29/10/2017

0:00:38 > 0:00:40Morning, everyone.

0:00:40 > 0:00:42I'm Sarah Smith, and welcome to The Sunday Politics,

0:00:42 > 0:00:44where we always bring you everything you need to know to understand

0:00:44 > 0:00:46what's going on in politics.

0:00:46 > 0:00:50Coming up on today's programme...

0:00:50 > 0:00:52The Government says

0:00:52 > 0:00:54the international trade minister Mark Garnier will be investigated

0:00:54 > 0:00:57the international trade minister of inappropriate behaviour

0:00:57 > 0:01:04towards a female staff member.

0:01:04 > 0:01:05The Prime

0:01:05 > 0:01:06The Prime Minister says she can

0:01:06 > 0:01:08The Prime Minister says she can agree a deal with the EU and plenty

0:01:08 > 0:01:14of time for Parliament to vote on it before we leave in 2018. Well

0:01:14 > 0:01:18Parliament play ball? New evidence cast out

0:01:18 > 0:01:20And in the north-west - glass half full.

0:01:20 > 0:01:23The pubs calling for a freeze on duty to stop them

0:01:23 > 0:01:25calling time for good.

0:01:28 > 0:01:29preferred option?In London 50 years on

0:01:29 > 0:01:31preferred option?In London 50 years are lobbying the Home Secretary to

0:01:31 > 0:01:37stop the alleged harassment of women attending abortion clinics.

0:01:37 > 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 > 0:01:46Julia Hartley-Brewer, Steve Richards and Anne McElvoy.

0:01:46 > 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 > 0:01:54the Ministerial Code following allegations

0:01:54 > 0:02:00of inappropriate behaviour.

0:02:00 > 0:02:03It comes after reports in the Mail on Sunday which has spoken to one

0:02:03 > 0:02:04of Mr Garnier's former employees.

0:02:04 > 0:02:06News of the investigation was announced by the Health

0:02:06 > 0:02:08Secretary Jeremy Hunt on the Andrew Marr show earlier.

0:02:08 > 0:02:12The stories, if they are true, are totally unacceptable

0:02:12 > 0:02:14and the Cabinet Office will be conducting an investigation

0:02:14 > 0:02:17as to whether there has been a breach of the ministerial code

0:02:17 > 0:02:18in this particular case.

0:02:18 > 0:02:20But as you know the facts are disputed.

0:02:20 > 0:02:23This is something that covers behaviour by MPs of all parties

0:02:23 > 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 > 0:02:33the Speaker of the House of Commons, to ask for his advice as to how

0:02:33 > 0:02:39we change that culture.

0:02:39 > 0:02:43That was Jeremy Hunt a little earlier. I want to turn to the panel

0:02:43 > 0:02:48to make sense of this news. This is the government taking these

0:02:48 > 0:02:51allegations quite seriously.What has changed in this story is they

0:02:51 > 0:02:56used to be a bit of delay while people work out what they should say

0:02:56 > 0:03:01about it, how seriously to take it. As you see now a senior cabinet

0:03:01 > 0:03:06member out there, Jeremy Hunt, with an instant response. He does have

0:03:06 > 0:03:09the worry of whether the facts are disputed, but what they want to be

0:03:09 > 0:03:14seen doing is to do something very quickly. In the past they would say

0:03:14 > 0:03:19it was all part of the rough and tumble of Westminster.Mark Garnier

0:03:19 > 0:03:23does not deny these stories, which is that he asked an employee to buy

0:03:23 > 0:03:28sex toys, but he said it was just high jinks and it was taken out of

0:03:28 > 0:03:32context. Is this the sort of thing that a few years ago in a different

0:03:32 > 0:03:37environment would be investigated? Not necessarily quite the frenzy

0:03:37 > 0:03:45that it is nowadays. The combination of social media, all the Sunday

0:03:45 > 0:03:47political programmes were ministers have to go on armed with a response

0:03:47 > 0:03:55means that you get these we have to be seen to be doing something. That

0:03:55 > 0:03:59means there is this Cabinet Office investigation. You pointed out to us

0:03:59 > 0:04:03before the programme that he was not a minister before this happened. It

0:04:03 > 0:04:08does not matter whether he says yes, know I did this or did not,

0:04:08 > 0:04:12something has to be seen to be done. Clearly ministers today are being

0:04:12 > 0:04:16armed with that bit of information and that Theresa May will ask John

0:04:16 > 0:04:20Bercow the speaker to look into the whole culture of Parliament in this

0:04:20 > 0:04:26context. That is the response to this kind of frenzy.If we do live

0:04:26 > 0:04:29in an environment where something has to be seen to be done, does that

0:04:29 > 0:04:35always mean the right thing gets done?Absolutely not. We are in

0:04:35 > 0:04:39witch hunt territory. All of us work in the Commons over many years and

0:04:39 > 0:04:44anyone would think it was a scene out of Benny Hill or a carry on

0:04:44 > 0:04:49film. Sadly it is not that much fun and it is rather dull and dreary.

0:04:49 > 0:04:54Yes, there are sex pests, yes, there is sexual harassment, but the idea

0:04:54 > 0:04:58this is going on on a huge scale is nonsense.Doesn't matter whether it

0:04:58 > 0:05:05is a huge scale or not? Or just a few instances?Any workplace where

0:05:05 > 0:05:10you have the mixing of work and social so intertwined and you throw

0:05:10 > 0:05:14a huge amount of alcohol and late night and people living away from

0:05:14 > 0:05:20home you will have this happen.That does not make it OK.It makes sexual

0:05:20 > 0:05:25harassment not OK as it is not anywhere. This happens to men as

0:05:25 > 0:05:29well and if they have an issue into it there are employment tribunal 's

0:05:29 > 0:05:33and they can contact lawyers. I do not think this should be a matter of

0:05:33 > 0:05:39the speaker, it should be someone completely independent of any party.

0:05:39 > 0:05:44People think MPs are employees of the party or the Commons, they are

0:05:44 > 0:05:48not.Because they are self-employed to whom do you go if you are a

0:05:48 > 0:05:53researcher?That has to be clarified. I agree you need a much

0:05:53 > 0:05:59clearer line of reporting. It was a bit like the situation when we came

0:05:59 > 0:06:05into the media many years ago, the Punic wars in my case! You were not

0:06:05 > 0:06:12quite sure who to go to. If you work worried that it might impede your

0:06:12 > 0:06:17career, and you had to talk to people who work next to you, that is

0:06:17 > 0:06:21just one example, but in the Commons people do not know who they should

0:06:21 > 0:06:25go to. Where Theresa May might be making a mistake, it is the same

0:06:25 > 0:06:29mistake when it was decided to investigate through Levinson the

0:06:29 > 0:06:35culture of the media which was like nailing jelly to a wall. Look at the

0:06:35 > 0:06:38culture of anybody's job and the environment they are in and there is

0:06:38 > 0:06:44usually a lot wrong with it. When you try and make it general, they

0:06:44 > 0:06:49are not trying to blame individuals, or it say they need a better line on

0:06:49 > 0:06:53reporting of sexual harassment, which I support, the Commons is a

0:06:53 > 0:06:57funny place and it is a rough old trade and you are never going to

0:06:57 > 0:07:02iron out the human foibles of that. Diane Abbott was talking about this

0:07:02 > 0:07:06earlier.

0:07:06 > 0:07:09When I first went into Parliament so many of those men had been to all

0:07:09 > 0:07:16boys boarding schools and had really difficult attitudes towards women.

0:07:16 > 0:07:20The world has moved on and middle-aged women are less likely

0:07:20 > 0:07:30than middle-aged men to believe that young research are irresistibly

0:07:30 > 0:07:35attracted to them. We have seen the issues and we have seen one of our

0:07:35 > 0:07:41colleagues been suspended for quite unacceptable language.

0:07:41 > 0:07:45That is a point, Jarrod O'Mara, a Labour MP who has had the whip

0:07:45 > 0:07:50suspended, this goes across all parties.The idea that there is a

0:07:50 > 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 > 0:08:15mentioned so far in politics. But it also raises questions about how

0:08:15 > 0:08:21candidates are selected for example. There has been a huge pressure for

0:08:21 > 0:08:25the centre to keep out of things. I bet from now on there will be much

0:08:25 > 0:08:30greater scrutiny of all candidates and tweets will have to be looked at

0:08:30 > 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 > 0:08:45about Jarrod O'Mara and the Lib Dems knew about it, so it is difficult to

0:08:45 > 0:08:51suggest the Labour Party did not as well.There is very clear evidence

0:08:51 > 0:08:56the Labour Party did know. But we are in a situation of how perfect

0:08:56 > 0:09:02and well-behaved does everyone have to be? If you look at past American

0:09:02 > 0:09:07presidents, JFK and Bill Clinton, these men were sex pest

0:09:07 > 0:09:10extraordinaire, with totally inappropriate behaviour on a regular

0:09:10 > 0:09:14basis. There are things you are not allowed to say if you are feminists.

0:09:14 > 0:09:19Young women are really attracted to powerful men. I was busted for the

0:09:19 > 0:09:23idea that there are young women in the House of commons who are

0:09:23 > 0:09:30throwing themselves at middle-aged, potbellied, balding, older men. We

0:09:30 > 0:09:36need to focus on the right things. When it is unwanted, harassing,

0:09:36 > 0:09:39inappropriate and criminal, absolutely, you come down like a

0:09:39 > 0:09:43tonne of bricks. It is not just because there are more women in the

0:09:43 > 0:09:48Commons, it is because there are more men married to women like us.

0:09:48 > 0:09:50We have to leave it there.

0:09:50 > 0:09:53As attention turns in Westminster to the hundreds

0:09:53 > 0:09:55of amendments put down on the EU Withdrawal Bill, David Davis has

0:09:55 > 0:09:58caused a stir this week by saying it's possible Parliament won't get

0:09:58 > 0:10:01a vote on the Brexit deal until after March 2019 -

0:10:01 > 0:10:03when the clock runs out and we leave the EU.

0:10:03 > 0:10:06Let's take a look at how the controversy played out.

0:10:06 > 0:10:10And which point do you envisage Parliament having a vote?

0:10:10 > 0:10:11As soon as possible thereafter.

0:10:11 > 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 > 0:10:19So, the vote in Parliament...

0:10:19 > 0:10:20The other thing...

0:10:20 > 0:10:22Could be after March 2019?

0:10:22 > 0:10:23It could be, yeah, it could be.

0:10:23 > 0:10:25The...

0:10:25 > 0:10:26It depends when it concludes.

0:10:26 > 0:10:29Mr Barnier, remember, has said he'd like...

0:10:29 > 0:10:31Sorry, the vote of our Parliament, the UK Parliament, could be

0:10:31 > 0:10:33after March 2019?

0:10:33 > 0:10:34Yes, it could be.

0:10:34 > 0:10:36Could be.

0:10:36 > 0:10:37The thing to member...

0:10:37 > 0:10:39Which would be...

0:10:39 > 0:10:41Well, it can't come before we have the deal.

0:10:41 > 0:10:44You said that it is POSSIBLE that Parliament night not vote

0:10:44 > 0:10:48on the deal until AFTER the end of March 2019.

0:10:48 > 0:10:49I'm summarising correctly what you said...?

0:10:49 > 0:10:51Yeah, that's correct.

0:10:51 > 0:10:53In the event we don't do the deal until then, yeah.

0:10:53 > 0:10:55Can the Prime Minister please explain how it's possible

0:10:55 > 0:10:57to have a meaningful vote on something that's

0:10:57 > 0:11:02already taken place?

0:11:02 > 0:11:06As the honourable gentleman knows, we're in negotiations

0:11:06 > 0:11:09with the European Union, but I am confident that the timetable under

0:11:09 > 0:11:12the Lisbon Treaty does give time until March 2019

0:11:12 > 0:11:14for the negotiations to take place.

0:11:14 > 0:11:17But I'm confident, because it is in the interests of both sides,

0:11:17 > 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 > 0:11:31in time for this Parliament to have a vote that we committed to.

0:11:31 > 0:11:34We are working to reach an agreement on the final deal

0:11:34 > 0:11:36in good time before we leave the European Union in March 2019.

0:11:36 > 0:11:39Clearly, we cannot say for certain at this stage

0:11:39 > 0:11:41when this will be agreed.

0:11:41 > 0:11:43But as Michel Barnier said, he hopes to get a draft deal

0:11:43 > 0:11:49agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim is well.

0:11:49 > 0:11:52agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim as well.

0:11:52 > 0:11:54I'm joined now by the former Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary

0:11:54 > 0:11:57Benn, who is the chair of the Commons Brexit Committee,

0:11:57 > 0:12:00which David Davis was giving evidence to.

0:12:00 > 0:12:06Good morning.When you think a parliamentary vote should take place

0:12:06 > 0:12:12in order for it to be meaningful?It has to be before we leave the

0:12:12 > 0:12:14European Union. Michel Barnier said at the start of the negotiations

0:12:14 > 0:12:19that he wants to wrap them up by October of next year, so we have

0:12:19 > 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 > 0:12:40and re-negotiate?That would not be acceptable. We will not be given a

0:12:40 > 0:12:43bit of paper and told to take it or leave it. But the following day

0:12:43 > 0:12:47Steve Baker, also a minister in the department, told our committee that

0:12:47 > 0:12:50the government now accepts that in order to implement transitional

0:12:50 > 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 > 0:13:03to do that, why don't you have a separate bill to implement the

0:13:03 > 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 > 0:13:14to the timing, you have said you do not think it is possible to

0:13:14 > 0:13:19negotiate a trade deal in the next 12 months. You say the only people

0:13:19 > 0:13:23who think that is possible British ministers. If you do not believe we

0:13:23 > 0:13:28can get a deal negotiated, how can we get a vote on it in 12 months'

0:13:28 > 0:13:33time?If things go well, and there is still a risk of no agreement

0:13:33 > 0:13:47which 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 > 0:13:59government is to set out how it thinks that will work, and then an

0:13:59 > 0:14:02agreement between the UK and the 27 member states saying, we will now

0:14:02 > 0:14:04negotiate a new trade and market access arrangement, and new

0:14:04 > 0:14:06association agreement between the two parties, and that will be done

0:14:06 > 0:14:08in the transition period. Parliament will be voting in those

0:14:08 > 0:14:13circumstances on a deal which leads to the door being open.But we would

0:14:13 > 0:14:18be outside the EU at that point, so how meaningful can vote be where you

0:14:18 > 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 > 0:14:33it is possible to negotiate all of the issues that will need to be

0:14:33 > 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 > 0:14:52presented to it. It is likely to be a mix agreement so the approval

0:14:52 > 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 > 0:15:20have said it is a take it or leave it option and it is the Noel Edmonds

0:15:20 > 0:15:27option, deal or no Deal, you say yes or no to it. You cannot send them

0:15:27 > 0:15:32back to re-negotiate.

0:15:32 > 0:15:37If it is a separate piece of legislation, when Parliament has a

0:15:37 > 0:15:42chance to shape the nature of that legislation.But it can't change

0:15:42 > 0:15:46what has been negotiated with the EU?Well, you could say to the

0:15:46 > 0:15:51government, we're happy with this but was not happy about that chukka

0:15:51 > 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 > 0:16:05possible tariffs, whilst able to control migration. If they've got to

0:16:05 > 0:16:09get the best deal that they can on that, how on earth is the Labour

0:16:09 > 0:16:14Party, saying we want a bit more, owing to persuade the other 27?We

0:16:14 > 0:16:17certainly don't want the lowest possible tariffs, we want no tariffs

0:16:17 > 0:16:22are taught. My personal view is that, has made a profound mistake in

0:16:22 > 0:16:27deciding that it wants to leave the customs union. If you want to help

0:16:27 > 0:16:31deal with the very serious question of the border between Northern

0:16:31 > 0:16:35Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, the way you do that is to stay in

0:16:35 > 0:16:41the customs union and I hope, will change its mind.But the Labour

0:16:41 > 0:16:44Party is simply saying in the House of Commons, we want a better deal

0:16:44 > 0:16:51than what, has been able to get?It depends how the negotiations unfold.

0:16:51 > 0:16:56, has ended up on the transitional arrangements in the place that Keir

0:16:56 > 0:17:02Starmer set out on behalf of the shadow cabinet in August, when he

0:17:02 > 0:17:06said, we will need to stay in the single market and the customs union

0:17:06 > 0:17:09for the duration of the transition, and I think that is the position,

0:17:09 > 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 > 0:17:23and we have not even got on to the negotiations. -- there's very little

0:17:23 > 0:17:29time left.On phase two, the labour Party have set out six clear tests,

0:17:29 > 0:17:33and two of them are crucial. You say you want the exact same benefits we

0:17:33 > 0:17:37currently have in the customs union but you also want to be able to

0:17:37 > 0:17:41ensure the fair migration to control immigration, basically, which does

0:17:41 > 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 > 0:17:56But you say no deal would be catastrophic if so it seems to me

0:17:56 > 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 > 0:18:10Businesses have sent a letter to the Prime Minister saying that a

0:18:10 > 0:18:13transition is essential because the possibility of a no deal and no

0:18:13 > 0:18:16transitional would be very damaging for the economy. We fought the

0:18:16 > 0:18:19general election on a policy of seeking to retain the benefits of

0:18:19 > 0:18:23the single market and the customs union. Keir Starmer said on behalf

0:18:23 > 0:18:28of the shadow government that as far as the longer term arrangements are

0:18:28 > 0:18:31concerned, that should leave all options on the table, because it is

0:18:31 > 0:18:35the end that you're trying to achieve and you then find the means

0:18:35 > 0:18:40to support it. So we're setting out very clearly those tests.If you

0:18:40 > 0:18:44were to vote down an agreement because it did not meet your tests,

0:18:44 > 0:18:49and there was time to send, back to the EU to get a better deal, then

0:18:49 > 0:18:51you would have significantly weakened their negotiating hand

0:18:51 > 0:18:56chukka that doesn't help them?I don't think, has deployed its

0:18:56 > 0:19:00negotiating hand very strongly thus far. Because we had a general

0:19:00 > 0:19:03election which meant that we lost time that we would have used for

0:19:03 > 0:19:07negotiating. We still don't know what kind of long-term trade and

0:19:07 > 0:19:14market access deal, wants. The Prime Minister says, I don't want a deal

0:19:14 > 0:19:18like Canada and I don't want a deal like the European Economic Area. But

0:19:18 > 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 > 0:19:31for the benefit of the other 27 European countries, what kind of

0:19:31 > 0:19:35deal it wants. When I travel to Europe and talk to those involved in

0:19:35 > 0:19:40the negotiations, you see other leaders saying, we don't actually

0:19:40 > 0:19:43know what Britain wants. With a year to go it is about time we made that

0:19:43 > 0:19:49clear.One related question on the European Union - you spoke in your

0:19:49 > 0:19:53famous speech in Syria about the international brigades in Spain, and

0:19:53 > 0:19:57I wonder if your solidarity with them leads you to think that the UK

0:19:57 > 0:20:00Government should be recognising Catalonia is an independent state?

0:20:00 > 0:20:05No, I don't think so. It is a very difficult and potentially dangerous

0:20:05 > 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 > 0:20:19elections will give Catalonia the chance to take that decision, but I

0:20:19 > 0:20:26am not clear what the declaration of independence actually means. Are

0:20:26 > 0:20:30they going to be borders, is they're going to be an army? There will have

0:20:30 > 0:20:33to be some agreement. Catalonia has already had a high degree of

0:20:33 > 0:20:38autonomy. It may like some more, and it seems to me if you look at the

0:20:38 > 0:20:43experience here in the United Kingdom, that is the way to go, not

0:20:43 > 0:20:46a constitutional stand-off. And I really hope nobody is charged with

0:20:46 > 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 > 0:20:57consultation on plans for a third runway at Heathrow.

0:20:57 > 0:20:59While ministers are clear the £18 billion project

0:20:59 > 0:21:01is still the preferred option, new data raises further questions

0:21:01 > 0:21:03about the environmental impact of expansion,

0:21:03 > 0:21:05and offers an improved economic case for a second

0:21:05 > 0:21:06runway at Gatwick instead.

0:21:06 > 0:21:09So, with opponents on all sides of the Commons, does the Government

0:21:09 > 0:21:11still have the votes to get the plans off the ground?

0:21:11 > 0:21:21Here's Elizabeth Glinka.

0:21:25 > 0:21:27The debate over the expansion of Heathrow has been

0:21:27 > 0:21:28going on for decades.

0:21:28 > 0:21:31Plans for a third runway were first introduced

0:21:31 > 0:21:32by the Labour government in 2003.

0:21:32 > 0:21:36Then, after spending millions of pounds, finally, in 2015,

0:21:36 > 0:21:41the airport commission recommended that those plans go ahead,

0:21:41 > 0:21:45and the government position appeared to be fixed.

0:21:45 > 0:21:47But, of course, since then, we've had a general election.

0:21:47 > 0:21:51The Government have lost their Commons majority.

0:21:51 > 0:21:54And with opposition on both front benches, the Parliamentary

0:21:54 > 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 > 0:22:04and that don't forget was the bedrock for the Government's

0:22:04 > 0:22:06decision, that's why the government supposedly made the decision

0:22:06 > 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 > 0:22:21More and more people want to fly.

0:22:21 > 0:22:24And after the referendum, connectivity post-Brexit

0:22:24 > 0:22:28is going to be absolutely critical to the UK economy, so if anything,

0:22:28 > 0:22:34I think the case is stronger for expansion at Heathrow.

0:22:34 > 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 > 0:22:47the public consultation.

0:22:47 > 0:22:51But it maintains the case for Heathrow is as strong as ever,

0:22:51 > 0:22:56delivering benefits of up to £74 billion to the wider economy.

0:22:56 > 0:22:58And in any case, the Government says, action must be taken,

0:22:58 > 0:23:03as all five of London's airports will be completely

0:23:03 > 0:23:07full by the mid-2030s.

0:23:07 > 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 > 0:23:21is now less likely to meet its environmental targets.

0:23:21 > 0:23:26Campaigners like these in Hounslow sense the wind is shifting.

0:23:26 > 0:23:28We're feeling encouraged, because we see all kinds

0:23:28 > 0:23:30of weaknesses in the argument.

0:23:30 > 0:23:33Certainly, quite a few MPs, I think certainly Labour MPs,

0:23:33 > 0:23:36are beginning to think perhaps it's not such a great idea

0:23:36 > 0:23:39to have a third runway.

0:23:39 > 0:23:41Their MP is convinced colleagues can now be persuaded

0:23:41 > 0:23:43to see things their way.

0:23:43 > 0:23:45The Labour Party quite rightly set four key tests

0:23:45 > 0:23:48for a third runway at Heathrow.

0:23:48 > 0:23:51And in my view, Heathrow is not able...

0:23:51 > 0:23:55The Heathrow option is not able to pass any of those.

0:23:55 > 0:23:58So, I see a lot of colleagues in the Labour Party around

0:23:58 > 0:24:01the country beginning to think twice.

0:24:01 > 0:24:06And if you look at the cross-party MPs supportin this anti-Heathrow

0:24:06 > 0:24:10And if you look at the cross-party MPs supporting this anti-Heathrow

0:24:10 > 0:24:12protest this week, you will see some familiar faces.

0:24:12 > 0:24:14You know my position - as the constituency MP,

0:24:14 > 0:24:15I'm totally opposed.

0:24:15 > 0:24:18I think this is another indication of just the difficulties

0:24:18 > 0:24:20the Government have got off of implementing this policy.

0:24:20 > 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 > 0:24:26So, if some on the Labour front bench are, shall

0:24:26 > 0:24:29we say, not supportive, what about the other side?

0:24:29 > 0:24:32In a free vote, we could have had up to 60 Conservative MPs

0:24:32 > 0:24:34voting against expansion, that's the number that is normally

0:24:34 > 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 > 0:24:39the numbers would be fewer.

0:24:39 > 0:24:42I can't tell you what that number is, but I can tell

0:24:42 > 0:24:45you that there are people right the way through the party,

0:24:45 > 0:24:47from the backbenches to the heart of the government,

0:24:47 > 0:24:49who will vote against Heathrow expansion.

0:24:49 > 0:24:52And yet the SNP, whose Commons votes could prove vital,

0:24:52 > 0:24:54are behind the Heathrow plan, which promises more

0:24:54 > 0:24:55connecting flights.

0:24:55 > 0:24:59And other supporters are convinced they have the numbers.

0:24:59 > 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 > 0:25:07I think that will be clearly demonstrated.

0:25:07 > 0:25:10Any vote on this issue won't come until next summer.

0:25:10 > 0:25:12For both sides, yet more time to argue about weather

0:25:12 > 0:25:19the plans should take off or be permanently grounded.

0:25:23 > 0:25:24Elizabeth Glinka there.

0:25:24 > 0:25:27And I'm joined now by the former Cabinet minister Theresa Villiers,

0:25:27 > 0:25:29who oversaw aviation policy as a transport minister

0:25:29 > 0:25:36under David Cameron.

0:25:36 > 0:25:41Thanks for coming in. You have made your opposition to a third runway at

0:25:41 > 0:25:45Heathrow consistently clear. , have reopened this consultation but it is

0:25:45 > 0:25:49still clearly their preferred option?It is but what I have always

0:25:49 > 0:25:52asked is, why try to build a new runway at Heathrow when you can

0:25:52 > 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 > 0:26:03though? Private finance is already to go at Heathrow, because that's

0:26:03 > 0:26:07where people want to do it and that's where the private backers

0:26:07 > 0:26:10want to put it. It would take much longer to get the private finance

0:26:10 > 0:26:15for Gatwick? Part of that private finance is passengers of the future,

0:26:15 > 0:26:20but also, the costs of the surface transport needed to expand Heathrow

0:26:20 > 0:26:28is phenomenal. I mean, TfL estimates vary between £10 billion and £15

0:26:28 > 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 > 0:26:43ultimately where passengers and airlines want to go to, isn't it?

0:26:43 > 0:26:48Every slot is practically full. Every time a new one comes up, it is

0:26:48 > 0:26:54up immediately, it's a very popular airport. Gatwick is not where they

0:26:54 > 0:26:57want to go?There are many airlines and passengers who do want to fly

0:26:57 > 0:27:01from Gatwick, and all the forecasts indicate that a new runway there

0:27:01 > 0:27:05would be full of planes very rapidly. But I think the key thing

0:27:05 > 0:27:11is that successive elements have said, technology will deliver a way

0:27:11 > 0:27:16to resolve the around noise and air quality. I don't have any confidence

0:27:16 > 0:27:21that science has demonstrated that technology will deliver those

0:27:21 > 0:27:25solutions to these very serious environmental limbs which have

0:27:25 > 0:27:27stopped Heathrow expansion for decades.Jim Fitzpatrick in the film

0:27:27 > 0:27:32was mentioning that people think there is a need for even more

0:27:32 > 0:27:35collectivity in Britain post-Brexit. We know that business has been

0:27:35 > 0:27:39crying out for more routes, they really think it hurts business

0:27:39 > 0:27:43expansion that we don't get on with this. More consultation is just

0:27:43 > 0:27:47going to lead to more delay, isn't it?This is a hugely controversial

0:27:47 > 0:27:50decision. There is a reason why people have been talking about

0:27:50 > 0:27:54expanding Heathrow for 50 years and it is never happened, it's because

0:27:54 > 0:27:59it's a bad idea. So, inevitably the legal processes are very complex.

0:27:59 > 0:28:03One of my anxieties about, pursuing this option is that potentially it

0:28:03 > 0:28:06means another lost decade for airport expansion. Because the

0:28:06 > 0:28:12problems with Heathrow expansion are so serious, I believe that's one of

0:28:12 > 0:28:15the reasons why I advocated, anyone who wants a new runway in the

0:28:15 > 0:28:19south-east should be backing Gatwick is a much more deliverable option.

0:28:19 > 0:28:25Let me move on to Brexit. We were talking with Hilary Benn about a

0:28:25 > 0:28:28meaningful vote being given to the House of Commons chukka how

0:28:28 > 0:28:31important do you think that is?Of course the Commons will vote on

0:28:31 > 0:28:37this. The Commons is going to vote on this many, many times. We have

0:28:37 > 0:28:40also had a hugely important vote not only in the referendum on the 23rd

0:28:40 > 0:28:44of June but also on Article 50.But will that vote allow any changes to

0:28:44 > 0:28:50it? Hilary Benn seemed to think that the Commons would be able to shape

0:28:50 > 0:28:54the deal with the vote. But actually is it going to be, saying, take it

0:28:54 > 0:28:59or leave it at all what we have negotiated?Our Prime Minister

0:28:59 > 0:29:04negotiates on our behalf internationally. It's

0:29:04 > 0:29:07well-established precedent that after an agreement is reached

0:29:07 > 0:29:12overseas, then it is considered in the House of Commons.What if it was

0:29:12 > 0:29:17voted down in the House of Commons? Well, the legal effect of that would

0:29:17 > 0:29:19be that we left the European Union without any kind of deal, because

0:29:19 > 0:29:24the key decision was on the voting of Article 50 as an irreversible

0:29:24 > 0:29:30decision.Is it irreversible, though? We understand, may have had

0:29:30 > 0:29:33legal advice saying that Yukon stopped the clock on Article 50.

0:29:33 > 0:29:37Would it not be possible if the Commons voted against to ask the

0:29:37 > 0:29:40European Union for a little bit more time to try and renegotiate?There

0:29:40 > 0:29:49is a debate about the reversibility of Article 50. But the key point is

0:29:49 > 0:29:54that we are all working for a good deal for the United Kingdom and the

0:29:54 > 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 > 0:30:08about frustrating the process. I think that would be wrong. I think

0:30:08 > 0:30:11we should respect the result of the referendum.Will it be by next

0:30:11 > 0:30:14summer, so there is time for Parliament and for other

0:30:14 > 0:30:17parliaments?I certainly hope that we get that agreement between the

0:30:17 > 0:30:23two sides, and the recent European summit seemed to indicate a

0:30:23 > 0:30:26willingness from the European side to be constructive. But one point

0:30:26 > 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 > 0:30:38work on the details of a trade agreement. I hope we get as much as

0:30:38 > 0:30:42possible in place before exit day. But filling out some of that detail

0:30:42 > 0:30:51is made easier if we can secure that two-year transitional deal.

0:30:51 > 0:30:57That is interesting because a lot of Brexiteers what the deal to be done

0:30:57 > 0:31:05by the inflammation period, it is not a time for that.I fully

0:31:05 > 0:31:10recognise we need compromise, I am keen to work with people across my

0:31:10 > 0:31:13party in terms of spectrum of opinion, and with other parties as

0:31:13 > 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 > 0:31:28House of commons and Theresa May will write to the Speaker of the

0:31:28 > 0:31:31House of Commons to make sure there is a better way that people can

0:31:31 > 0:31:36report sexual harassment in the House of commons. Is that necessary?

0:31:36 > 0:31:41A better procedure is needed. It is sad it has taken this controversy to

0:31:41 > 0:31:46push this forward. But there is a problem with MPs who are individual

0:31:46 > 0:31:51employers. If you work for an MP and have a complaint against them,

0:31:51 > 0:31:55essentially they are overseeing their own complaints process. I

0:31:55 > 0:31:59think a role for the House of commons authorities in ensuring that

0:31:59 > 0:32:03those complaints are properly dealt with I think would be very helpful,

0:32:03 > 0:32:08so I think the Prime Minister's letter was a sensible move.So you

0:32:08 > 0:32:11think there is a culture of sexual harassment in the House of commons?

0:32:11 > 0:32:18I have not been subjected to it or seen evidence of it, but obviously

0:32:18 > 0:32:22there is anxiety and allegations have made their way into the papers

0:32:22 > 0:32:25and they should be treated appropriately and properly

0:32:25 > 0:32:27investigated.Thank you for talking to us.

0:32:27 > 0:32:29Thank you for talking to us.

0:32:29 > 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 > 0:32:36With over 800 members the upper house is the second largest

0:32:36 > 0:32:38legislative chamber in the world after the National People's

0:32:38 > 0:32:39Congress of China.

0:32:39 > 0:32:42The report is expected to recommend that new peerages should be

0:32:42 > 0:32:45time-limited to 15 years and that in the future political peerage

0:32:45 > 0:32:49appointments will also be tied to a party's election performance.

0:32:49 > 0:32:52The government has been under pressure to take action to cut

0:32:52 > 0:32:55members of the unelected chamber, where they are entitled

0:32:55 > 0:32:59to claim an attendance allowance of £300 a day.

0:32:59 > 0:33:02And once again these expenses have been in the news.

0:33:02 > 0:33:05The Electoral Reform Society discovered that 16 peers had claimed

0:33:05 > 0:33:08around £400,000 without speaking in any debates or submitting any

0:33:08 > 0:33:11questions for an entire year.

0:33:11 > 0:33:14One of the Lords to be criticised was Digby Jones,

0:33:14 > 0:33:17the crossbencher and former trade minister, he hasn't spoken

0:33:17 > 0:33:21in the Lords since April 2016 and has voted only seven times

0:33:21 > 0:33:24during 2016 and 2017.

0:33:24 > 0:33:27Yet he has claimed around £15,000 in this period.

0:33:27 > 0:33:30When asked what he does in the House he said,

0:33:30 > 0:33:33"I go in and I will invite for lunch or meet with inward

0:33:33 > 0:33:35investors into the country.

0:33:35 > 0:33:38I fly the flag for Britain."

0:33:38 > 0:33:40Well, we can speak now to Lord Jones who joins us

0:33:40 > 0:33:44from Stratford Upon Avon.

0:33:44 > 0:33:49Thank you very much for talking to us. You provide value for money in

0:33:49 > 0:33:56the House of Lords do you think? Definitely. I am, by the way, very

0:33:56 > 0:34:01keen on reform. I want to see that 15 year tide. I would like to see a

0:34:01 > 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 > 0:34:17paying for and why. The £300, as a crossbencher I get no support, and

0:34:17 > 0:34:25nor do I want any, speech writing, secretarial assistance, none of

0:34:25 > 0:34:30that, and the £300 goes towards that.Whilst you are in there

0:34:30 > 0:34:34because we will talk about the reform of the Lords in general, but

0:34:34 > 0:34:38in terms of you yourself, you say you invite people in for lunch, is

0:34:38 > 0:34:42it not possible for you to take part in debates and votes and ask

0:34:42 > 0:34:47questions at the same time?Have you ever listened to a debate in the

0:34:47 > 0:34:59laws? Yes, many times.Yes, many times. You have to put your name

0:34:59 > 0:35:07down in advance and you have to be there for the whole debate.You have

0:35:07 > 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 > 0:35:21part of being a member of the House of Lords and what it means. If you

0:35:21 > 0:35:25are not prepared to wait or take part in debates, why do you want to

0:35:25 > 0:35:29be a member? It is possible to resign from the House of Lords.

0:35:29 > 0:35:33There are many things members of the Lords do that does not relate to

0:35:33 > 0:35:38parrot fashion following somebody else, which I refuse to do, about

0:35:38 > 0:35:43speaking to an empty chamber, or indeed hanging on sometimes for

0:35:43 > 0:35:48hours to vote. There are many other things that you do. You quote me as

0:35:48 > 0:35:53saying I will entertain at lunchtime or show people around the House,

0:35:53 > 0:35:56everything from schoolchildren to inward investors. I will meet

0:35:56 > 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 > 0:36:08None of that relates to going into the House and getting on your hind

0:36:08 > 0:36:12legs, although I do go in and sit there and learn and listen to

0:36:12 > 0:36:19others, which, if more people would receive and not transmit, we might

0:36:19 > 0:36:22get a better informed society. At the same time many times I will go

0:36:22 > 0:36:27after I have listened and I am leaving and if I have not heard the

0:36:27 > 0:36:33debate, I will not vote.Voting is an essential part of being part of a

0:36:33 > 0:36:39legislative chamber. This is not just an executive committee, it is a

0:36:39 > 0:36:44legislature, surpassing that law is essential, is it not?Do you really

0:36:44 > 0:36:48believe that an MP or a member of the Lords who has not heard a moment

0:36:48 > 0:36:54of the debate, who is then listening to the Bell, walks in and does not

0:36:54 > 0:36:58know which lobby, the whips tell him, they have not heard the debate

0:36:58 > 0:37:03and they do not know what they are voting on and they go and do it?

0:37:03 > 0:37:09That is your democracy? Voting seems to be an essential part of this

0:37:09 > 0:37:14chamber, and you have your ideas about reforming the chamber. It

0:37:14 > 0:37:17sounds as though you would reform yourself out of it. You say people

0:37:17 > 0:37:21who are not voting and who are not taking part in debate should no

0:37:21 > 0:37:28longer be members of the House.I did not say that. I said we ought to

0:37:28 > 0:37:32redefine what attendance means and then if you do not attend on the new

0:37:32 > 0:37:36criteria, you do not have to come ever again, we will give you your

0:37:36 > 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 > 0:37:52and sometimes I would not. If I did not, then off I go. Similarly after

0:37:52 > 0:37:5915 years, off you go. If you reach 75 or 80, off you go. Why do we have

0:37:59 > 0:38:0492 members who are only there because of daddy.You are talking

0:38:04 > 0:38:07about hereditary peers. You would like to reduce the House to what

0:38:07 > 0:38:14kind of number?I would get it down to 400.You would get rid of half

0:38:14 > 0:38:18the peers there at the moment? You think you are active enough to

0:38:18 > 0:38:25remain as one of the 400?No, I said that might well include me. Let's

0:38:25 > 0:38:30get a set of criteria, let's push it through, because the laws is losing

0:38:30 > 0:38:34respect in the whole of the country because there are too many and all

0:38:34 > 0:38:38these things about what people pay for. I bet most people think the

0:38:38 > 0:38:43money you get is paid. It is not, it is re-funding for all the things you

0:38:43 > 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 > 0:38:57if you do not meet the criteria, you have got to go and

0:38:57 > 0:39:00if you do not meet the criteria, you have got to go and that includes

0:39:00 > 0:39:01if you do not meet the criteria, you Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking

0:39:01 > 0:39:05Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.

0:39:05 > 0:39:10Lloyd Jones, thank you're watching the Sunday Politics.

0:39:10 > 0:39:21Coming up on the programme, MP Anna Soubry about the Brexit

0:39:21 > 0:39:22I'm Nina Warhurst.

0:39:22 > 0:39:23Coming up in the Northwest.

0:39:23 > 0:39:26Glass half full, the pubs calling for a freeze on duty to stop them

0:39:26 > 0:39:29calling time for good.

0:39:29 > 0:39:32The trade is struggling at the moment because of the prices

0:39:32 > 0:39:36always increasing so anything that can help will help.

0:39:36 > 0:39:39No beer in the studio this time, but plenty of fizz in the form

0:39:40 > 0:39:41of this week's guests.

0:39:41 > 0:39:43Lisa Nandy is the Labour MP for Wigan and Mark Menzies

0:39:43 > 0:39:45is the Conservative MP for Fylde.

0:39:45 > 0:39:47Welcome to you both.

0:39:47 > 0:39:51We start this week with care homes because figures obtained by the BBC

0:39:51 > 0:39:53show that in the last year 45 private care homes in

0:39:54 > 0:39:56the north-west have closed down.

0:39:56 > 0:39:5829 of them residential.

0:39:58 > 0:40:0016 of them nursing.

0:40:00 > 0:40:03That's affected 759 residents, many of whom were left looking

0:40:03 > 0:40:05for somewhere else to stay.

0:40:05 > 0:40:08Sometimes with very little notice.

0:40:08 > 0:40:10Liverpool has been the hardest hit.

0:40:10 > 0:40:1215 homeowners ceasing to operate there and that's affected

0:40:12 > 0:40:15more than 300 residents.

0:40:15 > 0:40:21265 of them nursing home residents, that's a third of the total.

0:40:21 > 0:40:23Here is what one family told us.

0:40:23 > 0:40:26We have a duty of care to the elderly, to look

0:40:26 > 0:40:28after them properly.

0:40:28 > 0:40:31And it isn't happening.

0:40:31 > 0:40:33Mark, duty of care isn't happening.

0:40:33 > 0:40:36Paul Grant from Liverpool City Council said this has become

0:40:36 > 0:40:38a reflection of the society that we have become now,

0:40:38 > 0:40:40that we can't even look after the generation

0:40:40 > 0:40:42that we should be cherishing.

0:40:42 > 0:40:46This is a hugely important subject and I think the BBC on Thursday

0:40:46 > 0:40:51evening ran a fantastic piece on this.

0:40:51 > 0:40:53One of the issues that was highlighted was that there

0:40:53 > 0:41:00were six homes in Liverpool, three of whom were designated by CQC

0:41:00 > 0:41:03as failing, another three desperate in need of improvement and so,

0:41:03 > 0:41:07with all of this, we have to make sure it's not just about the number

0:41:07 > 0:41:10of care homes but the quality and if care homes are not delivering

0:41:10 > 0:41:11they have to be closed down.

0:41:11 > 0:41:13Yes, but it is about funding as well.

0:41:13 > 0:41:15They can't afford to update because they're not

0:41:15 > 0:41:17getting the funding.

0:41:17 > 0:41:20Councils are telling us all the time that because of central cuts,

0:41:20 > 0:41:22they can't provide the care they want to.

0:41:22 > 0:41:25For sure, more money has gone in, we know that, more money,

0:41:25 > 0:41:28even more has to go in.

0:41:28 > 0:41:30From central government?

0:41:30 > 0:41:33And other sources too but we need to get this

0:41:33 > 0:41:35on a long-term framework.

0:41:35 > 0:41:38Because we have to plan for adult social care for the next generation

0:41:38 > 0:41:40and we are not there yet.

0:41:40 > 0:41:42Does that mean, Lisa, going to government and saying

0:41:42 > 0:41:45we need more cash or is it time for us to take more responsibility

0:41:45 > 0:41:46from an earlier age?

0:41:46 > 0:41:48It's definitely partly about the cash.

0:41:48 > 0:41:51It's not right to say that more money has gone in.

0:41:51 > 0:41:54Over the last seven years since the Tories came to power,

0:41:54 > 0:41:57six billion has been taken out of social care and the number

0:41:57 > 0:42:01of publicly funded care places has fallen by a quarter and that is one

0:42:01 > 0:42:05of the major pressures in the system and that's why actually the funding

0:42:05 > 0:42:08does matter and it's welcome that Mark is saying that more needs to go

0:42:08 > 0:42:13in, but he is right too to say that this is a wider issue about how

0:42:13 > 0:42:18we fund and pay for a demographic that is changing.

0:42:19 > 0:42:20We are living longer.

0:42:20 > 0:42:21It's a good thing.

0:42:21 > 0:42:24It's great that we're all surviving into a later age,

0:42:24 > 0:42:26but we have to think very seriously as a country about

0:42:27 > 0:42:28how we pay for it.

0:42:28 > 0:42:29How can we do that?

0:42:29 > 0:42:31It can only be done a cross-party basis.

0:42:31 > 0:42:33You've seen two examples in recent years.

0:42:33 > 0:42:36First the proposals put forward by Andy Burnham which were labelled

0:42:36 > 0:42:40by the Tories as a death tax, and killed, and then you saw

0:42:40 > 0:42:44the fairly shambolic set of events around the election that raised

0:42:44 > 0:42:47concerns amongst everybody including Labour, but were very quickly

0:42:47 > 0:42:51labelled as a dementia tax and were killed off.

0:42:51 > 0:42:53The trouble is, unless you establish a cross-party commission to deal

0:42:53 > 0:42:56with this you're always going to get this.

0:42:56 > 0:42:59Do you regret that the budget has been cut over the last seven years?

0:42:59 > 0:43:01Should that be reinvested, a cross-party agreement,

0:43:01 > 0:43:03this needs to a priority?

0:43:03 > 0:43:04There are positive things which have taken place

0:43:04 > 0:43:07in terms of funding so, for example, the ability

0:43:07 > 0:43:09for councils to raise 2% levy for social care,

0:43:09 > 0:43:12but more money has to go in.

0:43:12 > 0:43:15And I think Lisa is partly right in that we have to approach

0:43:15 > 0:43:19this in a mature way.

0:43:19 > 0:43:21The way in which particularly the Liberal Democrats responded

0:43:21 > 0:43:24by calling it a dementia tax, yes, the manifesto launched

0:43:24 > 0:43:28at the election regarding social care was shambolically handled

0:43:28 > 0:43:32on our part, but we have to make sure that we do this in a mature way

0:43:32 > 0:43:35because our old people deserve it.

0:43:35 > 0:43:38OK, both agree we need cross-party support.

0:43:38 > 0:43:40And urgently as well because this has been

0:43:40 > 0:43:42going on for far too long now.

0:43:42 > 0:43:44And it's not just care homes in short supply, is it?

0:43:44 > 0:43:46The Communities Secretary Sajid Javid this week called

0:43:46 > 0:43:49on the Chanecellor to borrow £50 billion to fund

0:43:49 > 0:43:52the 300,000 new homes we need to build each year.

0:43:52 > 0:43:55That was a point picked up by the leader of the Liberal

0:43:55 > 0:43:58Democrats who wanted to know if that's happening.

0:43:58 > 0:44:00Can I therefore welcome the Communities Secretary's

0:44:00 > 0:44:03statement yesterday that the Treasury has agreed

0:44:03 > 0:44:08to increase net borrowing by I think 50 billion in order to enable

0:44:08 > 0:44:09this to happen?

0:44:09 > 0:44:14Will he confirm that this is government policy?

0:44:14 > 0:44:18No, Mr Speaker, that's not what my right honourable friend had said.

0:44:18 > 0:44:21As the right honourable gentleman very well knows.

0:44:21 > 0:44:23I would however agree with him that increasing activity

0:44:23 > 0:44:28in the construction sector is a very good way of creating jobs.

0:44:28 > 0:44:29Ouch!

0:44:29 > 0:44:32So Vince Cable and Sajid Javid put firmly in their place.

0:44:32 > 0:44:34Well, in Liverpool they think part of the solution,

0:44:34 > 0:44:36could be bringing empty homes back into use.

0:44:36 > 0:44:39So far they've reduced that number by a third.

0:44:39 > 0:44:42Claire Hamilton reports.

0:44:42 > 0:44:43Three houses.

0:44:43 > 0:44:46Three different ways of bringing them back to life.

0:44:46 > 0:44:50These tinned up Victorian terraces are part of the Welsh Streets,

0:44:50 > 0:44:52saved from demonstration after a fearless battle

0:44:52 > 0:44:56and being brought back to life by this developer.

0:44:56 > 0:44:59The first 20 homes were snapped up by tenants within a weekend,

0:44:59 > 0:45:02proof that good old terraced housing are still popular.

0:45:02 > 0:45:05We have an expertise in going into neighbourhoods

0:45:05 > 0:45:09which traditional house-builders have struggled to make work.

0:45:09 > 0:45:12And our expertise is in taking redundant derelict housing stocks,

0:45:12 > 0:45:14such as those that we started with here and transforming

0:45:14 > 0:45:19them into aspirational energy-efficient houses,

0:45:19 > 0:45:22which are suitable for the needs of more modern families today.

0:45:22 > 0:45:24Assembly.

0:45:24 > 0:45:27Empty houses turned into award-winning art two years ago

0:45:27 > 0:45:30when the assembled collective won a Turner prize partly for their work

0:45:30 > 0:45:35renovating ten homes in the Granby area of the city.

0:45:35 > 0:45:37The community land trust is something which is held

0:45:37 > 0:45:42in trust for the community and by the community.

0:45:42 > 0:45:46And our aims are community driven and led and to fulfil the wishes

0:45:46 > 0:45:50and aspirations of that community and to keep affordable housing.

0:45:50 > 0:45:53These homes, sold for just a pound by Liverpool City Council,

0:45:53 > 0:45:56generated thousands of applications.

0:45:56 > 0:45:58The scheme grabbed headlines, but is just one of a raft

0:45:58 > 0:46:01of measures the council is employing to stop the decline

0:46:01 > 0:46:03of derelict properties.

0:46:03 > 0:46:06We really believe it will revitalise areas that have stood

0:46:06 > 0:46:08derelict for a long time and it is a challenge

0:46:08 > 0:46:11for those people who move in.

0:46:11 > 0:46:14The house we're standing by today is completed and as you can see,

0:46:14 > 0:46:19if you look at the street, there's a number of other houses

0:46:19 > 0:46:23in works, so it's a challenge to be living here while all this work

0:46:23 > 0:46:24is going on.

0:46:24 > 0:46:26But I think those people who take that challenge,

0:46:26 > 0:46:28who commit to homes for £1, are helping us to

0:46:28 > 0:46:30revitalise the city.

0:46:30 > 0:46:33What it all comes down to of course is money and with the government's

0:46:33 > 0:46:36empty homes funding at an end, councils will need to innovate to

0:46:36 > 0:46:40revive enough homes to meet demand.

0:46:41 > 0:46:43Mark, we did hear at Conservative conference in between the coughs,

0:46:43 > 0:46:47that pledge of £2 billion in social housing, but that's been

0:46:47 > 0:46:50described as chicken feed by the Cambridge Housing

0:46:50 > 0:46:53and Planning, considering we need 300,000 new units a year.

0:46:53 > 0:46:55And that would build around 5,000.

0:46:55 > 0:46:57Nowhere near.

0:46:57 > 0:47:00If you use that two billion just to build houses, then, yes,

0:47:00 > 0:47:04it will build you the number of houses you have outlined

0:47:04 > 0:47:07but it is how housing associations and councils can lock that money

0:47:07 > 0:47:11to borrow against and also to use it to leverage other developers

0:47:11 > 0:47:14into the social housing sector.

0:47:14 > 0:47:17And if that is done properly you can build multiple more

0:47:17 > 0:47:18houses than the number...

0:47:18 > 0:47:21So should they be given the freedom to buy land at a cheaper rate

0:47:22 > 0:47:24which Labour are calling for?

0:47:24 > 0:47:26I think sensibly everything needs to put on a table.

0:47:26 > 0:47:28We know for sure that the housing market is broken.

0:47:28 > 0:47:32The government has got its White Paper, we'll see some

0:47:32 > 0:47:34announcement in the budgets.

0:47:34 > 0:47:36Everything has to be on the table to fix this and it's

0:47:37 > 0:47:38not just one solution.

0:47:38 > 0:47:39We have to do multiple things and quickly.

0:47:39 > 0:47:42Interesting that Sajid Javid called for this 50 billion

0:47:42 > 0:47:44and the Chancellor flatly said no, that's not happening.

0:47:44 > 0:47:46Confusion then within the party?

0:47:46 > 0:47:49Sajid Javid, great guy, but it's not his job to be announcing major

0:47:49 > 0:47:53spending announcements.

0:47:53 > 0:47:55He is the Communities Secretary.

0:47:55 > 0:47:57It's the job of the Chancellor and the Budget.

0:47:57 > 0:48:00We are coming up to the Budget, so let's see what comes

0:48:00 > 0:48:01out of the Budget.

0:48:01 > 0:48:03I can't really blame the Chancellor for that one.

0:48:03 > 0:48:06Do you think it's going to be 50 billion in the Budget?

0:48:06 > 0:48:08Absolutely not, but I think we will take steps towards addressing

0:48:08 > 0:48:14the housing crisis but also have to make sure that the private sector

0:48:14 > 0:48:17is building houses at a much faster rate because at the moment

0:48:17 > 0:48:19it is drip feed and it's not acceptable.

0:48:19 > 0:48:21Lisa, Labour has pledged to build at least 100,000

0:48:21 > 0:48:22council homes a year.

0:48:22 > 0:48:24Where is that money coming from?

0:48:24 > 0:48:27We set out quite costed details in our manifesto about how

0:48:27 > 0:48:32we would pay for that pledge, but the point is this.

0:48:32 > 0:48:34Where would it come from?

0:48:34 > 0:48:36It's all very well saying the private sector has

0:48:36 > 0:48:38to pay for more housing, but what we've seen

0:48:38 > 0:48:40in areas like mine in Wigan and across the Northwest

0:48:40 > 0:48:44is when the private sector is in the driving seat what you get

0:48:44 > 0:48:47is homes that cost is around half a million pounds that local

0:48:47 > 0:48:50people can't afford.

0:48:50 > 0:48:54As a consequence, what we have got in this country now is homeownership

0:48:54 > 0:48:56at its lowest rate for 30 years.

0:48:56 > 0:49:00We've got rough sleepers back on our streets and we've got nearly

0:49:00 > 0:49:0380,000 families stuck in temporary accommodation.

0:49:03 > 0:49:06That's why actually borrowing in order to invest

0:49:06 > 0:49:09when interest rates are low is an incredibly important thing.

0:49:09 > 0:49:12So more borrowing?

0:49:12 > 0:49:15The Tories created this crisis.

0:49:15 > 0:49:18One of Jeremy Corbyn's solutions is to bring in the rent control

0:49:18 > 0:49:22and Selter have said if that happens, landlords would sell

0:49:22 > 0:49:24and Shelter have said if that happens, landlords would sell

0:49:24 > 0:49:26and the housing crisis would exacerbate because there

0:49:26 > 0:49:28would be fewer properties on the market.

0:49:28 > 0:49:30Was he wrong to promise that at Labour conference?

0:49:30 > 0:49:33I used to work for the youth homelessness charity Centrepoint

0:49:33 > 0:49:35and we had always taken the same position as Shelter

0:49:35 > 0:49:38which is still my position now.

0:49:38 > 0:49:40Rent controls have a role but only if you increase

0:49:40 > 0:49:42the housing supply.

0:49:42 > 0:49:44And that is the importance of the Labour policy.

0:49:44 > 0:49:48We are saying build more houses and make sure that local authorities

0:49:48 > 0:49:50have the powers to keep rents low.

0:49:50 > 0:49:53Crucially, what we are not saying is it's a national policy.

0:49:53 > 0:49:56Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister will decide to cap all rents

0:49:56 > 0:49:58and the reason that's important is the film you just

0:49:58 > 0:50:00showed about Liverpool.

0:50:00 > 0:50:03The problem in Liverpool of empty homes is the exact reverse

0:50:03 > 0:50:07of the problem in London where there's just nowhere to build.

0:50:07 > 0:50:08What is wrong with that?

0:50:08 > 0:50:09In places oversubscribed, where working people

0:50:09 > 0:50:13can't afford to live, put a cap on it but put a cap on it

0:50:13 > 0:50:15in a reasonable way so not challenging the free market

0:50:15 > 0:50:17but ensuring people have somewhere to live?

0:50:17 > 0:50:22I'll tell you something more important than rent controls

0:50:22 > 0:50:24and that is all the other charges that landlords are putting

0:50:24 > 0:50:27on and letting agents are putting on to people where they're asking

0:50:27 > 0:50:30for six weeks holding deposits, check-in fees, hundreds

0:50:30 > 0:50:32and hundreds of pounds.

0:50:32 > 0:50:34Checkout fees.

0:50:34 > 0:50:38This is rip-off Britain at large.

0:50:38 > 0:50:40This is why the government in its White Paper is going

0:50:40 > 0:50:42to tackle this and good.

0:50:42 > 0:50:43What about social housing?

0:50:43 > 0:50:44Are you going to do that?

0:50:44 > 0:50:46In the 2015 election when we proposed a whole package

0:50:46 > 0:50:49of things like this, you said Ed Miliband was living

0:50:49 > 0:50:51in a Marxist universe.

0:50:51 > 0:50:54So is your policy now to adopt the Marxist universe and bring

0:50:54 > 0:50:57in these checks people desperately need to prevent them

0:50:57 > 0:51:00being ripped off?

0:51:00 > 0:51:03There's nothing Marxist universe about stopping shysters

0:51:03 > 0:51:08from charging people, holding deposits and check-in

0:51:08 > 0:51:10fees and all that.

0:51:10 > 0:51:14That is an example of the free market broken.

0:51:14 > 0:51:16Social housing when Right To Buy was brought in,

0:51:16 > 0:51:18it was supposed to be one for one.

0:51:18 > 0:51:20One was sold off and another one was built.

0:51:20 > 0:51:23That's not being enforced and that's leading to the crisis.

0:51:23 > 0:51:25It wasn't necessarily one for one.

0:51:25 > 0:51:28It was about using the money that was generated from the sale

0:51:28 > 0:51:32of a property in order to reinvest.

0:51:32 > 0:51:37But the Conservatives have built council houses under six years

0:51:37 > 0:51:39than the Labour Party did in 13.

0:51:39 > 0:51:40It's nonsense.

0:51:40 > 0:51:43It's fallen by 97% since you came to power.

0:51:43 > 0:51:48The Labour Party's housing spokesman in London has asked the Labour Party

0:51:48 > 0:51:51to apologise for its failure on building social housing.

0:51:51 > 0:51:59Absolute rubbish.

0:51:59 > 0:52:01Your own spokesman has asked Labour to apologise.

0:52:01 > 0:52:04This is the case against all of the evidence and facts to think

0:52:04 > 0:52:06you've been building affordable housing for people in this country.

0:52:06 > 0:52:09Why have we got the housing crisis seven years after you took office?

0:52:10 > 0:52:11OK, we have to move on.

0:52:11 > 0:52:13How many planning applications went through last year?

0:52:13 > 0:52:15We wait for the Budget to see whether there will be

0:52:15 > 0:52:17something for houses.

0:52:17 > 0:52:19Right, onto events in Mark's neck of the woods.

0:52:19 > 0:52:20The chief executive of Lancashire County Council

0:52:20 > 0:52:23was told to pack her bags this week.

0:52:23 > 0:52:26The Council rubber-stamped the controversial management

0:52:26 > 0:52:29restructure that also put several senior officers out of a job.

0:52:29 > 0:52:31Mike Stevens has been following the story

0:52:31 > 0:52:33closely and joins us now.

0:52:33 > 0:52:36Why has this been so controversial?

0:52:36 > 0:52:39This is all about the relationship between these two people, the leader

0:52:39 > 0:52:41of Lancashire County Council, Geoff Driver, and the chief

0:52:41 > 0:52:44executive, Jo Turton.

0:52:44 > 0:52:47The proposals were first presented back in July to a behind closed

0:52:47 > 0:52:51doors Cabinet meeting by Councillor Driver and he showed

0:52:51 > 0:52:55them a single sheet of A4 paper, I've got it here, and it basically

0:52:55 > 0:52:58outlines plans to oust the Chief Executive by changing her

0:52:58 > 0:53:01job description to include a requirement for formal financial

0:53:01 > 0:53:05qualifications, something which she doesn't actually have.

0:53:05 > 0:53:09Now opponents of Councillor Driver have said this is connected

0:53:09 > 0:53:12to something called Operation Sheraton which is

0:53:12 > 0:53:14an ongoing fraud investigation in which Councillor Driver and three

0:53:14 > 0:53:18other men are currently on police bail, on suspicion of witness

0:53:18 > 0:53:21intimidation and perverting the course of justice.

0:53:21 > 0:53:24What is the exact alleged link to Operation Sheraton?

0:53:24 > 0:53:28It's believed Jo Turton and some of her fellow senior officers have

0:53:28 > 0:53:32given witness statements to Operation Sheraton so some senior

0:53:32 > 0:53:37figures in Lancashire including the Leader of the Opposition,

0:53:37 > 0:53:39have said that this is Geoff Driver's way

0:53:39 > 0:53:40of ousting Jo Turton.

0:53:40 > 0:53:43It's his way of getting rid of her and of course Geoff Driver

0:53:43 > 0:53:45denies this and says that's absolute rubbish.

0:53:45 > 0:53:50He says this will save the County Council millions

0:53:50 > 0:53:53and millions of pounds in the long term, however in the short

0:53:53 > 0:53:56term his opponents have said this could lead the County Council open

0:53:56 > 0:53:57to serious legal challenges.

0:53:57 > 0:53:59OK, so more trouble for the County Council.

0:53:59 > 0:54:08Thank you.

0:54:08 > 0:54:11The former leader has said that the restructuring is a deliberate

0:54:11 > 0:54:13attempt by Geoff Driver to create a power vacuum so is this

0:54:13 > 0:54:14what we are seeing?

0:54:14 > 0:54:15To consolidate his position?

0:54:15 > 0:54:17Not at all.

0:54:17 > 0:54:18A new Chief Executive, somebody who is very,

0:54:18 > 0:54:20very highly regarded, has actually been

0:54:20 > 0:54:21appointed yesterday.

0:54:21 > 0:54:24But it's my understanding that, far from creating a power vacuum,

0:54:24 > 0:54:26it's making sure we have the right people with the right

0:54:26 > 0:54:27skills in place.

0:54:27 > 0:54:32I think we have to wait and see how this develops.

0:54:32 > 0:54:38Also he chose this week's meeting to push through a ban

0:54:38 > 0:54:39on the non-stunned Halal meat, potentially causing

0:54:39 > 0:54:40community tensions.

0:54:40 > 0:54:41Was this a mistake?

0:54:41 > 0:54:42Not at all.

0:54:42 > 0:54:45Halal is a very sensitive subject for reasons we understand,

0:54:45 > 0:54:47but I think there's a very potent animal welfare point,

0:54:47 > 0:54:50on large animals, to make sure the animal has been stunned before

0:54:50 > 0:54:51it's actually slaughtered.

0:54:51 > 0:54:52It's a very emotive thing.

0:54:52 > 0:54:55Even though none of the schools have asked for it and it's

0:54:55 > 0:54:58come directly from him, it's become his flag, hasn't it?

0:54:58 > 0:55:00That may be the case, but the whole issue around animal

0:55:00 > 0:55:03welfare and how animals are slaughtered I think

0:55:03 > 0:55:06is really important.

0:55:06 > 0:55:09OK, maybe Lancashire's leaders could head to the pub to thrash

0:55:09 > 0:55:12things out if they can find one that is, because around 20,000 pubs

0:55:12 > 0:55:16have called time for good over the past three decades.

0:55:16 > 0:55:19One local MP says the government needs to put a bit of tax relief

0:55:19 > 0:55:23on tap in next month's budget, as Mark Edwards explains.

0:55:24 > 0:55:27I think we're on to a winner here, Trig.

0:55:27 > 0:55:31Pub culture has been ingrained in British life for centuries.

0:55:31 > 0:55:36But things have changed.

0:55:36 > 0:55:38The once thriving Railway has shunted into the sidings.

0:55:38 > 0:55:41Haydock's Huntsman is now a supermarket.

0:55:41 > 0:55:45A story repeated countless times.

0:55:45 > 0:55:47But that's not what villagers here in East Lancashire

0:55:47 > 0:55:50were going to allow to happen to this, their one and only

0:55:50 > 0:55:52pub, The Bay Horse.

0:55:52 > 0:55:55After the pub closed last year we discovered early this year

0:55:55 > 0:55:58there were plans to convert it into housing.

0:55:58 > 0:56:01So we thought we'd buy it ourselves before they do.

0:56:01 > 0:56:06Villagers raised £500,000 to buy The Bayhorse in less than a year.

0:56:06 > 0:56:09With individual contributions up to £50,000.

0:56:09 > 0:56:13They are planning to raise a glass to opening night next month.

0:56:13 > 0:56:14The community got together.

0:56:14 > 0:56:16Lots of people have made new friends.

0:56:16 > 0:56:18Upstairs in the pub today there are volunteers

0:56:19 > 0:56:20painting, decorating.

0:56:20 > 0:56:23We've all come together.

0:56:23 > 0:56:24It's been great for community spirit.

0:56:24 > 0:56:27We've had a fabulous pub in the past and it's been

0:56:27 > 0:56:28a really good meeting place.

0:56:28 > 0:56:31We just want to have a pub there because it's the only

0:56:31 > 0:56:32one in the village.

0:56:32 > 0:56:34According to the campaign for real ale, in 1980

0:56:34 > 0:56:36there were 69,000 pubs in the UK.

0:56:36 > 0:56:40By 2015, it had dwindled to less than 50,000.

0:56:40 > 0:56:43Over that time the number of pints served daily plummeted from almost

0:56:43 > 0:56:4730 million to just under 11 million.

0:56:47 > 0:56:51It's persuaded the West Lonsdale MP to take an early day motion urging

0:56:51 > 0:56:54the government to call time on beer tax increases for the life

0:56:54 > 0:56:57of this Parliament.

0:56:57 > 0:57:00That way we'll have a chance for those people who are drinkers

0:57:00 > 0:57:03in pubs, for those people who are selling beer, those people

0:57:03 > 0:57:07who are landlords and landladies, giving them the chance to be able

0:57:07 > 0:57:09to catch up shall we say with the underpriced competition

0:57:10 > 0:57:12from the supermarkets.

0:57:12 > 0:57:14Tax and VAT represent one third of the costs

0:57:15 > 0:57:19of the average pub pint.

0:57:19 > 0:57:22Another 60% goes on running costs overheads and staff wages.

0:57:22 > 0:57:23Leaving about 6% profit.

0:57:23 > 0:57:26For landlords lucky enough to still have customers.

0:57:26 > 0:57:29So, will Tim Farron's idea make any difference with the average cost

0:57:29 > 0:57:32of a pub pint approaching £4?

0:57:32 > 0:57:35It's a big difference really at the end of the day.

0:57:35 > 0:57:38The trade is struggling at the moment because of the prices.

0:57:38 > 0:57:40It's always increasing.

0:57:40 > 0:57:42Anything that can help will help.

0:57:42 > 0:57:44The supermarkets are giving it away.

0:57:44 > 0:57:48They think why should I pay £4.50 for a pint when I can get

0:57:48 > 0:57:50it for £1.20 at home?

0:57:50 > 0:57:53The rate of pub closure has slowed according to CAMRA.

0:57:53 > 0:57:56But by this time next week, another 25 will have

0:57:56 > 0:58:04sold their last pint.

0:58:04 > 0:58:0525 pubs a week closing.

0:58:05 > 0:58:06Breaks my heart.

0:58:06 > 0:58:07Is Tim Farron right?

0:58:07 > 0:58:09Should that 33% tax on alcohol be reduced to give

0:58:09 > 0:58:10pubs a fighting chance?

0:58:10 > 0:58:12I think he's right actually.

0:58:12 > 0:58:14My consistency in Wigan is made up a whole series

0:58:14 > 0:58:22of former pit villages.

0:58:22 > 0:58:24I'm sure your consistency is very similar with local pubs,

0:58:24 > 0:58:25the community pub, is the major

0:58:25 > 0:58:28institution, the glue that holds the village together and in recent

0:58:28 > 0:58:30years I've seen exactly what Tim has seen, pubs

0:58:30 > 0:58:31disappearing all over the place.

0:58:31 > 0:58:33It's not necessarily caused by things like beer

0:58:33 > 0:58:38duty and higher taxes.

0:58:38 > 0:58:41There are other reasons as well but it leaves the cut-price alcohol

0:58:41 > 0:58:44supermarkets offer and the fact we've had a major recession

0:58:44 > 0:58:45and people's incomes are lower.

0:58:45 > 0:58:47But there were definitely things the government could do,

0:58:47 > 0:58:49including cutting business rates and cutting beer duty

0:58:49 > 0:58:54which would make a real difference.

0:58:54 > 0:58:56It's time to stop punishing drinkers especially because people drink

0:58:56 > 0:59:03in a healthier way now certainly in a less dangerous

0:59:03 > 0:59:04way than they were 20 years ago?

0:59:04 > 0:59:07The pub is a hub of local communities, really important.

0:59:07 > 0:59:14That was one of the reasons why in 2013 you saw George Osborne,

0:59:14 > 0:59:17then Chancellor, cutting the beer duty, ending it and cutting beer

0:59:17 > 0:59:18duty is very important.

0:59:18 > 0:59:22You'll be asking the spreadsheet filter to cut beer duty?

0:59:22 > 0:59:25I have written to him on this, asking him to make sure

0:59:25 > 0:59:35that the rights of beer drinkers are taken into account.

0:59:38 > 0:59:40There are some great pubs in your constituency.

0:59:40 > 0:59:41And mine.

0:59:41 > 0:59:43I've actually been to a few in Wigan.

0:59:43 > 0:59:45Next it's been a big week at the enquiry

0:59:45 > 0:59:46into abuse in Rochdale.

0:59:46 > 0:59:49With that and the rest of the week's news, is Juliette Phillips.

0:59:49 > 0:59:51An alleged neo-Nazi Christopher Lythgoe was charged

0:59:51 > 0:59:54with encouragement to commit murder in relation to the West

0:59:54 > 0:59:56Lancashire MP Rosie Cooper.

0:59:56 > 0:59:59The leader of Rochdale Council is accused of lying to the public

0:59:59 > 1:00:03enquiry into child abuse.

1:00:03 > 1:00:05Richard Farnell's fellow Labour councillor Peter Johnson said

1:00:05 > 1:00:07he had not told the truth.

1:00:07 > 1:00:11And denied knowledge of abuse in this care home.

1:00:11 > 1:00:16It means Mr Farnell lied to this enquiry.

1:00:16 > 1:00:19I wouldn't use that word but I would say didn't tell the truth.

1:00:19 > 1:00:21Mr Farnell called this account a complete invention.

1:00:21 > 1:00:26GPs say they face an uncertain future because of rising service

1:00:26 > 1:00:31charges for their buildings.

1:00:31 > 1:00:32Surgeries say it's preventing them offering

1:00:33 > 1:00:34the going rate to new staff.

1:00:34 > 1:00:40Unions representing BAe workers went to London to lobby MPs

1:00:40 > 1:00:44over 750 job cuts.

1:00:44 > 1:00:47Meanwhile, peace activists say they broke into one of the sites

1:00:47 > 1:00:48to disable warplanes and save lives.

1:00:52 > 1:00:55And just in case you want a bit more politics, you know you do,

1:00:55 > 1:00:59at 5.40 tomorrow afternoon, Kevin Fitzpatrick will be hosting

1:00:59 > 1:01:05a new show The P Word on BBC Radio Manchester

1:01:05 > 1:01:09and he will be discussing tomorrow fake news.

1:01:09 > 1:01:11Have you been the victim of fake news?

1:01:11 > 1:01:13Once, about six years ago I was described as being critically

1:01:13 > 1:01:15ill in Saint Thomas's Hospital.

1:01:15 > 1:01:17A friend phoned me up and asked me how I was.

1:01:17 > 1:01:19I said I'm having a cup of tea.

1:01:19 > 1:01:20So sometimes.

1:01:20 > 1:01:22Where had they got the story from?

1:01:22 > 1:01:24I had been ill early in the day, gone to hospital

1:01:24 > 1:01:27but I was only there for an hour.

1:01:27 > 1:01:28I was back fighting fit.

1:01:28 > 1:01:31Reading the story.

1:01:31 > 1:01:38I went online and then read the story.

1:01:38 > 1:01:43What about you, Lisa?

1:01:43 > 1:01:51I spend a lot of time reading hOw I want to be leader

1:01:51 > 1:01:54of the Labour Party usually when I'm rooting around

1:01:54 > 1:01:57of the Labour Party usually when I'm rooting around my bins looking keys.

1:01:57 > 1:01:58That's true.

1:01:58 > 1:02:03That the good news story, not a fake news story.

1:02:03 > 1:02:06There were rumours of me being a jihadist because they wore

1:02:06 > 1:02:08a yellow T-shirt which makes sense, doesn't it?

1:02:08 > 1:02:09Many thanks to our guests.

1:02:09 > 1:02:12The P Word will be on at 540 tomorrow on BBC Radio Manchester.

1:02:12 > 1:02:14That is it from us.

1:02:14 > 1:02:14We hand you back now to Sarah in London.

1:02:24 > 1:02:27Now, the much anticipated EU Withdrawal Bill,

1:02:27 > 1:02:30which will transfer EU law into UK law in preparation for Brexit,

1:02:30 > 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 > 1:02:40Henry VIII powers for Whitehall to amend some laws without

1:02:40 > 1:02:44consulting parliament, and it faces fierce resistance

1:02:44 > 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 > 1:02:56We're joined now by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry who has been a strong

1:02:56 > 1:03:00critic of the legislation.

1:03:00 > 1:03:05Thank you very much for joining us. Before we talk about the withdrawal

1:03:05 > 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 > 1:03:18independent body to be established to investigate claims of sexual

1:03:18 > 1:03:22harassment in Parliament. What are your thoughts on that?A very good

1:03:22 > 1:03:27idea, sounds like a great deal of common sense. I had already this

1:03:27 > 1:03:30morning sent a request to the speaker asking for an urgent

1:03:30 > 1:03:34statement from the Leader of the House as to what could now be done

1:03:34 > 1:03:40to make sure that any complaints actually against anybody working in

1:03:40 > 1:03:43Parliament, to extend the protections that workers throughout

1:03:43 > 1:03:48the rest of businesses and in other workplaces have, they should now be

1:03:48 > 1:03:51extended into Parliament and asking for an urgent statement from the

1:03:51 > 1:03:56leader. Clearly the PM is well onto this and it is a good idea. We have

1:03:56 > 1:04:00to make sure everybody who works in Parliament enjoys exactly the same

1:04:00 > 1:04:05protections as other workers, so I welcome this.This should maybe have

1:04:05 > 1:04:10happened a long time ago. We hear stories of harassment that has been

1:04:10 > 1:04:13going on for decades, but until now it has been difficult to work out

1:04:13 > 1:04:19who you could complain to about it. It is my understanding that my Chief

1:04:19 > 1:04:23Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip, and Milton, shared that view

1:04:23 > 1:04:28and have shared that view for some time but found it difficult to get

1:04:28 > 1:04:32all the agreement necessary. Anyway, we are where we are and we are

1:04:32 > 1:04:44making that progress, but

1:04:45 > 1:04:47my Chief Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip wanted this done

1:04:47 > 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 > 1:04:54You have put your name to an amendment which is calling for a

1:04:54 > 1:04:57vote on the final agreement in essence, do you really believe that

1:04:57 > 1:05:01that will be a meaningful both offered to the Commons?Yes, if you

1:05:01 > 1:05:06look at the terms of the amendment, it would deliver exactly that. It

1:05:06 > 1:05:11would give members of Parliament the opportunity to debated and voted on

1:05:11 > 1:05:15it. It would be an effective piece of legislation and would go through

1:05:15 > 1:05:20both houses and should be done. One of the problems with this process is

1:05:20 > 1:05:24that Parliament has been excluded from the sort of debate and

1:05:24 > 1:05:29decisions that would have enabled the government to move forward in

1:05:29 > 1:05:39progress and form a consensus so we get the very best Brexit deal.We

1:05:39 > 1:05:42have been excluded, that has been wrong in my view, but by the end we

1:05:42 > 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 > 1:05:59there will be no deal.If you look at the amendment we put forward

1:05:59 > 1:06:03there will be other alternatives. This is all hypothetical because we

1:06:03 > 1:06:06want a good deal and it is difficult to see that the government would not

1:06:06 > 1:06:12bring a good deal to the House in any event. But this is hypothetical,

1:06:12 > 1:06:17it would mean Parliament would say to government, go back and seek an

1:06:17 > 1:06:23extension as we know it is there in Article 50. It is perfectly possible

1:06:23 > 1:06:27with the agreement of the other members of the EU to seek an

1:06:27 > 1:06:31extension so we continue the negotiations and we get a deal that

1:06:31 > 1:06:35is good for our country. It keeps all options open and that is the

1:06:35 > 1:06:40most important thing.How many Conservative MPs really would take

1:06:40 > 1:06:45that option in those circumstances? It is only if you get enough votes

1:06:45 > 1:06:48that you would be able to ask the government to go back and

1:06:48 > 1:06:59re-negotiate.

1:07:02 > 1:07:05Have you for that?For give me, but you are jumping way down the line. I

1:07:05 > 1:07:07am talking about an amendment that keeps the options open. I am not

1:07:07 > 1:07:11speculating as to what would happen, I am not going there, it is far too

1:07:11 > 1:07:14speculative. Let's get this bill in good shape. The principle of this

1:07:14 > 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 > 1:07:30must happen. It is the means by which we do it that causes problems

1:07:30 > 1:07:36and we have this argument and debate about what we call the endgame.I am

1:07:36 > 1:07:40sure we will talk about this many more times before we get to that

1:07:40 > 1:07:45vote. I will turn to our panel of political experts. Listening to the

1:07:45 > 1:07:51tone of what the remainders are trying to achieve with the EU

1:07:51 > 1:07:56withdrawal bill, will be achieved? You can hear that tussled there,

1:07:56 > 1:08:01they want the maximum space and room for Parliament to have a say. But

1:08:01 > 1:08:07they have to be careful. The reason is that clock is ticking and if you

1:08:07 > 1:08:13have a situation which may seem to be more interested in finding

1:08:13 > 1:08:17different things to object to and saying no to, it is not getting a

1:08:17 > 1:08:21good deal and it does not look good for the remainders in this argument

1:08:21 > 1:08:26and they will have to come through with their proposals. I do not mind

1:08:26 > 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 > 1:08:41say, I am sorry we have run out of time. The 27 will say they cannot be

1:08:41 > 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 > 1:08:58are doing it because they think Parliament should have a say or

1:08:58 > 1:09:03because they want to obstruct it? They do not think people should have

1:09:03 > 1:09:08a say in the first place, they think people got it wrong, so they need

1:09:08 > 1:09:15more clever people than the voters to have final say.Or they believed

1:09:15 > 1:09:18taking back control means Parliament should have the final say.

1:09:18 > 1:09:21Parliament said they would like to give that decision back to the

1:09:21 > 1:09:27people. This is the issue. It seems to me that people like Anna Soubry

1:09:27 > 1:09:31are trying to delay of the transition period a bit longer.

1:09:31 > 1:09:36These negotiations will take as long as they have got. The EU will take

1:09:36 > 1:09:44it to the wire and if we do not get a decent deal, and one of the

1:09:44 > 1:09:47reasons is the level of incompetence on this government's part I have to

1:09:47 > 1:09:52say and the other one will be the people who want to remain

1:09:52 > 1:09:58undermining them. They undermined the government at every single stage

1:09:58 > 1:10:02and they undermine Britain's interests.It is the timing of all

1:10:02 > 1:10:05of this that is crucial and whether the government can get a deal in

1:10:05 > 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 > 1:10:26having the power to either stop it or endorse it. You cannot have a

1:10:26 > 1:10:29government doing something like this with no vote in the House of

1:10:29 > 1:10:36commons. When you say it will go to the last minute I completely agree,

1:10:36 > 1:10:41but last-minute in reality means next summer. It has got to get

1:10:41 > 1:10:44through the European Parliament and the Westminster Parliament and quite

1:10:44 > 1:10:51a few others as well.The trouble with invoking Parliament is if it is

1:10:51 > 1:10:56driven solely by remain, I would love to say what people in the

1:10:56 > 1:11:03league side think. I disagree with Julia, I do not think you could say

1:11:03 > 1:11:08people had their say and the terms with which we leave are left open

1:11:08 > 1:11:11and only the government should have a say in it, Parliament clearly

1:11:11 > 1:11:20should have a say in it.Do we want a good deal or not?It does not mean

1:11:20 > 1:11:25anything if you do not do it by next summer I suggest.Does that leave

1:11:25 > 1:11:29Parliament any room for changing the deal or is it simply take it or

1:11:29 > 1:11:34leave it?It will have to have that rule because it cannot simply be

1:11:34 > 1:11:38another of these binary votes were you accept the deal or no Deal.

1:11:38 > 1:11:44There has to be some space.How can a few MPs in the House of Commons

1:11:44 > 1:11:49change a deal that has been agreed by the member states?Because of the

1:11:49 > 1:11:55sequence, a huge if by the way, if they vote down the deal that the

1:11:55 > 1:11:58government has negotiated, the government will have to re-negotiate

1:11:58 > 1:12:02or there will have to be an election. This will be a moment of

1:12:02 > 1:12:05huge crisis, our government not getting through its much topped

1:12:05 > 1:12:14about...It is a mini Catalonia.I think it would be as big as

1:12:14 > 1:12:17Catalonia, but with the implication that there would have to be a

1:12:17 > 1:12:20practical change in the deal because if Parliament has not supported

1:12:20 > 1:12:26it...It is a remain fantasy that this deal can be put off and off

1:12:26 > 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 > 1:12:42the worst, but there is an unreality to that position if you keep trying

1:12:42 > 1:12:48to do it again and again, at some point people will want clarity.I

1:12:48 > 1:12:54labour putting forward a realistic proposition?I thought Hilary Benn

1:12:54 > 1:12:58was very realistic this morning, I wish he was more in the driving seat

1:12:58 > 1:13:03of Labour policy. He made clear where he disagreed and he made clear

1:13:03 > 1:13:06where he thought the negotiations had gone off track or were bogged

1:13:06 > 1:13:15down. I worry a bit about the Labour position being incoherent, but that

1:13:15 > 1:13:18is kept that way by the present leadership because as far as they

1:13:18 > 1:13:22are concerned the government is suffering enough, why should they

1:13:22 > 1:13:28have a position? Hilary Benn said we needed to have clarity about the

1:13:28 > 1:13:31timetable. It is like reading an insurance contract and finding the

1:13:31 > 1:13:34bit where you might get away with it. That is not a policy.

1:13:34 > 1:13:37That is not a policy.

1:13:37 > 1:13:38That's all for today.

1:13:38 > 1:13:41Join me again next Sunday at 11 here on BBC One.

1:13:41 > 1:13:45Until then, bye bye.