29/10/2017

0:00:37 > 0:00:39Morning, everyone.

0:00:39 > 0:00:41I'm Sarah Smith, and welcome to The Sunday Politics,

0:00:41 > 0:00:44where we always bring you everything you need to know to understand

0:00:44 > 0:00:45what's going on in politics.

0:00:45 > 0:00:49Coming up on today's programme...

0:00:49 > 0:00:51The Government says

0:00:51 > 0:00:53the international trade minister Mark Garnier will be investigated

0:00:53 > 0:00:56following newspaper allegations of inappropriate behaviour

0:00:56 > 0:00:58towards a female staff member.

0:00:58 > 0:01:04We'll have the latest.

0:01:04 > 0:01:07The Prime Minister says she can agree a deal with the EU and plenty

0:01:07 > 0:01:13of time for Parliament to vote on it before we leave in 2018. Well

0:01:13 > 0:01:19Parliament play ball? New evidence cast out on the economic

0:01:19 > 0:01:20In the South: cast out on the economic and

0:01:20 > 0:01:22Should there be some sort of statute of limitations

0:01:22 > 0:01:24on prosecuting Armed Service personnel for crimes

0:01:24 > 0:01:28allegedly committed as part of their active duty?

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 > 0:01:40All that coming up in the programme.

0:01:40 > 0:01:43And with me today to help make sense of all the big stories,

0:01:43 > 0:01:47Julia Hartley-Brewer, Steve Richards and Anne McElvoy.

0:01:47 > 0:01:49Some breaking news this morning.

0:01:49 > 0:01:51The Government has announced that it will investigate

0:01:51 > 0:01:53whether the International Trade Minister Mark Garnier broke

0:01:53 > 0:01:55the Ministerial Code following allegations

0:01:55 > 0:02:00of inappropriate behaviour.

0:02:00 > 0:02:04It comes after reports in the Mail on Sunday which has spoken to one

0:02:04 > 0:02:05of Mr Garnier's former employees.

0:02:05 > 0:02:07News of the investigation was announced by the Health

0:02:07 > 0:02:09Secretary Jeremy Hunt on the Andrew Marr show earlier.

0:02:09 > 0:02:13The stories, if they are true, are totally unacceptable

0:02:13 > 0:02:15and the Cabinet Office will be conducting an investigation

0:02:15 > 0:02:18as to whether there has been a breach of the ministerial code

0:02:18 > 0:02:19in this particular case.

0:02:19 > 0:02:21But as you know the facts are disputed.

0:02:21 > 0:02:24This is something that covers behaviour by MPs of all parties

0:02:24 > 0:02:27and that is why the other thing that is going to happen

0:02:27 > 0:02:30is that today Theresa May is going to write to John Bercow,

0:02:30 > 0:02:34the Speaker of the House of Commons, to ask for his advice as to how

0:02:34 > 0:02:40we change that culture.

0:02:40 > 0:02:44That was Jeremy Hunt a little earlier. I want to turn to the panel

0:02:44 > 0:02:49to make sense of this news. This is the government taking these

0:02:49 > 0:02:52allegations quite seriously.What has changed in this story is they

0:02:52 > 0:02:57used to be a bit of delay while people work out what they should say

0:02:57 > 0:03:02about it, how seriously to take it. As you see now a senior cabinet

0:03:02 > 0:03:06member out there, Jeremy Hunt, with an instant response. He does have

0:03:06 > 0:03:10the worry of whether the facts are disputed, but what they want to be

0:03:10 > 0:03:15seen doing is to do something very quickly. In the past they would say

0:03:15 > 0:03:20it was all part of the rough and tumble of Westminster.Mark Garnier

0:03:20 > 0:03:24does not deny these stories, which is that he asked an employee to buy

0:03:24 > 0:03:29sex toys, but he said it was just high jinks and it was taken out of

0:03:29 > 0:03:32context. Is this the sort of thing that a few years ago in a different

0:03:32 > 0:03:38environment would be investigated? Not necessarily quite the frenzy

0:03:38 > 0:03:46that it is nowadays. The combination of social media, all the Sunday

0:03:46 > 0:03:48political programmes were ministers have to go on armed with a response

0:03:48 > 0:03:56means that you get these we have to be seen to be doing something. That

0:03:56 > 0:04:00means there is this Cabinet Office investigation. You pointed out to us

0:04:00 > 0:04:04before the programme that he was not a minister before this happened. It

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

0:04:08 > 0:04:13something has to be seen to be done. Clearly ministers today are being

0:04:13 > 0:04:17armed with that bit of information and that Theresa May will ask John

0:04:17 > 0:04:21Bercow the speaker to look into the whole culture of Parliament in this

0:04:21 > 0:04:27context. That is the response to this kind of frenzy.If we do live

0:04:27 > 0:04:30in an environment where something has to be seen to be done, does that

0:04:30 > 0:04:36always mean the right thing gets done?Absolutely not. We are in

0:04:36 > 0:04:40witch hunt territory. All of us work in the Commons over many years and

0:04:40 > 0:04:45anyone would think it was a scene out of Benny Hill or a carry on

0:04:45 > 0:04:50film. Sadly it is not that much fun and it is rather dull and dreary.

0:04:50 > 0:04:55Yes, there are sex pests, yes, there is sexual harassment, but the idea

0:04:55 > 0:04:59this is going on on a huge scale is nonsense.Doesn't matter whether it

0:04:59 > 0:05:06is a huge scale or not? Or just a few instances?Any workplace where

0:05:06 > 0:05:11you have the mixing of work and social so intertwined and you throw

0:05:11 > 0:05:14a huge amount of alcohol and late night and people living away from

0:05:14 > 0:05:21home you will have this happen.That does not make it OK.It makes sexual

0:05:21 > 0:05:25harassment not OK as it is not anywhere. This happens to men as

0:05:25 > 0:05:30well and if they have an issue into it there are employment tribunal 's

0:05:30 > 0:05:34and they can contact lawyers. I do not think this should be a matter of

0:05:34 > 0:05:40the speaker, it should be someone completely independent of any party.

0:05:40 > 0:05:45People think MPs are employees of the party or the Commons, they are

0:05:45 > 0:05:48not.Because they are self-employed to whom do you go if you are a

0:05:48 > 0:05:54researcher?That has to be clarified. I agree you need a much

0:05:54 > 0:06:00clearer line of reporting. It was a bit like the situation when we came

0:06:00 > 0:06:05into the media many years ago, the Punic wars in my case! You were not

0:06:05 > 0:06:13quite sure who to go to. If you work worried that it might impede your

0:06:13 > 0:06:18career, and you had to talk to people who work next to you, that is

0:06:18 > 0:06:22just one example, but in the Commons people do not know who they should

0:06:22 > 0:06:26go to. Where Theresa May might be making a mistake, it is the same

0:06:26 > 0:06:30mistake when it was decided to investigate through Levinson the

0:06:30 > 0:06:36culture of the media which was like nailing jelly to a wall. Look at the

0:06:36 > 0:06:39culture of anybody's job and the environment they are in and there is

0:06:39 > 0:06:44usually a lot wrong with it. When you try and make it general, they

0:06:44 > 0:06:50are not trying to blame individuals, or it say they need a better line on

0:06:50 > 0:06:54reporting of sexual harassment, which I support, the Commons is a

0:06:54 > 0:06:58funny place and it is a rough old trade and you are never going to

0:06:58 > 0:07:02iron out the human foibles of that. Diane Abbott was talking about this

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

0:07:07 > 0:07:10When I first went into Parliament so many of those men had been to all

0:07:10 > 0:07:17boys boarding schools and had really difficult attitudes towards women.

0:07:17 > 0:07:21The world has moved on and middle-aged women are less likely

0:07:21 > 0:07:30than middle-aged men to believe that young research are irresistibly

0:07:30 > 0:07:36attracted to them. We have seen the issues and we have seen one of our

0:07:36 > 0:07:42colleagues been suspended for quite unacceptable language.

0:07:42 > 0:07:46That is a point, Jarrod O'Mara, a Labour MP who has had the whip

0:07:46 > 0:07:51suspended, this goes across all parties.The idea that there is a

0:07:51 > 0:07:56left or right divide over this is absurd. This is a cultural issue. In

0:07:56 > 0:08:01the media and in a lot of other institutions if this is going to

0:08:01 > 0:08:05develop politically, the frenzy will carry on for a bit and other names

0:08:05 > 0:08:09will come out over the next few days, not just the two we have

0:08:09 > 0:08:16mentioned so far in politics. But it also raises questions about how

0:08:16 > 0:08:21candidates are selected for example. There has been a huge pressure for

0:08:21 > 0:08:26the centre to keep out of things. I bet from now on there will be much

0:08:26 > 0:08:31greater scrutiny of all candidates and tweets will have to be looked at

0:08:31 > 0:08:37and all the rest of it.Selecting candidates is interesting. Miriam

0:08:37 > 0:08:41Gonzalez, Nick Clegg's wife, says that during that election they knew

0:08:41 > 0:08:46about Jarrod O'Mara and the Lib Dems knew about it, so it is difficult to

0:08:46 > 0:08:52suggest the Labour Party did not as well.There is very clear evidence

0:08:52 > 0:08:56the Labour Party did know. But we are in a situation of how perfect

0:08:56 > 0:09:03and well-behaved does everyone have to be? If you look at past American

0:09:03 > 0:09:07presidents, JFK and Bill Clinton, these men were sex pest

0:09:07 > 0:09:11extraordinaire, with totally inappropriate behaviour on a regular

0:09:11 > 0:09:15basis. There are things you are not allowed to say if you are feminists.

0:09:15 > 0:09:20Young women are really attracted to powerful men. I was busted for the

0:09:20 > 0:09:24idea that there are young women in the House of commons who are

0:09:24 > 0:09:31throwing themselves at middle-aged, potbellied, balding, older men. We

0:09:31 > 0:09:37need to focus on the right things. When it is unwanted, harassing,

0:09:37 > 0:09:40inappropriate and criminal, absolutely, you come down like a

0:09:40 > 0:09:44tonne of bricks. It is not just because there are more women in the

0:09:44 > 0:09:48Commons, it is because there are more men married to women like us.

0:09:48 > 0:09:51We have to leave it there.

0:09:51 > 0:09:53As attention turns in Westminster to the hundreds

0:09:53 > 0:09:56of amendments put down on the EU Withdrawal Bill, David Davis has

0:09:56 > 0:09:59caused a stir this week by saying it's possible Parliament won't get

0:09:59 > 0:10:02a vote on the Brexit deal until after March 2019 -

0:10:02 > 0:10:04when the clock runs out and we leave the EU.

0:10:04 > 0:10:06Let's take a look at how the controversy played out.

0:10:06 > 0:10:11And which point do you envisage Parliament having a vote?

0:10:11 > 0:10:12As soon as possible thereafter.

0:10:12 > 0:10:15This Parliament?

0:10:15 > 0:10:17As soon as possible possible thereafter, yeah.

0:10:17 > 0:10:18As soon as possible thereafter.

0:10:18 > 0:10:20So, the vote in Parliament...

0:10:20 > 0:10:21The other thing...

0:10:21 > 0:10:22Could be after March 2019?

0:10:22 > 0:10:24It could be, yeah, it could be.

0:10:24 > 0:10:26The...

0:10:26 > 0:10:27It depends when it concludes.

0:10:27 > 0:10:29Mr Barnier, remember, has said he'd like...

0:10:29 > 0:10:32Sorry, the vote of our Parliament, the UK Parliament, could be

0:10:32 > 0:10:33after March 2019?

0:10:33 > 0:10:35Yes, it could be.

0:10:35 > 0:10:37Could be.

0:10:37 > 0:10:38The thing to member...

0:10:38 > 0:10:40Which would be...

0:10:40 > 0:10:42Well, it can't come before we have the deal.

0:10:42 > 0:10:45You said that it is POSSIBLE that Parliament night not vote

0:10:45 > 0:10:48on the deal until AFTER the end of March 2019.

0:10:48 > 0:10:50I'm summarising correctly what you said...?

0:10:50 > 0:10:51Yeah, that's correct.

0:10:51 > 0:10:54In the event we don't do the deal until then, yeah.

0:10:54 > 0:10:56Can the Prime Minister please explain how it's possible

0:10:56 > 0:10:58to have a meaningful vote on something that's

0:10:58 > 0:11:03already taken place?

0:11:03 > 0:11:07As the honourable gentleman knows, we're in negotiations

0:11:07 > 0:11:09with the European Union, but I am confident that the timetable under

0:11:09 > 0:11:13the Lisbon Treaty does give time until March 2019

0:11:13 > 0:11:15for the negotiations to take place.

0:11:15 > 0:11:18But I'm confident, because it is in the interests of both sides,

0:11:18 > 0:11:21it's not just this Parliament that wants to have a vote on that deal,

0:11:21 > 0:11:23but actually there will be ratification by other parliaments,

0:11:23 > 0:11:28that we will be able to achieve that agreement and that negotiation

0:11:28 > 0:11:32in time for this Parliament to have a vote that we committed to.

0:11:32 > 0:11:34We are working to reach an agreement on the final deal

0:11:34 > 0:11:37in good time before we leave the European Union in March 2019.

0:11:37 > 0:11:39Clearly, we cannot say for certain at this stage

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

0:11:41 > 0:11:44But as Michel Barnier said, he hopes to get a draft deal

0:11:44 > 0:11:49agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim is well.

0:11:49 > 0:11:53agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim as well.

0:11:53 > 0:11:55I'm joined now by the former Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary

0:11:55 > 0:11:57Benn, who is the chair of the Commons Brexit Committee,

0:11:57 > 0:12:01which David Davis was giving evidence to.

0:12:01 > 0:12:07Good morning.When you think a parliamentary vote should take place

0:12:07 > 0:12:12in order for it to be meaningful?It has to be before we leave the

0:12:12 > 0:12:15European Union. Michel Barnier said at the start of the negotiations

0:12:15 > 0:12:20that he wants to wrap them up by October of next year, so we have

0:12:20 > 0:12:23only got 12 months left, the clock is ticking and there is a huge

0:12:23 > 0:12:27amount of ground to cover.You do not think there is any point in

0:12:27 > 0:12:38having the vote the week before we leave because you could then not go

0:12:38 > 0:12:41and re-negotiate?That would not be acceptable. We will not be given a

0:12:41 > 0:12:44bit of paper and told to take it or leave it. But the following day

0:12:44 > 0:12:48Steve Baker, also a minister in the department, told our committee that

0:12:48 > 0:12:51the government now accepts that in order to implement transitional

0:12:51 > 0:12:55arrangements that it is seeking, it will need separate legislation. I

0:12:55 > 0:12:59put the question to him if you are going to need separate legislation

0:12:59 > 0:13:04to do that, why don't you have a separate bill to implement the

0:13:04 > 0:13:06withdrawal agreement rather than seeking to use the powers the

0:13:06 > 0:13:11government is proposing to take in the EU withdrawal bill.If we stick

0:13:11 > 0:13:15to the timing, you have said you do not think it is possible to

0:13:15 > 0:13:19negotiate a trade deal in the next 12 months. You say the only people

0:13:19 > 0:13:24who think that is possible British ministers. If you do not believe we

0:13:24 > 0:13:29can get a deal negotiated, how can we get a vote on it in 12 months'

0:13:29 > 0:13:33time?If things go well, and there is still a risk of no agreement

0:13:33 > 0:13:48which would be disastrous for the economy and the country, if

0:13:52 > 0:13:55things go there will be a deal on the divorce issues, there will be a

0:13:55 > 0:13:57deal on the nature of the transitional arrangement and the

0:13:57 > 0:14:00government is to set out how it thinks that will work, and then an

0:14:00 > 0:14:03agreement between the UK and the 27 member states saying, we will now

0:14:03 > 0:14:05negotiate a new trade and market access arrangement, and new

0:14:05 > 0:14:07association agreement between the two parties, and that will be done

0:14:07 > 0:14:09in the transition period. Parliament will be voting in those

0:14:09 > 0:14:14circumstances on a deal which leads to the door being open.But we would

0:14:14 > 0:14:19be outside the EU at that point, so how meaningful can vote be where you

0:14:19 > 0:14:24take it or leave it if we have already left the EU? Surely this has

0:14:24 > 0:14:30to happen before March 2019 for it to make a difference?I do not think

0:14:30 > 0:14:34it is possible to negotiate all of the issues that will need to be

0:14:34 > 0:14:39covered in the time available.Then it is not possible to have a

0:14:39 > 0:14:50meaningful vote on it?Parliament will have to have a look at the deal

0:14:50 > 0:14:53presented to it. It is likely to be a mix agreement so the approval

0:14:53 > 0:14:55process in the rest of Europe, unlike the Article 50 agreement,

0:14:55 > 0:14:58which will be a majority vote in the European Parliament and in the

0:14:58 > 0:15:01British Parliament, every single Parliament will have a vote on it,

0:15:01 > 0:15:06so it will be a more complex process anyway, but I do not think that is

0:15:06 > 0:15:12the time to get all of that sorted between now and October next year.

0:15:12 > 0:15:16Whether it is before or after we have left the EU, the government

0:15:16 > 0:15:21have said it is a take it or leave it option and it is the Noel Edmonds

0:15:21 > 0:15:28option, deal or no Deal, you say yes or no to it. You cannot send them

0:15:28 > 0:15:32back to re-negotiate.

0:15:32 > 0:15:38If it is a separate piece of legislation, when Parliament has a

0:15:38 > 0:15:43chance to shape the nature of that legislation.But it can't change

0:15:43 > 0:15:47what has been negotiated with the EU?Well, you could say to the

0:15:47 > 0:15:52government, we're happy with this but was not happy about that chukka

0:15:52 > 0:15:57here's some fresh instructions, go back in and...It seems to me what

0:15:57 > 0:16:01they want is the maximum access to the single market for the lowest

0:16:01 > 0:16:06possible tariffs, whilst able to control migration. If they've got to

0:16:06 > 0:16:10get the best deal that they can on that, how on earth is the Labour

0:16:10 > 0:16:14Party, saying we want a bit more, owing to persuade the other 27?We

0:16:14 > 0:16:18certainly don't want the lowest possible tariffs, we want no tariffs

0:16:18 > 0:16:22are taught. My personal view is that, has made a profound mistake in

0:16:22 > 0:16:28deciding that it wants to leave the customs union. If you want to help

0:16:28 > 0:16:32deal with the very serious question of the border between Northern

0:16:32 > 0:16:36Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, the way you do that is to stay in

0:16:36 > 0:16:41the customs union and I hope, will change its mind.But the Labour

0:16:41 > 0:16:45Party is simply saying in the House of Commons, we want a better deal

0:16:45 > 0:16:52than what, has been able to get?It depends how the negotiations unfold.

0:16:52 > 0:16:57, has ended up on the transitional arrangements in the place that Keir

0:16:57 > 0:17:03Starmer set out on behalf of the shadow cabinet in August, when he

0:17:03 > 0:17:06said, we will need to stay in the single market and the customs union

0:17:06 > 0:17:10for the duration of the transition, and I think that is the position,

0:17:10 > 0:17:14has now reached. It has not been helped by differences of view within

0:17:14 > 0:17:18the Cabinet, and a lot of time has passed and there's proved time left

0:17:18 > 0:17:24and we have not even got on to the negotiations. -- there's very little

0:17:24 > 0:17:29time left.On phase two, the labour Party have set out six clear tests,

0:17:29 > 0:17:34and two of them are crucial. You say you want the exact same benefits we

0:17:34 > 0:17:38currently have in the customs union but you also want to be able to

0:17:38 > 0:17:42ensure the fair migration to control immigration, basically, which does

0:17:42 > 0:17:45sound a bit like having your cake and eating it. You say that you will

0:17:45 > 0:17:49vote against any deal that doesn't give you all of that, the exact same

0:17:49 > 0:17:53benefits of the single market, and allowing you to control migration.

0:17:53 > 0:17:57But you say no deal would be catastrophic if so it seems to me

0:17:57 > 0:18:00you're unlikely to get the deal that you could vote for but you don't

0:18:00 > 0:18:05want to vote for no deal?We absolutely don't want a no deal.

0:18:05 > 0:18:11Businesses have sent a letter to the Prime Minister saying that a

0:18:11 > 0:18:14transition is essential because the possibility of a no deal and no

0:18:14 > 0:18:17transitional would be very damaging for the economy. We fought the

0:18:17 > 0:18:20general election on a policy of seeking to retain the benefits of

0:18:20 > 0:18:24the single market and the customs union. Keir Starmer said on behalf

0:18:24 > 0:18:29of the shadow government that as far as the longer term arrangements are

0:18:29 > 0:18:32concerned, that should leave all options on the table, because it is

0:18:32 > 0:18:36the end that you're trying to achieve and you then find the means

0:18:36 > 0:18:41to support it. So we're setting out very clearly those tests.If you

0:18:41 > 0:18:44were to vote down an agreement because it did not meet your tests,

0:18:44 > 0:18:50and there was time to send, back to the EU to get a better deal, then

0:18:50 > 0:18:52you would have significantly weakened their negotiating hand

0:18:52 > 0:18:57chukka that doesn't help them?I don't think, has deployed its

0:18:57 > 0:19:01negotiating hand very strongly thus far. Because we had a general

0:19:01 > 0:19:04election which meant that we lost time that we would have used for

0:19:04 > 0:19:08negotiating. We still don't know what kind of long-term trade and

0:19:08 > 0:19:15market access deal, wants. The Prime Minister says, I don't want a deal

0:19:15 > 0:19:19like Canada and I don't want a deal like the European Economic Area. But

0:19:19 > 0:19:23we still don't know what kind of deal they want. With about 12 months

0:19:23 > 0:19:27to go, the other thing, needs to do is to set out very clearly above all

0:19:27 > 0:19:32for the benefit of the other 27 European countries, what kind of

0:19:32 > 0:19:35deal it wants. When I travel to Europe and talk to those involved in

0:19:35 > 0:19:41the negotiations, you see other leaders saying, we don't actually

0:19:41 > 0:19:44know what Britain wants. With a year to go it is about time we made that

0:19:44 > 0:19:50clear.One related question on the European Union - you spoke in your

0:19:50 > 0:19:54famous speech in Syria about the international brigades in Spain, and

0:19:54 > 0:19:58I wonder if your solidarity with them leads you to think that the UK

0:19:58 > 0:20:01Government should be recognising Catalonia is an independent state?

0:20:01 > 0:20:06No, I don't think so. It is a very difficult and potentially dangerous

0:20:06 > 0:20:11situation in Catalonia at the moment. Direct rule from Madrid is

0:20:11 > 0:20:16not a long-term solution. There needs to be a negotiation, and

0:20:16 > 0:20:20elections will give Catalonia the chance to take that decision, but I

0:20:20 > 0:20:27am not clear what the declaration of independence actually means. Are

0:20:27 > 0:20:31they going to be borders, is they're going to be an army? There will have

0:20:31 > 0:20:34to be some agreement. Catalonia has already had a high degree of

0:20:34 > 0:20:39autonomy. It may like some more, and it seems to me if you look at the

0:20:39 > 0:20:44experience here in the United Kingdom, that is the way to go, not

0:20:44 > 0:20:47a constitutional stand-off. And I really hope nobody is charged with

0:20:47 > 0:20:51rebellion, because actually that would make matters worse.

0:20:51 > 0:20:55Now, the Government has this week reopened the public

0:20:55 > 0:20:58consultation on plans for a third runway at Heathrow.

0:20:58 > 0:21:00While ministers are clear the £18 billion project

0:21:00 > 0:21:02is still the preferred option, new data raises further questions

0:21:02 > 0:21:03about the environmental impact of expansion,

0:21:03 > 0:21:06and offers an improved economic case for a second

0:21:06 > 0:21:07runway at Gatwick instead.

0:21:07 > 0:21:10So, with opponents on all sides of the Commons, does the Government

0:21:10 > 0:21:12still have the votes to get the plans off the ground?

0:21:12 > 0:21:21Here's Elizabeth Glinka.

0:21:26 > 0:21:28The debate over the expansion of Heathrow has been

0:21:28 > 0:21:29going on for decades.

0:21:29 > 0:21:31Plans for a third runway were first introduced

0:21:31 > 0:21:33by the Labour government in 2003.

0:21:33 > 0:21:37Then, after spending millions of pounds, finally, in 2015,

0:21:37 > 0:21:42the airport commission recommended that those plans go ahead,

0:21:42 > 0:21:45and the government position appeared to be fixed.

0:21:45 > 0:21:48But, of course, since then, we've had a general election.

0:21:48 > 0:21:52The Government have lost their Commons majority.

0:21:52 > 0:21:55And with opposition on both front benches, the Parliamentary

0:21:55 > 0:21:59arithmetic looks a little bit up in the air.

0:21:59 > 0:22:02A lot has changed since the airport commission produced its report,

0:22:02 > 0:22:05and that don't forget was the bedrock for the Government's

0:22:05 > 0:22:07decision, that's why the government supposedly made the decision

0:22:07 > 0:22:08that it made.

0:22:08 > 0:22:11But most of the assumptions made in that report have

0:22:11 > 0:22:13been undermined since, by data on passenger numbers,

0:22:13 > 0:22:16on economic benefits, and more than anything, on pollution.

0:22:16 > 0:22:19There's demand from international carriers to get into Heathrow.

0:22:19 > 0:22:22More and more people want to fly.

0:22:22 > 0:22:25And after the referendum, connectivity post-Brexit

0:22:25 > 0:22:29is going to be absolutely critical to the UK economy, so if anything,

0:22:29 > 0:22:35I think the case is stronger for expansion at Heathrow.

0:22:35 > 0:22:37A vote on expansion had been due to take place this summer.

0:22:37 > 0:22:39But with Westminster somewhat distracted, that didn't happen.

0:22:39 > 0:22:42Now, fresh data means the Government has had to reopen

0:22:42 > 0:22:48the public consultation.

0:22:48 > 0:22:51But it maintains the case for Heathrow is as strong as ever,

0:22:51 > 0:22:57delivering benefits of up to £74 billion to the wider economy.

0:22:57 > 0:22:59And in any case, the Government says, action must be taken,

0:22:59 > 0:23:04as all five of London's airports will be completely

0:23:04 > 0:23:08full by the mid-2030s.

0:23:08 > 0:23:10Still, the new research does cast an alternative expansion at Gatwick

0:23:10 > 0:23:14in a more favourable economic light, while showing Heathrow

0:23:14 > 0:23:22is now less likely to meet its environmental targets.

0:23:22 > 0:23:26Campaigners like these in Hounslow sense the wind is shifting.

0:23:26 > 0:23:29We're feeling encouraged, because we see all kinds

0:23:29 > 0:23:31of weaknesses in the argument.

0:23:31 > 0:23:34Certainly, quite a few MPs, I think certainly Labour MPs,

0:23:34 > 0:23:37are beginning to think perhaps it's not such a great idea

0:23:37 > 0:23:39to have a third runway.

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

0:23:41 > 0:23:44to see things their way.

0:23:44 > 0:23:46The Labour Party quite rightly set four key tests

0:23:46 > 0:23:49for a third runway at Heathrow.

0:23:49 > 0:23:52And in my view, Heathrow is not able...

0:23:52 > 0:23:56The Heathrow option is not able to pass any of those.

0:23:56 > 0:23:59So, I see a lot of colleagues in the Labour Party around

0:23:59 > 0:24:01the country beginning to think twice.

0:24:01 > 0:24:07And if you look at the cross-party MPs supportin this anti-Heathrow

0:24:07 > 0:24:10And if you look at the cross-party MPs supporting this anti-Heathrow

0:24:10 > 0:24:13protest this week, you will see some familiar faces.

0:24:13 > 0:24:15You know my position - as the constituency MP,

0:24:15 > 0:24:16I'm totally opposed.

0:24:16 > 0:24:19I think this is another indication of just the difficulties

0:24:19 > 0:24:21the Government have got off of implementing this policy.

0:24:21 > 0:24:23I don't think it's going to happen, I just don't think

0:24:23 > 0:24:24it's going to happen.

0:24:24 > 0:24:27So, if some on the Labour front bench are, shall

0:24:27 > 0:24:30we say, not supportive, what about the other side?

0:24:30 > 0:24:33In a free vote, we could have had up to 60 Conservative MPs

0:24:33 > 0:24:35voting against expansion, that's the number that is normally

0:24:35 > 0:24:36used and I think it's right.

0:24:36 > 0:24:38In the circumstances where it requires an active rebellion,

0:24:38 > 0:24:40the numbers would be fewer.

0:24:40 > 0:24:43I can't tell you what that number is, but I can tell

0:24:43 > 0:24:46you that there are people right the way through the party,

0:24:46 > 0:24:48from the backbenches to the heart of the government,

0:24:48 > 0:24:49who will vote against Heathrow expansion.

0:24:49 > 0:24:53And yet the SNP, whose Commons votes could prove vital,

0:24:53 > 0:24:55are behind the Heathrow plan, which promises more

0:24:55 > 0:24:56connecting flights.

0:24:56 > 0:25:00And other supporters are convinced they have the numbers.

0:25:00 > 0:25:03There is a majority of members of Parliament that support Heathrow

0:25:03 > 0:25:06expansion, and when that is put to the test, whenever that will be,

0:25:06 > 0:25:08I think that will be clearly demonstrated.

0:25:08 > 0:25:10Any vote on this issue won't come until next summer.

0:25:10 > 0:25:13For both sides, yet more time to argue about weather

0:25:13 > 0:25:20the plans should take off or be permanently grounded.

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

0:25:25 > 0:25:28And I'm joined now by the former Cabinet minister Theresa Villiers,

0:25:28 > 0:25:30who oversaw aviation policy as a transport minister

0:25:30 > 0:25:37under David Cameron.

0:25:37 > 0:25:42Thanks for coming in. You have made your opposition to a third runway at

0:25:42 > 0:25:46Heathrow consistently clear. , have reopened this consultation but it is

0:25:46 > 0:25:50still clearly their preferred option?It is but what I have always

0:25:50 > 0:25:53asked is, why try to build a new runway at Heathrow when you can

0:25:53 > 0:25:56build one at Gatwick in half the time, for half the cost and with a

0:25:56 > 0:26:00tiny fraction of the environment will cost average is that true,

0:26:00 > 0:26:04though? Private finance is already to go at Heathrow, because that's

0:26:04 > 0:26:07where people want to do it and that's where the private backers

0:26:07 > 0:26:11want to put it. It would take much longer to get the private finance

0:26:11 > 0:26:16for Gatwick? Part of that private finance is passengers of the future,

0:26:16 > 0:26:21but also, the costs of the surface transport needed to expand Heathrow

0:26:21 > 0:26:29is phenomenal. I mean, TfL estimates vary between £10 billion and £15

0:26:29 > 0:26:32billion. And there's no suggestion that those private backers are going

0:26:32 > 0:26:37to meet those costs. So, this is a hugely expensive project as well as

0:26:37 > 0:26:41one which will create very significant damage.Heathrow is

0:26:41 > 0:26:44ultimately where passengers and airlines want to go to, isn't it?

0:26:44 > 0:26:49Every slot is practically full. Every time a new one comes up, it is

0:26:49 > 0:26:54up immediately, it's a very popular airport. Gatwick is not where they

0:26:54 > 0:26:58want to go?There are many airlines and passengers who do want to fly

0:26:58 > 0:27:02from Gatwick, and all the forecasts indicate that a new runway there

0:27:02 > 0:27:06would be full of planes very rapidly. But I think the key thing

0:27:06 > 0:27:11is that successive elements have said, technology will deliver a way

0:27:11 > 0:27:17to resolve the around noise and air quality. I don't have any confidence

0:27:17 > 0:27:22that science has demonstrated that technology will deliver those

0:27:22 > 0:27:26solutions to these very serious environmental limbs which have

0:27:26 > 0:27:28stopped Heathrow expansion for decades.Jim Fitzpatrick in the film

0:27:28 > 0:27:33was mentioning that people think there is a need for even more

0:27:33 > 0:27:36collectivity in Britain post-Brexit. We know that business has been

0:27:36 > 0:27:40crying out for more routes, they really think it hurts business

0:27:40 > 0:27:44expansion that we don't get on with this. More consultation is just

0:27:44 > 0:27:48going to lead to more delay, isn't it?This is a hugely controversial

0:27:48 > 0:27:51decision. There is a reason why people have been talking about

0:27:51 > 0:27:55expanding Heathrow for 50 years and it is never happened, it's because

0:27:55 > 0:27:59it's a bad idea. So, inevitably the legal processes are very complex.

0:27:59 > 0:28:04One of my anxieties about, pursuing this option is that potentially it

0:28:04 > 0:28:07means another lost decade for airport expansion. Because the

0:28:07 > 0:28:13problems with Heathrow expansion are so serious, I believe that's one of

0:28:13 > 0:28:16the reasons why I advocated, anyone who wants a new runway in the

0:28:16 > 0:28:20south-east should be backing Gatwick is a much more deliverable option.

0:28:20 > 0:28:26Let me move on to Brexit. We were talking with Hilary Benn about a

0:28:26 > 0:28:29meaningful vote being given to the House of Commons chukka how

0:28:29 > 0:28:32important do you think that is?Of course the Commons will vote on

0:28:32 > 0:28:38this. The Commons is going to vote on this many, many times. We have

0:28:38 > 0:28:41also had a hugely important vote not only in the referendum on the 23rd

0:28:41 > 0:28:45of June but also on Article 50.But will that vote allow any changes to

0:28:45 > 0:28:51it? Hilary Benn seemed to think that the Commons would be able to shape

0:28:51 > 0:28:55the deal with the vote. But actually is it going to be, saying, take it

0:28:55 > 0:29:00or leave it at all what we have negotiated?Our Prime Minister

0:29:00 > 0:29:05negotiates on our behalf internationally. It's

0:29:05 > 0:29:07well-established precedent that after an agreement is reached

0:29:07 > 0:29:13overseas, then it is considered in the House of Commons.What if it was

0:29:13 > 0:29:17voted down in the House of Commons? Well, the legal effect of that would

0:29:17 > 0:29:20be that we left the European Union without any kind of deal, because

0:29:20 > 0:29:25the key decision was on the voting of Article 50 as an irreversible

0:29:25 > 0:29:30decision.Is it irreversible, though? We understand, may have had

0:29:30 > 0:29:34legal advice saying that Yukon stopped the clock on Article 50.

0:29:34 > 0:29:38Would it not be possible if the Commons voted against to ask the

0:29:38 > 0:29:41European Union for a little bit more time to try and renegotiate?There

0:29:41 > 0:29:49is a debate about the reversibility of Article 50. But the key point is

0:29:49 > 0:29:55that we are all working for a good deal for the United Kingdom and the

0:29:55 > 0:29:59I'm concerned that some of the amendments to the legislation are

0:29:59 > 0:30:02not about the nature of the deal at the end of the process, they're just

0:30:02 > 0:30:09about frustrating the process. I think that would be wrong. I think

0:30:09 > 0:30:12we should respect the result of the referendum.Will it be by next

0:30:12 > 0:30:15summer, so there is time for Parliament and for other

0:30:15 > 0:30:18parliaments?I certainly hope that we get that agreement between the

0:30:18 > 0:30:23two sides, and the recent European summit seemed to indicate a

0:30:23 > 0:30:27willingness from the European side to be constructive. But one point

0:30:27 > 0:30:31where I think Hilary Benn has a point, if we do secure agreement on

0:30:31 > 0:30:34a transitional deal, that does potentially give us more time to

0:30:34 > 0:30:39work on the details of a trade agreement. I hope we get as much as

0:30:39 > 0:30:43possible in place before exit day. But filling out some of that detail

0:30:43 > 0:30:51is made easier if we can secure that two-year transitional deal.

0:30:51 > 0:30:58That is interesting because a lot of Brexiteers what the deal to be done

0:30:58 > 0:31:06by the inflammation period, it is not a time for that.I fully

0:31:06 > 0:31:11recognise we need compromise, I am keen to work with people across my

0:31:11 > 0:31:14party in terms of spectrum of opinion, and with other parties as

0:31:14 > 0:31:19well to ensure we get the best outcome.Let me ask you briefly

0:31:19 > 0:31:23before you go about the possible culture of sexual harassment in the

0:31:23 > 0:31:29House of commons and Theresa May will write to the Speaker of the

0:31:29 > 0:31:32House of Commons to make sure there is a better way that people can

0:31:32 > 0:31:37report sexual harassment in the House of commons. Is that necessary?

0:31:37 > 0:31:42A better procedure is needed. It is sad it has taken this controversy to

0:31:42 > 0:31:47push this forward. But there is a problem with MPs who are individual

0:31:47 > 0:31:52employers. If you work for an MP and have a complaint against them,

0:31:52 > 0:31:55essentially they are overseeing their own complaints process. I

0:31:55 > 0:32:00think a role for the House of commons authorities in ensuring that

0:32:00 > 0:32:04those complaints are properly dealt with I think would be very helpful,

0:32:04 > 0:32:08so I think the Prime Minister's letter was a sensible move.So you

0:32:08 > 0:32:12think there is a culture of sexual harassment in the House of commons?

0:32:12 > 0:32:19I have not been subjected to it or seen evidence of it, but obviously

0:32:19 > 0:32:22there is anxiety and allegations have made their way into the papers

0:32:22 > 0:32:26and they should be treated appropriately and properly

0:32:26 > 0:32:28investigated.Thank you for talking to us.

0:32:28 > 0:32:30Thank you for talking to us.

0:32:30 > 0:32:32Next week the Lord Speaker's committee publishes its final report

0:32:32 > 0:32:34into reducing the size of the House of Lords.

0:32:34 > 0:32:37With over 800 members the upper house is the second largest

0:32:37 > 0:32:39legislative chamber in the world after the National People's

0:32:39 > 0:32:40Congress of China.

0:32:40 > 0:32:43The report is expected to recommend that new peerages should be

0:32:43 > 0:32:46time-limited to 15 years and that in the future political peerage

0:32:46 > 0:32:50appointments will also be tied to a party's election performance.

0:32:50 > 0:32:53The government has been under pressure to take action to cut

0:32:53 > 0:32:56members of the unelected chamber, where they are entitled

0:32:56 > 0:33:00to claim an attendance allowance of £300 a day.

0:33:00 > 0:33:03And once again these expenses have been in the news.

0:33:03 > 0:33:06The Electoral Reform Society discovered that 16 peers had claimed

0:33:06 > 0:33:08around £400,000 without speaking in any debates or submitting any

0:33:08 > 0:33:12questions for an entire year.

0:33:12 > 0:33:15One of the Lords to be criticised was Digby Jones,

0:33:15 > 0:33:18the crossbencher and former trade minister, he hasn't spoken

0:33:18 > 0:33:21in the Lords since April 2016 and has voted only seven times

0:33:21 > 0:33:25during 2016 and 2017.

0:33:25 > 0:33:28Yet he has claimed around £15,000 in this period.

0:33:28 > 0:33:31When asked what he does in the House he said,

0:33:31 > 0:33:34"I go in and I will invite for lunch or meet with inward

0:33:34 > 0:33:35investors into the country.

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

0:33:38 > 0:33:41Well, we can speak now to Lord Jones who joins us

0:33:41 > 0:33:45from Stratford Upon Avon.

0:33:45 > 0:33:50Thank you very much for talking to us. You provide value for money in

0:33:50 > 0:33:57the House of Lords do you think? Definitely. I am, by the way, very

0:33:57 > 0:34:02keen on reform. I want to see that 15 year tide. I would like to see a

0:34:02 > 0:34:07time limit, an age limit of 75 or 80. I would like attendants

0:34:07 > 0:34:11definitely define so the whole public understood what people are

0:34:11 > 0:34:18paying for and why. The £300, as a crossbencher I get no support, and

0:34:18 > 0:34:26nor do I want any, speech writing, secretarial assistance, none of

0:34:26 > 0:34:30that, and the £300 goes towards that.Whilst you are in there

0:34:30 > 0:34:35because we will talk about the reform of the Lords in general, but

0:34:35 > 0:34:39in terms of you yourself, you say you invite people in for lunch, is

0:34:39 > 0:34:42it not possible for you to take part in debates and votes and ask

0:34:42 > 0:34:48questions at the same time?Have you ever listened to a debate in the

0:34:48 > 0:35:00laws? Yes, many times.Yes, many times. You have to put your name

0:35:00 > 0:35:08down in advance and you have to be there for the whole debate.You have

0:35:08 > 0:35:11to be around when the vote is called and you do not know when the book is

0:35:11 > 0:35:15called, you have no idea when the boat is going to be called.This is

0:35:15 > 0:35:22part of being a member of the House of Lords and what it means. If you

0:35:22 > 0:35:25are not prepared to wait or take part in debates, why do you want to

0:35:25 > 0:35:30be a member? It is possible to resign from the House of Lords.

0:35:30 > 0:35:34There are many things members of the Lords do that does not relate to

0:35:34 > 0:35:39parrot fashion following somebody else, which I refuse to do, about

0:35:39 > 0:35:44speaking to an empty chamber, or indeed hanging on sometimes for

0:35:44 > 0:35:49hours to vote. There are many other things that you do. You quote me as

0:35:49 > 0:35:53saying I will entertain at lunchtime or show people around the House,

0:35:53 > 0:35:57everything from schoolchildren to inward investors. I will meet

0:35:57 > 0:36:00ministers about big business issues or educational issues, and at the

0:36:00 > 0:36:05same time I will meet other members of the Lords to get things moving.

0:36:05 > 0:36:09None of that relates to going into the House and getting on your hind

0:36:09 > 0:36:13legs, although I do go in and sit there and learn and listen to

0:36:13 > 0:36:19others, which, if more people would receive and not transmit, we might

0:36:19 > 0:36:23get a better informed society. At the same time many times I will go

0:36:23 > 0:36:28after I have listened and I am leaving and if I have not heard the

0:36:28 > 0:36:34debate, I will not vote.Voting is an essential part of being part of a

0:36:34 > 0:36:39legislative chamber. This is not just an executive committee, it is a

0:36:39 > 0:36:45legislature, surpassing that law is essential, is it not?Do you really

0:36:45 > 0:36:49believe that an MP or a member of the Lords who has not heard a moment

0:36:49 > 0:36:55of the debate, who is then listening to the Bell, walks in and does not

0:36:55 > 0:36:59know which lobby, the whips tell him, they have not heard the debate

0:36:59 > 0:37:04and they do not know what they are voting on and they go and do it?

0:37:04 > 0:37:10That is your democracy? Voting seems to be an essential part of this

0:37:10 > 0:37:14chamber, and you have your ideas about reforming the chamber. It

0:37:14 > 0:37:18sounds as though you would reform yourself out of it. You say people

0:37:18 > 0:37:22who are not voting and who are not taking part in debate should no

0:37:22 > 0:37:28longer be members of the House.I did not say that. I said we ought to

0:37:28 > 0:37:33redefine what attendance means and then if you do not attend on the new

0:37:33 > 0:37:37criteria, you do not have to come ever again, we will give you your

0:37:37 > 0:37:42wish. I agree attendance might mean unless you speak, you are going.

0:37:42 > 0:37:47Fair enough, if that is what is agreed, yes. Sometimes I would speak

0:37:47 > 0:37:53and sometimes I would not. If I did not, then off I go. Similarly after

0:37:53 > 0:37:5915 years, off you go. If you reach 75 or 80, off you go. Why do we have

0:37:59 > 0:38:0592 members who are only there because of daddy.You are talking

0:38:05 > 0:38:08about hereditary peers. You would like to reduce the House to what

0:38:08 > 0:38:15kind of number?I would get it down to 400.You would get rid of half

0:38:15 > 0:38:18the peers there at the moment? You think you are active enough to

0:38:18 > 0:38:26remain as one of the 400?No, I said that might well include me. Let's

0:38:26 > 0:38:31get a set of criteria, let's push it through, because the laws is losing

0:38:31 > 0:38:35respect in the whole of the country because there are too many and all

0:38:35 > 0:38:39these things about what people pay for. I bet most people think the

0:38:39 > 0:38:44money you get is paid. It is not, it is re-funding for all the things you

0:38:44 > 0:38:49have to pay for yourself. But I understand how respect has been lost

0:38:49 > 0:38:54in society. Let's change it now. Let's get it through and then, yes,

0:38:54 > 0:38:59if you do not meet the criteria, you have got to go and that includes me.

0:38:59 > 0:39:01Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.

0:39:01 > 0:39:04Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.

0:39:04 > 0:39:06It's coming up to 11.40, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

0:39:06 > 0:39:09Coming up on the programme, we'll be talking to the former

0:39:09 > 0:39:12business minister and Conservative MP Anna Soubry about the Brexit

0:39:12 > 0:39:21negotiations and claims of sexual harassment in Parliament.

0:39:21 > 0:39:22Welcome to Sunday Politics South. harassment in Parliament.

0:39:22 > 0:39:24My name's Peter Henley. harassment in Parliament.

0:39:24 > 0:39:27On today's show, should there be a statute of limitations to protect

0:39:27 > 0:39:30Armed Forces personnel from being pursued through

0:39:30 > 0:39:33the courts for crimes allegedly committed as part of their active

0:39:33 > 0:39:38service, sometimes decades after the event?

0:39:38 > 0:39:40First, let's meet the two politicians here for

0:39:40 > 0:39:42the rest of this programme.

0:39:42 > 0:39:43Louise Goldsmith is the Conservative leader

0:39:43 > 0:39:44of West Sussex County Council.

0:39:44 > 0:39:46Hello, Peter.

0:39:46 > 0:39:48And Paul Harvey is the leader of the Labour group

0:39:48 > 0:39:49on Basingstoke and Deane Council.

0:39:49 > 0:39:51Hi, Peter.

0:39:51 > 0:39:55This week, there was a warning that leisure centres could go

0:39:55 > 0:39:57the same way as libraries, and the Local Government Association

0:39:57 > 0:40:00saying that council-owned sports halls and swimming pools are getting

0:40:00 > 0:40:04old and tired from lack of investment, with many coming

0:40:04 > 0:40:07to the end of their 25-year life.

0:40:07 > 0:40:09You are under financial pressure, but we don't want to lose

0:40:09 > 0:40:11leisure centres, do we?

0:40:11 > 0:40:14No, they are really important, but perhaps we shouldn't call

0:40:14 > 0:40:15them leisure centres.

0:40:15 > 0:40:17We should call them wellbeing centres, particularly

0:40:17 > 0:40:20focusing on the healthy mind and the healthy body.

0:40:20 > 0:40:23But if they're not being refurbished, if we are not having

0:40:23 > 0:40:25that modern approach, maybe involving the health

0:40:25 > 0:40:28service in some of this, which it seems it's not,

0:40:28 > 0:40:29according to the LGA...?

0:40:29 > 0:40:33I think the LGA could have expanded on that, and involving ourselves,

0:40:33 > 0:40:36who are responsible for public health as a county council, and also

0:40:36 > 0:40:41the primary health care CCGs, to look at the overall

0:40:41 > 0:40:42package for people.

0:40:42 > 0:40:50I think that is the future for that.

0:40:50 > 0:40:51Is that a possible revenue stream?

0:40:51 > 0:40:54That's what they were suggesting, that maybe in the Budget

0:40:54 > 0:40:56the Chancellor could say, let's put some of the money

0:40:56 > 0:40:57the way of councils.

0:40:57 > 0:40:59He's not going to do it though, is he?

0:40:59 > 0:41:03What we've got to look at is how we support our people in our

0:41:03 > 0:41:05communities using our buildings is the best way, and also

0:41:05 > 0:41:07focusing on the healthy mind and the healthy body,

0:41:07 > 0:41:09and we don't do that alone anymore.

0:41:09 > 0:41:11We do it with districts and boroughs, we do it

0:41:11 > 0:41:13with health partners, and that's probably

0:41:13 > 0:41:15where I think we should put our energies for the future.

0:41:15 > 0:41:17It's all sensible, building for the future, but it's

0:41:18 > 0:41:19not happening, is it?

0:41:19 > 0:41:20Councils are under so much pressure.

0:41:20 > 0:41:22We've got adult social care budgets being cut,

0:41:22 > 0:41:24children's services budgets being cut, and leisure

0:41:24 > 0:41:26services is down the pecking order, of course it is,

0:41:26 > 0:41:27and that's a problem.

0:41:27 > 0:41:30If you see what a leisure centre does, it is there for leisure

0:41:30 > 0:41:32and it's also there for health.

0:41:32 > 0:41:34The amount of school swimming lessons that take

0:41:34 > 0:41:36place in leisure centres, the amount of healthy active life

0:41:36 > 0:41:39classes that take place, that GPs refer people to with heart

0:41:39 > 0:41:43complaint and so on, the actual activities that take

0:41:43 > 0:41:45place in leisure centres are right at the heart of the community.

0:41:45 > 0:41:47The Government does want infrastructure

0:41:47 > 0:41:48investment, doesn't it?

0:41:48 > 0:41:51It needs to put its money where its mouth is, and it is

0:41:51 > 0:41:52obsessed with the austerity agenda.

0:41:52 > 0:41:55I'm sorry, there has just been, and you should know there's been

0:41:55 > 0:41:56a big infrastructure fund.

0:41:56 > 0:41:58People have bid for that, we've bid for that.

0:41:58 > 0:42:02Why is the LGA saying what it is saying?

0:42:02 > 0:42:03What's going to happen?

0:42:03 > 0:42:04Are you going to spend money?

0:42:04 > 0:42:06We are not closing one library.

0:42:06 > 0:42:08We are going to be investing in our libraries for our community,

0:42:08 > 0:42:11and it's a new way of looking at things.

0:42:11 > 0:42:12Why is adult social care being cut?

0:42:12 > 0:42:14I'm sorry, you talking over me.

0:42:14 > 0:42:16We've just got to look at the money we've got,

0:42:16 > 0:42:18the assets we've got and really focus on delivering

0:42:18 > 0:42:20to our residents.

0:42:20 > 0:42:22It's a new challenge, but it's fantastically exciting.

0:42:22 > 0:42:24We can do it working together in partnership.

0:42:24 > 0:42:26But you haven't seen the money, have you?

0:42:26 > 0:42:29Look at the cuts to adult social care and look at what's happening

0:42:29 > 0:42:31to our youth centres and children's services, school

0:42:31 > 0:42:32budgets are being cut.

0:42:32 > 0:42:35Look at what is happening to our children's centres, being closed.

0:42:35 > 0:42:37We are seeing the fabric of our communities being directly

0:42:37 > 0:42:39impacted by these cuts and, I'm sorry, the Government

0:42:39 > 0:42:42is not putting its money where its mouth is.

0:42:42 > 0:42:43Paul would say that.

0:42:43 > 0:42:46We are saying, this is reality, we need to deliver and build

0:42:46 > 0:42:48strong communities.

0:42:48 > 0:42:51We will use our assets and work with partners to deliver

0:42:51 > 0:42:55in a different way but to continue delivering those services.

0:42:55 > 0:42:59Now, the latest of the region's large-scale opportunities for retail

0:42:59 > 0:43:02therapy opened its doors this week.

0:43:02 > 0:43:06The Westgate Centre in Oxford replaces a shopping centre

0:43:06 > 0:43:08dating back to the '70s.

0:43:08 > 0:43:11At 800,000 square feet, it's got space for 100 shops,

0:43:11 > 0:43:1525 restaurants and a cinema - although, on opening day,

0:43:15 > 0:43:19only 62 of the units were actually ready for business.

0:43:19 > 0:43:22It's said the rest will be starting up before Christmas.

0:43:22 > 0:43:25The expectation is that it will pull in 15 million people a year

0:43:25 > 0:43:29and provide 3,500 jobs.

0:43:29 > 0:43:33Maybe ironically, maybe ominously, on Friday, the CBI produced a report

0:43:33 > 0:43:36saying that high-street sales are falling at their fastest

0:43:36 > 0:43:39rate since the height of the recession in 2009,

0:43:39 > 0:43:41so have all these large-scale retail developments

0:43:41 > 0:43:43actually missed the boat?

0:43:43 > 0:43:45I'm joined by retail consultant Keith Slater.

0:43:45 > 0:43:49Westgate, very well received, even though it's taken

0:43:49 > 0:43:51a long time getting there.

0:43:51 > 0:43:55But it's the last of its type, isn't it?

0:43:55 > 0:43:57Online sales, apart from anything else.

0:43:57 > 0:44:01There have been major changes in the way shopping

0:44:01 > 0:44:03malls have developed, right from when you go back

0:44:03 > 0:44:06to the MetroCentre in Newcastle, which was one of the first ones,

0:44:06 > 0:44:08and they were all out of town, whereas the Westgate is actually

0:44:08 > 0:44:10in the centre of Oxford.

0:44:10 > 0:44:13There have been virtually no out-of-town developments over

0:44:13 > 0:44:16the last five to ten years and the only other major mall

0:44:16 > 0:44:18development has been in the centre of Leeds.

0:44:18 > 0:44:20So people have been saying, can we bring people back

0:44:20 > 0:44:24into town and city centres, rather than take them out of them?

0:44:24 > 0:44:28Are we getting a bit dependent on shops to do this work for us?

0:44:28 > 0:44:32Restaurants are part of this, I suppose, but don't we want housing

0:44:32 > 0:44:36to make city centres more than just somewhere to spend money?

0:44:36 > 0:44:40Absolutely, and there are flats alongside the Westgate element.

0:44:40 > 0:44:44And you've got to have shops to pay for it nowadays.

0:44:44 > 0:44:47You do, because the business rates obviously generate

0:44:47 > 0:44:50quite a lot of income, and that goes to the local

0:44:50 > 0:44:53authorities and national government to be able to put back to local

0:44:53 > 0:44:57authorities, so that space can generate a lot for the city.

0:44:57 > 0:44:58Is it zero-sum?

0:44:58 > 0:45:00Is it taking it away from somewhere else?

0:45:00 > 0:45:03Or does a new development like that for Oxford,

0:45:03 > 0:45:06and maybe the tourism that comes in - and has done for Bicester, it's

0:45:06 > 0:45:09done amazing things for Bicester - is it taking it away

0:45:09 > 0:45:10from somewhere else?

0:45:10 > 0:45:12It all depends on the state of retail at the time.

0:45:12 > 0:45:15At this point in time, and the CBI survey is normally

0:45:15 > 0:45:17a little bit volatile, so that's not maybe the best

0:45:17 > 0:45:21indicator, the Office of National Statistics figures

0:45:21 > 0:45:24for September were quite reasonable but, yes,

0:45:24 > 0:45:27a lot of money is going to have to come from somewhere

0:45:27 > 0:45:29else, and is it going to come from Reading,

0:45:29 > 0:45:31Milton Keynes or Bristol?

0:45:31 > 0:45:32Right.

0:45:32 > 0:45:35The CBI survey is sort of one of confidence as well,

0:45:35 > 0:45:39because it is saying to people, 50% of them said it looks

0:45:39 > 0:45:42like things are not so good, compared to 15 saying

0:45:42 > 0:45:43things are improving.

0:45:43 > 0:45:47A lot of the big retailers have been saying that for a long while.

0:45:47 > 0:45:49Next have been saying for a year that it was worried

0:45:49 > 0:45:51about what was going to be happening.

0:45:51 > 0:45:53M&S has not been doing particularly well.

0:45:53 > 0:45:55The supermarkets, and again this is where the Office

0:45:55 > 0:46:00of National Statistics figures are strange, supermarkets and food

0:46:00 > 0:46:05shopping was down in September on the year before by nearly 3%,

0:46:05 > 0:46:07let alone what it was down in volume, whereas high-street

0:46:07 > 0:46:11clothing shopping was up nearly 8%, mainly because the high street

0:46:11 > 0:46:13wasn't discounting quite so much.

0:46:13 > 0:46:15It's all about discounts, isn't it?

0:46:15 > 0:46:18We've talked about local authority budgets, but people's

0:46:18 > 0:46:20personal budgets are under pressure, aren't they?

0:46:20 > 0:46:23They are, and of course the major fall in sterling back after Brexit

0:46:23 > 0:46:27was agreed last year has meant that the prices of our imports -

0:46:27 > 0:46:30a lot of our clothing comes from China -

0:46:30 > 0:46:33have gone up significantly, and that tends to be passed

0:46:33 > 0:46:39to the consumer fairly quickly.

0:46:39 > 0:46:41So, have we got a strong economy or not?

0:46:41 > 0:46:42It's a simple question.

0:46:42 > 0:46:47I know you're going to differ on this as well.

0:46:47 > 0:46:49I think things are incredibly complex.

0:46:49 > 0:46:50Everyone is holding their breath on Brexit.

0:46:51 > 0:46:52Which way is it going to go.

0:46:52 > 0:46:54Are we going to have a deal?

0:46:54 > 0:46:56Is there going to be a positive result?

0:46:56 > 0:46:57So there's uncertainty.

0:46:57 > 0:47:00And the interest rate changes that may well be coming down the line

0:47:00 > 0:47:03will have an impact in so many areas of people's lives.

0:47:03 > 0:47:06OK, but you go to the Westgate and you see people spending money

0:47:06 > 0:47:08and the clamour to get into those shops and the amount

0:47:08 > 0:47:11of money being spent - that's a strong economy.

0:47:11 > 0:47:13And inflation is causing a significant amount of issues

0:47:13 > 0:47:16for people whose wages are just not keeping up with inflation so, yeah,

0:47:16 > 0:47:18people are spending money, and there are many people who aren't

0:47:18 > 0:47:19spending money equally.

0:47:19 > 0:47:21It's not as simple as saying that.

0:47:21 > 0:47:23There are many people out there who genuinely

0:47:23 > 0:47:26are having their household budgets really squeezed by what's going on.

0:47:26 > 0:47:29It isn't rosy for everybody, and we need to understand that.

0:47:29 > 0:47:32You could go to the city centres and see the flashy shops and say

0:47:32 > 0:47:35that everything was wonderful but, as Paul points out, a lot of people

0:47:35 > 0:47:37are less than just about managing.

0:47:37 > 0:47:39I think we've got a certain amount of inflation coming through,

0:47:39 > 0:47:41and we've had deflation for quite a long time.

0:47:41 > 0:47:44We were told it was a blip but it hasn't been.

0:47:44 > 0:47:45But people are going out.

0:47:45 > 0:47:48They are probably being a little more cautious because times are not

0:47:48 > 0:47:51quite so certain as they were, and you see this as a cycle

0:47:51 > 0:47:54with shopping, but you've also got to invest.

0:47:54 > 0:47:56In West Sussex, we are investing in Burgess Hill, a very

0:47:56 > 0:48:00big retail area there, to meet the demand of the 5,000

0:48:00 > 0:48:02houses that are being built.

0:48:02 > 0:48:05Worthing, we are looking at quite exciting plans,

0:48:05 > 0:48:08and I think it's important to have the town centre managers

0:48:08 > 0:48:12there to make sure that towns are vibrant and bring people in,

0:48:12 > 0:48:14because shopping isn't just about shopping any more -

0:48:14 > 0:48:17it's about an experience, it's about eating out,

0:48:17 > 0:48:18about having a coffee.

0:48:18 > 0:48:22And our towns have got to develop to meet that,

0:48:22 > 0:48:24otherwise people will go elsewhere.

0:48:24 > 0:48:26I think that's spot on.

0:48:26 > 0:48:28I think the town centre having investment, seen

0:48:28 > 0:48:31as the centre of the community is really important.

0:48:31 > 0:48:36The danger is - for example, in Basingstoke, we have this threat

0:48:36 > 0:48:37of an out-of-town-centre retail park that's being supported

0:48:38 > 0:48:39by the council.

0:48:39 > 0:48:42It's a couple of miles up the road.

0:48:42 > 0:48:45The potential is it's going to strip £30 million of business

0:48:45 > 0:48:46out of our town centre.

0:48:46 > 0:48:48It's going to kill our town centre.

0:48:48 > 0:48:49We don't want that.

0:48:49 > 0:48:51We want a vibrant, strong town centre, exactly

0:48:51 > 0:48:52as Louise describes, that is generating

0:48:52 > 0:48:53positive economics.

0:48:53 > 0:48:55But if there's a lot of investment in Basingstoke,

0:48:55 > 0:48:58as Keith is saying, not zero-sum, it could bring stuff

0:48:58 > 0:48:59into Basingstoke.

0:48:59 > 0:49:01You would hope it would, but we're being told

0:49:01 > 0:49:03by all the retail experts, they are saying to us, look,

0:49:03 > 0:49:06if you have this happen, this out-of-town retail experience

0:49:06 > 0:49:08is going to draw people out of your town centre.

0:49:08 > 0:49:11What you want is a vibrant, strong town centre that brings

0:49:11 > 0:49:13people in to spend their money in the town centre.

0:49:13 > 0:49:15Has that happened in Oxford, with Bicester?

0:49:15 > 0:49:19It hasn't really happened, is it?

0:49:19 > 0:49:21Bicester has been an amazing success.

0:49:21 > 0:49:22You were telling me best in the world.

0:49:22 > 0:49:24Bicester has the highest sales density of any

0:49:24 > 0:49:26shopping mall in the world.

0:49:26 > 0:49:29Our average high street takes about £4,000 per square metre per year.

0:49:29 > 0:49:31Bicester Village takes £30,000 per square metre per year.

0:49:31 > 0:49:34I couldn't get these two to say, but is the economy strong or not?

0:49:34 > 0:49:35They've got their own opinions.

0:49:35 > 0:49:36What do you think?

0:49:36 > 0:49:39I think retailing is quite strong at the moment,

0:49:39 > 0:49:40but people are worried.

0:49:40 > 0:49:43They want to know what's going to be happening for the future.

0:49:43 > 0:49:45Are we going to see sterling carrying on being at low

0:49:45 > 0:49:48values against the dollar, which is what affects the prices

0:49:48 > 0:49:49of imports from China?

0:49:49 > 0:49:51Are they going to be faced with more increased costs,

0:49:51 > 0:49:54because we had a major business rate revaluation of a lot

0:49:54 > 0:49:55of retail properties.

0:49:55 > 0:49:59It's a very complex way of valuing the business rates

0:49:59 > 0:50:02value for a retail store, and a lot of them

0:50:02 > 0:50:03pay a lot of money.

0:50:03 > 0:50:06The problem is that we then finish up with cloned high

0:50:06 > 0:50:09streets that look the same, whereas what we need for our high

0:50:09 > 0:50:11streets to be vibrant is more of the independent shops.

0:50:11 > 0:50:14In Oxford, hopefully, a big increase in supply

0:50:14 > 0:50:17is going to lead to maybe the colleges, which own a lot

0:50:17 > 0:50:20of the rest of the high street in Oxford, looking at their rents

0:50:20 > 0:50:22and saying, if we can bring down our rents -

0:50:22 > 0:50:25Next and River Island have already moved from Cornmarket Street,

0:50:25 > 0:50:29that property is now empty- can the college that actually owns

0:50:29 > 0:50:32it look at the rent and say, if we bring the rent down,

0:50:32 > 0:50:36can we bring in an independent and make it something different?

0:50:36 > 0:50:39Could be an exciting time, and a lot more tourists.

0:50:39 > 0:50:40That's not such a good thing.

0:50:40 > 0:50:44Sorry, we've run out of time to go further into that, but thank you.

0:50:44 > 0:50:47It does help the economy, and the economy is doing well.

0:50:47 > 0:50:49OK, you say, but you say not.

0:50:49 > 0:50:53I think there's an awful lot of hesitation, isn't there?

0:50:53 > 0:50:55We've seen many instances in recent years of Armed Forces personnel

0:50:55 > 0:51:00being prosecuted for alleged crimes committed in Bosnia, Iraq, even

0:51:00 > 0:51:03Northern Ireland decades previously.

0:51:03 > 0:51:06But, with several of those cases being abandoned amid claims that

0:51:06 > 0:51:10they'd been politically motivated or brought by ambulance-chasing

0:51:10 > 0:51:14lawyers, is it time for some sort of statute of limitations?

0:51:14 > 0:51:17Our Berkshire reporter, Patrick O'Hagan, has this report.

0:51:22 > 0:51:26The brutality of war can leave lifelong scars.

0:51:26 > 0:51:28For some, those scars are physical.

0:51:28 > 0:51:31For others, they are buried deep in the psyche, leading

0:51:31 > 0:51:34to behaviour that most of us far from the battlefield

0:51:34 > 0:51:38would deem appalling.

0:51:38 > 0:51:40Sometimes, that behaviour can trigger court action -

0:51:40 > 0:51:43some of it spurious, some of it genuine.

0:51:43 > 0:51:46Earlier this year, the Government's own £60 million investigation

0:51:46 > 0:51:50into the actions of British troops in Iraq was shut down because of

0:51:51 > 0:51:54ambulance-chasing lawyers.

0:51:54 > 0:51:56I am affronted by those who would use public money,

0:51:56 > 0:52:01vast amounts of it, in creating bogus claims which hound veterans,

0:52:02 > 0:52:05sometimes into old age.

0:52:05 > 0:52:08One genuine case highlights the difficulty of judging

0:52:08 > 0:52:10what's right and wrong.

0:52:10 > 0:52:13Sergeant Blackman was shown shooting an injured Taliban insurgent.

0:52:13 > 0:52:17He was later found guilty of murder but, after a campaign,

0:52:17 > 0:52:21his conviction was reduced to manslaughter, allowing

0:52:21 > 0:52:23him to be released.

0:52:23 > 0:52:24He had suffered horrendous combat stress.

0:52:24 > 0:52:28Cases like this are thankfully rare.

0:52:28 > 0:52:30That shouldn't disguise the fact that, for many returning from war,

0:52:30 > 0:52:34mental health is a huge problem.

0:52:34 > 0:52:39I've served in Bosnia in '97...

0:52:39 > 0:52:41John Riding-Woods had just joined the Royal Logistics Corps

0:52:41 > 0:52:45when he stepped off a plane and into the hell that was Bosnia.

0:52:45 > 0:52:48He was only 17.

0:52:48 > 0:52:51I was there during the elections and the end of the ethnic cleansing.

0:52:51 > 0:52:54Some of the things I saw as a very young and impressionable man

0:52:55 > 0:52:58still live with me today.

0:52:58 > 0:53:01For me, it was not what I'd seen the adults do to each other,

0:53:01 > 0:53:08it's what had been done to children that couldn't defend themselves.

0:53:08 > 0:53:11John left the Army two years ago, when his regiment was disbanded,

0:53:11 > 0:53:16but his PTSD has left him struggling to adapt to life back in Andover.

0:53:16 > 0:53:19He is now being helped by Forces Re-engineered,

0:53:19 > 0:53:23which teaches veterans to repair cars and bikes.

0:53:23 > 0:53:26He's getting his life back together but, like many in the forces,

0:53:26 > 0:53:29he is angry that one day he may be judged by those who have never

0:53:29 > 0:53:32walked in his shoes.

0:53:32 > 0:53:35Various circumstances that you can't even think of or fathom.

0:53:35 > 0:53:39Your mind goes completely.

0:53:39 > 0:53:42These people that are sitting there, deciding that, yes, we're now

0:53:42 > 0:53:45going to take this person to court has had years to sit

0:53:45 > 0:53:49there and rip our decisions apart, that we make in split seconds,

0:53:49 > 0:53:52without being there, without having to be

0:53:52 > 0:53:57in the same situation to us.

0:53:59 > 0:54:02The British Army spent 30 years in Northern Ireland.

0:54:02 > 0:54:04PTSD had barely been heard of when Newbury's MP

0:54:04 > 0:54:08Richard Benyon was stationed there with the Royal Green Jackets.

0:54:08 > 0:54:11He's deeply saddened that soldiers struggling with the stresses

0:54:11 > 0:54:14of what they saw back then are still being

0:54:14 > 0:54:16questioned by lawyers.

0:54:16 > 0:54:20One individual who is in his late 70s was involved in a firefight

0:54:20 > 0:54:24in which a suspected terrorist died, and he has been

0:54:24 > 0:54:26questioned over 20 times.

0:54:26 > 0:54:32He is in poor health and was taken early one morning to Exeter Airport

0:54:32 > 0:54:36and flown to Belfast for questioning under caution.

0:54:36 > 0:54:39You know, this is wrong.

0:54:39 > 0:54:41Here at Combat Stress, they support former servicemen

0:54:41 > 0:54:43and women struggling with mental health.

0:54:43 > 0:54:48Nearly 3,000 Iraq and Afghan veterans rely on them.

0:54:48 > 0:54:50The traumas that people have to come here and actually start

0:54:50 > 0:54:55to unpick and work through, the idea that some of those might

0:54:55 > 0:54:59also actually be exacerbated by perhaps people being pursued

0:54:59 > 0:55:02through the courts, I think, is taking their trauma

0:55:02 > 0:55:06to a whole other level, and it would add significant

0:55:06 > 0:55:12pressure and I think could tip people really over the edge.

0:55:12 > 0:55:14Later this week, Richard Benyon will introduce a bill

0:55:14 > 0:55:17which will tell lawyers they can only bring a case against

0:55:17 > 0:55:21a former soldier within ten years of the offence.

0:55:21 > 0:55:23If some terrorists have been let off, for goodness' sake,

0:55:23 > 0:55:27our Armed Forces should be allowed to live their lives into old age

0:55:27 > 0:55:33feeling appreciated for what they've done, not criminalised.

0:55:33 > 0:55:36I don't want to be waking up one day and finding a letter

0:55:36 > 0:55:38on my doorstep saying, you are now being taken to court

0:55:38 > 0:55:40for things that I've done.

0:55:40 > 0:55:43I would think that I'm being let down by the people that

0:55:43 > 0:55:46were in power and are not in power any more.

0:55:46 > 0:55:49There's got to be something put somewhere to say

0:55:49 > 0:55:52look, enough is enough.

0:55:53 > 0:55:56Paul Harvey, what do you think of Richard Benyon's bill?

0:55:56 > 0:55:59He puts it fairly plainly.

0:55:59 > 0:56:02He says terrorists have been let off - why pursue servicepeople?

0:56:02 > 0:56:04I think he's identified a really important issue,

0:56:04 > 0:56:07which is this whole notion of the vexatious litigation that

0:56:07 > 0:56:10goes on, and I think the Government needs to...

0:56:10 > 0:56:13The statute of limitations debate, I think, is difficult,

0:56:13 > 0:56:17because of the nature of our society and the rule of law and the nature

0:56:17 > 0:56:20of the approach that we take as a liberal democracy,

0:56:20 > 0:56:23and what we expect as a society in that context.

0:56:23 > 0:56:27However, the issue is real and genuine, where you have lawyers

0:56:27 > 0:56:29chasing after our Armed Forces.

0:56:29 > 0:56:32The Government can take action and should take action specifically

0:56:32 > 0:56:35against those that do that, and the way they go about it,

0:56:35 > 0:56:39that kind of legislation I think is very legitimate,

0:56:39 > 0:56:41and that's where the focus should be.

0:56:41 > 0:56:44Lawyers always get it in the neck.

0:56:44 > 0:56:45I've heard people...

0:56:45 > 0:56:48Some of their practices are quite disgraceful in this respect.

0:56:48 > 0:56:50Right, and that is being dealt with.

0:56:50 > 0:56:55But I have heard also people who served in the forces saying,

0:56:55 > 0:56:58we work as hard as we can to maintain the highest

0:56:58 > 0:56:59possible standards...

0:56:59 > 0:57:00Exactly.

0:57:00 > 0:57:03And everybody has to be held to account in that

0:57:03 > 0:57:04situation, don't they?

0:57:04 > 0:57:07And that's absolutely important, because we have one of the most

0:57:07 > 0:57:08professional Armed Forces in the world.

0:57:08 > 0:57:11We put our Armed Forces into incredible situations

0:57:11 > 0:57:15when we ask them to go and do war and do conflict and take

0:57:15 > 0:57:18part in international operations around the world,

0:57:18 > 0:57:22and we have a responsibility to them that the leadership they have

0:57:22 > 0:57:25is the best it can be, that the quality of the equipment

0:57:25 > 0:57:28they have is the best it can be, the rules of engagement,

0:57:28 > 0:57:31the objectives, that what we ask of them is right

0:57:31 > 0:57:33and they are equipped to do the job in every possible way

0:57:33 > 0:57:34we can give them.

0:57:34 > 0:57:37When they come home, we look after them, we support them,

0:57:37 > 0:57:39their families, too.

0:57:39 > 0:57:41If they've done something wrong, we let them off

0:57:41 > 0:57:42if it's gone too long?

0:57:42 > 0:57:44The rule of law applies.

0:57:44 > 0:57:45The rule of law is important in this.

0:57:45 > 0:57:49When we go out into the world stage, we go out there taking the values

0:57:49 > 0:57:53that are important to us with us - the rule of law, all of those

0:57:53 > 0:57:56elements in terms of the rules of engagement that we have

0:57:56 > 0:57:57as an Armed Forces operating on an international

0:57:58 > 0:57:59stage, if you like.

0:57:59 > 0:58:02The quality that we display in that environment is important,

0:58:02 > 0:58:06but we cannot also take away from what we are asking them to do.

0:58:06 > 0:58:09War is dangerous, it is complex, there are split-second,

0:58:09 > 0:58:12instant decisions that they take.

0:58:12 > 0:58:15They are in danger, their lives are in danger in many cases and,

0:58:15 > 0:58:19in those circumstances, they need the back-up that they have

0:58:19 > 0:58:21from the Government, their own military leadership

0:58:21 > 0:58:25and as a society, when we ask them to do that on our behalf.

0:58:25 > 0:58:28Louise, it's fair to say that those of us who haven't

0:58:29 > 0:58:30been there have no idea.

0:58:30 > 0:58:35You and I have no idea, if you've been 24 hours

0:58:35 > 0:58:40in a battlefield fighting, the impact that that has,

0:58:40 > 0:58:42not only today but tomorrow.

0:58:42 > 0:58:46And we owe a huge amount to all our servicepeople.

0:58:46 > 0:58:49I think we've got the best forces in the world.

0:58:49 > 0:58:53And I think that they are well lead.

0:58:53 > 0:58:55And we owe them a huge debt.

0:58:55 > 0:59:00It's not just about the serving men and women, it's about the families

0:59:00 > 0:59:02that go behind them because, without those families and that

0:59:02 > 0:59:05back-up, they are nothing.

0:59:05 > 0:59:08But somebody will go out of their front door

0:59:08 > 0:59:09on Friday afternoon, say goodbye, particularly

0:59:09 > 0:59:12with the Iraq war, and nobody could actually be sure if they're

0:59:12 > 0:59:15going to come back, if they're going to come back

0:59:15 > 0:59:16seriously injured or what.

0:59:16 > 0:59:20We are asking people to live with that, to serve and care

0:59:20 > 0:59:26for us and protect us, and as I say we all have a huge duty

0:59:26 > 0:59:28of care to make sure that they are supported

0:59:28 > 0:59:32and respected, not only when there are battles but every day.

0:59:32 > 0:59:36We would not be sitting here without all of those people

0:59:37 > 0:59:38that gave up their lives.

0:59:38 > 0:59:43We are still in the centenary period for that terrible war of wars.

0:59:43 > 0:59:45We've had several more.

0:59:45 > 0:59:48But the freedoms we have here are thanks to the men and women

0:59:48 > 0:59:51who have served this country.

0:59:51 > 0:59:52We shall leave it there with our poppies.

0:59:52 > 0:59:54Very well said.

0:59:54 > 0:59:56So now our regular round-up of the political week

0:59:56 > 0:59:59in the south in 60 seconds, and it's all about people

0:59:59 > 1:00:01changing their minds.

1:00:10 > 1:00:12Expanding Gatwick is back on the Government's agenda.

1:00:12 > 1:00:15Starting another consultation on Heathrow's third runway,

1:00:15 > 1:00:19the Department for Transport said new research has made them look

1:00:19 > 1:00:22at the southern option again.

1:00:22 > 1:00:24Second thoughts, too, important, as former Conservative MP

1:00:24 > 1:00:28Flick Drummond quit her job as Hampshire deputy police and crime

1:00:28 > 1:00:31commissioner after just a month.

1:00:31 > 1:00:33In a joint statement with commissioner Michael Lane,

1:00:33 > 1:00:38she said they'd failed to build a close professional relationship.

1:00:38 > 1:00:41A complete change of heart on the Isle of Wight over gay pride.

1:00:41 > 1:00:44Previous MP Andrew Turner was forced to resign after telling school

1:00:44 > 1:00:46pupils he wouldn't go.

1:00:46 > 1:00:50New MP Bob Seely welcomed the island's choice for next

1:00:50 > 1:00:52year's national event.

1:00:52 > 1:00:55I really want this event now to be in our diary permanently.

1:00:55 > 1:00:57Simon House, a shelter for rough sleepers in Oxford,

1:00:57 > 1:01:01due to close next year in county council cuts, will now be kept open

1:01:01 > 1:01:03by the city council.

1:01:03 > 1:01:07They are spending £1.5 million, including a new centre in Cowley,

1:01:07 > 1:01:13to provide 37 beds.

1:01:14 > 1:01:17Louise, do you think the Government is changing its mind on Heathrow?

1:01:17 > 1:01:19I think they are just having a further review of this,

1:01:19 > 1:01:21and this is just more...

1:01:21 > 1:01:22Another consultation?

1:01:22 > 1:01:25The process we're going to have to go through.

1:01:25 > 1:01:27Right, but we need the runway, maybe, somewhere.

1:01:27 > 1:01:29What do you think?

1:01:29 > 1:01:31Have you had that feeling of, here we go again?

1:01:31 > 1:01:32It's that round and round.

1:01:32 > 1:01:36Will somebody make a decision that everybody could get on with?

1:01:36 > 1:01:39Would you build it, if you had to take the flak for it?

1:01:39 > 1:01:42If you live there, of course, you would oppose it

1:01:42 > 1:01:44because of the impact it would have on your life.

1:01:44 > 1:01:47If your business depended on it, of course you'd want the runway.

1:01:47 > 1:01:49There are so many competing interests in all of this.

1:01:49 > 1:01:50So Heathrow, third runway, yes?

1:01:50 > 1:01:51Yes, we need it.

1:01:51 > 1:01:53Rather than Gatwick.

1:01:53 > 1:01:55Well, the truth of the matter is everybody loves going on holiday,

1:01:55 > 1:01:58they like going on a plane, they like travelling,

1:01:58 > 1:02:00and there is a growing demand, as we know.

1:02:00 > 1:02:01Economically, we can't do without it.

1:02:01 > 1:02:04Thank you, both of you, for joining us on the programme this week.

1:02:04 > 1:02:08Next week, our guests will be the MP for Portsmouth North,

1:02:08 > 1:02:10Penny Morduant, and, for Labour, Tony Page from Reading.

1:02:11 > 1:02:13For now, back to Sarah.

1:02:16 > 1:02:25With that, it's back to Sarah.

1:02:25 > 1:02:27Now, the much anticipated EU Withdrawal Bill,

1:02:27 > 1:02:31which will transfer EU law into UK law in preparation for Brexit,

1:02:31 > 1:02:35is expected to be debated by MPs later next month.

1:02:35 > 1:02:38Critics have called it a "power grab" as it introduces so-called

1:02:38 > 1:02:41Henry VIII powers for Whitehall to amend some laws without

1:02:41 > 1:02:45consulting parliament, and it faces fierce resistance

1:02:45 > 1:02:48from opposition parties as well as many on the government's

1:02:48 > 1:02:53own backbenches, with 300 amendments and 54 new clauses tabled on it.

1:02:53 > 1:02:57We're joined now by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry who has been a strong

1:02:57 > 1:03:01critic of the legislation.

1:03:01 > 1:03:06Thank you very much for joining us. Before we talk about the withdrawal

1:03:06 > 1:03:10bill, I would like to bring up with you that the Prime Minister has just

1:03:10 > 1:03:14sent a letter to the Commons Speaker John Bercow asking for an

1:03:14 > 1:03:19independent body to be established to investigate claims of sexual

1:03:19 > 1:03:23harassment in Parliament. What are your thoughts on that?A very good

1:03:23 > 1:03:28idea, sounds like a great deal of common sense. I had already this

1:03:28 > 1:03:31morning sent a request to the speaker asking for an urgent

1:03:31 > 1:03:35statement from the Leader of the House as to what could now be done

1:03:35 > 1:03:41to make sure that any complaints actually against anybody working in

1:03:41 > 1:03:44Parliament, to extend the protections that workers throughout

1:03:44 > 1:03:48the rest of businesses and in other workplaces have, they should now be

1:03:48 > 1:03:52extended into Parliament and asking for an urgent statement from the

1:03:52 > 1:03:57leader. Clearly the PM is well onto this and it is a good idea. We have

1:03:57 > 1:04:01to make sure everybody who works in Parliament enjoys exactly the same

1:04:01 > 1:04:06protections as other workers, so I welcome this.This should maybe have

1:04:06 > 1:04:11happened a long time ago. We hear stories of harassment that has been

1:04:11 > 1:04:14going on for decades, but until now it has been difficult to work out

1:04:14 > 1:04:20who you could complain to about it. It is my understanding that my Chief

1:04:20 > 1:04:24Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip, and Milton, shared that view

1:04:24 > 1:04:29and have shared that view for some time but found it difficult to get

1:04:29 > 1:04:33all the agreement necessary. Anyway, we are where we are and we are

1:04:33 > 1:04:45making that progress, but

1:04:45 > 1:04:48my Chief Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip wanted this done

1:04:48 > 1:04:50some time ago.That is an interesting point. Let's move on to

1:04:50 > 1:04:52the much anticipated EU withdrawal bill which will finally be debated.

1:04:52 > 1:04:55You have put your name to an amendment which is calling for a

1:04:55 > 1:04:58vote on the final agreement in essence, do you really believe that

1:04:58 > 1:05:02that will be a meaningful both offered to the Commons?Yes, if you

1:05:02 > 1:05:07look at the terms of the amendment, it would deliver exactly that. It

1:05:07 > 1:05:12would give members of Parliament the opportunity to debated and voted on

1:05:12 > 1:05:16it. It would be an effective piece of legislation and would go through

1:05:16 > 1:05:21both houses and should be done. One of the problems with this process is

1:05:21 > 1:05:25that Parliament has been excluded from the sort of debate and

1:05:25 > 1:05:30decisions that would have enabled the government to move forward in

1:05:30 > 1:05:40progress and form a consensus so we get the very best Brexit deal.We

1:05:40 > 1:05:43have been excluded, that has been wrong in my view, but by the end we

1:05:43 > 1:05:45should not be excluded. The government have made it clear that

1:05:45 > 1:05:48whilst there may well be a boat if you win on this amendment, it will

1:05:48 > 1:05:53be a take it or leave it vote. This is a deal you should accept, or

1:05:53 > 1:06:00there will be no deal.If you look at the amendment we put forward

1:06:00 > 1:06:03there will be other alternatives. This is all hypothetical because we

1:06:03 > 1:06:07want a good deal and it is difficult to see that the government would not

1:06:07 > 1:06:13bring a good deal to the House in any event. But this is hypothetical,

1:06:13 > 1:06:18it would mean Parliament would say to government, go back and seek an

1:06:18 > 1:06:24extension as we know it is there in Article 50. It is perfectly possible

1:06:24 > 1:06:28with the agreement of the other members of the EU to seek an

1:06:28 > 1:06:32extension so we continue the negotiations and we get a deal that

1:06:32 > 1:06:36is good for our country. It keeps all options open and that is the

1:06:36 > 1:06:41most important thing.How many Conservative MPs really would take

1:06:41 > 1:06:46that option in those circumstances? It is only if you get enough votes

1:06:46 > 1:06:49that you would be able to ask the government to go back and

1:06:49 > 1:06:59re-negotiate.

1:07:02 > 1:07:06Have you for that?For give me, but you are jumping way down the line. I

1:07:06 > 1:07:08am talking about an amendment that keeps the options open. I am not

1:07:08 > 1:07:11speculating as to what would happen, I am not going there, it is far too

1:07:11 > 1:07:15speculative. Let's get this bill in good shape. The principle of this

1:07:15 > 1:07:20bill is right and we need to put into British domestic law existing

1:07:20 > 1:07:25EU laws and regulations into our substantive law. We all agree that

1:07:25 > 1:07:31must happen. It is the means by which we do it that causes problems

1:07:31 > 1:07:37and we have this argument and debate about what we call the endgame.I am

1:07:37 > 1:07:40sure we will talk about this many more times before we get to that

1:07:40 > 1:07:46vote. I will turn to our panel of political experts. Listening to the

1:07:46 > 1:07:52tone of what the remainders are trying to achieve with the EU

1:07:52 > 1:07:57withdrawal bill, will be achieved? You can hear that tussled there,

1:07:57 > 1:08:02they want the maximum space and room for Parliament to have a say. But

1:08:02 > 1:08:08they have to be careful. The reason is that clock is ticking and if you

1:08:08 > 1:08:14have a situation which may seem to be more interested in finding

1:08:14 > 1:08:18different things to object to and saying no to, it is not getting a

1:08:18 > 1:08:22good deal and it does not look good for the remainders in this argument

1:08:22 > 1:08:27and they will have to come through with their proposals. I do not mind

1:08:27 > 1:08:30Parliament saying it should have a big say, but what do you do if

1:08:30 > 1:08:36Parliament says this is not good enough? The government must simply

1:08:36 > 1:08:42say, I am sorry we have run out of time. The 27 will say they cannot be

1:08:42 > 1:08:46bothered to have another round either. They have to be strong, but

1:08:46 > 1:08:50realistic about what their role in this is.Do you think the people

1:08:50 > 1:08:55putting this amendment who say they want a binding vote in parliament

1:08:55 > 1:08:59are doing it because they think Parliament should have a say or

1:08:59 > 1:09:04because they want to obstruct it? They do not think people should have

1:09:04 > 1:09:08a say in the first place, they think people got it wrong, so they need

1:09:08 > 1:09:16more clever people than the voters to have final say.Or they believed

1:09:16 > 1:09:19taking back control means Parliament should have the final say.

1:09:19 > 1:09:22Parliament said they would like to give that decision back to the

1:09:22 > 1:09:28people. This is the issue. It seems to me that people like Anna Soubry

1:09:28 > 1:09:32are trying to delay of the transition period a bit longer.

1:09:32 > 1:09:37These negotiations will take as long as they have got. The EU will take

1:09:37 > 1:09:45it to the wire and if we do not get a decent deal, and one of the

1:09:45 > 1:09:48reasons is the level of incompetence on this government's part I have to

1:09:48 > 1:09:53say and the other one will be the people who want to remain

1:09:53 > 1:09:59undermining them. They undermined the government at every single stage

1:09:59 > 1:10:03and they undermine Britain's interests.It is the timing of all

1:10:03 > 1:10:06of this that is crucial and whether the government can get a deal in

1:10:06 > 1:10:12time.There will be a meaningful vote, whether it is an shined in

1:10:12 > 1:10:17legislation or not, there cannot be an historic development as big as

1:10:17 > 1:10:22this without Parliament having a meaningful vote. I meaningful,

1:10:22 > 1:10:27having the power to either stop it or endorse it. You cannot have a

1:10:27 > 1:10:30government doing something like this with no vote in the House of

1:10:30 > 1:10:37commons. When you say it will go to the last minute I completely agree,

1:10:37 > 1:10:42but last-minute in reality means next summer. It has got to get

1:10:42 > 1:10:45through the European Parliament and the Westminster Parliament and quite

1:10:45 > 1:10:52a few others as well.The trouble with invoking Parliament is if it is

1:10:52 > 1:10:57driven solely by remain, I would love to say what people in the

1:10:57 > 1:11:04league side think. I disagree with Julia, I do not think you could say

1:11:04 > 1:11:08people had their say and the terms with which we leave are left open

1:11:08 > 1:11:12and only the government should have a say in it, Parliament clearly

1:11:12 > 1:11:20should have a say in it.Do we want a good deal or not?It does not mean

1:11:20 > 1:11:26anything if you do not do it by next summer I suggest.Does that leave

1:11:26 > 1:11:30Parliament any room for changing the deal or is it simply take it or

1:11:30 > 1:11:35leave it?It will have to have that rule because it cannot simply be

1:11:35 > 1:11:38another of these binary votes were you accept the deal or no Deal.

1:11:38 > 1:11:45There has to be some space.How can a few MPs in the House of Commons

1:11:45 > 1:11:50change a deal that has been agreed by the member states?Because of the

1:11:50 > 1:11:55sequence, a huge if by the way, if they vote down the deal that the

1:11:55 > 1:11:59government has negotiated, the government will have to re-negotiate

1:11:59 > 1:12:03or there will have to be an election. This will be a moment of

1:12:03 > 1:12:05huge crisis, our government not getting through its much topped

1:12:05 > 1:12:15about...It is a mini Catalonia.I think it would be as big as

1:12:15 > 1:12:18Catalonia, but with the implication that there would have to be a

1:12:18 > 1:12:21practical change in the deal because if Parliament has not supported

1:12:21 > 1:12:27it...It is a remain fantasy that this deal can be put off and off

1:12:27 > 1:12:31until they get something that is as close to remaining as they can

1:12:31 > 1:12:36possibly get. I am very much for trying to get the best and avoiding

1:12:36 > 1:12:43the worst, but there is an unreality to that position if you keep trying

1:12:43 > 1:12:49to do it again and again, at some point people will want clarity.I

1:12:49 > 1:12:54labour putting forward a realistic proposition?I thought Hilary Benn

1:12:54 > 1:12:59was very realistic this morning, I wish he was more in the driving seat

1:12:59 > 1:13:04of Labour policy. He made clear where he disagreed and he made clear

1:13:04 > 1:13:07where he thought the negotiations had gone off track or were bogged

1:13:07 > 1:13:15down. I worry a bit about the Labour position being incoherent, but that

1:13:15 > 1:13:19is kept that way by the present leadership because as far as they

1:13:19 > 1:13:23are concerned the government is suffering enough, why should they

1:13:23 > 1:13:28have a position? Hilary Benn said we needed to have clarity about the

1:13:28 > 1:13:32timetable. It is like reading an insurance contract and finding the

1:13:32 > 1:13:35bit where you might get away with it. That is not a policy.

1:13:35 > 1:13:38That is not a policy.

1:13:38 > 1:13:39That's all for today.

1:13:39 > 1:13:41Join me again next Sunday at 11 here on BBC One.

1:13:41 > 1:13:46Until then, bye bye.