:43:21Conservatives because the problem is someone
0:43:21 > 0:43:23comes up with a plan and the
0:43:23 > 0:43:24opposition rubbishes it and votes it down.
0:43:24 > 0:43:25Yes.
0:43:25 > 0:43:27We would if they had a plan.
0:43:27 > 0:43:29Barbara Keeley, my shadow minister who covers social care and
0:43:29 > 0:43:32mental health, has said time and time again she would be happy
0:43:32 > 0:43:34to sit down if there was something on the
0:43:35 > 0:43:36table to discuss.
0:43:36 > 0:43:37If there was a real plan.
0:43:37 > 0:43:40But when you've even got Ben saying what was in the
0:43:40 > 0:43:42manifesto even he would distance himself from, they need to come
0:43:42 > 0:43:43forward with a plan.
0:43:43 > 0:43:46And what we have heard this week, the care B and B
0:43:46 > 0:43:48aspect, whoever came up with that, thankfully everyone is
0:43:48 > 0:43:50distancing themselves from it but that was just crazy.
0:43:51 > 0:43:52We need real proposals on the table.
0:43:52 > 0:43:55I'm sure that is an issue we will come back
0:43:55 > 0:43:56to.
0:43:56 > 0:43:57Staying with another health-related issue, and the
0:43:57 > 0:44:00Government is currently coming under pressure to hold an enquiry on what
0:44:00 > 0:44:03has been described as an ongoing public health scandal affecting
0:44:03 > 0:44:04thousands of women.
0:44:04 > 0:44:06Many have been left in permanent pain because of
0:44:06 > 0:44:07mesh implants.
0:44:07 > 0:44:09The implants are usually used to treat organ prolapse
0:44:09 > 0:44:10and incontinence.
0:44:10 > 0:44:12But there have been reports of serious
0:44:12 > 0:44:13complications linked to this surgery.
0:44:13 > 0:44:16Last week the chair of the Health Select Committee, Conservative MP
0:44:16 > 0:44:18Sarah Wollaston, said, an absence of data and cavalier practice had
0:44:18 > 0:44:19exposed woman to unacceptable risks.
0:44:19 > 0:44:22Our reporter has been speaking to Lorna about what
0:44:22 > 0:44:25happened to her when she had a mesh implant to fix a bowel problem.
0:44:25 > 0:44:28Within 12 months I was aware that I was becoming seriously unwell.
0:44:28 > 0:44:29The symptoms included seizures, pain,
0:44:29 > 0:44:35weight loss, and explosive, foul smelling diarrhoea.
0:44:35 > 0:44:41I was really frightened.
0:44:41 > 0:44:45I initially went to the GP and I said, I feel like I have
0:44:45 > 0:44:51got a monster in my body and it is try to spit it out.
0:44:51 > 0:44:58So eventually I saw a hospital consultant.
0:44:58 > 0:45:00There seemed to be for me long periods of
0:45:00 > 0:45:01medical inertia.
0:45:01 > 0:45:05Eventually by August 2013 I was really frightened.
0:45:05 > 0:45:08And I walked into a hospital department and I said, I begged for
0:45:08 > 0:45:15help, somebody help me.
0:45:15 > 0:45:1724 hours later I was undergoing emergency surgery.
0:45:17 > 0:45:20I had a perforated bowel and I was septic.
0:45:20 > 0:45:21My marriage collapsed.
0:45:21 > 0:45:24So I find myself alone.
0:45:24 > 0:45:26My career collapsed.
0:45:26 > 0:45:29I had to leave work.
0:45:29 > 0:45:33My ill health was clearly becoming indefinite.
0:45:33 > 0:45:35It challenged my faith at the time as
0:45:35 > 0:45:37well.
0:45:37 > 0:45:41So emotionally, psychologically, spiritually, and
0:45:41 > 0:45:46physically, I felt harmed at every level.
0:45:46 > 0:45:49And what was quite concerning at that time as well is
0:45:49 > 0:45:53that there was very little help from the welfare state.
0:45:53 > 0:45:56I am in constant pain and I never know from which day
0:45:56 > 0:46:01to the next the pain levels are going to be.
0:46:01 > 0:46:07I get constant migraines, I now have fibromyalgia,
0:46:07 > 0:46:13so I get a lot of muscle pain, joint aches, I am constantly cold.
0:46:13 > 0:46:14Self-esteem is low.
0:46:14 > 0:46:16Self-confidence is low.
0:46:16 > 0:46:19My ability to socialise is affected.
0:46:19 > 0:46:21Further use of the mesh should be suspended
0:46:21 > 0:46:23and there should be a
0:46:23 > 0:46:26public enquiry.
0:46:26 > 0:46:28Labour has called for an immediate halt to the use of
0:46:28 > 0:46:30mesh implants.
0:46:30 > 0:46:32Sharon Hodgson is the party's shadow public health
0:46:32 > 0:46:35minister.
0:46:35 > 0:46:37No-one could listen to Lorna's story there without having
0:46:37 > 0:46:40huge sympathy and horror at the complications that she has gone
0:46:40 > 0:46:41through.
0:46:41 > 0:46:44But there is a danger that Labour could be overreacting to
0:46:44 > 0:46:45this?
0:46:45 > 0:46:48Because the medical experts say in the vast majority of cases
0:46:48 > 0:46:49these implants provide great benefits to women.
0:46:49 > 0:46:53It's only a minority where there are problems.
0:46:53 > 0:46:55That might be right.
0:46:55 > 0:47:03This is why we have called for a full halt to any
0:47:03 > 0:47:05more of these things being put into women
0:47:05 > 0:47:07and a full enquiry into the
0:47:07 > 0:47:17numbers of women affected and why.
0:47:20 > 0:47:23Because it might be the case, there is arguments, 1-3% of
0:47:23 > 0:47:25women affected, or up to 15%, which the campaign groups
0:47:25 > 0:47:26are saying it's more like 15%.
0:47:26 > 0:47:29Yes, that could be 85% of women have no problem and it
0:47:29 > 0:47:30transforms their life.
0:47:30 > 0:47:32But it ruins the life of the others.
0:47:32 > 0:47:35If that was a car or a washing machine or a
0:47:35 > 0:47:38tumble dryer that there was 1-3% blowing up and causing devastation
0:47:38 > 0:47:40anywhere near what we've heard, it would be recalled.
0:47:40 > 0:47:41There would be a huge pause.
0:47:41 > 0:47:42We know that happens.
0:47:42 > 0:47:44But why when it is something that has
0:47:44 > 0:47:46been put into women's bodies, and women aren't told
0:47:46 > 0:47:49what the negative consequences could be, it is a quick
0:47:49 > 0:47:5120 minute procedure, the tour that will
0:47:51 > 0:47:54transform your life, deal with
0:47:54 > 0:47:57your stress incontinence or your bowel problem.
0:47:57 > 0:48:00They are not told that there could be these awful side-effects
0:48:00 > 0:48:02which ruin their lives.
0:48:02 > 0:48:05I take that point but the problem is if you shut
0:48:05 > 0:48:10this off, even for a period, there is a danger here for the women who
0:48:10 > 0:48:13have got not life-threatening problems, but they are embarrassing,
0:48:13 > 0:48:16inconvenient, debilitating problems that these are supposed to tackle.
0:48:16 > 0:48:20And the alternatives have problems too.
0:48:20 > 0:48:23So you are going to deny a treatment that is working for people
0:48:23 > 0:48:25to lots of women in the meantime.
0:48:25 > 0:48:28We had a debate last week on this and
0:48:28 > 0:48:31there was a number of women who were able to travel came
0:48:31 > 0:48:35to the debate, sat in on the debate, and after the
0:48:35 > 0:48:38debate we had a full meeting in one of the committee rooms and this was
0:48:38 > 0:48:39one of the things raised.
0:48:39 > 0:48:42And I spoke to a lot of the women and I said,
0:48:42 > 0:48:47knowing where you were before, your problem, whatever it was, the reason
0:48:47 > 0:48:50you had the sling or the mesh or the tape as they now call it,
0:48:50 > 0:48:53put in, knowing what you know now, would you have had it done?
0:48:53 > 0:48:55How bad was your life before compared to now?
0:48:55 > 0:48:58And every one of them, obviously these are the women affected, every
0:48:58 > 0:49:01one of them said they wouldn't.
0:49:01 > 0:49:10Because they said that the problems
0:49:10 > 0:49:12before were mild to moderate and now they are devastating effects.
0:49:12 > 0:49:15I also spoke to the surgeon, a Harley
0:49:15 > 0:49:18Street surgeon, she is one of the best in the country, who spends four
0:49:18 > 0:49:21hours a time to remove these, because they get incorporated into
0:49:21 > 0:49:23the women's bodies, bowels, bladders, vaginas, and she said
0:49:23 > 0:49:25that often other procedures, physiotherapy and
0:49:25 > 0:49:27other methods aren't
0:49:27 > 0:49:30tried because this is just seen as a quick cheap fix.
0:49:30 > 0:49:31Other things should be tried.
0:49:31 > 0:49:34But you are asking us to perhaps place our
0:49:34 > 0:49:35faith in a minority of the
0:49:35 > 0:49:37medical profession and some politicians rather than what appears
0:49:37 > 0:49:40to be the majority of the medical profession.
0:49:40 > 0:49:42This could cause panic to women that have
0:49:42 > 0:49:44these.
0:49:44 > 0:49:47They might think, I want to get it taken out, which is
0:49:47 > 0:49:48another complicated and dangerous procedure.
0:49:48 > 0:49:50Exactly.
0:49:50 > 0:49:52And the procedure to get it taken out is
0:49:52 > 0:49:56awful, devastating, and a huge operation to have it taken out.
0:49:56 > 0:49:59This is why we need the pause.
0:49:59 > 0:50:01America has it as a high risk procedure.
0:50:01 > 0:50:08Canada has a pause.
0:50:08 > 0:50:11Other countries, Scotland paused in 2014.
0:50:11 > 0:50:15We just need to pause and look again.
0:50:15 > 0:50:17I think woman, knowing of this, women need to know what could
0:50:17 > 0:50:20happen, then it is up to them, with their doctors,
0:50:20 > 0:50:21to decide what they do next.
0:50:21 > 0:50:24Thank you.
0:50:24 > 0:50:26Whether it is railways or the water industry,
0:50:26 > 0:50:29nationalisation is a policy more often associated with the Labour
0:50:29 > 0:50:30Party.
0:50:30 > 0:50:33But when it comes to the future of Durham Tees Valley Airport
0:50:33 > 0:50:35it seems to be the Conservatives making the running.
0:50:35 > 0:50:37The airport has seen its passenger numbers nosedive
0:50:37 > 0:50:47from around 900,000 in 2006 to just 130,000 last year.
0:50:49 > 0:50:50Tees Valley mayor wants to bring back
0:50:50 > 0:50:52into public ownership to revive its fortunes.
0:50:52 > 0:50:55But how would that work and is it a good week to spend tax
0:50:55 > 0:51:03payers money?
0:51:03 > 0:51:05I have been to Scotland where something similar has
0:51:05 > 0:51:06already been attempted.
0:51:06 > 0:51:07Prestwick airport at its peak.
0:51:07 > 0:51:1030 miles south of Glasgow in Ayrshire, a gateway to
0:51:10 > 0:51:11the world.
0:51:11 > 0:51:12Even Elvis stopped here once.
0:51:12 > 0:51:18And Prestwick today is still just about rocking.
0:51:18 > 0:51:23But like Durham Tees Valley Airport has had a turbulent decade.
0:51:23 > 0:51:30Passenger numbers have plummeted at Prestwick, down 75% since 2005, in
0:51:30 > 0:51:342013 the existence of the airport was in question. Its future under
0:51:34 > 0:51:39its then private owner was bleak. The Scottish Government stepped in,
0:51:39 > 0:51:44buying Prestwick for £1. For years later on it is yet to recapture its
0:51:44 > 0:51:48glory days but passenger numbers are rising again. The local MP says
0:51:48 > 0:51:51public ownership is the key to revival.
0:51:51 > 0:51:55Knowing that you are not having to just love from year to year, that
0:51:55 > 0:52:01you have got a backer that is stable and committed to the future of the
0:52:01 > 0:52:05airport, means that the team can knuckle down and work out how to
0:52:05 > 0:52:09attract, whether British maintenance work, cargo, passengers.Even though
0:52:09 > 0:52:14this is just one of five arrivals today this is an airport that is no
0:52:14 > 0:52:18ambitious, there are even plans to become the UK's first spaceport. Is
0:52:18 > 0:52:24this a model for a publicly owned airport in Teesside? Do not get too
0:52:24 > 0:52:35carried away. At the last count this airport was still using £9 million
0:52:35 > 0:52:38per year and its survival was only secured with £40 million of loans
0:52:38 > 0:52:40from the Scottish taxpayer. That debt has led to some serious
0:52:40 > 0:52:42questions being asked. The Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh. It has
0:52:42 > 0:52:45emerged it could take 15 more years for that to be clear. Some are not
0:52:45 > 0:52:50convinced taxpayers get a good deal when politicians by airports.
0:52:50 > 0:52:54I am sceptical whether the public will ever see a return on their
0:52:54 > 0:52:58investments, that is public money that could be used on schools,
0:52:58 > 0:53:01hospitals. That is a situation similar to that in the north-east of
0:53:01 > 0:53:06agreement where the regional airport at Newcastle, Leeds Bradford, and a
0:53:06 > 0:53:10smaller airport in the middle, I wonder how viable batters.If it was
0:53:10 > 0:53:16viable it would not be public support. Even Ben Houchen's
0:53:16 > 0:53:20counterparts at Hollywood have not been entirely won over to political
0:53:20 > 0:53:22intervention. At the time it was the right thing
0:53:22 > 0:53:27to do to take into ownership to safeguard those local jobs. That is
0:53:27 > 0:53:30very important. But it cannot stay in public ownership in the long
0:53:30 > 0:53:33term. I want to see yet returned as soon as possible to private
0:53:33 > 0:53:38ownership. I want to be successful. I want the public purse to be
0:53:38 > 0:53:42refunded every penny that has been spent to date.Perhaps even a short
0:53:42 > 0:53:54burst of public ownership could benefit Durham Tees Valley Airport,
0:53:54 > 0:53:57charting a Pattullo Bible, except that nobody has offered to sell this
0:53:57 > 0:53:59airport for £1.Labour sees the mayor would be better moving on from
0:53:59 > 0:54:02that place. It is pie in the sky. It is not going to happen. Ben Houchen
0:54:02 > 0:54:07has not made an offer to buy it. Accept it is just for the purpose of
0:54:07 > 0:54:11getting elected and move on to journeyman transport needs of the
0:54:11 > 0:54:16area and not pursue these flights of fancy.And the owner says it has a
0:54:16 > 0:54:21good plan to secure the future of Teesside airport. So will following
0:54:21 > 0:54:25the Prestwick pattern even be an option?
0:54:25 > 0:54:29Latest octave Ben Houchen, the Tees Valley mayor about that and other
0:54:29 > 0:54:35issues he has been tackling in his first six months in the job.
0:54:35 > 0:54:39This is pie in the sky, the airport is not for sale, you make the
0:54:39 > 0:54:43promise in the heat of an election campaign, do you want to go back on
0:54:43 > 0:54:48it?Not at all. I am committed to trying to deliver my election
0:54:48 > 0:54:52pledge. Having been brought up in the area I know the importance of
0:54:52 > 0:54:55the airport, not just for flights to go on holiday, but for economic
0:54:55 > 0:55:01importance. We have got a massive regeneration project which is trying
0:55:01 > 0:55:05to attract inward economic investment, and having an airport
0:55:05 > 0:55:10for work passengers is just as supported as those flights. There is
0:55:10 > 0:55:15an economic case that we need a good local airport. We talk of Newcastle,
0:55:15 > 0:55:20the catchment area for Teesside is larger than Newcastle. There is an
0:55:20 > 0:55:23economic arguments that Teesside airport can thrive.I want to
0:55:23 > 0:55:27deliver on that pledge. Even if you did manage to buy, you can see from
0:55:27 > 0:55:32what has happened at Prestwick, they have saved it from potential
0:55:32 > 0:55:35closure, but at a potential drain on the public purse. You have got lots
0:55:35 > 0:55:40of things you want to spend money on.The bill can do more than one
0:55:40 > 0:55:45thing at a time. When Andy talks about other transport priorities we
0:55:45 > 0:55:48have already launched our road infrastructure plan for a bypass
0:55:48 > 0:55:55road, improving the a 66 corridor. You can only spend each £1 once,
0:55:55 > 0:55:59every £1 you spend on the airport 's money you cannot spend on bus
0:55:59 > 0:56:03services, roads, railways.That is right that I was elected on the
0:56:03 > 0:56:06mandate, of buying the airport, the public have given me a clear mandate
0:56:06 > 0:56:15that that is what they want me to spend their money on. Having been
0:56:15 > 0:56:18given that mandate to pursue my pledge I make sure the economic
0:56:18 > 0:56:21pledge Stapp sap, to see to the public this is the plan. But it is
0:56:21 > 0:56:26not for sale. I am in discussion with the owners. They have not
0:56:26 > 0:56:29turned red and said it is not for sale. I have another meeting in
0:56:29 > 0:56:34coming weeks to talk about the details proposition. It is a
0:56:34 > 0:56:39sensitive negotiation at the moment. Don't you think, as a conservative,
0:56:39 > 0:56:44this is bizarre, you probably believe that private-sector
0:56:44 > 0:56:48companies are better at running these institutions, rather than
0:56:48 > 0:56:51politicians? You are saying you could run it better than this
0:56:51 > 0:56:56private company that has a plan for this airport.There are a number of
0:56:56 > 0:57:00options on the table. The end goal of what we do with the airport is
0:57:00 > 0:57:06open to debate. We have seen some public and private partnerships in
0:57:06 > 0:57:10Manchester and Newcastle were public sector has majority ownership but I
0:57:10 > 0:57:17good strong private provider. The mix of what could happen is not as
0:57:17 > 0:57:21straightforward as becoming the new chief executive of the airport.The
0:57:21 > 0:57:26former Redcar steelworks site, a Corporation setup, when might we see
0:57:26 > 0:57:30jobs move on to that site?We watched public consultation last
0:57:30 > 0:57:34week, that last for six weeks, please get involved and give us your
0:57:34 > 0:57:40feedback. We have been very clear that because of the significant road
0:57:40 > 0:57:42infrastructure and broad rationalisation we should expect to
0:57:42 > 0:57:45see construction jobs starting next year and depending on how
0:57:45 > 0:57:48negotiations go with some of the partners we hope to be able to carve
0:57:48 > 0:57:55out some projects at some point next year. Do you need more money? We
0:57:55 > 0:57:58need Government money and I have been lobbying extremely hard with
0:57:58 > 0:58:02the treasury and the budget to get money into the area to kick-start
0:58:02 > 0:58:07that project. The Prime Minister is behind it and I am trying to make
0:58:07 > 0:58:09sure that the rest of the ministers are behind it because it is
0:58:09 > 0:58:13something we need to get this project off the ground because it
0:58:13 > 0:58:16ultimately means regeneration of the area which means jobs for local
0:58:16 > 0:58:23people.Thank you. Electric cars, even driverless vehicles, are the
0:58:23 > 0:58:27future, and one north-east MPs revealed that she bought one but not
0:58:27 > 0:58:30without some problems. Here is that story and the rest of the news in 60
0:58:30 > 0:58:38seconds. Bishop Auckland MP is now the proud
0:58:38 > 0:58:42owner of a Nissan Beef electric car but she told the Commons more
0:58:42 > 0:58:48vehicle charging points when needed and better advice from garages.The
0:58:48 > 0:58:53men in the garage were not good at explaining how it worked. Out of the
0:58:53 > 0:58:5720 people they employed, only one really understood it. That sales
0:58:57 > 0:59:04force also has to understand how these things work.Plans for the
0:59:04 > 0:59:07continued overnight closure of an urgent care centre in North Tyneside
0:59:07 > 0:59:15have been condemned by an MP and a mayor. It comes as a hospital
0:59:15 > 0:59:20appears to reopen its 24 hour service. Councillors in Hartlepool
0:59:20 > 0:59:26have a new waterfront masterplan with a hotel and watersports
0:59:26 > 0:59:33activities. And Ukip Euro MP has called victory
0:59:33 > 0:59:38in attempt to stop subsidising bull-fighting in Spain. The
0:59:38 > 0:59:42amendment is passed, it is yet to be confirmed.
0:59:42 > 0:59:51One bit of extra news. North East has been appointed Brexit Minister
0:59:51 > 0:59:57for the House of Lords. I want to talk about electric cars,
0:59:57 > 1:00:01have you got one?Not yet. It was interesting what Helen said. She
1:00:01 > 1:00:08made a very good point. One of the things that is always put us off
1:00:08 > 1:00:13getting one is the distance, how far you have got to go. We go up and
1:00:13 > 1:00:21down the country quite a bit. The new Nissan Leaf that is manufactured
1:00:21 > 1:00:28later this year is going to be 60% further capacity, it will go 235
1:00:28 > 1:00:34miles, nearly enough to get you to London, but with regard to the sales
1:00:34 > 1:00:40pitch, for people who are put off by the distance, one of the things that
1:00:40 > 1:00:45the seals men are supposed to remind people is that for a holiday or the
1:00:45 > 1:00:49odd long journey the amount of money you are saving, you could have a
1:00:49 > 1:00:55hired car that could do that journey, but 235 miles, and a
1:00:55 > 1:00:59charging point at service stations. As the infrastructure good enough at
1:00:59 > 1:01:04the moment? Probably not but hopefully in time it will be. We
1:01:04 > 1:01:07need the super fast ones to be at service stations and then getting
1:01:07 > 1:01:14around the country will not be a problem.Ben Houchen is there a
1:01:14 > 1:01:18mayoral vehicle, as it electric?It is not electric. The north-east has
1:01:18 > 1:01:23more than 1000 electric charging points. I believe it may still be
1:01:23 > 1:01:27the most connected for electric vehicles. On an adjacent point we
1:01:27 > 1:01:32are working hard to go a step be on the electric vehicles, we are
1:01:32 > 1:01:35working with governments to see if we can come up with the pilot for
1:01:35 > 1:01:40automated vehicles, as a pilot area, to test that technology. We have got
1:01:40 > 1:01:43a great supply chain in the Tees Valley. We have got the Nissan being
1:01:43 > 1:01:46produced in the north-east and Sunderland as well, we have a
1:01:46 > 1:01:53heritage of car production. Diesel? I have a diesel car but the
1:01:53 > 1:01:57long-term vision of moving to new technology weather in manufacturing,
1:01:57 > 1:02:01industrial, cars, I am always in favour of.Thank you. That is about
1:02:01 > 1:02:06it for this week. I form in my driverless car, that is what my
1:02:06 > 1:02:10passengers tell me it feels like when I am at the real. I will be
1:02:10 > 1:02:15back here, same time, simplest, next Sunday, Liberal Democrat MP Vince
1:02:15 > 1:02:15Cable
1:02:16 > 1:02:25With that, it's back to Sarah.
1:02:25 > 1:02:27Now, the much anticipated EU Withdrawal Bill,
1:02:27 > 1:02:31which will transfer EU law into UK law in preparation for Brexit,
1:02:31 > 1:02:35is expected to be debated by MPs later next month.
1:02:35 > 1:02:38Critics have called it a "power grab" as it introduces so-called
1:02:38 > 1:02:41Henry VIII powers for Whitehall to amend some laws without
1:02:41 > 1:02:45consulting parliament, and it faces fierce resistance
1:02:45 > 1:02:48from opposition parties as well as many on the government's
1:02:48 > 1:02:53own backbenches, with 300 amendments and 54 new clauses tabled on it.
1:02:53 > 1:02:57We're joined now by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry who has been a strong
1:02:57 > 1:03:01critic of the legislation.
1:03:01 > 1:03:06Thank you very much for joining us. Before we talk about the withdrawal
1:03:06 > 1:03:10bill, I would like to bring up with you that the Prime Minister has just
1:03:10 > 1:03:14sent a letter to the Commons Speaker John Bercow asking for an
1:03:14 > 1:03:19independent body to be established to investigate claims of sexual
1:03:19 > 1:03:23harassment in Parliament. What are your thoughts on that?A very good
1:03:23 > 1:03:28idea, sounds like a great deal of common sense. I had already this
1:03:28 > 1:03:31morning sent a request to the speaker asking for an urgent
1:03:31 > 1:03:35statement from the Leader of the House as to what could now be done
1:03:35 > 1:03:41to make sure that any complaints actually against anybody working in
1:03:41 > 1:03:44Parliament, to extend the protections that workers throughout
1:03:44 > 1:03:48the rest of businesses and in other workplaces have, they should now be
1:03:48 > 1:03:52extended into Parliament and asking for an urgent statement from the
1:03:52 > 1:03:57leader. Clearly the PM is well onto this and it is a good idea. We have
1:03:57 > 1:04:01to make sure everybody who works in Parliament enjoys exactly the same
1:04:01 > 1:04:06protections as other workers, so I welcome this.This should maybe have
1:04:06 > 1:04:11happened a long time ago. We hear stories of harassment that has been
1:04:11 > 1:04:14going on for decades, but until now it has been difficult to work out
1:04:14 > 1:04:20who you could complain to about it. It is my understanding that my Chief
1:04:20 > 1:04:24Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip, and Milton, shared that view
1:04:24 > 1:04:29and have shared that view for some time but found it difficult to get
1:04:29 > 1:04:33all the agreement necessary. Anyway, we are where we are and we are
1:04:33 > 1:04:44making that progress, but
1:04:45 > 1:04:48my Chief Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip wanted this done
1:04:48 > 1:04:50some time ago.That is an interesting point. Let's move on to
1:04:50 > 1:04:52the much anticipated EU withdrawal bill which will finally be debated.
1:04:52 > 1:04:55You have put your name to an amendment which is calling for a
1:04:55 > 1:04:58vote on the final agreement in essence, do you really believe that
1:04:58 > 1:05:02that will be a meaningful both offered to the Commons?Yes, if you
1:05:02 > 1:05:07look at the terms of the amendment, it would deliver exactly that. It
1:05:07 > 1:05:12would give members of Parliament the opportunity to debated and voted on
1:05:12 > 1:05:16it. It would be an effective piece of legislation and would go through
1:05:16 > 1:05:21both houses and should be done. One of the problems with this process is
1:05:21 > 1:05:25that Parliament has been excluded from the sort of debate and
1:05:25 > 1:05:30decisions that would have enabled the government to move forward in
1:05:30 > 1:05:40progress and form a consensus so we get the very best Brexit deal.We
1:05:40 > 1:05:43have been excluded, that has been wrong in my view, but by the end we
1:05:43 > 1:05:45should not be excluded. The government have made it clear that
1:05:45 > 1:05:48whilst there may well be a boat if you win on this amendment, it will
1:05:48 > 1:05:53be a take it or leave it vote. This is a deal you should accept, or
1:05:53 > 1:06:00there will be no deal.If you look at the amendment we put forward
1:06:00 > 1:06:03there will be other alternatives. This is all hypothetical because we
1:06:03 > 1:06:07want a good deal and it is difficult to see that the government would not
1:06:07 > 1:06:13bring a good deal to the House in any event. But this is hypothetical,
1:06:13 > 1:06:18it would mean Parliament would say to government, go back and seek an
1:06:18 > 1:06:24extension as we know it is there in Article 50. It is perfectly possible
1:06:24 > 1:06:28with the agreement of the other members of the EU to seek an
1:06:28 > 1:06:32extension so we continue the negotiations and we get a deal that
1:06:32 > 1:06:36is good for our country. It keeps all options open and that is the
1:06:36 > 1:06:41most important thing.How many Conservative MPs really would take
1:06:41 > 1:06:46that option in those circumstances? It is only if you get enough votes
1:06:46 > 1:06:49that you would be able to ask the government to go back and
1:06:49 > 1:06:59re-negotiate.
1:07:02 > 1:07:06Have you for that?For give me, but you are jumping way down the line. I
1:07:06 > 1:07:08am talking about an amendment that keeps the options open. I am not
1:07:08 > 1:07:11speculating as to what would happen, I am not going there, it is far too
1:07:11 > 1:07:15speculative. Let's get this bill in good shape. The principle of this
1:07:15 > 1:07:20bill is right and we need to put into British domestic law existing
1:07:20 > 1:07:25EU laws and regulations into our substantive law. We all agree that
1:07:25 > 1:07:31must happen. It is the means by which we do it that causes problems
1:07:31 > 1:07:37and we have this argument and debate about what we call the endgame.I am
1:07:37 > 1:07:40sure we will talk about this many more times before we get to that
1:07:40 > 1:07:46vote. I will turn to our panel of political experts. Listening to the
1:07:46 > 1:07:52tone of what the remainders are trying to achieve with the EU
1:07:52 > 1:07:57withdrawal bill, will be achieved? You can hear that tussled there,
1:07:57 > 1:08:02they want the maximum space and room for Parliament to have a say. But
1:08:02 > 1:08:08they have to be careful. The reason is that clock is ticking and if you
1:08:08 > 1:08:14have a situation which may seem to be more interested in finding
1:08:14 > 1:08:18different things to object to and saying no to, it is not getting a
1:08:18 > 1:08:22good deal and it does not look good for the remainders in this argument
1:08:22 > 1:08:27and they will have to come through with their proposals. I do not mind
1:08:27 > 1:08:30Parliament saying it should have a big say, but what do you do if
1:08:30 > 1:08:36Parliament says this is not good enough? The government must simply
1:08:36 > 1:08:42say, I am sorry we have run out of time. The 27 will say they cannot be
1:08:42 > 1:08:46bothered to have another round either. They have to be strong, but
1:08:46 > 1:08:50realistic about what their role in this is.Do you think the people
1:08:50 > 1:08:55putting this amendment who say they want a binding vote in parliament
1:08:55 > 1:08:59are doing it because they think Parliament should have a say or
1:08:59 > 1:09:04because they want to obstruct it? They do not think people should have
1:09:04 > 1:09:08a say in the first place, they think people got it wrong, so they need
1:09:08 > 1:09:16more clever people than the voters to have final say.Or they believed
1:09:16 > 1:09:19taking back control means Parliament should have the final say.
1:09:19 > 1:09:22Parliament said they would like to give that decision back to the
1:09:22 > 1:09:28people. This is the issue. It seems to me that people like Anna Soubry
1:09:28 > 1:09:32are trying to delay of the transition period a bit longer.
1:09:32 > 1:09:37These negotiations will take as long as they have got. The EU will take
1:09:37 > 1:09:45it to the wire and if we do not get a decent deal, and one of the
1:09:45 > 1:09:48reasons is the level of incompetence on this government's part I have to
1:09:48 > 1:09:53say and the other one will be the people who want to remain
1:09:53 > 1:09:59undermining them. They undermined the government at every single stage
1:09:59 > 1:10:03and they undermine Britain's interests.It is the timing of all
1:10:03 > 1:10:06of this that is crucial and whether the government can get a deal in
1:10:06 > 1:10:12time.There will be a meaningful vote, whether it is an shined in
1:10:12 > 1:10:17legislation or not, there cannot be an historic development as big as
1:10:17 > 1:10:22this without Parliament having a meaningful vote. I meaningful,
1:10:22 > 1:10:27having the power to either stop it or endorse it. You cannot have a
1:10:27 > 1:10:30government doing something like this with no vote in the House of
1:10:30 > 1:10:37commons. When you say it will go to the last minute I completely agree,
1:10:37 > 1:10:42but last-minute in reality means next summer. It has got to get
1:10:42 > 1:10:45through the European Parliament and the Westminster Parliament and quite
1:10:45 > 1:10:52a few others as well.The trouble with invoking Parliament is if it is
1:10:52 > 1:10:57driven solely by remain, I would love to say what people in the
1:10:57 > 1:11:04league side think. I disagree with Julia, I do not think you could say
1:11:04 > 1:11:08people had their say and the terms with which we leave are left open
1:11:08 > 1:11:12and only the government should have a say in it, Parliament clearly
1:11:12 > 1:11:20should have a say in it.Do we want a good deal or not?It does not mean
1:11:20 > 1:11:26anything if you do not do it by next summer I suggest.Does that leave
1:11:26 > 1:11:30Parliament any room for changing the deal or is it simply take it or
1:11:30 > 1:11:35leave it?It will have to have that rule because it cannot simply be
1:11:35 > 1:11:38another of these binary votes were you accept the deal or no Deal.
1:11:38 > 1:11:45There has to be some space.How can a few MPs in the House of Commons
1:11:45 > 1:11:50change a deal that has been agreed by the member states?Because of the
1:11:50 > 1:11:55sequence, a huge if by the way, if they vote down the deal that the
1:11:55 > 1:11:59government has negotiated, the government will have to re-negotiate
1:11:59 > 1:12:03or there will have to be an election. This will be a moment of
1:12:03 > 1:12:05huge crisis, our government not getting through its much topped
1:12:05 > 1:12:15about...It is a mini Catalonia.I think it would be as big as
1:12:15 > 1:12:18Catalonia, but with the implication that there would have to be a
1:12:18 > 1:12:21practical change in the deal because if Parliament has not supported
1:12:21 > 1:12:27it...It is a remain fantasy that this deal can be put off and off
1:12:27 > 1:12:31until they get something that is as close to remaining as they can
1:12:31 > 1:12:36possibly get. I am very much for trying to get the best and avoiding
1:12:36 > 1:12:43the worst, but there is an unreality to that position if you keep trying
1:12:43 > 1:12:49to do it again and again, at some point people will want clarity.I
1:12:49 > 1:12:54labour putting forward a realistic proposition?I thought Hilary Benn
1:12:54 > 1:12:59was very realistic this morning, I wish he was more in the driving seat
1:12:59 > 1:13:04of Labour policy. He made clear where he disagreed and he made clear
1:13:04 > 1:13:07where he thought the negotiations had gone off track or were bogged
1:13:07 > 1:13:15down. I worry a bit about the Labour position being incoherent, but that
1:13:15 > 1:13:19is kept that way by the present leadership because as far as they
1:13:19 > 1:13:23are concerned the government is suffering enough, why should they
1:13:23 > 1:13:28have a position? Hilary Benn said we needed to have clarity about the
1:13:28 > 1:13:32timetable. It is like reading an insurance contract and finding the
1:13:32 > 1:13:35bit where you might get away with it. That is not a policy.
1:13:35 > 1:13:38That is not a policy.
1:13:38 > 1:13:39That's all for today.
1:13:39 > 1:13:41Join me again next Sunday at 11 here on BBC One.
1:13:41 > 1:13:46Until then, bye bye.