29/10/2017

0:00:36 > 0:00:38Morning, everyone.

0:00:38 > 0:00:40I'm Sarah Smith, and welcome to The Sunday Politics,

0:00:40 > 0:00:43where we always bring you everything you need to know to understand

0:00:43 > 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 > 0:00:57towards a female staff member.

0:00:57 > 0:01:03We'll have the latest.

0:01:03 > 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 > 0:01:23Parliament play ball? New evidence cast out on the economic

0:01:23 > 0:01:23And cast out on the economic

0:01:23 > 0:01:24And in cast out on the economic

0:01:24 > 0:01:24And in the cast out on the economic

0:01:24 > 0:01:24And in the Midlands... cast out on the economic

0:01:24 > 0:01:24And in the Midlands... We cast out on the economic

0:01:24 > 0:01:25And in the Midlands... We will cast out on the economic

0:01:25 > 0:01:25And in the Midlands... We will have cast out on the economic

0:01:25 > 0:01:26And in the Midlands... We will have the results of our own Brexit

0:01:26 > 0:01:29survey. Positive or negative?

0:01:29 > 0:01:31on from the abortion act white MPs are lobbying the Home Secretary to

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

0:01:37 > 0:01:40All that coming up in the programme.

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

0:01:43 > 0:01:47Julia 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 > 0:01:54the Ministerial Code following allegations

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

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

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

0:02:04 > 0:02:07News 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 > 0:02:12The stories, if they are true, are totally unacceptable

0:02:12 > 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 > 0:02:33the Speaker of the House of Commons, to ask for his advice as to how

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

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

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

0:02:48 > 0:02:52allegations quite seriously.What has changed in this story is they

0:02:52 > 0:02:56used to be a bit of delay while people work out what they should say

0:02:56 > 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 > 0:03:09the worry of whether the facts are disputed, but what they want to be

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

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

0:03:19 > 0:03:24does not deny these stories, which is that he asked an employee to buy

0:03:24 > 0:03:28sex toys, but he said it was just high jinks and it was taken out of

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

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

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

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

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

0:03:55 > 0:04:00means there is this Cabinet Office investigation. You pointed out to us

0:04:00 > 0:04:03before the programme that he was not a minister before this happened. It

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

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

0:04:12 > 0:04:17armed with that bit of information and that Theresa May will ask John

0:04:17 > 0:04:20Bercow the speaker to look into the whole culture of Parliament in this

0:04:20 > 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 > 0:04:35always mean the right thing gets done?Absolutely not. We are in

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

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

0:04:44 > 0:04:50film. 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 > 0:05:10you have the mixing of work and social so intertwined and you throw

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

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

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

0:05:25 > 0:05:30well 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 > 0:05:44People think MPs are employees of the party or the Commons, they are

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

0:05:48 > 0:05:54researcher?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 > 0:06:12quite sure who to go to. If you work worried that it might impede your

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

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

0:06:21 > 0:06:26go to. Where Theresa May might be making a mistake, it is the same

0:06:26 > 0:06:29mistake when it was decided to investigate through Levinson the

0:06:29 > 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 > 0:06:49are not trying to blame individuals, or it say they need a better line on

0:06:49 > 0:06:54reporting of sexual harassment, which I support, the Commons is a

0:06:54 > 0:06:57funny place and it is a rough old trade and you are never going to

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

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

0:07:06 > 0:07:10When 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 > 0:07:35attracted to them. We have seen the issues and we have seen one of our

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

0:07:41 > 0:07:46That 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 > 0:08:30greater scrutiny of all candidates and tweets will have to be looked at

0:08:30 > 0:08:37and all the rest of it.Selecting candidates is interesting. Miriam

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

0:08:41 > 0:08:45about Jarrod O'Mara and the Lib Dems knew about it, so it is difficult to

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

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

0:08:56 > 0:09:03and 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 > 0:09:10extraordinaire, with totally inappropriate behaviour on a regular

0:09:10 > 0:09:15basis. There are things you are not allowed to say if you are feminists.

0:09:15 > 0:09:19Young women are really attracted to powerful men. I was busted for the

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

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

0:09:30 > 0:09:37need 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 > 0:09:43tonne of bricks. It is not just because there are more women in the

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

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

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

0:09:53 > 0:09:56of 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 > 0:10:01a vote on the Brexit deal until after March 2019 -

0:10:01 > 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 > 0:10:10And which point do you envisage Parliament having a vote?

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

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

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

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

0:10:24 > 0:10:25The...

0:10:25 > 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 > 0:10:37The thing to member...

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

0:10:39 > 0:10:42Well, it can't come before we have the deal.

0:10:42 > 0:10:44You said that it is POSSIBLE that Parliament night not vote

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

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

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

0:10:51 > 0:10:54In 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 > 0:11:02already taken place?

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

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

0:11:09 > 0:11:13the 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 > 0:11:31in time for this Parliament to have a vote that we committed to.

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

0:11:34 > 0:11:37in 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 > 0:11:52agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim as well.

0:11:52 > 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 > 0:12:00which David Davis was giving evidence to.

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

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

0:12:12 > 0:12:15European 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 > 0:12:47Steve Baker, also a minister in the department, told our committee that

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

0:12:50 > 0:12:55arrangements that it is seeking, it will need separate legislation. I

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

0:12:59 > 0:13:03to do that, why don't you have a separate bill to implement the

0:13:03 > 0:13:06withdrawal agreement rather than seeking to use the powers the

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

0:13:11 > 0:13:14to the timing, you have said you do not think it is possible to

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

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

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

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

0:13:33 > 0:13:47which would be disastrous for the economy and the country, if

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

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

0:13:57 > 0:14:00government 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 > 0:14:04negotiate a new trade and market access arrangement, and new

0:14:04 > 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 > 0:14:18be outside the EU at that point, so how meaningful can vote be where you

0:14:18 > 0:14:24take it or leave it if we have already left the EU? Surely this has

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

0:14:30 > 0:14:34it 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 > 0:15:20have said it is a take it or leave it option and it is the Noel Edmonds

0:15:20 > 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 > 0:15:37If it is a separate piece of legislation, when Parliament has a

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

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

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

0:15:51 > 0:15:57here's some fresh instructions, go back in and...It seems to me what

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

0:16:01 > 0:16:05possible tariffs, whilst able to control migration. If they've got to

0:16:05 > 0:16:10get 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 > 0:16:27deciding that it wants to leave the customs union. If you want to help

0:16:27 > 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 > 0:16:44Party is simply saying in the House of Commons, we want a better deal

0:16:44 > 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 > 0:17:09for the duration of the transition, and I think that is the position,

0:17:09 > 0:17:14has now reached. It has not been helped by differences of view within

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

0:17:18 > 0:17:23and we have not even got on to the negotiations. -- there's very little

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

0:17:29 > 0:17:34and 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 > 0:17:56But you say no deal would be catastrophic if so it seems to me

0:17:56 > 0:18:00you're unlikely to get the deal that you could vote for but you don't

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

0:18:05 > 0:18:10Businesses have sent a letter to the Prime Minister saying that a

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

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

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

0:18:19 > 0:18:24the 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 > 0:18:31concerned, that should leave all options on the table, because it is

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

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

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

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

0:18:50 > 0:18:51you would have significantly weakened their negotiating hand

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

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

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

0:19:03 > 0:19:08negotiating. We still don't know what kind of long-term trade and

0:19:08 > 0:19:14market access deal, wants. The Prime Minister says, I don't want a deal

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

0:19:18 > 0:19:23we still don't know what kind of deal they want. With about 12 months

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

0:19:27 > 0:19:32for 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 > 0:19:40the negotiations, you see other leaders saying, we don't actually

0:19:40 > 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 > 0:19:53famous speech in Syria about the international brigades in Spain, and

0:19:53 > 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 > 0:20:26am not clear what the declaration of independence actually means. Are

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

0:20:30 > 0:20:34to be some agreement. Catalonia has already had a high degree of

0:20:34 > 0:20:38autonomy. It may like some more, and it seems to me if you look at the

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

0:20:43 > 0:20:47a 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 > 0:20:57consultation on plans for a third runway at Heathrow.

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

0:20:59 > 0:21:02is still the preferred option, new data raises further questions

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

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

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

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

0:21:09 > 0:21:12still have the votes to get the plans off the ground?

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

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

0:21:27 > 0:21:29going 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 > 0:21:36Then, after spending millions of pounds, finally, in 2015,

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

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

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

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

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

0:21:54 > 0:21:59arithmetic looks a little bit up in the air.

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

0:22:02 > 0:22:05and 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 > 0:22:21More and more people want to fly.

0:22:21 > 0:22:25And after the referendum, connectivity post-Brexit

0:22:25 > 0:22:28is going to be absolutely critical to the UK economy, so if anything,

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

0:22:34 > 0:22:37A vote on expansion had been due to take place this summer.

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

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

0:22:42 > 0:22:47the public consultation.

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

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

0:22:56 > 0:22:59And in any case, the Government says, action must be taken,

0:22:59 > 0:23:03as all five of London's airports will be completely

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

0:23:07 > 0:23:10Still, the new research does cast an alternative expansion at Gatwick

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

0:23:14 > 0:23:21is now less likely to meet its environmental targets.

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

0:23:26 > 0:23:29We'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 > 0:23:36are beginning to think perhaps it's not such a great idea

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

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

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

0:23:43 > 0:23:46The Labour Party quite rightly set four key tests

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

0:23:49 > 0:23:51And in my view, Heathrow is not able...

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

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

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

0:24:01 > 0:24:07And 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 > 0:24:12protest this week, you will see some familiar faces.

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

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

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

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

0:24:20 > 0:24:23I don't think it's going to happen, I just don't think

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

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

0:24:27 > 0:24:29we say, not supportive, what about the other side?

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

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

0:24:34 > 0:24:36used and I think it's right.

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

0:24:38 > 0:24:40the 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 > 0:24:45you that there are people right the way through the party,

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

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

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

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

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

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

0:24:59 > 0:25:03There is a majority of members of Parliament that support Heathrow

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

0:25:06 > 0:25:08I 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 > 0:25:12For both sides, yet more time to argue about weather

0:25:12 > 0:25:20the plans should take off or be permanently grounded.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

0:25:52 > 0:25:56build one at Gatwick in half the time, for half the cost and with a

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

0:26:00 > 0:26:04though? 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 > 0:26:10want to put it. It would take much longer to get the private finance

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

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

0:26:20 > 0:26:29is 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 > 0:26:48Every slot is practically full. Every time a new one comes up, it is

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

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

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

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

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

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

0:27:17 > 0:27:21that science has demonstrated that technology will deliver those

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

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

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

0:27:33 > 0:27:35collectivity in Britain post-Brexit. We know that business has been

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

0:28:03 > 0:28:07means another lost decade for airport expansion. Because the

0:28:07 > 0:28:12problems with Heathrow expansion are so serious, I believe that's one of

0:28:12 > 0:28:16the reasons why I advocated, anyone who wants a new runway in the

0:28:16 > 0:28:19south-east should be backing Gatwick is a much more deliverable option.

0:28:19 > 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 > 0:28:31important do you think that is?Of course the Commons will vote on

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

0:28:37 > 0:28:41also 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 > 0:28:50it? Hilary Benn seemed to think that the Commons would be able to shape

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

0:28:54 > 0:29:00or 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 > 0:29:19be that we left the European Union without any kind of deal, because

0:29:19 > 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 > 0:29:33legal advice saying that Yukon stopped the clock on Article 50.

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

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

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

0:29:49 > 0:29:55that 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 > 0:30:08about frustrating the process. I think that would be wrong. I think

0:30:08 > 0:30:12we should respect the result of the referendum.Will it be by next

0:30:12 > 0:30:14summer, so there is time for Parliament and for other

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

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

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

0:30:26 > 0:30:31where I think Hilary Benn has a point, if we do secure agreement on

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

0:30:34 > 0:30:39work 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 > 0:30:57That is interesting because a lot of Brexiteers what the deal to be done

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

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

0:31:10 > 0:31:14party 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 > 0:31:28House of commons and Theresa May will write to the Speaker of the

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

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

0:31:36 > 0:31:42A better procedure is needed. It is sad it has taken this controversy to

0:31:42 > 0:31:46push this forward. But there is a problem with MPs who are individual

0:31:46 > 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 > 0:32:03those complaints are properly dealt with I think would be very helpful,

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

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

0:32:12 > 0:32:18I have not been subjected to it or seen evidence of it, but obviously

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

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

0:32:26 > 0:32:27investigated.Thank you for talking to us.

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

0:32:29 > 0:32:32Next week the Lord Speaker's committee publishes its final report

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

0:32:34 > 0:32:37With 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 > 0:32:45time-limited to 15 years and that in the future political peerage

0:32:45 > 0:32:50appointments will also be tied to a party's election performance.

0:32:50 > 0:32:52The government has been under pressure to take action to cut

0:32:52 > 0:32:56members of the unelected chamber, where they are entitled

0:32:56 > 0:32:59to claim an attendance allowance of £300 a day.

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

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

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

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

0:33:12 > 0:33:14One of the Lords to be criticised was Digby Jones,

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

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

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

0:33:24 > 0:33:28Yet he has claimed around £15,000 in this period.

0:33:28 > 0:33:30When asked what he does in the House he said,

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

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

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

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

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

0:33:45 > 0:33:49Thank you very much for talking to us. You provide value for money in

0:33:49 > 0:33:57the House of Lords do you think? Definitely. I am, by the way, very

0:33:57 > 0:34:01keen on reform. I want to see that 15 year tide. I would like to see a

0:34:01 > 0:34:07time limit, an age limit of 75 or 80. I would like attendants

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

0:34:11 > 0:34:18paying 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 > 0:34:34because we will talk about the reform of the Lords in general, but

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

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

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

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

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

0:35:07 > 0:35:11to be around when the vote is called and you do not know when the book is

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

0:35:15 > 0:35:21part of being a member of the House of Lords and what it means. If you

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

0:35:25 > 0:35:30be 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 > 0:35:43speaking to an empty chamber, or indeed hanging on sometimes for

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

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

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

0:35:56 > 0:36:00ministers about big business issues or educational issues, and at the

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

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

0:36:09 > 0:36:12legs, although I do go in and sit there and learn and listen to

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

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

0:36:23 > 0:36:27after I have listened and I am leaving and if I have not heard the

0:36:27 > 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 > 0:36:44legislature, surpassing that law is essential, is it not?Do you really

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

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

0:36:54 > 0:36:59know which lobby, the whips tell him, they have not heard the debate

0:36:59 > 0:37:03and they do not know what they are voting on and they go and do it?

0:37:03 > 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 > 0:37:21who are not voting and who are not taking part in debate should no

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

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

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

0:37:36 > 0:37:42wish. I agree attendance might mean unless you speak, you are going.

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

0:37:47 > 0:37:53and 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 > 0:38:07about hereditary peers. You would like to reduce the House to what

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

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

0:38:18 > 0:38:26remain 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 > 0:38:34respect in the whole of the country because there are too many and all

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

0:38:38 > 0:38:44money 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 > 0:39:11business minister and Conservative MP Anna Soubry about the Brexit

0:39:11 > 0:39:13negotiations and claims of sexual harassment in Parliament.

0:39:23 > 0:39:27Hello, welcome to the Sunday Politics in the Midlands.

0:39:27 > 0:39:29From the heartlands of British industry, we have the results

0:39:29 > 0:39:30of our own Brexit survey.

0:39:30 > 0:39:33Positive or negative - which camp are our local

0:39:33 > 0:39:37business leaders in?

0:39:37 > 0:39:40We've asked nearly 700 of them as the clock ticks

0:39:40 > 0:39:46down towards Brexit day.

0:39:46 > 0:39:50It's political uncertanty they hate the most, so I'll be talking to two

0:39:50 > 0:39:53of the politicians at the sharp end of all this - Khalid Mahmood,

0:39:53 > 0:39:55Labour MP for Birmingham Perry Barr and Shadow Minister for Europe.

0:39:55 > 0:39:58And Mark Garnier, Conservative MP for Wyre Forest, the globe-trotting

0:39:58 > 0:40:02International Trade Minister who's drumming up business for Britain

0:40:02 > 0:40:06around the soon-to-be post-Brexit World.

0:40:06 > 0:40:09Good to have you both with us today.

0:40:09 > 0:40:12But we begin with a call for a Government whip to resign

0:40:12 > 0:40:14or be sacked for writing a letter condemned by university

0:40:14 > 0:40:17leaders as "McCarthyism".

0:40:17 > 0:40:20Vice chancellors, including the head of Worcester University, received

0:40:20 > 0:40:21the letter from the Conservative arch-Brexiteer Chris

0:40:21 > 0:40:26Heaton-Harris, MP for Daventry.

0:40:26 > 0:40:29He asked the university chiefs to explain what they are teaching

0:40:29 > 0:40:31their students about Brexit, to detail the content

0:40:31 > 0:40:34of their lectures and to list the names of their teachers.

0:40:34 > 0:40:40When I read this letter, a chill went down my spine

0:40:40 > 0:40:42because I realised immediately that this was a sinister letter

0:40:42 > 0:40:44aimed at compromising academic freedom and the liberties

0:40:44 > 0:40:51of the British people.

0:40:51 > 0:40:53I am absolutely certain that the purpose of this list,

0:40:53 > 0:40:57if he could compile one, would be to publish the guilty

0:40:57 > 0:41:00people who are responsible in some way or another for influencing young

0:41:00 > 0:41:07people to think in a way which he himself does not approve of.

0:41:07 > 0:41:12The Vice Chancellor of your local university in Worcester, Mark. He

0:41:12 > 0:41:19wants Mr Heaton-Harris to go. What would you say to him?I have known

0:41:19 > 0:41:23David for a long time. Chris and David. Chris Heaton-Harris is a

0:41:23 > 0:41:29friend. I have worked hard with him on projects previously. If he was a

0:41:29 > 0:41:34swivel-eyed, lunatic Brexiteer, I would think there was something

0:41:34 > 0:41:38menacing about this. But he is very pragmatic and I like him very much.

0:41:38 > 0:41:41There is no question of McCarthyism. You just try to get an idea of what

0:41:41 > 0:41:45is going on.You would see why people feel that it smacks of

0:41:45 > 0:41:49McCarthyism. There is an implication that listing names looks

0:41:49 > 0:41:54uncomfortably like compiling a dossier of names.I agree. It does

0:41:54 > 0:41:59not look good. Having read the letter, it looks like just a rather

0:41:59 > 0:42:01sort of sloppily crafted letter, rather than something which is

0:42:01 > 0:42:08creating a list...Should Mr Heaton-Harris go?He should consider

0:42:08 > 0:42:15what he has written.He should go? He should consider his position

0:42:15 > 0:42:18because it does smell of that. If the Education Department was this

0:42:18 > 0:42:23the lecturers need to look at what they are delivering and how they do

0:42:23 > 0:42:30that, that is different. How balance the reading and teaching is. To name

0:42:30 > 0:42:34people is a huge problem. The right that sort of document to academics

0:42:34 > 0:42:41is unforgivable.Maybe he also has an mind that according to a YouGov

0:42:41 > 0:42:44survey, something like 80% of lecturers in universities voted to

0:42:44 > 0:42:50remain in the EU. Maybe there is a point, giving universities take a

0:42:50 > 0:42:55lot of public money.They get over 60% from Europe. I do not think

0:42:55 > 0:43:00their integrity would be challenged in this way. Most of these people

0:43:00 > 0:43:04spend their life... They respect the freedom they have and that is what

0:43:04 > 0:43:07universities are about.Thank you.

0:43:07 > 0:43:10Perhaps the sincerest commentary on the pros and cons of Brexit comes

0:43:10 > 0:43:12from the people with skin in the game - the thousands

0:43:12 > 0:43:17of companies here in Britain's industrial heartlands.

0:43:17 > 0:43:19We're told business hates uncertainty, but it hates

0:43:19 > 0:43:21uncertainty about Brexit most of all, according to our own

0:43:21 > 0:43:25Sunday Politics survey of nearly 700 local firms.

0:43:25 > 0:43:28Our Hereford and Worcester political reporter, James Pearson,

0:43:28 > 0:43:38has been asking those company bosses why they responded as they did.

0:43:39 > 0:43:41Steeling themselves for a surge in sales.

0:43:41 > 0:43:44While these handmade, high-spec caravans are British

0:43:44 > 0:43:47built, many are destined for foreign fields.

0:43:47 > 0:43:52Since last year's referendum, Worcestershire?based manufacturers

0:43:52 > 0:43:53Rocket Caravans have seen their exports take off.

0:43:53 > 0:44:02Since Brexit, turnover has increased I would say between 20 and 25%.

0:44:02 > 0:44:05As a direct result of the value of the pound dropping.

0:44:05 > 0:44:07We have seen this particularly with our Australian distributor,

0:44:07 > 0:44:10who has taken about six units a year from us.

0:44:10 > 0:44:13In the last 12 months, they have taken 15 from us.

0:44:13 > 0:44:16So, that has made a massive difference to that market.

0:44:16 > 0:44:18Rocket Caravans are feeling upbeat about Brexit.

0:44:18 > 0:44:22But it seems they are in the minority.

0:44:22 > 0:44:25In our survey, only 16% of manufacturers here

0:44:25 > 0:44:27in Herefordshire and Worcestershire say Brexit has had a positive

0:44:27 > 0:44:28impact on their business.

0:44:28 > 0:44:31Nearly half say that the effect has been neutral so far,

0:44:31 > 0:44:37while more than a third say that it has had a negative impact.

0:44:41 > 0:44:43Outdoors outfitters Olpro fall into that camp.

0:44:43 > 0:44:51Owner Dan Walton was in the Remain tent during the referendum.

0:44:51 > 0:44:53Conversations with customers since have left him worried

0:44:53 > 0:44:55at being left in the cold by clients on the continent.

0:44:55 > 0:45:01Our main export market is Germany and our main wholesaler there has

0:45:01 > 0:45:04already delayed making decisions on whether they will do new lines

0:45:04 > 0:45:06from us or whether they go to European suppliers instead.

0:45:06 > 0:45:08So already for us, it is having an effect.

0:45:08 > 0:45:10It's a picture repeated across the region.

0:45:10 > 0:45:12In the survey we carried out in association with local

0:45:12 > 0:45:16Chambers of Commerce, of the 689 businesses that took

0:45:16 > 0:45:19part, 26% reported a negative impact since the Brexit vote,

0:45:19 > 0:45:22with just 11% reporting a positive one.

0:45:22 > 0:45:26By far the largest number ? 63% - said that so far the effect

0:45:26 > 0:45:29on their business had been a neutral one.

0:45:29 > 0:45:31Food for thought for one of those ministers involved

0:45:32 > 0:45:38in getting a Brexit deal.

0:45:38 > 0:45:41We are entering these negotiations with a constructive approach,

0:45:41 > 0:45:45looking to achieve a comprehensive deal between the UK and

0:45:45 > 0:45:50the European Union on these fronts, and we think that's something that

0:45:50 > 0:45:52should be in the interest of all sides.

0:45:52 > 0:45:55It is in the interest of UK businesses but also to the European

0:45:55 > 0:45:56supply chains and European businesses with whom

0:45:56 > 0:45:57we're interacting.

0:45:57 > 0:46:00With talks on the UK's future relationship with the EU

0:46:00 > 0:46:02still months away from starting, those representing businesses say

0:46:02 > 0:46:03many can't wait long for certainty.

0:46:03 > 0:46:08Businesses are trying to remain positive and they do not like to be

0:46:08 > 0:46:15frightened off by any particular terms, like saying businesses

0:46:15 > 0:46:17are going to ruin their chances because they are very positive

0:46:18 > 0:46:19about their future and growth.

0:46:19 > 0:46:21But businesses are definitely being affected by Brexit

0:46:21 > 0:46:24and we will be seeing more and more of that as we get

0:46:24 > 0:46:25closer to spring 2019.

0:46:25 > 0:46:27With Brexit talks bogged down on that all-important Brexit Bill,

0:46:27 > 0:46:30businesses may have to wait months longer for the politicians to hammer

0:46:30 > 0:46:34out a future trade deal.

0:46:34 > 0:46:37James Pearson compiled that survey with the help of the Chambers

0:46:37 > 0:46:38of Commerce in Herefordshire and Worcestershire,

0:46:38 > 0:46:45Coventry and Warwickshire, the Black Country and Shropshire.

0:46:45 > 0:46:48And we're also joined here today by the Ukip MEP, Jim Carver.

0:46:48 > 0:46:51Until recently, he was his party's Foreign and Commonwealth spokesman.

0:46:51 > 0:46:57Now he's their Assistant Deputy Leader.

0:46:57 > 0:47:00Jim, much more negativity than positivity out there apparently.

0:47:00 > 0:47:05What would you say to them?It depends who you ask. I get a lot of

0:47:05 > 0:47:09positivity. Yesterday, the Worcestershire Grove barometer

0:47:09 > 0:47:15released figures showing the top 50 medium-sized companies in

0:47:15 > 0:47:18Worcestershire have seen an amazing growth. 2.4 billion in extra revenue

0:47:18 > 0:47:26now asked three-year. In Wyre Forest, when I have my constituency,

0:47:26 > 0:47:29we have seen a 50% increase in employment in those companies.What

0:47:29 > 0:47:35would you say to Daniel Walton, the camping equipment supplier, who says

0:47:35 > 0:47:38that his customers in Germany and elsewhere in Europe quite logically,

0:47:38 > 0:47:42they would look to suppliers elsewhere in the EU rather than to

0:47:42 > 0:47:47him, to cut out the uncertainty altogether?With the pound dropping,

0:47:47 > 0:47:52it is finding a true value. It was completely overvalued and it has

0:47:52 > 0:48:00come down in price, better for exporters. I do business overseas. I

0:48:00 > 0:48:05heard it is great for export. What you have to look at is

0:48:05 > 0:48:10competitiveness for your product. Rocket Caravans have, with a bespoke

0:48:10 > 0:48:14product that has become far more attractive.Let me suggest to you

0:48:14 > 0:48:17that it is the increasing possibility of the no deal outcome

0:48:17 > 0:48:20that is really splitting them. I have seems figures from the London

0:48:20 > 0:48:24School of Economics which suggests Birmingham's economy could suffer by

0:48:24 > 0:48:29£7 billion a year with a dual outcome and the economy of the city

0:48:29 > 0:48:37could be hit down by 5.5 billion a year.I don't buy that. As an MEP,

0:48:37 > 0:48:39what we here in the European Parliament, I am having discussions

0:48:39 > 0:48:44with MEPs, people in the commission, European Commission also --

0:48:44 > 0:48:51officials. We have a huge trade deficit with the European Union. And

0:48:51 > 0:48:56the elephant in the room is not even been discussed. When we leave the

0:48:56 > 0:49:00European Union in 2019, what you will find, Patrick, is that when we

0:49:00 > 0:49:05go to the WTO, if we do not have a deal, a figure of around 80%...

0:49:05 > 0:49:08No-one is discussed this at Westminster at all. No-one has

0:49:08 > 0:49:12discussed the fact that 80% of the Tavis that could be introduced under

0:49:12 > 0:49:15WTO rules will have to be paid by the member states directly to the

0:49:15 > 0:49:19commission. It is actually commission's interest to go away and

0:49:19 > 0:49:23have an ordeal.Is Jim Wright? Bearing in mind that there have been

0:49:23 > 0:49:30also some reasons from David Davis and Theresa May is a -- in last few

0:49:30 > 0:49:35days that this uncertainty could last a lot longer beyond March 2019.

0:49:35 > 0:49:40Potentially, yes. But as was said in that piece, what we're trying to

0:49:40 > 0:49:43achieve something that businesses essentially feels very similar to

0:49:43 > 0:49:51what we have at the moment. A carrot in the EU. Customs free as well.

0:49:51 > 0:49:56Going back to the tent seller. What is interesting is if the customers

0:49:56 > 0:50:00in Germany and looking round, what they are actually doing is paying

0:50:00 > 0:50:0315% more for the product than they would otherwise be paying if they

0:50:03 > 0:50:05continue to buy from him. The question which comes back to this...

0:50:05 > 0:50:12This is where we need to unravel the knot, because sterling is down 50%

0:50:12 > 0:50:18and is probably where it should be, I am not sure what the tariffs are

0:50:18 > 0:50:22on Kent but the trade weight tariff for the whole of the UK trade with

0:50:22 > 0:50:27the EU in 2015 was 2.9%. For the economy as a whole, it is actually

0:50:27 > 0:50:34now seeing a 13%... We are now 13% cheaper for the European Union and

0:50:34 > 0:50:43before -- than before.Tavis can be negotiated.They are heading down.

0:50:43 > 0:50:50Labour's position is constructive ambiguity. You have one eye on the

0:50:50 > 0:50:54Remains aborting younger voters and your other eye on the other people

0:50:54 > 0:51:00who voted to leave the EU.We are committed to exiting the European

0:51:00 > 0:51:07Union. We want good terms for the transition deal. With Xbox we're

0:51:07 > 0:51:10doing at the moment, we have to remember the pound is low. We still

0:51:10 > 0:51:22have the agreements with Europe under current Tavis. -- tariffs. But

0:51:22 > 0:51:26there is ambiguity at the moment for the company is, particularly

0:51:26 > 0:51:35financial pharmaceuticals, and some of the big research and development

0:51:35 > 0:51:39companies moving to Europe to seek stability. Unless we provide

0:51:39 > 0:51:46stability post Brexit, they cannot plan.That is precisely why I

0:51:46 > 0:51:49argued... The very next day I was in parliament after the referendum, I

0:51:49 > 0:51:54argued that we should be actually instigating Article 50 immediately.

0:51:54 > 0:51:58Waiting a year has created so much uncertainty.I was hoping to tell

0:51:58 > 0:52:03you how important carmaking industry is in this part of the world. The

0:52:03 > 0:52:08boss of JL are is worried about access to the European Union. We

0:52:08 > 0:52:12know that car manufacturers are going to be seeing Theresa May next

0:52:12 > 0:52:16week about their anxieties over this. Guess what, we can see

0:52:16 > 0:52:19year-on-year decreases in castles for the first month running. What

0:52:19 > 0:52:25would you say to them?I would say that we are buying far more

0:52:25 > 0:52:36personal, citron, Renault etc from the European Union... Sorry, if I

0:52:36 > 0:52:40can finish. We are buying these great quality cars from Germany

0:52:40 > 0:52:45because we like them and as consumer lead. But a lot of the components

0:52:45 > 0:52:50are made in the UK because of British quality.We are producing 2

0:52:50 > 0:52:52million cars, probably more than at any other time. A lot of components

0:52:52 > 0:52:56from those cars are coming from Europe. That is the problem at the

0:52:56 > 0:53:00moment. They have to balance how they deal with that. The trade

0:53:00 > 0:53:14tariffs on that do not increase value.We have a lot of the supply

0:53:14 > 0:53:18chain in the automotive industry in the UK. Panesar 10% on the auto

0:53:18 > 0:53:24sector. That is significant. # trade tariffs are 10%. Sometimes we need

0:53:24 > 0:53:32to remember that the likes of five series BMWs are made in America...I

0:53:32 > 0:53:37would love to go on with this but we must call a halt. Particular franks

0:53:37 > 0:53:41to you, Jim Carver, for being with us today. -- thanks.

0:53:41 > 0:53:43Coming soon to a town near you, Universal Credit.

0:53:43 > 0:53:46It's supposed to simplify things by rolling six benefits into one

0:53:46 > 0:53:49payment and to make work pay because people won't be penalised

0:53:49 > 0:53:50for doing extra hours.

0:53:50 > 0:53:53The principle behind it is even supported by the Opposition.

0:53:53 > 0:53:54So what's not to like?

0:53:54 > 0:53:57Plenty, apparently.

0:53:57 > 0:54:00A succession of local MPs took part in an emergency Commons debate,

0:54:00 > 0:54:02and as Kathryn Stanczyszyn explains, Labour want the roll-out

0:54:03 > 0:54:05put on hold.

0:54:05 > 0:54:08Universal Credit will arrive at job centres in six areas of the Midlands

0:54:08 > 0:54:11in the run-up to Christmas, including parts of

0:54:11 > 0:54:13Wolverhampton and Birmingham.

0:54:13 > 0:54:16But one Labour MP pleaded with the Government to put

0:54:16 > 0:54:17those plans on hold.

0:54:17 > 0:54:21Mr Speaker, disaster looms for tens of thousands of Birmingham citizens.

0:54:21 > 0:54:27Come and listen to some of the heartbreaking cases.

0:54:27 > 0:54:30People in tears in our constituency offices, saying, what are we going

0:54:30 > 0:54:35to do over Christmas? Hear first-hand the real-life experience

0:54:35 > 0:54:41of the consequences of your actions. Have you no heart? Pause Universal

0:54:41 > 0:54:44Credit and then get it right.

0:54:44 > 0:54:47Labour supports the principal of Univeral Credit but say the way

0:54:47 > 0:54:51it's being implemented is causing financial hardship, including a rise

0:54:51 > 0:54:55in referrals to food banks.

0:54:55 > 0:55:00These six-week waiting period is wishing claimants further into debt.

0:55:00 > 0:55:08-- pushing. With some facing further delays. If they have gone blockaded

0:55:08 > 0:55:11circumstances, this forces claimants to borrow money, rely on food banks

0:55:11 > 0:55:15and face eviction whilst waiting for their first payment.

0:55:15 > 0:55:18Conservative backbenchers rallied to the Government cause,

0:55:18 > 0:55:20saying Universal Credit had replaced a dyfunctional system and,

0:55:20 > 0:55:25where it's operating, it is working.

0:55:25 > 0:55:30Evidence shows that Universal Credit is helping people into work faster

0:55:30 > 0:55:33and helping them into work and staying there longer.

0:55:33 > 0:55:35With Herefordshire, Shropshire, Walsall and Coventry all due to get

0:55:35 > 0:55:40Universal Credit in the early part of next year, it's a policy

0:55:40 > 0:55:42the Government must get right if it isn't to risk

0:55:42 > 0:55:43a backlash from voters.

0:55:43 > 0:55:45Kathryn Stanczyszyn reporting.

0:55:45 > 0:55:48And the all-party Work and Pensions Select Committee has

0:55:48 > 0:55:51supported those calls for a pause in the roll-out of Universal Credit.

0:55:51 > 0:55:55They say the six-week wait before claimants receive their first

0:55:55 > 0:56:01payments are causing "acute financial difficulty".

0:56:01 > 0:56:04Mark Garnier, how much pressure does it take before your Government does

0:56:04 > 0:56:12actually concede the point of pausing this, having a heart?That

0:56:12 > 0:56:15is up to the Work and Pensions Secretary. But what was missing in

0:56:15 > 0:56:22this piece was the fact that there are loans available to people. 50%

0:56:22 > 0:56:26in the first month. It is VP of over a nine-month period. The question we

0:56:26 > 0:56:33have to ask is, talking to the Citizens Advice bureau in Wyre

0:56:33 > 0:56:36Forest, we have been dragged to find out what is going on and we have not

0:56:36 > 0:56:38seen the overwhelming numbers of people coming through at having

0:56:38 > 0:56:44troubles over this.But a quarter having delays of even more than six

0:56:44 > 0:56:48weeks. It seems worse.Look, I agree. I would not want to shock

0:56:48 > 0:56:56that point at all. What we are trying to do is mimic with this

0:56:56 > 0:57:03employment. People are employed on a monthly basis. We want to copy that

0:57:03 > 0:57:09as much as we can. If it does not work like that, there is a

0:57:09 > 0:57:12legitimate argument against this. The way it has been ruled out, it

0:57:12 > 0:57:18has not been compiling all doubt until 2022, but that will iron out

0:57:18 > 0:57:25these problems so we can deal with them.And the key point, as was

0:57:25 > 0:57:28mentioned, is getting people into work more quickly. That has to be a

0:57:28 > 0:57:34central argument.It is. Firstly, the Government has conceded only 55p

0:57:34 > 0:57:41phone lines and frankly have -- thankfully have listened. But we

0:57:41 > 0:57:47want a pause because of people in circumstances, especially with

0:57:47 > 0:57:50private landlords, who are serving notices on them. It is very

0:57:50 > 0:58:00difficult for them. But what we are asking for is, let's have a pause,

0:58:00 > 0:58:02sees the policies have succeeded, and what better to support the

0:58:02 > 0:58:08people. Iain Duncan Smith says we should look at it as well.We saw a

0:58:08 > 0:58:13roll-out of this in areas where there was an increase in

0:58:13 > 0:58:18homelessness and use of food banks. That suggests genuine hardship.

0:58:18 > 0:58:22There is. We saw some crazy numbers coming out in Gloucester. It turned

0:58:22 > 0:58:26out that there were eight people instead of 600 people that were

0:58:26 > 0:58:31suggested being made homeless by this. But I do concede this is not

0:58:31 > 0:58:36without fault. We need to make sure the system is at fault of the

0:58:36 > 0:58:39limitation of the system. It is to separate elements.A sensible

0:58:39 > 0:58:44approach. We want to look at it, that is what we want to do.

0:58:44 > 0:58:47Let's catch up with the rest of the political developments making

0:58:47 > 0:58:48the news here over the past week.

0:58:48 > 0:58:55Our round-up in 60 seconds is brought to us today by Sarah Bishop.

0:58:55 > 0:58:58Hereford is to get a university.

0:58:58 > 0:59:02The Government is giving £15 million to the new institution.

0:59:02 > 0:59:07Lack of security cameras inside Birmingham Prison meant

0:59:07 > 0:59:09last December's riots spread more quickly.

0:59:09 > 0:59:14That's the conclusion of a report by the Independent Monitoring Board.

0:59:14 > 0:59:19At PMQs, a Warwickshire MP led the praise of the emergency services

0:59:19 > 0:59:21after a peaceful end to an alleged firearms incident last

0:59:21 > 0:59:22Sunday in Nuneaton.

0:59:22 > 0:59:25Will she join me and the honourable member for Nuneaton

0:59:25 > 0:59:27in praising the excellent work of Warwickshire Police

0:59:27 > 0:59:33and West Midlands Ambulance Services in ensuring the situation

0:59:33 > 0:59:35was brought to a swift conclusion without any casualties?

0:59:35 > 0:59:37The Chief Constables of West Midlands and Staffordshire Police

0:59:37 > 0:59:41told the Home Affairs Committee that a rise in crime, combined

0:59:41 > 0:59:45with frozen budgets, has left their forces struggling

0:59:45 > 0:59:48to tackle crime.

0:59:48 > 0:59:52And Channel 4 boss David Abraham has condemned a Tory manifesto pledge

0:59:52 > 0:59:54to move Channel 4 out of London.

0:59:54 > 1:00:01He told MPs on the Culture Committee it was "irresponsible".

1:00:01 > 1:00:03Mr Abraham was particularly unhappy public money had been spent

1:00:03 > 1:00:06by cities vying for Channel 4.

1:00:06 > 1:00:09The West Midlands Mayor Andy Street has hosted a Westminster reception

1:00:09 > 1:00:10in support of Birmingham's campaign.

1:00:10 > 1:00:17Stoke also wants to host the channel.

1:00:17 > 1:00:20Obviously, Mr Abraham feels this is another Tory manifesto commitment

1:00:20 > 1:00:23that is not worth the paper it is printed on. It is going to be

1:00:23 > 1:00:28junked, like so much else.Moving Channel 4 at a London? I hope not.

1:00:28 > 1:00:32It would be fantastic to go to Birmingham. Good on Andy Street

1:00:32 > 1:00:39forgetting up there. Right behind it.I think Mr Abraham needs to get

1:00:39 > 1:00:43out of central London, look around the country and see...Coventry has

1:00:43 > 1:00:47also expressed an interest as well. It is not a formal process. It is

1:00:47 > 1:00:51not like one of these conventional beauty contests, in a way. It is a

1:00:51 > 1:00:57bit of an open-ended piece of string, isn't it?Potentially, yes.

1:00:57 > 1:01:02But I think we would be happy to work on a cross-party basis to get

1:01:02 > 1:01:05it to Birmingham or the West Midlands.What would it bring to the

1:01:05 > 1:01:10West Midlands as a region?A huge amount of resources. Therefore trade

1:01:10 > 1:01:17for hotels, restaurants and things like that. Allowing people in those

1:01:17 > 1:01:24industries to join in Birmingham. Absolutely. It was on this show a

1:01:24 > 1:01:30few years ago, we were talking about empty floors on this building. Now

1:01:30 > 1:01:33the BBC has recognised the errors of its ways and put more people you.

1:01:33 > 1:01:41But Channel 4 do not want to leave London...We will drag him up here.

1:01:41 > 1:01:47Screaming!We will watch with interest. My thanks to our guests.

1:01:47 > 1:01:49Finally from me, it's the "tug of war" that's

1:01:49 > 1:01:53lasted four years already, and still no sign of a result.

1:01:53 > 1:01:55Should Acute Hospital services be concentrated in Telford,

1:01:55 > 1:01:58Shrewsbury, or both?

1:01:58 > 1:02:01Next week, the Chief Executive of the Shrewsbury and Telford

1:02:01 > 1:02:05Hospital Trust will be in the hot seat.

1:02:05 > 1:02:08Simon Wright joins Jim Hawkins on BBC Radio Shropshire from ten

1:02:08 > 1:02:14o'clock on Thursday morning.

1:02:14 > 1:02:14I'm not sure we

1:02:15 > 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 > 1:02:44consulting parliament, and it faces fierce resistance

1:02:44 > 1:02:48from opposition parties as well as many on the government's

1:02:48 > 1:02:53own backbenches, with 300 amendments and 54 new clauses tabled on it.

1:02:53 > 1:02:56We're joined now by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry who has been a strong

1:02:56 > 1:03:01critic of the legislation.

1:03:01 > 1:03:05Thank you very much for joining us. Before we talk about the withdrawal

1:03:05 > 1:03:10bill, I would like to bring up with you that the Prime Minister has just

1:03:10 > 1:03:14sent a letter to the Commons Speaker John Bercow asking for an

1:03:14 > 1:03:18independent body to be established to investigate claims of sexual

1:03:18 > 1:03:23harassment 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 > 1:03:34statement from the Leader of the House as to what could now be done

1:03:34 > 1:03:41to make sure that any complaints actually against anybody working in

1:03:41 > 1:03:43Parliament, to extend the protections that workers throughout

1:03:43 > 1:03:48the rest of businesses and in other workplaces have, they should now be

1:03:48 > 1:03:52extended 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 > 1:04:10happened a long time ago. We hear stories of harassment that has been

1:04:10 > 1:04:14going on for decades, but until now it has been difficult to work out

1:04:14 > 1:04:19who you could complain to about it. It is my understanding that my Chief

1:04:19 > 1:04:24Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip, and Milton, shared that view

1:04:24 > 1:04:28and have shared that view for some time but found it difficult to get

1:04:28 > 1:04:32all the agreement necessary. Anyway, we are where we are and we are

1:04:32 > 1:04:44making that progress, but

1:04:45 > 1:04:47my Chief Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip wanted this done

1:04:47 > 1:04:50some time ago.That is an interesting point. Let's move on to

1:04:50 > 1:04:52the much anticipated EU withdrawal bill which will finally be debated.

1:04:52 > 1:04:55You have put your name to an amendment which is calling for a

1:04:55 > 1:04:57vote on the final agreement in essence, do you really believe that

1:04:57 > 1:05:01that will be a meaningful both offered to the Commons?Yes, if you

1:05:01 > 1:05:06look at the terms of the amendment, it would deliver exactly that. It

1:05:06 > 1:05:11would give members of Parliament the opportunity to debated and voted on

1:05:11 > 1:05:15it. It would be an effective piece of legislation and would go through

1:05:15 > 1:05:21both 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 > 1:05:29decisions that would have enabled the government to move forward in

1:05:29 > 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 > 1:05:59there will be no deal.If you look at the amendment we put forward

1:05:59 > 1:06:03there will be other alternatives. This is all hypothetical because we

1:06:03 > 1:06:07want a good deal and it is difficult to see that the government would not

1:06:07 > 1:06:12bring a good deal to the House in any event. But this is hypothetical,

1:06:12 > 1:06:18it would mean Parliament would say to government, go back and seek an

1:06:18 > 1:06:23extension as we know it is there in Article 50. It is perfectly possible

1:06:23 > 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 > 1:06:45that option in those circumstances? It is only if you get enough votes

1:06:45 > 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 > 1:07:05Have you for that?For give me, but you are jumping way down the line. I

1:07:05 > 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 > 1:07:30must happen. It is the means by which we do it that causes problems

1:07:30 > 1:07:36and we have this argument and debate about what we call the endgame.I am

1:07:36 > 1:07:40sure we will talk about this many more times before we get to that

1:07:40 > 1:07:45vote. I will turn to our panel of political experts. Listening to the

1:07:45 > 1:07:52tone 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 > 1:08:01they want the maximum space and room for Parliament to have a say. But

1:08:01 > 1:08:07they have to be careful. The reason is that clock is ticking and if you

1:08:07 > 1:08:14have 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 > 1:08:58are doing it because they think Parliament should have a say or

1:08:58 > 1:09:03because they want to obstruct it? They do not think people should have

1:09:03 > 1:09:08a say in the first place, they think people got it wrong, so they need

1:09:08 > 1:09:15more clever people than the voters to have final say.Or they believed

1:09:15 > 1:09:18taking back control means Parliament should have the final say.

1:09:18 > 1:09:21Parliament said they would like to give that decision back to the

1:09:21 > 1:09:28people. 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 > 1:09:36These negotiations will take as long as they have got. The EU will take

1:09:36 > 1:09:44it to the wire and if we do not get a decent deal, and one of the

1:09:44 > 1:09:47reasons is the level of incompetence on this government's part I have to

1:09:47 > 1:09:52say and the other one will be the people who want to remain

1:09:52 > 1:09:59undermining them. They undermined the government at every single stage

1:09:59 > 1:10:02and they undermine Britain's interests.It is the timing of all

1:10:02 > 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 > 1:10:26having the power to either stop it or endorse it. You cannot have a

1:10:26 > 1:10:29government doing something like this with no vote in the House of

1:10:29 > 1:10:36commons. When you say it will go to the last minute I completely agree,

1:10:36 > 1:10:41but last-minute in reality means next summer. It has got to get

1:10:41 > 1:10:44through the European Parliament and the Westminster Parliament and quite

1:10:44 > 1:10:52a 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 > 1:11:03league side think. I disagree with Julia, I do not think you could say

1:11:03 > 1:11:08people had their say and the terms with which we leave are left open

1:11:08 > 1:11:11and only the government should have a say in it, Parliament clearly

1:11:11 > 1:11:20should have a say in it.Do we want a good deal or not?It does not mean

1:11:20 > 1:11:25anything if you do not do it by next summer I suggest.Does that leave

1:11:25 > 1:11:29Parliament any room for changing the deal or is it simply take it or

1:11:29 > 1:11:34leave it?It will have to have that rule because it cannot simply be

1:11:34 > 1:11:38another of these binary votes were you accept the deal or no Deal.

1:11:38 > 1:11:44There has to be some space.How can a few MPs in the House of Commons

1:11:44 > 1:11:50change 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 > 1:11:58government has negotiated, the government will have to re-negotiate

1:11:58 > 1:12:02or there will have to be an election. This will be a moment of

1:12:02 > 1:12:05huge crisis, our government not getting through its much topped

1:12:05 > 1:12:14about...It is a mini Catalonia.I think it would be as big as

1:12:14 > 1:12:17Catalonia, but with the implication that there would have to be a

1:12:17 > 1:12:21practical 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 > 1:12:42the worst, but there is an unreality to that position if you keep trying

1:12:42 > 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 > 1:13:06where he thought the negotiations had gone off track or were bogged

1:13:06 > 1:13:15down. I worry a bit about the Labour position being incoherent, but that

1:13:15 > 1:13:19is 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 > 1:13:34bit where you might get away with it. That is not a policy.

1:13:34 > 1:13:37That is not a policy.

1:13:37 > 1:13:38That's all for today.

1:13:38 > 1:13:41Join me again next Sunday at 11 here on BBC One.

1:13:41 > 1:13:46Until then, bye bye.