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 > 0:00:54the international trade minister Mark Garnier will be investigated
0:00:54 > 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 economic and
0:01:21 > 0:01:23In the south-west, MPs aske Defence Secretary about reports
0:01:23 > 0:01:24Devonport's amphibious ships have been
0:01:24 > 0:01:29offered for sale to navies in Brazil and Chile.
0:01:29 > 0:01:32on from the abortion act white MPs are lobbying the Home Secretary to
0:01:32 > 0:01:38stop the alleged harassment of women attending abortion clinics.
0:01:38 > 0:01:41All that coming up in the programme.
0:01:41 > 0:01:44And with me today to help make sense of all the big stories,
0:01:44 > 0:01:47Julia Hartley-Brewer, Steve Richards and Anne McElvoy.
0:01:47 > 0:01:50Some breaking news this morning.
0:01:50 > 0:01:52The Government has announced that it will investigate
0:01:52 > 0:01:54whether the International Trade Minister Mark Garnier broke
0:01:54 > 0:01:55the Ministerial Code following allegations
0:01:55 > 0:02:01of inappropriate behaviour.
0:02:01 > 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 > 0:02:28and that is why the other thing that is going to happen
0:02:28 > 0:02:31is that today Theresa May is going to write to John Bercow,
0:02:31 > 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 > 0:03:07member out there, Jeremy Hunt, with an instant response. He does have
0:03:07 > 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 > 0:03:33context. Is this the sort of thing that a few years ago in a different
0:03:33 > 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 > 0:04:09does not matter whether he says yes, know I did this or did not,
0:04:09 > 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 > 0:05:15a huge amount of alcohol and late night and people living away from
0:05:15 > 0:05:21home you will have this happen.That does not make it OK.It makes sexual
0:05:21 > 0:05:26harassment not OK as it is not anywhere. This happens to men as
0:05:26 > 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 > 0:05:49not.Because they are self-employed to whom do you go if you are a
0:05:49 > 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 > 0:06:06into the media many years ago, the Punic wars in my case! You were not
0:06:06 > 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 > 0:06:45usually a lot wrong with it. When you try and make it general, they
0:06:45 > 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 > 0:07:03iron out the human foibles of that. Diane Abbott was talking about this
0:07:03 > 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 > 0:07:31than middle-aged men to believe that young research are irresistibly
0:07:31 > 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 > 0:07:57left or right divide over this is absurd. This is a cultural issue. In
0:07:57 > 0:08:02the media and in a lot of other institutions if this is going to
0:08:02 > 0:08:06develop politically, the frenzy will carry on for a bit and other names
0:08:06 > 0:08:10will come out over the next few days, not just the two we have
0:08:10 > 0:08:16mentioned so far in politics. But it also raises questions about how
0:08:16 > 0:08:22candidates are selected for example. There has been a huge pressure for
0:08:22 > 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 > 0:08:38and all the rest of it.Selecting candidates is interesting. Miriam
0:08:38 > 0:08:42Gonzalez, Nick Clegg's wife, says that during that election they knew
0:08:42 > 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 > 0:08:57the Labour Party did know. But we are in a situation of how perfect
0:08:57 > 0:09:03and well-behaved does everyone have to be? If you look at past American
0:09:03 > 0:09:08presidents, JFK and Bill Clinton, these men were sex pest
0:09:08 > 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 > 0:09:49Commons, it is because there are more men married to women like us.
0:09:49 > 0:09:51We have to leave it there.
0:09:51 > 0:09:54As attention turns in Westminster to the hundreds
0:09:54 > 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 > 0:10:07Let's take a look at how the controversy played out.
0:10:07 > 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 > 0:10:16This Parliament?
0:10:16 > 0:10:18As soon as possible possible thereafter, yeah.
0:10:18 > 0:10:19As soon as possible thereafter.
0:10:19 > 0:10:20So, the vote in Parliament...
0:10:20 > 0:10:21The other thing...
0:10:21 > 0:10:23Could be after March 2019?
0:10:23 > 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 > 0:10:30Mr Barnier, remember, has said he'd like...
0:10:30 > 0:10:32Sorry, the vote of our Parliament, the UK Parliament, could be
0:10:32 > 0:10:34after March 2019?
0:10:34 > 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 > 0:10:49on the deal until AFTER the end of March 2019.
0:10:49 > 0:10:50I'm summarising correctly what you said...?
0:10:50 > 0:10:52Yeah, that's correct.
0:10:52 > 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 > 0:11:10with the European Union, but I am confident that the timetable under
0:11:10 > 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 > 0:11:22it's not just this Parliament that wants to have a vote on that deal,
0:11:22 > 0:11:24but actually there will be ratification by other parliaments,
0:11:24 > 0:11:29that we will be able to achieve that agreement and that negotiation
0:11:29 > 0:11:32in time for this Parliament to have a vote that we committed to.
0:11:32 > 0:11:35We are working to reach an agreement on the final deal
0:11:35 > 0:11:37in good time before we leave the European Union in March 2019.
0:11:37 > 0:11:40Clearly, we cannot say for certain at this stage
0:11:40 > 0:11:42when this will be agreed.
0:11:42 > 0:11:44But as Michel Barnier said, he hopes to get a draft deal
0:11:44 > 0:11:50agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim is well.
0:11:50 > 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 > 0:11:58Benn, who is the chair of the Commons Brexit Committee,
0:11:58 > 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 > 0:12:13in order for it to be meaningful?It has to be before we leave the
0:12:13 > 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 > 0:12:24only got 12 months left, the clock is ticking and there is a huge
0:12:24 > 0:12:28amount of ground to cover.You do not think there is any point in
0:12:28 > 0:12:39having the vote the week before we leave because you could then not go
0:12:39 > 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 > 0:12:56arrangements that it is seeking, it will need separate legislation. I
0:12:56 > 0:13:00put the question to him if you are going to need separate legislation
0:13:00 > 0:13:04to do that, why don't you have a separate bill to implement the
0:13:04 > 0:13:07withdrawal agreement rather than seeking to use the powers the
0:13:07 > 0:13:12government is proposing to take in the EU withdrawal bill.If we stick
0:13:12 > 0:13:15to the timing, you have said you do not think it is possible to
0:13:15 > 0:13:20negotiate a trade deal in the next 12 months. You say the only people
0:13:20 > 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 > 0:13:34time?If things go well, and there is still a risk of no agreement
0:13:34 > 0:13:48which would be disastrous for the economy and the country, if
0:13:53 > 0:13:56things go there will be a deal on the divorce issues, there will be a
0:13:56 > 0:13:58deal on the nature of the transitional arrangement and the
0:13:58 > 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 > 0:14:25take it or leave it if we have already left the EU? Surely this has
0:14:25 > 0:14:31to happen before March 2019 for it to make a difference?I do not think
0:14:31 > 0:14:34it is possible to negotiate all of the issues that will need to be
0:14:34 > 0:14:40covered in the time available.Then it is not possible to have a
0:14:40 > 0:14:51meaningful vote on it?Parliament will have to have a look at the deal
0:14:51 > 0:14:53presented to it. It is likely to be a mix agreement so the approval
0:14:53 > 0:14:56process in the rest of Europe, unlike the Article 50 agreement,
0:14:56 > 0:14:59which will be a majority vote in the European Parliament and in the
0:14:59 > 0:15:02British Parliament, every single Parliament will have a vote on it,
0:15:02 > 0:15:07so it will be a more complex process anyway, but I do not think that is
0:15:07 > 0:15:13the time to get all of that sorted between now and October next year.
0:15:13 > 0:15:17Whether it is before or after we have left the EU, the government
0:15:17 > 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 > 0:15:33back to re-negotiate.
0:15:33 > 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 > 0:15:58here's some fresh instructions, go back in and...It seems to me what
0:15:58 > 0:16:02they want is the maximum access to the single market for the lowest
0:16:02 > 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 > 0:16:15Party, saying we want a bit more, owing to persuade the other 27?We
0:16:15 > 0:16:18certainly don't want the lowest possible tariffs, we want no tariffs
0:16:18 > 0:16:23are taught. My personal view is that, has made a profound mistake in
0:16:23 > 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 > 0:16:42the customs union and I hope, will change its mind.But the Labour
0:16:42 > 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 > 0:17:07said, we will need to stay in the single market and the customs union
0:17:07 > 0:17:10for the duration of the transition, and I think that is the position,
0:17:10 > 0:17:15has now reached. It has not been helped by differences of view within
0:17:15 > 0:17:19the Cabinet, and a lot of time has passed and there's proved time left
0:17:19 > 0:17:24and we have not even got on to the negotiations. -- there's very little
0:17:24 > 0:17:30time left.On phase two, the labour Party have set out six clear tests,
0:17:30 > 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 > 0:17:46sound a bit like having your cake and eating it. You say that you will
0:17:46 > 0:17:50vote against any deal that doesn't give you all of that, the exact same
0:17:50 > 0:17:54benefits of the single market, and allowing you to control migration.
0:17:54 > 0:17:57But you say no deal would be catastrophic if so it seems to me
0:17:57 > 0:18:01you're unlikely to get the deal that you could vote for but you don't
0:18:01 > 0:18:06want to vote for no deal?We absolutely don't want a no deal.
0:18:06 > 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 > 0:18:45were to vote down an agreement because it did not meet your tests,
0:18:45 > 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 > 0:19:24we still don't know what kind of deal they want. With about 12 months
0:19:24 > 0:19:28to go, the other thing, needs to do is to set out very clearly above all
0:19:28 > 0:19:32for the benefit of the other 27 European countries, what kind of
0:19:32 > 0:19:36deal it wants. When I travel to Europe and talk to those involved in
0:19:36 > 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 > 0:20:12situation in Catalonia at the moment. Direct rule from Madrid is
0:20:12 > 0:20:17not a long-term solution. There needs to be a negotiation, and
0:20:17 > 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 > 0:20:52rebellion, because actually that would make matters worse.
0:20:52 > 0:20:56Now, the Government has this week reopened the public
0:20:56 > 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 > 0:21:04about the environmental impact of expansion,
0:21:04 > 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 > 0:21:22Here'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 > 0:21:32Plans for a third runway were first introduced
0:21:32 > 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 > 0:21:46and the government position appeared to be fixed.
0:21:46 > 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 > 0:22:00arithmetic looks a little bit up in the air.
0:22:00 > 0:22:03A lot has changed since the airport commission produced its report,
0:22:03 > 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 > 0:22:09that it made.
0:22:09 > 0:22:12But most of the assumptions made in that report have
0:22:12 > 0:22:14been undermined since, by data on passenger numbers,
0:22:14 > 0:22:17on economic benefits, and more than anything, on pollution.
0:22:17 > 0:22:20There's demand from international carriers to get into Heathrow.
0:22:20 > 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 > 0:22:38A vote on expansion had been due to take place this summer.
0:22:38 > 0:22:40But with Westminster somewhat distracted, that didn't happen.
0:22:40 > 0:22:43Now, fresh data means the Government has had to reopen
0:22:43 > 0:22:48the public consultation.
0:22:48 > 0:22:52But it maintains the case for Heathrow is as strong as ever,
0:22:52 > 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 > 0:23:11Still, the new research does cast an alternative expansion at Gatwick
0:23:11 > 0:23:15in a more favourable economic light, while showing Heathrow
0:23:15 > 0:23:22is now less likely to meet its environmental targets.
0:23:22 > 0:23:27Campaigners like these in Hounslow sense the wind is shifting.
0:23:27 > 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 > 0:23:40to have a third runway.
0:23:40 > 0:23:42Their MP is convinced colleagues can now be persuaded
0:23:42 > 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 > 0:24:02the country beginning to think twice.
0:24:02 > 0:24:07And if you look at the cross-party MPs supportin this anti-Heathrow
0:24:07 > 0:24:11And if you look at the cross-party MPs supporting this anti-Heathrow
0:24:11 > 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 > 0:24:24I don't think it's going to happen, I just don't think
0:24:24 > 0:24:25it's going to happen.
0:24:25 > 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 > 0:24:37used and I think it's right.
0:24:37 > 0:24:39In the circumstances where it requires an active rebellion,
0:24:39 > 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 > 0:24:50who will vote against Heathrow expansion.
0:24:50 > 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 > 0:25:04There is a majority of members of Parliament that support Heathrow
0:25:04 > 0:25:07expansion, and when that is put to the test, whenever that will be,
0:25:07 > 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 > 0:25:57build one at Gatwick in half the time, for half the cost and with a
0:25:57 > 0:26:01tiny fraction of the environment will cost average is that true,
0:26:01 > 0:26:04though? Private finance is already to go at Heathrow, because that's
0:26:04 > 0:26:08where people want to do it and that's where the private backers
0:26:08 > 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 > 0:26:42one which will create very significant damage.Heathrow is
0:26:42 > 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 > 0:26:55up immediately, it's a very popular airport. Gatwick is not where they
0:26:55 > 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 > 0:27:12is that successive elements have said, technology will deliver a way
0:27:12 > 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 > 0:28:00it's a bad idea. So, inevitably the legal processes are very complex.
0:28:00 > 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 > 0:29:08well-established precedent that after an agreement is reached
0:29:08 > 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 > 0:29:31decision.Is it irreversible, though? We understand, may have had
0:29:31 > 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 > 0:29:50is a debate about the reversibility of Article 50. But the key point is
0:29:50 > 0:29:55that we are all working for a good deal for the United Kingdom and the
0:29:55 > 0:30:00I'm concerned that some of the amendments to the legislation are
0:30:00 > 0:30:03not about the nature of the deal at the end of the process, they're just
0:30:03 > 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 > 0:30:24two sides, and the recent European summit seemed to indicate a
0:30:24 > 0:30:27willingness from the European side to be constructive. But one point
0:30:27 > 0:30:32where I think Hilary Benn has a point, if we do secure agreement on
0:30:32 > 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 > 0:30:52is made easier if we can secure that two-year transitional deal.
0:30:52 > 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 > 0:31:20well to ensure we get the best outcome.Let me ask you briefly
0:31:20 > 0:31:24before you go about the possible culture of sexual harassment in the
0:31:24 > 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 > 0:31:56essentially they are overseeing their own complaints process. I
0:31:56 > 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 > 0:32:09so I think the Prime Minister's letter was a sensible move.So you
0:32:09 > 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 > 0:32:35into reducing the size of the House of Lords.
0:32:35 > 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 > 0:33:09around £400,000 without speaking in any debates or submitting any
0:33:09 > 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 > 0:33:22in the Lords since April 2016 and has voted only seven times
0:33:22 > 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 > 0:33:39I fly the flag for Britain."
0:33:39 > 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 > 0:34:08time limit, an age limit of 75 or 80. I would like attendants
0:34:08 > 0:34:12definitely define so the whole public understood what people are
0:34:12 > 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 > 0:34:31that, and the £300 goes towards that.Whilst you are in there
0:34:31 > 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 > 0:34:43it not possible for you to take part in debates and votes and ask
0:34:43 > 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 > 0:35:12to be around when the vote is called and you do not know when the book is
0:35:12 > 0:35:16called, you have no idea when the boat is going to be called.This is
0:35:16 > 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 > 0:35:54saying I will entertain at lunchtime or show people around the House,
0:35:54 > 0:35:57everything from schoolchildren to inward investors. I will meet
0:35:57 > 0:36:01ministers about big business issues or educational issues, and at the
0:36:01 > 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 > 0:36:20others, which, if more people would receive and not transmit, we might
0:36:20 > 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 > 0:37:15chamber, and you have your ideas about reforming the chamber. It
0:37:15 > 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 > 0:37:43wish. I agree attendance might mean unless you speak, you are going.
0:37:43 > 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 > 0:38:19the peers there at the moment? You think you are active enough to
0:38:19 > 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 > 0:38:55in society. Let's change it now. Let's get it through and then, yes,
0:38:55 > 0:39:00if you do not meet the criteria, you have got to go and that includes me.
0:39:00 > 0:39:02Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.
0:39:02 > 0:39:04Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.
0:39:04 > 0:39:07It's coming up to 11.40, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
0:39:07 > 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 > 0:39:26Hello, I'm Lucy Fisher. harassment in Parliament.
0:39:26 > 0:39:29Coming up on the Sunday Politics here
0:39:29 > 0:39:30in the southwest...
0:39:30 > 0:39:31You don't mess with Plymouth.
0:39:31 > 0:39:33You don't mess with these ships.
0:39:33 > 0:39:34You don't mess with the Navy.
0:39:34 > 0:39:37We are here for the country.
0:39:37 > 0:39:43The fight to secure the future of the
0:39:43 > 0:39:49nation's amphibious assault ships based in Plymouth continues.
0:39:49 > 0:39:51And for the next 20 minutes and join by
0:39:51 > 0:39:54Conservative MP for North Cornwall, Scott Mann, as the leader of the
0:39:54 > 0:39:59Lib Dem group on Dorset Council, Ros Kayes.
0:39:59 > 0:40:01Welcome both of you to the programme.
0:40:01 > 0:40:03Let's start with another running story which has been
0:40:03 > 0:40:06developing this week - the row over fishing safety.
0:40:06 > 0:40:08Last week we discussed a petition that is calling
0:40:08 > 0:40:10for the coastguard to launch lifeboats as soon as a fishing
0:40:10 > 0:40:13vessel fails to return home on time.
0:40:13 > 0:40:15It was started after the capsizing of Plymouth trawler Solstice last
0:40:15 > 0:40:17month, in which a fisherman died.
0:40:17 > 0:40:20A third fatal incident in two years, in which campaigners say there was a
0:40:20 > 0:40:21delay launching lifeboats.
0:40:21 > 0:40:23On Wednesday the MP for South East Cornwall,
0:40:23 > 0:40:25Cheryl Murray, told the
0:40:25 > 0:40:33Prime Minister she had concerns about the petition.
0:40:33 > 0:40:37I believe this is irresponsible and puts our
0:40:37 > 0:40:40valiant lifeboat crews in peril.
0:40:40 > 0:40:43If they don't know where they are going.
0:40:43 > 0:40:45We know this in Cornwall.
0:40:45 > 0:40:47Would the Prime Minister look at making safety grants available so
0:40:47 > 0:40:51that all fishing boats can have an AIS locator beacon on board.
0:40:51 > 0:40:55This would cost well under £4 million.
0:40:55 > 0:40:58Following that, the woman who launched a petition said she was
0:40:58 > 0:41:01staggered and disappointed by Mrs Murray's intervention.
0:41:01 > 0:41:04Lifeboatmen are very brave.
0:41:04 > 0:41:07They go in to face the danger to save us and others
0:41:07 > 0:41:08every day.
0:41:08 > 0:41:11That is what they do.
0:41:11 > 0:41:12The petition is supported
0:41:12 > 0:41:18by lifeboat men.
0:41:18 > 0:41:19By fishermen, by fishermen's families and industry
0:41:19 > 0:41:20more broadly.
0:41:20 > 0:41:22Scott, whose side do you come down on?
0:41:22 > 0:41:25Do you believe the petition is irresponsible or Cheryl
0:41:25 > 0:41:26Murray's response to it?
0:41:26 > 0:41:29Can I first of all just so what happened on the
0:41:29 > 0:41:31Solstice is very tragic and I think there does need
0:41:31 > 0:41:33to be a review.
0:41:33 > 0:41:35My minister, John Hayes, because I sit in the
0:41:35 > 0:41:37Department for Transport, has said he will leave
0:41:37 > 0:41:38no stone unturned in
0:41:38 > 0:41:44terms of looking at what happened in Plymouth.
0:41:44 > 0:41:46Because there was a delay in launching the lifeboat, which is
0:41:46 > 0:41:48why this petition has been started.
0:41:48 > 0:41:51You have got the north Cornish coast in your patch.
0:41:51 > 0:41:54Do you believe this idea they should have a beacon on
0:41:54 > 0:41:55the boat instead is the way forwards?
0:41:55 > 0:41:57There should be grants to get those?
0:41:57 > 0:41:59Yeah, I think that is a solution.
0:41:59 > 0:42:02With GPS technology as it currently is at the moment, and the
0:42:02 > 0:42:04way it is moving forward as rapidly as it is,
0:42:04 > 0:42:07I think it's important all boats that are on the water have beacons
0:42:07 > 0:42:13to know where they are.
0:42:13 > 0:42:17I had a meeting last week with the Pew Trust, and we were
0:42:17 > 0:42:19talking about ocean safety and one of their suggestions was that it
0:42:19 > 0:42:23would obviously be good for safety but it would also be good for
0:42:23 > 0:42:24illegal fishing and to look at people smuggling.
0:42:24 > 0:42:27To know where the boats are at all times.
0:42:27 > 0:42:29Ros, we did have cuts to the coastguard only two
0:42:29 > 0:42:30years ago.
0:42:30 > 0:42:33Do you think that has had any impact on this?
0:42:33 > 0:42:35I do think so, and I think it's an example of an
0:42:35 > 0:42:36ill thought through process.
0:42:36 > 0:42:40I can understand, although I didn't agree
0:42:40 > 0:42:44with, the cuts to the coastguard, but I think it needed to be backed
0:42:44 > 0:42:49up with funding so individual boats can afford to buy this
0:42:49 > 0:42:53equipment.
0:42:53 > 0:42:58If we cannot monitor them and we have not got proper oversight
0:42:58 > 0:43:00then incidents like this are only going to occur more frequently.
0:43:00 > 0:43:03And they are tragic and I think it is up to
0:43:03 > 0:43:06the Government to try to find a solution to prevent that.
0:43:06 > 0:43:09Scott, do you accept that there might be a
0:43:09 > 0:43:14link between coastguard cuts and the lifeboat delays?
0:43:14 > 0:43:15I think there is two separate issues.
0:43:15 > 0:43:17There is a process issue regarding how the
0:43:17 > 0:43:20coastguard and the RNLI join up together, but also an issue around
0:43:20 > 0:43:27technology and how we use technology going forward.
0:43:27 > 0:43:30I would say I think this review is welcome and I am
0:43:30 > 0:43:33hoping the Minister will be able to get the people around the table
0:43:33 > 0:43:35needs to to find out exactly what happened
0:43:35 > 0:43:40in Plymouth and see if we can improve on the services provided.
0:43:40 > 0:43:43And get the lifeboat out a bit quicker in future.
0:43:43 > 0:43:45OK, now, with economists predicting an interest
0:43:45 > 0:43:48rate rise on Thursday, mortgages could be about to get more
0:43:48 > 0:43:49expensive, and even further from the reach
0:43:49 > 0:43:51of the thousands struggling to
0:43:51 > 0:43:57get on the housing ladder here in the South West.
0:43:57 > 0:43:59This week, MPs debated a petition started by a
0:43:59 > 0:44:02Plymouth man who thinks lenders should be made to consider someone's
0:44:02 > 0:44:04rent payment track record when deciding
0:44:04 > 0:44:05whether to give them a
0:44:05 > 0:44:06mortgage.
0:44:06 > 0:44:08Jamie Kumar has more.
0:44:08 > 0:44:12If you are looking to rent a two bed property in Plymouth you will end up
0:44:12 > 0:44:14paying on average of 700 to £800 a month for it.
0:44:14 > 0:44:18All were a number of years that adds up to a lot of
0:44:18 > 0:44:19money.
0:44:19 > 0:44:21But should the fact you have been paying
0:44:21 > 0:44:23rent regularly over a
0:44:23 > 0:44:26period of time be enough proof you can afford mortgage repayments?
0:44:26 > 0:44:30Well, it seems a lot of people think it should be.
0:44:30 > 0:44:34147,307, to be precise.
0:44:34 > 0:44:40They signed a petition started by Plymouth dad Jamie Pogson.
0:44:40 > 0:44:42If the law does change then a lot of people
0:44:42 > 0:44:46will be able to obtain mortgages much easier.
0:44:46 > 0:44:49Because I know people that pay their rent on time all the
0:44:49 > 0:44:56time but they cannot get accepted for mortgages.
0:44:56 > 0:44:58Liz backs Jamie's idea, after eight years of paying
0:44:58 > 0:45:00rent, she is about to buy her first property.
0:45:00 > 0:45:03But she could only afford to do that because her family has
0:45:03 > 0:45:04helped with the deposit.
0:45:04 > 0:45:06The mortgage payments will be considerably less than rental.
0:45:06 > 0:45:09It has taken a while to be approved for
0:45:09 > 0:45:12the mortgage, to evidence I can make the repayments, even though I have
0:45:12 > 0:45:14been paying rent for years at a higher rate.
0:45:14 > 0:45:18This week, what started off as Jamie's angry rant on the
0:45:18 > 0:45:22way to work, was making politicians and Westminster sit up and listen.
0:45:22 > 0:45:24I would like to think that someone getting
0:45:24 > 0:45:29out of bed one day and wanting to change
0:45:29 > 0:45:30the world could produce a
0:45:30 > 0:45:33situation where thousands of people who are currently renting at the
0:45:33 > 0:45:36moment might be able to buy a house because of Jamie Pogson getting out,
0:45:36 > 0:45:37tabling that petition.
0:45:37 > 0:45:39It really showed the value of this house
0:45:39 > 0:45:41listening to those people who are signing petitions.
0:45:41 > 0:45:44Why aren't rental payments enough proof you can afford
0:45:44 > 0:45:47a mortgage?
0:45:47 > 0:45:51UK Finance, the body representing some lenders, says they
0:45:51 > 0:45:57can take that into account, but that on its own is not enough evidence
0:45:57 > 0:46:00you can take on a large debt and pay it back.
0:46:00 > 0:46:02So they have to look at other factors, like your credit
0:46:02 > 0:46:06score, how steady your job is and how much you can put down as a
0:46:06 > 0:46:07deposit.
0:46:07 > 0:46:13But there are some schemes which allow a tenant's rental record
0:46:13 > 0:46:22to contribute to their credit score.
0:46:22 > 0:46:24During the debate, the minister hinted lenders should look more
0:46:24 > 0:46:27favourably on people who pay their rent on time.
0:46:27 > 0:46:29It is clear many people still struggle to make the
0:46:29 > 0:46:32first step on the housing ladder.
0:46:32 > 0:46:34Credit reference agencies being able to access data related to
0:46:34 > 0:46:36prospective borrowers' history of paying rent,
0:46:36 > 0:46:37will benefit both the
0:46:37 > 0:46:39borrower but it will also benefit the lender.
0:46:39 > 0:46:42Perhaps bulkier, Jimmy wanted, but the start, maybe, of an
0:46:42 > 0:46:46important conversation.
0:46:46 > 0:46:47That might one day move lenders in the
0:46:48 > 0:46:49direction he wants.
0:46:49 > 0:46:50Jamie Kumar reporting.
0:46:50 > 0:46:52Ros, should lenders look more favourably on people who have
0:46:52 > 0:46:57paid their rent on time and can prove it?
0:46:57 > 0:46:59In a short answer, yes.
0:46:59 > 0:47:01Although I think we must remember the reason why
0:47:01 > 0:47:04people who are renting are finding it hard to get mortgagess because
0:47:04 > 0:47:06of a bottleneck in the housing market and extremely high places,
0:47:06 > 0:47:11especially in the south-west.
0:47:11 > 0:47:13Which has got to do with a failure to
0:47:13 > 0:47:14build social, affordable rented homes.
0:47:14 > 0:47:17People who rent, and I have been in both markets, have actually
0:47:17 > 0:47:20a much harder credit process to go through in order to even be allowed
0:47:20 > 0:47:22to rent a house.
0:47:22 > 0:47:24And often renting is more expensive than a mortgage
0:47:24 > 0:47:26anyway.
0:47:26 > 0:47:33Renting is more expensive and so if people can prove they have
0:47:33 > 0:47:38a record, and I can understand if you are taking up a bigger
0:47:38 > 0:47:47mortgage but might be over a number of years,
0:47:47 > 0:47:50but if they can prove they have got that record, yes, absolutely,
0:47:50 > 0:47:52well done for the petitioner because it
0:47:52 > 0:47:53is an absolute necessity.
0:47:53 > 0:47:55And it is also very unfair people who are
0:47:55 > 0:47:56renting are treated as second-class citizens.
0:47:56 > 0:47:59Not just in terms of getting mortgages but in terms of
0:47:59 > 0:48:00getting any kind of loan.
0:48:00 > 0:48:02You are always asked to tick that box,
0:48:02 > 0:48:04"Do you own or do rent?"
0:48:04 > 0:48:06So you do not think it would be encouraging irresponsible lending,
0:48:06 > 0:48:08to look at that?
0:48:08 > 0:48:11I do not think so because I think anybody who has been
0:48:11 > 0:48:13in the rental market for a long time and has
0:48:13 > 0:48:15been a good tenant, is as
0:48:15 > 0:48:17responsible if not more so than any mortgage holder.
0:48:17 > 0:48:19Scott, do you think this is something the Government
0:48:19 > 0:48:20should be pushing for?
0:48:20 > 0:48:21I think it's an excellent idea.
0:48:21 > 0:48:23I think it's an excellent idea.
0:48:23 > 0:48:26There is a scheme at the moment called Rent Plus, and they have been
0:48:26 > 0:48:28lobbying me quite hard to get the definition of
0:48:28 > 0:48:30affordable housing change so people can pay rent...
0:48:30 > 0:48:32So that it's actually affordable.
0:48:32 > 0:48:34And then upgrade to purchasing the home of
0:48:34 > 0:48:35the back of the rent they pay.
0:48:35 > 0:48:37And when you have got people putting all
0:48:37 > 0:48:40of their income into private rented accommodation and are not able to
0:48:40 > 0:48:43build that the deposit when you could effectively get a mortgage for
0:48:43 > 0:48:44half what they are paying.
0:48:44 > 0:48:46Because deposits are a real problem.
0:48:46 > 0:48:48There was the survey by Halifax that said
0:48:48 > 0:48:49most people are more worried about the deposit
0:48:49 > 0:48:51than about getting the
0:48:51 > 0:48:53mortgage because you cannot get one without the other.
0:48:53 > 0:48:55You actually have said about the help to buy scheme,
0:48:55 > 0:48:56the Tory
0:48:56 > 0:48:59party's own, it is like sticking a sticking plaster on a
0:48:59 > 0:49:00freight train.
0:49:00 > 0:49:01Well said.
0:49:01 > 0:49:02Do you still stand by that?
0:49:02 > 0:49:04I believe we have got fundamental problems in the
0:49:04 > 0:49:05south-west.
0:49:05 > 0:49:08Many people in Cornwall have to stretch to 13 or 14 times
0:49:08 > 0:49:11their income to be able to purchase their first home.
0:49:11 > 0:49:13I think there is much more we can do.
0:49:13 > 0:49:15Some of the most fundamental problems around
0:49:15 > 0:49:24housing are the land values.
0:49:24 > 0:49:30I think we need to think more radically
0:49:30 > 0:49:32about how we deal with some of that.
0:49:32 > 0:49:33Like the Communities Secretary Sajid Javid,
0:49:33 > 0:49:38because there is something going on here.
0:49:38 > 0:49:41Sajid Javid wants to build is several hundred thousand
0:49:41 > 0:49:45new homes and just at the Tory party conference Theresa May announced £2
0:49:45 > 0:49:49billion for 25,000 new homes.
0:49:49 > 0:49:51There is a real discrepancy going on there
0:49:51 > 0:49:52within the Government itself.
0:49:52 > 0:49:55I think we need to do more in the planning system.
0:49:55 > 0:49:57I think the Government can do so much but I
0:49:57 > 0:50:00think we need to find ways of creating new garden villages.
0:50:00 > 0:50:02So we built settlements outside of existing development boundaries.
0:50:02 > 0:50:03But is that a dream?
0:50:03 > 0:50:05No, I don't think it is.
0:50:05 > 0:50:06I think it is genuinely achievable.
0:50:06 > 0:50:09It shouldn't be right someone has to find 50% of the
0:50:09 > 0:50:11cost of their house in land value.
0:50:11 > 0:50:14We should be able to bring that down substantially and bring down the
0:50:14 > 0:50:15cost to be affordable.
0:50:15 > 0:50:16Ros, is that achievable?
0:50:16 > 0:50:19I think it is more than just doing stuff with the planning
0:50:19 > 0:50:20system.
0:50:20 > 0:50:23I think it is about allowing councils that still have cash left
0:50:23 > 0:50:25to release that money in order to build council homes.
0:50:25 > 0:50:29That has been mentioned at the conference.
0:50:29 > 0:50:31Whether it actually transpires into reality,
0:50:31 > 0:50:33let's hope it is pushed along quickly.
0:50:33 > 0:50:36I also think the idea of using the private sector, there
0:50:36 > 0:50:39are institutional investors like Legal And General
0:50:39 > 0:50:43that have some fantastic affordable housing schemes
0:50:43 > 0:50:45which they can make pay which do not actually
0:50:45 > 0:50:46need public investment in
0:50:46 > 0:50:47them.
0:50:47 > 0:50:50They might need public and the right thing to get them
0:50:50 > 0:50:51kick-started.
0:50:51 > 0:50:53We have hopefully got one happening in my own patch which
0:50:53 > 0:50:55will be funded by the private sector.
0:50:55 > 0:50:58There are imaginative things we can look at but what I do not
0:50:58 > 0:51:00want to see is governments of all persuasions,
0:51:00 > 0:51:03because they have done it over the last 15, 20 years, kick
0:51:03 > 0:51:04this issue into the long grass.
0:51:04 > 0:51:07They have made noises about it and haven't actually have not done
0:51:07 > 0:51:08anything about it.
0:51:08 > 0:51:10Can I just come in on that?
0:51:10 > 0:51:12So I asked the Chancellor this week, this
0:51:12 > 0:51:13Government has introduced a second home stamp
0:51:13 > 0:51:15duty levy which places an
0:51:15 > 0:51:18additional 3% on stamp duty for homes that are not for main
0:51:18 > 0:51:19residence.
0:51:19 > 0:51:21Which we have got a lot of down here.
0:51:21 > 0:51:22Indeed.
0:51:22 > 0:51:23Only 3%.
0:51:23 > 0:51:25We have managed to secure a £20 million
0:51:25 > 0:51:27for the south-west, of which 5.11 is going into...
0:51:27 > 0:51:3020 million is such a drop in the ocean when you are
0:51:30 > 0:51:31looking at the cost of housing.
0:51:31 > 0:51:34It is 1000 new homes in Cornwall that would not
0:51:34 > 0:51:35have been built before so
0:51:35 > 0:51:38I am very pleased we have managed to secure that and that is just one
0:51:38 > 0:51:39year's worth.
0:51:39 > 0:51:41OK.
0:51:41 > 0:51:42The campaign to save Devonport's amphibious ships
0:51:42 > 0:51:44from the axe has been ramping up this week.
0:51:44 > 0:51:46A petition against the leaked proposals gained 10,000
0:51:46 > 0:51:47signatures.
0:51:47 > 0:51:49The Conservative led Plymouth City Council voted
0:51:49 > 0:51:50unanimously to fight the plans.
0:51:50 > 0:51:52Meanwhile, at Westminster, the Defence Secretary was asked
0:51:52 > 0:51:54about reports Bulwark and Albion have already
0:51:54 > 0:51:56been quietly offered for sale to foreign navies.
0:51:56 > 0:52:02Chloe Axford reports.
0:52:02 > 0:52:04From the social enterprise coffee shop to the cafe outside the
0:52:04 > 0:52:05dockyard gates.
0:52:05 > 0:52:09People here say the Navy is part of Plymouth's DNA, and
0:52:09 > 0:52:11losing ships like HMS Albion and Bulwark, and their Marines,
0:52:11 > 0:52:12would be unthinkable.
0:52:12 > 0:52:15It does not just impact the dockyard, it impacts the
0:52:15 > 0:52:16residents, businesses around here.
0:52:16 > 0:52:19So I think it would worry a lot of people if it happened.
0:52:19 > 0:52:21Arguably, much of Devonport or Plymouth, even,
0:52:21 > 0:52:26would not exist if it wasn't for the Royal Navy.
0:52:26 > 0:52:31If change is going to happen it is probably beyond what is in our gift.
0:52:31 > 0:52:34Then my plea would be we manage that, invest in that and support
0:52:34 > 0:52:37people through that.
0:52:37 > 0:52:39The battle lines are now being drawn between
0:52:39 > 0:52:43those who want answers about the ships' future
0:52:43 > 0:52:46and those who dismiss reports they are going to be scrapped
0:52:46 > 0:52:47as simply speculation and scaremongering.
0:52:47 > 0:52:49Is it a case of attack being the best form of
0:52:49 > 0:52:50defence?
0:52:50 > 0:52:53In the Commons, Plymouth MP Johnny Mercer seem to think so.
0:52:53 > 0:52:57As members of this house we all have a
0:52:57 > 0:53:02responsibility when it comes to speculation.
0:53:02 > 0:53:04We can essentially speculate about anything at all.
0:53:04 > 0:53:07But these are people's lives, their jobs, and we should
0:53:07 > 0:53:09base our debate around facts and not a political
0:53:09 > 0:53:10agenda.
0:53:10 > 0:53:18Others on both sides of the house bombarded defence ministers
0:53:18 > 0:53:20with questions about the future of Devonport ships.
0:53:20 > 0:53:22Can I ask the Minister to speed up this review
0:53:22 > 0:53:25because there are lots of people that are very concerned about their
0:53:25 > 0:53:28jobs and the local economy Albion, Bulwark and the Royal Marines are to
0:53:28 > 0:53:29be scrapped.
0:53:29 > 0:53:31But each time, the frontbenchers took evasive action.
0:53:31 > 0:53:34Once again, he seems to be unnecessarily adding fuel to the
0:53:34 > 0:53:35speculation.
0:53:35 > 0:53:38Indeed perhaps even scaremongering to his
0:53:38 > 0:53:40own constituents, which I don't think is particularly valuable.
0:53:40 > 0:53:41At Wednesday's Defence Select Committee,
0:53:41 > 0:53:47Johnny Mercer was back on
0:53:47 > 0:53:51the offensive against any possible cuts, leading to some careful
0:53:51 > 0:53:54manoeuvring by the Defence Secretary to deflect attention away from
0:53:54 > 0:53:55Albion and Bulwark.
0:53:55 > 0:53:58The threats have intensified.
0:53:58 > 0:54:01We have to spend money dealing with the threat from cyber as
0:54:01 > 0:54:03well as finding resources to storm beaches.
0:54:03 > 0:54:06It is for the Chiefs to weigh these priorities up and give
0:54:06 > 0:54:08me the right military advice when the decision comes.
0:54:08 > 0:54:11Devonport's community is a strong one.
0:54:11 > 0:54:19This was local children at the half term
0:54:19 > 0:54:21apple day.
0:54:21 > 0:54:23This week, Plymouth's Conservative and Labour councillors
0:54:23 > 0:54:26voted unanimously to defend Devonport and the rest of the city
0:54:26 > 0:54:27against any cuts.
0:54:27 > 0:54:29Calling it a fight Plymouth cannot afford to lose.
0:54:29 > 0:54:32Navy contracts account for 8.5% of Plymouth's employment and 12% of
0:54:32 > 0:54:33economic output.
0:54:33 > 0:54:36You do not mess with Plymouth.
0:54:38 > 0:54:40You don't mess with the ships, you don't mess
0:54:40 > 0:54:41with the Navy.
0:54:41 > 0:54:44We are here for the country and now it is time for you to be
0:54:44 > 0:54:45here for us.
0:54:45 > 0:54:47The outcome of the Government's national security
0:54:47 > 0:54:50capability review is expected by Christmas.
0:54:50 > 0:54:52But there are already reports the Chilean and Brazilian
0:54:52 > 0:54:57navies are considering purchasing some of the UK's amphibious ships
0:54:57 > 0:55:00and frigates, leaving the outlook for the British Navy and those who
0:55:00 > 0:55:03rely on it here in Plymouth, distinctly unsettled.
0:55:03 > 0:55:07Chloe Axford reporting.
0:55:07 > 0:55:11Scott, how difficult is it to get the right position on
0:55:11 > 0:55:16this?
0:55:16 > 0:55:19We've heard Johnny Mercer on Monday saying in the Commons this
0:55:19 > 0:55:22was just speculation and by Wednesday he is in a committee room
0:55:22 > 0:55:24firing very hard questions at the Defence Secretary.
0:55:24 > 0:55:26What position should we take in what position do
0:55:26 > 0:55:27you take on this?
0:55:27 > 0:55:28Is it just speculation?
0:55:28 > 0:55:29Can we still say that?
0:55:29 > 0:55:32I am pleased Johnny is firing questions at the Defence Secretary
0:55:32 > 0:55:33on this.
0:55:33 > 0:55:35My understanding is it is speculation at this point.
0:55:35 > 0:55:37Why don't they just dismiss it then?
0:55:37 > 0:55:38If it is not true?
0:55:38 > 0:55:40This is the second part of a Strategic Defence Review.
0:55:40 > 0:55:42We have had one review and this
0:55:42 > 0:55:43is the second.
0:55:43 > 0:55:46I don't know why we're having a second one so quickly.
0:55:46 > 0:55:49I think the military capability and threat we face has not changed
0:55:49 > 0:55:50significantly from the last review.
0:55:50 > 0:55:55Too much money on the aircraft carrier in Portsmouth?
0:55:55 > 0:55:58I would argue the threat we face is changing and
0:55:58 > 0:56:01as an island nation we need to have amphibious vehicles.
0:56:01 > 0:56:07I would also make the point if the issue is about
0:56:07 > 0:56:09financing, I would suggest the Defence Secretary should speak to
0:56:09 > 0:56:14the Chancellor and make the case we should be spending some of aid
0:56:14 > 0:56:16budget, currently set 0.7%, on defence, security and social
0:56:16 > 0:56:18care, which I think should be our priorities.
0:56:18 > 0:56:23Ros, is that something you would agree with?
0:56:23 > 0:56:26I'm not sure I agree with the aid budget, but I
0:56:26 > 0:56:30think what we need to look at is what moving the Navy did to Weymouth
0:56:30 > 0:56:33which is in my own backyard, and I think, looking at the employment
0:56:33 > 0:56:36stats and economic contribution that Devonport makes to Plymouth, I think
0:56:36 > 0:56:37it would be really scary for the people
0:56:37 > 0:56:39of Plymouth if there was to
0:56:39 > 0:56:40be a mass disinvestment.
0:56:40 > 0:56:42Reading between the lines, what is your
0:56:42 > 0:56:43judgment of it?
0:56:43 > 0:56:46Do you think we can dismiss it as speculation?
0:56:46 > 0:56:52No, I don't agree with that at all.
0:56:52 > 0:56:55I think that there needs to be transparency about this and where
0:56:55 > 0:57:04there is not transparency it is because something is going on in the
0:57:04 > 0:57:07background and there will be some perhaps deals or discussions taking
0:57:07 > 0:57:10place about moving funding from one place to another.
0:57:10 > 0:57:12You say that, Defence Weekly, a highly respected
0:57:12 > 0:57:15magazine in the industry suggested there was talk in Chile and
0:57:15 > 0:57:16Argentina are possibly buying these ships.
0:57:16 > 0:57:20What is your response to that?
0:57:20 > 0:57:24I would say that they must be good ships and we should keep a
0:57:24 > 0:57:25hold of them.
0:57:25 > 0:57:27It is important we have all capabilities open to
0:57:27 > 0:57:28us.
0:57:28 > 0:57:30As we enter this world that is changing drastically.
0:57:30 > 0:57:32I would pick the case we are an island
0:57:32 > 0:57:34nation and we need to keep our amphibious vehicles.
0:57:34 > 0:57:36I should qualify myself there, it is Chile
0:57:36 > 0:57:39and Brazil that perhaps are looking at buying our ships.
0:57:39 > 0:57:41You made two points, one was the threat,
0:57:41 > 0:57:42you said, is changing.
0:57:42 > 0:57:44But, two, we are an island nation so we need to keep
0:57:45 > 0:57:46our amphibious ships.
0:57:46 > 0:57:49Again, those are two opposing points of view.
0:57:49 > 0:57:52If the threat is changing and we are going to cyber warfare
0:57:52 > 0:57:54you probably wouldn't need to keep landing ships
0:57:54 > 0:57:57and we would not be able to need to land on beaches.
0:57:57 > 0:58:00And in which case it would not be very good use of
0:58:00 > 0:58:01taxpayer money.
0:58:01 > 0:58:03We already have a significant amount of money that
0:58:03 > 0:58:06goes into our cyber security threats and the challenges we face with
0:58:06 > 0:58:07that.
0:58:07 > 0:58:17The way the army and Navy and air.
0:58:21 > 0:58:25It is changing.
0:58:25 > 0:58:26We should keep the options open to us
0:58:26 > 0:58:28to deal with threats we face.
0:58:28 > 0:58:30That might well change in the future but
0:58:30 > 0:58:31that is my view.
0:58:31 > 0:58:33I think the amount we spend on defence, 2% of GDP,
0:58:33 > 0:58:36could be increased, it could be increased post-Brexit but could
0:58:36 > 0:58:38also be increased by looking again at the aid budget.
0:58:38 > 0:58:40This has been closely followed on Twitter and we
0:58:40 > 0:58:42have had quite a lot of tweets.
0:58:42 > 0:58:44David Rogers tweeted to say, "Did anybody
0:58:44 > 0:58:45question the cost impact of
0:58:45 > 0:58:46Trident on conventional forces?"
0:58:46 > 0:58:49So, Ros, if we scrapped the Trident programme maybe we could save our
0:58:49 > 0:58:50amphibious landing ships.
0:58:50 > 0:58:51Absolutely.
0:58:51 > 0:58:54And I think also we had to say although the nature of
0:58:54 > 0:58:57warfare is changing, we are not getting traditional big theatre
0:58:57 > 0:59:02wars, what we are getting is conflict where we have to enter
0:59:02 > 0:59:06quite quickly and have the resource at our fingertips in order to go in
0:59:06 > 0:59:09and either rescue or support or intervene
0:59:09 > 0:59:11in a conflict management role.
0:59:11 > 0:59:13So we still need those resources to perform that role and
0:59:13 > 0:59:15surely...
0:59:15 > 0:59:18Briefly, Scott, should we scrap Trident?
0:59:18 > 0:59:20I firmly believe we need a nuclear deterrent and we
0:59:20 > 0:59:23should maintain it.
0:59:23 > 0:59:26You want to have your cake and eat it, then, Scott.
0:59:26 > 0:59:27What do you mean?
0:59:27 > 0:59:29Well, if you're talking about taking money out of
0:59:29 > 0:59:35the aid budget and supporting these kind of conventional pieces of
0:59:35 > 0:59:38equipment and supporting Trident, what if there is not enough money to
0:59:38 > 0:59:39go around?
0:59:39 > 0:59:42Well, the aid budget is pretty substantial, 0.7% of GDP,
0:59:42 > 0:59:45and I think we should utilise that to protect people in this country.
0:59:45 > 0:59:53By preventing conflicts abroad that prevent us from leading to
0:59:53 > 0:59:54--needig to intervene.
0:59:54 > 0:59:56And I also believe some of that aid budget could potentially
0:59:56 > 0:59:59be used for social care, one of the most fundamental
0:59:59 > 1:00:02and pressing issues we face.
1:00:02 > 1:00:05I have to stop you there because it is time for our regular
1:00:05 > 1:00:08round-up of the political week in just 60 seconds.
1:00:08 > 1:00:14New figures showed 12,000 people in the region are on
1:00:14 > 1:00:16waiting lists for housing because their current properties
1:00:16 > 1:00:19are not fit to live in.
1:00:19 > 1:00:21There is no wonder why this place gets mouldy.
1:00:21 > 1:00:29There is so much water in the air.
1:00:29 > 1:00:31MPs lined up to demand speedier action on rail improvements
1:00:31 > 1:00:32for the region.
1:00:32 > 1:00:33No more excuses was the message.
1:00:33 > 1:00:36You have to look at the wind forecast and weather forecast
1:00:36 > 1:00:39and the shipping forecast to see if they are actually going to be
1:00:39 > 1:00:44running.
1:00:44 > 1:00:46The MP suspended for using the N-word makes an appearance on
1:00:46 > 1:00:49the Tory benches and refers to Conservative MPs as her honourable
1:00:49 > 1:00:51friends.
1:00:51 > 1:00:53When I have spoken to my honourable friend, the secretary of
1:00:53 > 1:00:56state on this issue...
1:00:56 > 1:00:58Faster than the speed of sound, the Bloodhound's
1:00:58 > 1:01:00test run in Cornwall was brought to the attention
1:01:00 > 1:01:01of the Prime Minister.
1:01:01 > 1:01:05I am very happy to join him in wishing the Bloodhound team well and
1:01:05 > 1:01:11indeed I have met some of them in the past.
1:01:16 > 1:01:24Scott, Anne Marie Morris, the Conservative MP for Newton Abbot,
1:01:24 > 1:01:26does that mean she has been given the whip back?
1:01:26 > 1:01:28Not as far as I am aware.
1:01:28 > 1:01:30That is obviously a decision above my pay grade.
1:01:30 > 1:01:33But she was in the rail debate and it was a very
1:01:33 > 1:01:34interesting debate.
1:01:34 > 1:01:36Luke Pollard made a very good point about getting
1:01:36 > 1:01:39Wi-Fi on trains and I think people are fascinated with electrification
1:01:39 > 1:01:41but from my point of view...
1:01:41 > 1:01:42And that has moved us neatly away from
1:01:42 > 1:01:45Anne-Marie Morris.
1:01:45 > 1:01:46I will bring in Ros.
1:01:46 > 1:01:48Should she be giving the work back?
1:01:48 > 1:01:49She used the N-word.
1:01:49 > 1:01:51Is this something we should forget and move on?
1:01:51 > 1:01:52She used a colloquial phrase inadvertently.
1:01:52 > 1:01:56I think that is very different from the kind of
1:01:56 > 1:02:00disciplinary that is being exercised in respect of Sheffield Hallam at
1:02:00 > 1:02:02the moment, which I think is an issue where discipline really needs
1:02:02 > 1:02:04to be exercised.
1:02:04 > 1:02:07I would not expect the whip to be withdrawn from her for
1:02:07 > 1:02:08her much longer.
1:02:08 > 1:02:10That is the Sunday Politics in the south-west.
1:02:10 > 1:02:15Thanks to my guests, Scott Mann and Ros Keyes
1:02:16 > 1:02:25With that, it's back to Sarah.
1:02:25 > 1:02:28Now, the much anticipated EU Withdrawal Bill,
1:02:28 > 1:02:31which will transfer EU law into UK law in preparation for Brexit,
1:02:31 > 1:02:36is expected to be debated by MPs later next month.
1:02:36 > 1:02:39Critics have called it a "power grab" as it introduces so-called
1:02:39 > 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 > 1:02:49from opposition parties as well as many on the government's
1:02:49 > 1:02:54own backbenches, with 300 amendments and 54 new clauses tabled on it.
1:02:54 > 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 > 1:03:11bill, I would like to bring up with you that the Prime Minister has just
1:03:11 > 1:03:15sent a letter to the Commons Speaker John Bercow asking for an
1:03:15 > 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 > 1:03:49the rest of businesses and in other workplaces have, they should now be
1:03:49 > 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 > 1:04:45making that progress, but
1:04:46 > 1:04:48my Chief Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip wanted this done
1:04:48 > 1:04:51some time ago.That is an interesting point. Let's move on to
1:04:51 > 1:04:53the much anticipated EU withdrawal bill which will finally be debated.
1:04:53 > 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 > 1:05:46should not be excluded. The government have made it clear that
1:05:46 > 1:05:49whilst there may well be a boat if you win on this amendment, it will
1:05:49 > 1:05:54be a take it or leave it vote. This is a deal you should accept, or
1:05:54 > 1:06:00there will be no deal.If you look at the amendment we put forward
1:06:00 > 1:06:04there will be other alternatives. This is all hypothetical because we
1:06:04 > 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 > 1:07:00re-negotiate.
1:07:03 > 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 > 1:07:12speculating as to what would happen, I am not going there, it is far too
1:07:12 > 1:07:15speculative. Let's get this bill in good shape. The principle of this
1:07:15 > 1:07:21bill is right and we need to put into British domestic law existing
1:07:21 > 1:07:26EU laws and regulations into our substantive law. We all agree that
1:07:26 > 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 > 1:07:41sure we will talk about this many more times before we get to that
1:07:41 > 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 > 1:08:31Parliament saying it should have a big say, but what do you do if
1:08:31 > 1:08:37Parliament says this is not good enough? The government must simply
1:08:37 > 1:08:42say, I am sorry we have run out of time. The 27 will say they cannot be
1:08:42 > 1:08:47bothered to have another round either. They have to be strong, but
1:08:47 > 1:08:51realistic about what their role in this is.Do you think the people
1:08:51 > 1:08:56putting this amendment who say they want a binding vote in parliament
1:08:56 > 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 > 1:09:09a say in the first place, they think people got it wrong, so they need
1:09:09 > 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 > 1:10:13time.There will be a meaningful vote, whether it is an shined in
1:10:13 > 1:10:18legislation or not, there cannot be an historic development as big as
1:10:18 > 1:10:23this without Parliament having a meaningful vote. I meaningful,
1:10:23 > 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 > 1:11:09people had their say and the terms with which we leave are left open
1:11:09 > 1:11:12and only the government should have a say in it, Parliament clearly
1:11:12 > 1:11:21should have a say in it.Do we want a good deal or not?It does not mean
1:11:21 > 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 > 1:11:39another of these binary votes were you accept the deal or no Deal.
1:11:39 > 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 > 1:11:56sequence, a huge if by the way, if they vote down the deal that the
1:11:56 > 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 > 1:12:06huge crisis, our government not getting through its much topped
1:12:06 > 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 > 1:12:32until they get something that is as close to remaining as they can
1:12:32 > 1:12:37possibly get. I am very much for trying to get the best and avoiding
1:12:37 > 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 > 1:12:55labour putting forward a realistic proposition?I thought Hilary Benn
1:12:55 > 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 > 1:13:16down. I worry a bit about the Labour position being incoherent, but that
1:13:16 > 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 > 1:13:29have a position? Hilary Benn said we needed to have clarity about the
1:13:29 > 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 > 1:13:42Join me again next Sunday at 11 here on BBC One.
1:13:42 > 1:13:46Until then, bye bye.