29/10/2017

0:00:36 > 0:00:37Morning, everyone.

0:00:37 > 0:00:40I'm Sarah Smith, and welcome to The Sunday Politics,

0:00:40 > 0:00:42where we always bring you everything you need to know to understand

0:00:42 > 0:00:44what's going on in politics.

0:00:44 > 0:00:48Coming up on today's programme...

0:00:48 > 0:00:50The Government says

0:00:50 > 0:00:52the international trade minister Mark Garnier will be investigated

0:00:52 > 0:00:55following newspaper allegations of inappropriate behaviour

0:00:55 > 0:00:57towards a female staff member.

0:00:57 > 0:01:02We'll have the latest.

0:01:02 > 0:01:06The Prime Minister says she can agree a deal with the EU and plenty

0:01:06 > 0:01:12of time for Parliament to vote on it before we leave in 2018. Well

0:01:12 > 0:01:19Parliament play ball? New evidence cast out on the economic

0:01:19 > 0:01:20Later on the Sunday Politics... cast out on the economic

0:01:20 > 0:01:22Around one in ten British IS fighters in

0:01:22 > 0:01:23the Middle East come from Yorkshire.

0:01:23 > 0:01:30We asked what should happen to them if and when they return home.

0:01:30 > 0:01:32are lobbying the Home Secretary to stop the alleged harassment of women

0:01:32 > 0:01:36attending abortion clinics.

0:01:36 > 0:01:39All that coming up in the programme.

0:01:39 > 0:01:42And with me today to help make sense of all the big stories,

0:01:42 > 0:01:46Julia Hartley-Brewer, Steve Richards and Anne McElvoy.

0:01:46 > 0:01:48Some breaking news this morning.

0:01:48 > 0:01:50The Government has announced that it will investigate

0:01:50 > 0:01:52whether the International Trade Minister Mark Garnier broke

0:01:52 > 0:01:54the Ministerial Code following allegations

0:01:54 > 0:01:59of inappropriate behaviour.

0:01:59 > 0:02:03It comes after reports in the Mail on Sunday which has spoken to one

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

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

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

0:02:08 > 0:02:11The stories, if they are true, are totally unacceptable

0:02:11 > 0:02:14and the Cabinet Office will be conducting an investigation

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

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

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

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

0:02:23 > 0:02:26and that is why the other thing that is going to happen

0:02:26 > 0:02:29is that today Theresa May is going to write to John Bercow,

0:02:29 > 0:02:33the Speaker of the House of Commons, to ask for his advice as to how

0:02:33 > 0:02:38we change that culture.

0:02:38 > 0:02:42That was Jeremy Hunt a little earlier. I want to turn to the panel

0:02:42 > 0:02:47to make sense of this news. This is the government taking these

0:02:47 > 0:02:51allegations quite seriously.What has changed in this story is they

0:02:51 > 0:02:55used to be a bit of delay while people work out what they should say

0:02:55 > 0:03:01about it, how seriously to take it. As you see now a senior cabinet

0:03:01 > 0:03:05member out there, Jeremy Hunt, with an instant response. He does have

0:03:05 > 0:03:09the worry of whether the facts are disputed, but what they want to be

0:03:09 > 0:03:13seen doing is to do something very quickly. In the past they would say

0:03:13 > 0:03:18it was all part of the rough and tumble of Westminster.Mark Garnier

0:03:18 > 0:03:23does not deny these stories, which is that he asked an employee to buy

0:03:23 > 0:03:27sex toys, but he said it was just high jinks and it was taken out of

0:03:27 > 0:03:31context. Is this the sort of thing that a few years ago in a different

0:03:31 > 0:03:37environment would be investigated? Not necessarily quite the frenzy

0:03:37 > 0:03:44that it is nowadays. The combination of social media, all the Sunday

0:03:44 > 0:03:47political programmes were ministers have to go on armed with a response

0:03:47 > 0:03:54means that you get these we have to be seen to be doing something. That

0:03:54 > 0:03:59means there is this Cabinet Office investigation. You pointed out to us

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

0:04:03 > 0:04:07does not matter whether he says yes, know I did this or did not,

0:04:07 > 0:04:12something has to be seen to be done. Clearly ministers today are being

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

0:04:16 > 0:04:19Bercow the speaker to look into the whole culture of Parliament in this

0:04:19 > 0:04:26context. That is the response to this kind of frenzy.If we do live

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

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

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

0:04:39 > 0:04:43anyone would think it was a scene out of Benny Hill or a carry on

0:04:43 > 0:04:49film. Sadly it is not that much fun and it is rather dull and dreary.

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

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

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

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

0:05:10 > 0:05:13a huge amount of alcohol and late night and people living away from

0:05:13 > 0:05:20home you will have this happen.That does not make it OK.It makes sexual

0:05:20 > 0:05:24harassment not OK as it is not anywhere. This happens to men as

0:05:24 > 0:05:29well and if they have an issue into it there are employment tribunal 's

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

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

0:05:39 > 0:05:43People think MPs are employees of the party or the Commons, they are

0:05:43 > 0:05:47not.Because they are self-employed to whom do you go if you are a

0:05:47 > 0:05:53researcher?That has to be clarified. I agree you need a much

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

0:05:59 > 0:06:04into the media many years ago, the Punic wars in my case! You were not

0:06:04 > 0:06:12quite sure who to go to. If you work worried that it might impede your

0:06:12 > 0:06:16career, and you had to talk to people who work next to you, that is

0:06:16 > 0:06:21just one example, but in the Commons people do not know who they should

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

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

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

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

0:06:38 > 0:06:43usually a lot wrong with it. When you try and make it general, they

0:06:43 > 0:06:48are not trying to blame individuals, or it say they need a better line on

0:06:48 > 0:06:53reporting of sexual harassment, which I support, the Commons is a

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

0:06:57 > 0:07:01iron out the human foibles of that. Diane Abbott was talking about this

0:07:01 > 0:07:05earlier.

0:07:05 > 0:07:09When I first went into Parliament so many of those men had been to all

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

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

0:07:20 > 0:07:29than middle-aged men to believe that young research are irresistibly

0:07:29 > 0:07:34attracted to them. We have seen the issues and we have seen one of our

0:07:34 > 0:07:40colleagues been suspended for quite unacceptable language.

0:07:40 > 0:07:45That is a point, Jarrod O'Mara, a Labour MP who has had the whip

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

0:07:50 > 0:07:55left or right divide over this is absurd. This is a cultural issue. In

0:07:55 > 0:08:00the media and in a lot of other institutions if this is going to

0:08:00 > 0:08:04develop politically, the frenzy will carry on for a bit and other names

0:08:04 > 0:08:08will come out over the next few days, not just the two we have

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

0:08:15 > 0:08:20candidates are selected for example. There has been a huge pressure for

0:08:20 > 0:08:25the centre to keep out of things. I bet from now on there will be much

0:08:25 > 0:08:29greater scrutiny of all candidates and tweets will have to be looked at

0:08:29 > 0:08:36and all the rest of it.Selecting candidates is interesting. Miriam

0:08:36 > 0:08:40Gonzalez, Nick Clegg's wife, says that during that election they knew

0:08:40 > 0:08:44about Jarrod O'Mara and the Lib Dems knew about it, so it is difficult to

0:08:44 > 0:08:50suggest the Labour Party did not as well.There is very clear evidence

0:08:50 > 0:08:55the Labour Party did know. But we are in a situation of how perfect

0:08:55 > 0:09:02and well-behaved does everyone have to be? If you look at past American

0:09:02 > 0:09:06presidents, JFK and Bill Clinton, these men were sex pest

0:09:06 > 0:09:09extraordinaire, with totally inappropriate behaviour on a regular

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

0:09:14 > 0:09:18Young women are really attracted to powerful men. I was busted for the

0:09:18 > 0:09:23idea that there are young women in the House of commons who are

0:09:23 > 0:09:29throwing themselves at middle-aged, potbellied, balding, older men. We

0:09:29 > 0:09:36need to focus on the right things. When it is unwanted, harassing,

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

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

0:09:43 > 0:09:47Commons, it is because there are more men married to women like us.

0:09:47 > 0:09:50We have to leave it there.

0:09:50 > 0:09:52As attention turns in Westminster to the hundreds

0:09:52 > 0:09:55of amendments put down on the EU Withdrawal Bill, David Davis has

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

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

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

0:10:03 > 0:10:05Let's take a look at how the controversy played out.

0:10:05 > 0:10:09And which point do you envisage Parliament having a vote?

0:10:09 > 0:10:11As soon as possible thereafter.

0:10:11 > 0:10:14This Parliament?

0:10:14 > 0:10:16As soon as possible possible thereafter, yeah.

0:10:16 > 0:10:17As soon as possible thereafter.

0:10:17 > 0:10:18So, the vote in Parliament...

0:10:18 > 0:10:20The other thing...

0:10:20 > 0:10:21Could be after March 2019?

0:10:21 > 0:10:23It could be, yeah, it could be.

0:10:23 > 0:10:24The...

0:10:24 > 0:10:26It depends when it concludes.

0:10:26 > 0:10:28Mr Barnier, remember, has said he'd like...

0:10:28 > 0:10:31Sorry, the vote of our Parliament, the UK Parliament, could be

0:10:31 > 0:10:32after March 2019?

0:10:32 > 0:10:34Yes, it could be.

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

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

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

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

0:10:41 > 0:10:43You said that it is POSSIBLE that Parliament night not vote

0:10:43 > 0:10:47on the deal until AFTER the end of March 2019.

0:10:47 > 0:10:48I'm summarising correctly what you said...?

0:10:48 > 0:10:50Yeah, that's correct.

0:10:50 > 0:10:53In the event we don't do the deal until then, yeah.

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

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

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

0:11:02 > 0:11:05As the honourable gentleman knows, we're in negotiations

0:11:05 > 0:11:08with the European Union, but I am confident that the timetable under

0:11:08 > 0:11:12the Lisbon Treaty does give time until March 2019

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

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

0:11:17 > 0:11:20it's not just this Parliament that wants to have a vote on that deal,

0:11:20 > 0:11:22but actually there will be ratification by other parliaments,

0:11:22 > 0:11:27that we will be able to achieve that agreement and that negotiation

0:11:27 > 0:11:30in time for this Parliament to have a vote that we committed to.

0:11:30 > 0:11:33We are working to reach an agreement on the final deal

0:11:33 > 0:11:36in good time before we leave the European Union in March 2019.

0:11:36 > 0:11:38Clearly, we cannot say for certain at this stage

0:11:38 > 0:11:40when this will be agreed.

0:11:40 > 0:11:43But as Michel Barnier said, he hopes to get a draft deal

0:11:43 > 0:11:48agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim is well.

0:11:48 > 0:11:52agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim as well.

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

0:11:54 > 0:11:56Benn, who is the chair of the Commons Brexit Committee,

0:11:56 > 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 > 0:12:11in order for it to be meaningful?It has to be before we leave the

0:12:11 > 0:12:14European Union. Michel Barnier said at the start of the negotiations

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

0:12:19 > 0:12:22only got 12 months left, the clock is ticking and there is a huge

0:12:22 > 0:12:26amount of ground to cover.You do not think there is any point in

0:12:26 > 0:12:37having the vote the week before we leave because you could then not go

0:12:37 > 0:12:40and re-negotiate?That would not be acceptable. We will not be given a

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

0:12:43 > 0:12:46Steve Baker, also a minister in the department, told our committee that

0:12:46 > 0:12:50the government now accepts that in order to implement transitional

0:12:50 > 0:12:54arrangements that it is seeking, it will need separate legislation. I

0:12:54 > 0:12:58put the question to him if you are going to need separate legislation

0:12:58 > 0:13:02to do that, why don't you have a separate bill to implement the

0:13:02 > 0:13:05withdrawal agreement rather than seeking to use the powers the

0:13:05 > 0:13:10government is proposing to take in the EU withdrawal bill.If we stick

0:13:10 > 0:13:14to the timing, you have said you do not think it is possible to

0:13:14 > 0:13:18negotiate a trade deal in the next 12 months. You say the only people

0:13:18 > 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 > 0:13:32time?If things go well, and there is still a risk of no agreement

0:13:32 > 0:13:46which would be disastrous for the economy and the country, if

0:13:51 > 0:13:54things go there will be a deal on the divorce issues, there will be a

0:13:54 > 0:13:56deal on the nature of the transitional arrangement and the

0:13:56 > 0:13:59government is to set out how it thinks that will work, and then an

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

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

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

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

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

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

0:14:18 > 0:14:23take it or leave it if we have already left the EU? Surely this has

0:14:23 > 0:14:29to happen before March 2019 for it to make a difference?I do not think

0:14:29 > 0:14:33it is possible to negotiate all of the issues that will need to be

0:14:33 > 0:14:38covered in the time available.Then it is not possible to have a

0:14:38 > 0:14:49meaningful vote on it?Parliament will have to have a look at the deal

0:14:49 > 0:14:52presented to it. It is likely to be a mix agreement so the approval

0:14:52 > 0:14:54process in the rest of Europe, unlike the Article 50 agreement,

0:14:54 > 0:14:57which will be a majority vote in the European Parliament and in the

0:14:57 > 0:15:00British Parliament, every single Parliament will have a vote on it,

0:15:00 > 0:15:05so it will be a more complex process anyway, but I do not think that is

0:15:05 > 0:15:11the time to get all of that sorted between now and October next year.

0:15:11 > 0:15:15Whether it is before or after we have left the EU, the government

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

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

0:15:27 > 0:15:31back to re-negotiate.

0:15:31 > 0:15:36If it is a separate piece of legislation, when Parliament has a

0:15:36 > 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 > 0:15:56here's some fresh instructions, go back in and...It seems to me what

0:15:56 > 0:16:00they want is the maximum access to the single market for the lowest

0:16:00 > 0:16:04possible tariffs, whilst able to control migration. If they've got to

0:16:04 > 0:16:09get the best deal that they can on that, how on earth is the Labour

0:16:09 > 0:16:13Party, saying we want a bit more, owing to persuade the other 27?We

0:16:13 > 0:16:17certainly don't want the lowest possible tariffs, we want no tariffs

0:16:17 > 0:16:21are taught. My personal view is that, has made a profound mistake in

0:16:21 > 0:16:26deciding that it wants to leave the customs union. If you want to help

0:16:26 > 0:16:31deal with the very serious question of the border between Northern

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

0:16:35 > 0:16:40the customs union and I hope, will change its mind.But the Labour

0:16:40 > 0:16:43Party is simply saying in the House of Commons, we want a better deal

0:16:43 > 0:16:51than what, has been able to get?It depends how the negotiations unfold.

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

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

0:17:02 > 0:17:05said, we will need to stay in the single market and the customs union

0:17:05 > 0:17:08for the duration of the transition, and I think that is the position,

0:17:08 > 0:17:13has now reached. It has not been helped by differences of view within

0:17:13 > 0:17:17the Cabinet, and a lot of time has passed and there's proved time left

0:17:17 > 0:17:22and we have not even got on to the negotiations. -- there's very little

0:17:22 > 0:17:28time left.On phase two, the labour Party have set out six clear tests,

0:17:28 > 0:17:33and two of them are crucial. You say you want the exact same benefits we

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

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

0:17:41 > 0:17:44sound a bit like having your cake and eating it. You say that you will

0:17:44 > 0:17:48vote against any deal that doesn't give you all of that, the exact same

0:17:48 > 0:17:52benefits of the single market, and allowing you to control migration.

0:17:52 > 0:17:56But you say no deal would be catastrophic if so it seems to me

0:17:56 > 0:17:59you're unlikely to get the deal that you could vote for but you don't

0:17:59 > 0:18:04want to vote for no deal?We absolutely don't want a no deal.

0:18:04 > 0:18:10Businesses have sent a letter to the Prime Minister saying that a

0:18:10 > 0:18:12transition is essential because the possibility of a no deal and no

0:18:12 > 0:18:16transitional would be very damaging for the economy. We fought the

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

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

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

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

0:18:31 > 0:18:34the end that you're trying to achieve and you then find the means

0:18:34 > 0:18:40to support it. So we're setting out very clearly those tests.If you

0:18:40 > 0:18:43were to vote down an agreement because it did not meet your tests,

0:18:43 > 0:18:49and there was time to send, back to the EU to get a better deal, then

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

0:18:51 > 0:18:55chukka that doesn't help them?I don't think, has deployed its

0:18:55 > 0:19:00negotiating hand very strongly thus far. Because we had a general

0:19:00 > 0:19:02election which meant that we lost time that we would have used for

0:19:02 > 0:19:07negotiating. We still don't know what kind of long-term trade and

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

0:19:14 > 0:19:17like Canada and I don't want a deal like the European Economic Area. But

0:19:17 > 0:19:22we still don't know what kind of deal they want. With about 12 months

0:19:22 > 0:19:26to go, the other thing, needs to do is to set out very clearly above all

0:19:26 > 0:19:31for the benefit of the other 27 European countries, what kind of

0:19:31 > 0:19:34deal it wants. When I travel to Europe and talk to those involved in

0:19:34 > 0:19:39the negotiations, you see other leaders saying, we don't actually

0:19:39 > 0:19:43know what Britain wants. With a year to go it is about time we made that

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

0:19:49 > 0:19:52famous speech in Syria about the international brigades in Spain, and

0:19:52 > 0:19:57I wonder if your solidarity with them leads you to think that the UK

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

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

0:20:05 > 0:20:10situation in Catalonia at the moment. Direct rule from Madrid is

0:20:10 > 0:20:15not a long-term solution. There needs to be a negotiation, and

0:20:15 > 0:20:19elections will give Catalonia the chance to take that decision, but I

0:20:19 > 0:20:25am not clear what the declaration of independence actually means. Are

0:20:25 > 0:20:29they going to be borders, is they're going to be an army? There will have

0:20:29 > 0:20:33to be some agreement. Catalonia has already had a high degree of

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

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

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

0:20:46 > 0:20:50rebellion, because actually that would make matters worse.

0:20:50 > 0:20:54Now, the Government has this week reopened the public

0:20:54 > 0:20:56consultation on plans for a third runway at Heathrow.

0:20:56 > 0:20:58While ministers are clear the £18 billion project

0:20:58 > 0:21:01is still the preferred option, new data raises further questions

0:21:01 > 0:21:02about the environmental impact of expansion,

0:21:02 > 0:21:04and offers an improved economic case for a second

0:21:04 > 0:21:06runway at Gatwick instead.

0:21:06 > 0:21:08So, with opponents on all sides of the Commons, does the Government

0:21:08 > 0:21:11still have the votes to get the plans off the ground?

0:21:11 > 0:21:20Here's Elizabeth Glinka.

0:21:24 > 0:21:26The debate over the expansion of Heathrow has been

0:21:26 > 0:21:28going on for decades.

0:21:28 > 0:21:30Plans for a third runway were first introduced

0:21:30 > 0:21:32by the Labour government in 2003.

0:21:32 > 0:21:35Then, after spending millions of pounds, finally, in 2015,

0:21:35 > 0:21:41the airport commission recommended that those plans go ahead,

0:21:41 > 0:21:44and the government position appeared to be fixed.

0:21:44 > 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 > 0:21:53And with opposition on both front benches, the Parliamentary

0:21:53 > 0:21:58arithmetic looks a little bit up in the air.

0:21:58 > 0:22:01A lot has changed since the airport commission produced its report,

0:22:01 > 0:22:04and that don't forget was the bedrock for the Government's

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

0:22:06 > 0:22:07that it made.

0:22:07 > 0:22:10But most of the assumptions made in that report have

0:22:10 > 0:22:12been undermined since, by data on passenger numbers,

0:22:12 > 0:22:15on economic benefits, and more than anything, on pollution.

0:22:15 > 0:22:18There's demand from international carriers to get into Heathrow.

0:22:18 > 0:22:20More and more people want to fly.

0:22:20 > 0:22:24And after the referendum, connectivity post-Brexit

0:22:24 > 0:22:27is going to be absolutely critical to the UK economy, so if anything,

0:22:27 > 0:22:33I think the case is stronger for expansion at Heathrow.

0:22:33 > 0:22:36A vote on expansion had been due to take place this summer.

0:22:36 > 0:22:38But with Westminster somewhat distracted, that didn't happen.

0:22:38 > 0:22:41Now, fresh data means the Government has had to reopen

0:22:41 > 0:22:47the public consultation.

0:22:47 > 0:22:50But it maintains the case for Heathrow is as strong as ever,

0:22:50 > 0:22:55delivering benefits of up to £74 billion to the wider economy.

0:22:55 > 0:22:58And in any case, the Government says, action must be taken,

0:22:58 > 0:23:02as all five of London's airports will be completely

0:23:02 > 0:23:07full by the mid-2030s.

0:23:07 > 0:23:09Still, the new research does cast an alternative expansion at Gatwick

0:23:09 > 0:23:13in a more favourable economic light, while showing Heathrow

0:23:13 > 0:23:21is now less likely to meet its environmental targets.

0:23:21 > 0:23:25Campaigners like these in Hounslow sense the wind is shifting.

0:23:25 > 0:23:28We're feeling encouraged, because we see all kinds

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

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

0:23:33 > 0:23:35are beginning to think perhaps it's not such a great idea

0:23:35 > 0:23:38to have a third runway.

0:23:38 > 0:23:40Their MP is convinced colleagues can now be persuaded

0:23:40 > 0:23:43to see things their way.

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

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

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

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

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

0:23:58 > 0:24:00the country beginning to think twice.

0:24:00 > 0:24:06And if you look at the cross-party MPs supportin this anti-Heathrow

0:24:06 > 0:24:09And if you look at the cross-party MPs supporting this anti-Heathrow

0:24:09 > 0:24:11protest this week, you will see some familiar faces.

0:24:11 > 0:24:13You know my position - as the constituency MP,

0:24:13 > 0:24:15I'm totally opposed.

0:24:15 > 0:24:17I think this is another indication of just the difficulties

0:24:17 > 0:24:20the Government have got off of implementing this policy.

0:24:20 > 0:24:22I don't think it's going to happen, I just don't think

0:24:22 > 0:24:23it's going to happen.

0:24:23 > 0:24:26So, if some on the Labour front bench are, shall

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

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

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

0:24:34 > 0:24:35used and I think it's right.

0:24:35 > 0:24:37In the circumstances where it requires an active rebellion,

0:24:37 > 0:24:39the numbers would be fewer.

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

0:24:42 > 0:24:44you that there are people right the way through the party,

0:24:44 > 0:24:47from the backbenches to the heart of the government,

0:24:47 > 0:24:48who will vote against Heathrow expansion.

0:24:48 > 0:24:52And yet the SNP, whose Commons votes could prove vital,

0:24:52 > 0:24:53are behind the Heathrow plan, which promises more

0:24:53 > 0:24:54connecting flights.

0:24:54 > 0:24:59And other supporters are convinced they have the numbers.

0:24:59 > 0:25:02There is a majority of members of Parliament that support Heathrow

0:25:02 > 0:25:05expansion, and when that is put to the test, whenever that will be,

0:25:05 > 0:25:07I think that will be clearly demonstrated.

0:25:07 > 0:25:09Any vote on this issue won't come until next summer.

0:25:09 > 0:25:12For both sides, yet more time to argue about weather

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

0:25:22 > 0:25:24Elizabeth Glinka there.

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

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

0:25:29 > 0:25:35under David Cameron.

0:25:35 > 0:25:41Thanks for coming in. You have made your opposition to a third runway at

0:25:41 > 0:25:44Heathrow consistently clear. , have reopened this consultation but it is

0:25:44 > 0:25:48still clearly their preferred option?It is but what I have always

0:25:48 > 0:25:52asked is, why try to build a new runway at Heathrow when you can

0:25:52 > 0:25:55build one at Gatwick in half the time, for half the cost and with a

0:25:55 > 0:25:59tiny fraction of the environment will cost average is that true,

0:25:59 > 0:26:03though? Private finance is already to go at Heathrow, because that's

0:26:03 > 0:26:06where people want to do it and that's where the private backers

0:26:06 > 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 > 0:26:19but also, the costs of the surface transport needed to expand Heathrow

0:26:19 > 0:26:28is phenomenal. I mean, TfL estimates vary between £10 billion and £15

0:26:28 > 0:26:31billion. And there's no suggestion that those private backers are going

0:26:31 > 0:26:36to meet those costs. So, this is a hugely expensive project as well as

0:26:36 > 0:26:40one which will create very significant damage.Heathrow is

0:26:40 > 0:26:43ultimately where passengers and airlines want to go to, isn't it?

0:26:43 > 0:26:47Every slot is practically full. Every time a new one comes up, it is

0:26:47 > 0:26:53up immediately, it's a very popular airport. Gatwick is not where they

0:26:53 > 0:26:56want to go?There are many airlines and passengers who do want to fly

0:26:56 > 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 > 0:27:10is that successive elements have said, technology will deliver a way

0:27:10 > 0:27:16to resolve the around noise and air quality. I don't have any confidence

0:27:16 > 0:27:20that science has demonstrated that technology will deliver those

0:27:20 > 0:27:25solutions to these very serious environmental limbs which have

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

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

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

0:27:35 > 0:27:38crying out for more routes, they really think it hurts business

0:27:38 > 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 > 0:27:53expanding Heathrow for 50 years and it is never happened, it's because

0:27:53 > 0:27:58it's a bad idea. So, inevitably the legal processes are very complex.

0:27:58 > 0:28:03One of my anxieties about, pursuing this option is that potentially it

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

0:29:04 > 0:29:06well-established precedent that after an agreement is reached

0:29:06 > 0:29:12overseas, then it is considered in the House of Commons.What if it was

0:29:12 > 0:29:16voted down in the House of Commons? Well, the legal effect of that would

0:29:16 > 0:29:19be that we left the European Union without any kind of deal, because

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

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

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

0:29:33 > 0:29:36Would it not be possible if the Commons voted against to ask the

0:29:36 > 0:29:39European Union for a little bit more time to try and renegotiate?There

0:29:39 > 0:29:48is a debate about the reversibility of Article 50. But the key point is

0:29:48 > 0:29:54that we are all working for a good deal for the United Kingdom and the

0:29:54 > 0:29:58I'm concerned that some of the amendments to the legislation are

0:29:58 > 0:30:01not about the nature of the deal at the end of the process, they're just

0:30:01 > 0:30:08about frustrating the process. I think that would be wrong. I think

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

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

0:30:14 > 0:30:16parliaments?I certainly hope that we get that agreement between the

0:30:16 > 0:30:22two sides, and the recent European summit seemed to indicate a

0:30:22 > 0:30:26willingness from the European side to be constructive. But one point

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

0:30:30 > 0:30:33a transitional deal, that does potentially give us more time to

0:30:33 > 0:30:38work on the details of a trade agreement. I hope we get as much as

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

0:30:42 > 0:30:50is made easier if we can secure that two-year transitional deal.

0:30:50 > 0:30:57That is interesting because a lot of Brexiteers what the deal to be done

0:30:57 > 0:31:04by the inflammation period, it is not a time for that.I fully

0:31:04 > 0:31:09recognise we need compromise, I am keen to work with people across my

0:31:09 > 0:31:13party in terms of spectrum of opinion, and with other parties as

0:31:13 > 0:31:18well to ensure we get the best outcome.Let me ask you briefly

0:31:18 > 0:31:22before you go about the possible culture of sexual harassment in the

0:31:22 > 0:31:27House of commons and Theresa May will write to the Speaker of the

0:31:27 > 0:31:31House of Commons to make sure there is a better way that people can

0:31:31 > 0:31:35report sexual harassment in the House of commons. Is that necessary?

0:31:35 > 0:31:41A better procedure is needed. It is sad it has taken this controversy to

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

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

0:31:51 > 0:31:54essentially they are overseeing their own complaints process. I

0:31:54 > 0:31:59think a role for the House of commons authorities in ensuring that

0:31:59 > 0:32:02those complaints are properly dealt with I think would be very helpful,

0:32:02 > 0:32:07so I think the Prime Minister's letter was a sensible move.So you

0:32:07 > 0:32:11think there is a culture of sexual harassment in the House of commons?

0:32:11 > 0:32:17I have not been subjected to it or seen evidence of it, but obviously

0:32:17 > 0:32:21there is anxiety and allegations have made their way into the papers

0:32:21 > 0:32:25and they should be treated appropriately and properly

0:32:25 > 0:32:26investigated.Thank you for talking to us.

0:32:26 > 0:32:29Thank you for talking to us.

0:32:29 > 0:32:31Next week the Lord Speaker's committee publishes its final report

0:32:31 > 0:32:33into reducing the size of the House of Lords.

0:32:33 > 0:32:36With over 800 members the upper house is the second largest

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

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

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

0:32:42 > 0:32:44time-limited to 15 years and that in the future political peerage

0:32:44 > 0:32:49appointments will also be tied to a party's election performance.

0:32:49 > 0:32:51The government has been under pressure to take action to cut

0:32:51 > 0:32:55members of the unelected chamber, where they are entitled

0:32:55 > 0:32:58to claim an attendance allowance of £300 a day.

0:32:58 > 0:33:02And once again these expenses have been in the news.

0:33:02 > 0:33:04The Electoral Reform Society discovered that 16 peers had claimed

0:33:04 > 0:33:07around £400,000 without speaking in any debates or submitting any

0:33:07 > 0:33:11questions for an entire year.

0:33:11 > 0:33:13One of the Lords to be criticised was Digby Jones,

0:33:13 > 0:33:17the crossbencher and former trade minister, he hasn't spoken

0:33:17 > 0:33:20in the Lords since April 2016 and has voted only seven times

0:33:20 > 0:33:23during 2016 and 2017.

0:33:23 > 0:33:27Yet he has claimed around £15,000 in this period.

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

0:33:30 > 0:33:32"I go in and I will invite for lunch or meet with inward

0:33:32 > 0:33:34investors into the country.

0:33:34 > 0:33:37I fly the flag for Britain."

0:33:37 > 0:33:40Well, we can speak now to Lord Jones who joins us

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

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

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

0:33:56 > 0:34:00keen on reform. I want to see that 15 year tide. I would like to see a

0:34:00 > 0:34:06time limit, an age limit of 75 or 80. I would like attendants

0:34:06 > 0:34:10definitely define so the whole public understood what people are

0:34:10 > 0:34:17paying for and why. The £300, as a crossbencher I get no support, and

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

0:34:25 > 0:34:29that, and the £300 goes towards that.Whilst you are in there

0:34:29 > 0:34:34because we will talk about the reform of the Lords in general, but

0:34:34 > 0:34:37in terms of you yourself, you say you invite people in for lunch, is

0:34:37 > 0:34:41it not possible for you to take part in debates and votes and ask

0:34:41 > 0:34:46questions at the same time?Have you ever listened to a debate in the

0:34:46 > 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 > 0:35:10to be around when the vote is called and you do not know when the book is

0:35:10 > 0:35:14called, you have no idea when the boat is going to be called.This is

0:35:14 > 0:35:20part of being a member of the House of Lords and what it means. If you

0:35:20 > 0:35:24are not prepared to wait or take part in debates, why do you want to

0:35:24 > 0:35:29be a member? It is possible to resign from the House of Lords.

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

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

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

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

0:35:48 > 0:35:52saying I will entertain at lunchtime or show people around the House,

0:35:52 > 0:35:56everything from schoolchildren to inward investors. I will meet

0:35:56 > 0:35:59ministers about big business issues or educational issues, and at the

0:35:59 > 0:36:04same time I will meet other members of the Lords to get things moving.

0:36:04 > 0:36:08None of that relates to going into the House and getting on your hind

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

0:36:12 > 0:36:18others, which, if more people would receive and not transmit, we might

0:36:18 > 0:36:22get a better informed society. At the same time many times I will go

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

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

0:36:33 > 0:36:38legislative chamber. This is not just an executive committee, it is a

0:36:38 > 0:36:43legislature, surpassing that law is essential, is it not?Do you really

0:36:43 > 0:36:47believe that an MP or a member of the Lords who has not heard a moment

0:36:47 > 0:36:54of the debate, who is then listening to the Bell, walks in and does not

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

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

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

0:37:09 > 0:37:13chamber, and you have your ideas about reforming the chamber. It

0:37:13 > 0:37:17sounds as though you would reform yourself out of it. You say people

0:37:17 > 0:37:20who are not voting and who are not taking part in debate should no

0:37:20 > 0:37:27longer be members of the House.I did not say that. I said we ought to

0:37:27 > 0:37:32redefine what attendance means and then if you do not attend on the new

0:37:32 > 0:37:35criteria, you do not have to come ever again, we will give you your

0:37:35 > 0:37:41wish. I agree attendance might mean unless you speak, you are going.

0:37:41 > 0:37:46Fair enough, if that is what is agreed, yes. Sometimes I would speak

0:37:46 > 0:37:52and sometimes I would not. If I did not, then off I go. Similarly after

0:37:52 > 0:37:5815 years, off you go. If you reach 75 or 80, off you go. Why do we have

0:37:58 > 0:38:0492 members who are only there because of daddy.You are talking

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

0:38:07 > 0:38:13kind of number?I would get it down to 400.You would get rid of half

0:38:13 > 0:38:17the peers there at the moment? You think you are active enough to

0:38:17 > 0:38:25remain as one of the 400?No, I said that might well include me. Let's

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

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

0:38:34 > 0:38:37these things about what people pay for. I bet most people think the

0:38:37 > 0:38:43money you get is paid. It is not, it is re-funding for all the things you

0:38:43 > 0:38:48have to pay for yourself. But I understand how respect has been lost

0:38:48 > 0:38:53in society. Let's change it now. Let's get it through and then, yes,

0:38:53 > 0:38:58if you do not meet the criteria, you have got to go and that includes me.

0:38:58 > 0:39:00Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.

0:39:00 > 0:39:03Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.

0:39:03 > 0:39:05It's coming up to 11.40, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

0:39:05 > 0:39:08Coming up on the programme, we'll be talking to the former

0:39:08 > 0:39:10business minister and Conservative MP Anna Soubry about the Brexit

0:39:10 > 0:39:21negotiations and claims of sexual harassment in Parliament.

0:39:21 > 0:39:22Yes, hello. harassment in Parliament.

0:39:22 > 0:39:23Good morning. harassment in Parliament.

0:39:23 > 0:39:25You're watching the Sunday Politics for Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.

0:39:25 > 0:39:29Coming up today: Around one in ten British IS fighters in

0:39:30 > 0:39:31the Middle East come from Yorkshire.

0:39:31 > 0:39:34We ask what should happen to them if and when they return home.

0:39:34 > 0:39:38Should the Jared O'Mara controversy act as a warning to others?

0:39:38 > 0:39:40Why experts say our so-called digital tattoo could

0:39:40 > 0:39:45come back to haunt us.

0:39:45 > 0:39:48We used to call it a digital fingerprint and it turns

0:39:48 > 0:39:49to digital footprint.

0:39:49 > 0:39:55And the terminology now is changing more towards digital tattoo.

0:39:55 > 0:39:57Discussing those subjects and more are our guests yesterday,

0:39:57 > 0:40:01Barry Sheerman, Labour MP for Huddersfield, and Stuart Andrew,

0:40:01 > 0:40:04Conservative MP for Pudsey.

0:40:04 > 0:40:07What should happen to British-born fighters who join the so-called

0:40:07 > 0:40:10Islamic State terror group?

0:40:10 > 0:40:11The Government estimates 850 people from Britain

0:40:11 > 0:40:15travel to Iraq and Syria.

0:40:15 > 0:40:18Of those, 250 have been identified and 22 of those are known

0:40:18 > 0:40:22to be from Yorkshire, although it's likely that a much

0:40:22 > 0:40:26higher number have travelled from this region and could return.

0:40:26 > 0:40:28As their caliphate continues to collapse, one government minister

0:40:28 > 0:40:32suggested that IS fighters should be killed.

0:40:32 > 0:40:35Another expert on conflict in the Middle East from Bradford

0:40:35 > 0:40:40claims that would be a mistake.

0:40:40 > 0:40:43I'm afraid we have to be serious about the fact these people

0:40:43 > 0:40:46are a serious danger to us.

0:40:46 > 0:40:48Unfortunately, the only way of dealing with them will be,

0:40:48 > 0:40:51in almost every case, to kill them.

0:40:51 > 0:40:53I think comments like that are extremely unhelpful

0:40:53 > 0:40:57and extremely polarising.

0:40:57 > 0:40:59Because, Isis is not the cause of the problem,

0:40:59 > 0:41:05it's the symptom of the problem.

0:41:05 > 0:41:09We have to remember the fact that he was the former governor of Iraq.

0:41:09 > 0:41:11At least part of the reason that the so-called Islamic State

0:41:11 > 0:41:14came about initially in Iraq and then later on in Syria

0:41:14 > 0:41:20was because of the British and American-led invasion

0:41:20 > 0:41:24of the country in 2003.

0:41:24 > 0:41:29Isis are responsible for some unbelievably barbaric acts,

0:41:29 > 0:41:32like beheading people, torturing people, enslaving men

0:41:32 > 0:41:41and women in Iraq and Syria, destroying cultural heritage sites.

0:41:41 > 0:41:43There are so many other crimes that we can go

0:41:43 > 0:41:50on and on and on talking about.

0:41:50 > 0:41:53Obviously, listing the crimes and listing the barbaric acts

0:41:53 > 0:41:57and behaviour is not really going to help us to find

0:41:57 > 0:42:01a meaningful solution.

0:42:01 > 0:42:04A lot of these people who are coming back to Yorkshire,

0:42:04 > 0:42:09they pose a different level of threat.

0:42:09 > 0:42:12A lot of people, particularly a lot of children, a lot of teenagers,

0:42:12 > 0:42:15who join an organisation like the so-called Islamic State

0:42:15 > 0:42:25or Al-Qaeda, probably have been brainwashed and indoctrinated.

0:42:25 > 0:42:29They maybe have been suffering from some kind of mental illness.

0:42:29 > 0:42:33This is exactly why I'm talking about a more comprehensive approach.

0:42:33 > 0:42:36And then come up with kind of effective policies which can

0:42:36 > 0:42:45pave the way to a kind of more sustainable peace.

0:42:45 > 0:42:48Is it really possible Isis fighters could come back and live a normal

0:42:48 > 0:42:51life in places like Huddersfield?

0:42:51 > 0:42:55I think they could in certain circumstances.

0:42:55 > 0:42:58I would want everyone who has been there to be tagged,

0:42:58 > 0:43:02to be known about, to be watched very carefully indeed.

0:43:02 > 0:43:04We can't stop them coming back.

0:43:04 > 0:43:07That's apparent.

0:43:07 > 0:43:09I'm sure Rory Stewart, when he was talking about shooting

0:43:09 > 0:43:12anyone while they were still in Syria, but the fact of the matter

0:43:12 > 0:43:18is we deserve the highest level of protection for our constituents.

0:43:18 > 0:43:20We say we can't stop them.

0:43:20 > 0:43:22You take passports off them.

0:43:22 > 0:43:26Why should they be British citizens after fighting for our enemies?

0:43:26 > 0:43:28I'm sorry but the answers we've had in the House of Commons

0:43:28 > 0:43:31from ministers is that these people will be coming back.

0:43:31 > 0:43:34If they're coming back, what I'm very keen on is our

0:43:34 > 0:43:35intelligence services, our police, our security operation

0:43:35 > 0:43:38knows where they are all the time.

0:43:38 > 0:43:41The Government doesn't seem to have a clear plan here, does it?

0:43:41 > 0:43:43I think it does, in fairness.

0:43:43 > 0:43:45Let's be frank about it.

0:43:45 > 0:43:47There's been an awful lot of legislation going through,

0:43:47 > 0:43:49trying to deal with the whole security issue.

0:43:49 > 0:43:51It's the number one job of any government, whichever

0:43:51 > 0:43:55political party is in power - that is defending and

0:43:55 > 0:43:57keeping our country safe.

0:43:57 > 0:44:01This is a very difficult and complex area.

0:44:01 > 0:44:03We have to make sure we have all the systems in place.

0:44:03 > 0:44:04You're right.

0:44:04 > 0:44:08If people come back having been out there, fighting against our country,

0:44:08 > 0:44:13then we do have the right to take those passports off them and,

0:44:13 > 0:44:17in those circumstances, if it's proven they've been fighting

0:44:17 > 0:44:19against British forces, then I think we should.

0:44:19 > 0:44:22The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation said

0:44:22 > 0:44:29they should be reintegrated into British society.

0:44:29 > 0:44:32I suspect many of the people you represent, Barry Sheerman,

0:44:32 > 0:44:34would agree with Rory Stewart they should be killed.

0:44:34 > 0:44:35Maybe so.

0:44:35 > 0:44:42I think most of the people would say that people that come back,

0:44:42 > 0:44:44we would make sure we know where they are.

0:44:44 > 0:44:46We would try to reintegrate them into society.

0:44:46 > 0:44:49The two of us were very close to a terrorist incident,

0:44:49 > 0:44:50right below my office.

0:44:50 > 0:44:51My staff saw it.

0:44:51 > 0:44:52All of it.

0:44:52 > 0:44:54I was so close, I could almost touch it.

0:44:54 > 0:44:56We all know about terrorism.

0:44:56 > 0:44:57We've got to defend our country from terrorism.

0:44:57 > 0:45:00We've got to be realistic.

0:45:00 > 0:45:02We know we can't stop these people coming back.

0:45:02 > 0:45:05When they come back, we must take all the proper procedures.

0:45:05 > 0:45:06Some of it might be education.

0:45:06 > 0:45:09They may have seen the error of their ways and we can

0:45:09 > 0:45:10make them good citizens.

0:45:10 > 0:45:13If they're not, we want to check where they are all the time.

0:45:13 > 0:45:15Can they really be deradicalised, effectively?

0:45:15 > 0:45:18Actually we need to go right to the beginning as well.

0:45:18 > 0:45:21We've got a lot of work to do to stop people being radicalised

0:45:21 > 0:45:23in the first place.

0:45:23 > 0:45:26It's not just government that does this or the security forces.

0:45:26 > 0:45:31Big internet companies have a role to play in this,

0:45:31 > 0:45:33helping us identify those who are vulnerable and in danger

0:45:33 > 0:45:35of being radicalised.

0:45:35 > 0:45:38Also making it very clear that these people are not

0:45:38 > 0:45:41going to some paradise.

0:45:41 > 0:45:46This is a horrible war zone where terrible atrocities are happening.

0:45:46 > 0:45:49We've got to stop the glamorisation of it - that is appealing to some

0:45:49 > 0:45:53people who feel supposedly disenfranchised from this country.

0:45:54 > 0:45:55Yeah.

0:45:55 > 0:45:58Many people will point to the origins of the problem.

0:45:58 > 0:46:01It perhaps can date back to British foreign policy decisions.

0:46:01 > 0:46:06You voted in favour of the Iraq War back in 2003.

0:46:06 > 0:46:08Do you not feel a sense of responsibility for what is

0:46:08 > 0:46:10happening in the Middle East?

0:46:10 > 0:46:11Of course I do.

0:46:11 > 0:46:14I think we all take responsibility for a much longer period

0:46:15 > 0:46:17of imperialism across the world.

0:46:17 > 0:46:18That is a fact.

0:46:18 > 0:46:21We have been a major world power, involved in the Middle East

0:46:21 > 0:46:23consistently over a long period of time.

0:46:23 > 0:46:28Yes, of course.

0:46:28 > 0:46:31If I were going to go back and look at the Iraq vote,

0:46:31 > 0:46:32I would change my mind.

0:46:32 > 0:46:33It is very easy...

0:46:33 > 0:46:37Had we not gone to war in Iraq in 2003, do you think Islamic State

0:46:37 > 0:46:39would ever have happened?

0:46:39 > 0:46:41Let's take you back in history.

0:46:41 > 0:46:42Go to the Twin Towers.

0:46:42 > 0:46:43Yes?

0:46:43 > 0:46:47The thing that shook the foundation of every Western democracy

0:46:47 > 0:46:52when all those people, many British people amongst them,

0:46:52 > 0:46:55an act of terrorism never known in the world before.

0:46:55 > 0:46:58Many of us reacted against that.

0:46:58 > 0:47:00Let's get our history right.

0:47:00 > 0:47:02The first dramatic blow was from these ghastly people

0:47:02 > 0:47:08who killed so many innocent people in the name of their religion.

0:47:08 > 0:47:11Some would say we are winning the battle against terror abroad

0:47:11 > 0:47:13but perhaps losing it at home when you consider the

0:47:13 > 0:47:14events of this year.

0:47:14 > 0:47:17This is another reason I find it quite difficult to say that people

0:47:17 > 0:47:20who have been out there fighting against our country should

0:47:20 > 0:47:24just walk back in here.

0:47:24 > 0:47:25I just don't think that's possible.

0:47:25 > 0:47:27Thinking about those people, as Barry said, we witnessed

0:47:27 > 0:47:31what happened in London.

0:47:31 > 0:47:34I have a good friend of mine - his mother was killed in Manchester

0:47:34 > 0:47:35in that terrorist attack.

0:47:35 > 0:47:37I must think about them.

0:47:37 > 0:47:39They are the ones we must stand up for.

0:47:39 > 0:47:41These are British people we need to make sure

0:47:41 > 0:47:42we are protecting and keeping safe.

0:47:42 > 0:47:45Can I also say that I have a substantial

0:47:45 > 0:47:46number of Muslims living in my constituency...

0:47:46 > 0:47:49They hate this terrorism.

0:47:49 > 0:47:50Absolutely.

0:47:50 > 0:47:51They really do hate it.

0:47:51 > 0:47:52They get painted into being supporters.

0:47:52 > 0:47:58They are not supporters.

0:47:58 > 0:48:00An interesting debate as always, this one.

0:48:00 > 0:48:02Now when the history books reflect on the political career

0:48:02 > 0:48:04of the Sheffield Hallam MP, Jared O'Mara, they are likely

0:48:04 > 0:48:08to point to a cautionary tale.

0:48:08 > 0:48:11Why weren't the necessary checks and balances made on his previous

0:48:11 > 0:48:16views and why wasn't he even interviewed by the Labour Party?

0:48:16 > 0:48:19Digital experts say it is a trap many younger people could fall

0:48:19 > 0:48:22into when they leave their reckless days behind and try to forge

0:48:22 > 0:48:25a respectable career.

0:48:25 > 0:48:28As James Vincent reports.

0:48:28 > 0:48:31He is one of our youngest MPs and he's been all over the papers.

0:48:31 > 0:48:36Jared O'Mara started the week as Labour MP for Sheffield Hallam.

0:48:36 > 0:48:39He ends it as an Independent.

0:48:39 > 0:48:41After the headlines accusing him of alleged misogynistic

0:48:41 > 0:48:44and homophobic remarks made online 15 years ago, he apologised

0:48:44 > 0:48:48and resigned from the Equalities Committee.

0:48:48 > 0:48:50When more recent allegations of similar behaviour emerged,

0:48:50 > 0:48:55Labour took the decision to investigate, then suspend him

0:48:55 > 0:48:59pending the outcome of that enquiry.

0:48:59 > 0:49:02As time goes on, we will have different MPs, younger MPs who have

0:49:02 > 0:49:06lived their entire lives online.

0:49:06 > 0:49:08The problem is, something that you post when you're

0:49:08 > 0:49:11younger doesn't go away.

0:49:11 > 0:49:14It's the sort of thing that Cath Knibbs sees more and more of.

0:49:14 > 0:49:19She's a psychotherapist specialising in abuse online.

0:49:19 > 0:49:21We used to call it a digital fingerprint, then it changed

0:49:21 > 0:49:22to digital footprint.

0:49:22 > 0:49:25The terminology now is changing more towards digital tattoo

0:49:25 > 0:49:27because once it's ingrained, it's ingrained and you're

0:49:27 > 0:49:30looking at a long time to actually remove it,

0:49:30 > 0:49:33if at all, ever, being able to remove it.

0:49:33 > 0:49:35Are you getting more and more people coming

0:49:35 > 0:49:37to you with these sorts of problems?

0:49:37 > 0:49:39They're not problems that older people in politics will understand

0:49:39 > 0:49:41because social media and the internet was not

0:49:41 > 0:49:43around then, was it?

0:49:43 > 0:49:45Employers do do background checks.

0:49:45 > 0:49:48We have a platform now that allows people to do it much more quickly.

0:49:48 > 0:49:53Quite often if social media profiles are open,

0:49:53 > 0:49:56it allows people to find out much more information.

0:49:56 > 0:49:59It is something I have seen used by the army, the medical community,

0:49:59 > 0:50:04solicitors, lawyers.

0:50:04 > 0:50:14But apparently not Labour.

0:50:18 > 0:50:22This year's snap election was such a rush and such a surprise that

0:50:22 > 0:50:23Labour's emergency selection process kicked in.

0:50:23 > 0:50:26Send your CV in, choose a seat to fancy, and the Exec Committee

0:50:26 > 0:50:28or the regional party picked who stood.

0:50:28 > 0:50:30Labour has admitted that Jared O'Mara was not interviewed

0:50:30 > 0:50:31before he became their candidate.

0:50:31 > 0:50:34This week Momentum, the grassroots Labour group met in Sheffield,

0:50:34 > 0:50:39some of them unhappy with the way the party picks its candidates.

0:50:39 > 0:50:42That just goes to show just how poor the selection process is and how

0:50:42 > 0:50:43undemocratic the selection process is, really.

0:50:43 > 0:50:49This is why we need mandatory reselection.

0:50:49 > 0:50:51There's clearly a problem with the selection process.

0:50:51 > 0:50:52He wouldn't have been my candidate.

0:50:52 > 0:50:54No.

0:50:54 > 0:50:57But, then again, what I learnt as someone who campaigns for Labour,

0:50:57 > 0:51:00or any political party really, if you're trying to change people's

0:51:00 > 0:51:07opinions and vote a certain way, you're not going to judge them based

0:51:07 > 0:51:09on what their previous beliefs were.

0:51:09 > 0:51:12So, I would not judge Jared O'Mara based on what he

0:51:12 > 0:51:18said 15 years earlier.

0:51:18 > 0:51:20This is a story about selection but, more importantly,

0:51:20 > 0:51:23about what standards of behaviour we expect from our MPs -

0:51:23 > 0:51:26even before they become MPs.

0:51:26 > 0:51:28The latest allegations about Jared O'Mara come

0:51:28 > 0:51:29from earlier this year.

0:51:29 > 0:51:33He categorically denies them.

0:51:33 > 0:51:35They are the allegations that are being investigated by Labour.

0:51:35 > 0:51:37Jared O'Mara was the big surprise of this election,

0:51:37 > 0:51:39almost like Labour wasn't expecting him to win.

0:51:39 > 0:51:45James Vincent reporting there.

0:51:45 > 0:51:49Barry Sheerman, do you believe Jared O'Mara has a future as a Labour MP?

0:51:49 > 0:51:52I think we should be very careful before we rush to judgment.

0:51:52 > 0:51:55I have only met this young man a couple of times.

0:51:55 > 0:51:58I can understand that when he was selected I think

0:51:58 > 0:52:02people would have looked that he was on the

0:52:02 > 0:52:05disability spectrum.

0:52:05 > 0:52:06There is no doubt.

0:52:06 > 0:52:09I chair the Autism Commission, so I deal with a lot

0:52:09 > 0:52:10of people on the autism...

0:52:10 > 0:52:13I'm not saying Jared is on the autism but he has,

0:52:13 > 0:52:16clearly, on the disability spectrum.

0:52:16 > 0:52:19When he was chosen, I think people would say,

0:52:19 > 0:52:24here's a young person who has a disability.

0:52:24 > 0:52:26Wouldn't it be a rather good thing if we extended candidates

0:52:26 > 0:52:29to someone like that?

0:52:29 > 0:52:32I think for the very best reason.

0:52:32 > 0:52:34I don't know...

0:52:34 > 0:52:35Do you accept now that's a mistake?

0:52:35 > 0:52:37No, I don't say that's a mistake.

0:52:37 > 0:52:40I would like to have a professional evaluation of what this young

0:52:40 > 0:52:44man's background is, what the nature of his disability

0:52:44 > 0:52:47is, before we all rush to judgment.

0:52:47 > 0:52:51So, I'm the sort person who says, let's have a measured look at this.

0:52:51 > 0:52:53I think the views expressed on social media years ago

0:52:53 > 0:52:56were absolutely abhorrent.

0:52:56 > 0:52:57Absolutely.

0:52:57 > 0:53:00It's very easy to rush to judgment and say,

0:53:00 > 0:53:04"Hang him," and all that sort of dreadful stuff.

0:53:04 > 0:53:05I want a careful evaluation.

0:53:05 > 0:53:08If these are genuinely his views and not affected

0:53:08 > 0:53:12by his disability at all, yes, he should not be

0:53:12 > 0:53:15a Labour candidate at a Parliamentary election.

0:53:16 > 0:53:17But let's carefully look.

0:53:17 > 0:53:20We chose a person on the disability spectrum, and I think we should...

0:53:20 > 0:53:24Based on what you've heard about him so far,

0:53:24 > 0:53:27would you be happy continuing to sit next to him on the Labour benches?

0:53:27 > 0:53:31If we have an evaluation of his disability and then

0:53:31 > 0:53:35I understand from where he is coming and why he said this,

0:53:35 > 0:53:38I want the full explanation before I rush to judgment.

0:53:38 > 0:53:40OK, Stuart Andrew.

0:53:40 > 0:53:43We live in a world now where many people have a digital past.

0:53:43 > 0:53:47Is it acceptable to believe that young people going into politics

0:53:47 > 0:53:51are going to have these squeaky-clean digital tattoo,

0:53:51 > 0:53:55as we heard it called there in James' film?

0:53:55 > 0:54:00There will be people with skeletons in their digital closet.

0:54:00 > 0:54:03I don't quite understand how a disability has anything to do

0:54:03 > 0:54:08with expressing certain views like that.

0:54:08 > 0:54:10You don't understand autism then.

0:54:10 > 0:54:11Well, no.

0:54:11 > 0:54:13What I'm trying to say here is, those views were, obviously,

0:54:13 > 0:54:18as Barry said, were abhorrent.

0:54:18 > 0:54:20Having been on the receiving end of abuse like that,

0:54:20 > 0:54:23I do find it particularly hard, I have to say.

0:54:23 > 0:54:26I think we do have an obligation, as MPs, to be careful

0:54:26 > 0:54:30about the language that we use and have used in the past.

0:54:30 > 0:54:33In terms of the digital history, you are right.

0:54:33 > 0:54:36A lot of young people today put all sorts on Facebook and Twitter.

0:54:36 > 0:54:39It is therefore a very long time.

0:54:39 > 0:54:44I am not really bothered about, I suppose, people's behaviour.

0:54:44 > 0:54:47Everyone has been young once and perhaps been a bit foolish.

0:54:47 > 0:54:49But what I am worried about is whether people have views

0:54:49 > 0:54:54against people who are gay, against women, that

0:54:54 > 0:54:59really are not suitable for somebody in public life.

0:54:59 > 0:55:00That does bother me.

0:55:00 > 0:55:02Many on the Momentum wing of the Labour Party,

0:55:02 > 0:55:04and we heard it there, would like to see

0:55:04 > 0:55:05mandatory reselection.

0:55:05 > 0:55:08What's your view on that?

0:55:08 > 0:55:10We should have proper selection and reselection in our party.

0:55:10 > 0:55:17We are a democratic party but that should be balanced

0:55:17 > 0:55:20in terms of how we do it, who is considered eligible to vote.

0:55:20 > 0:55:23We have good rules in the Labour Party historically.

0:55:23 > 0:55:28I think they should be observed.

0:55:28 > 0:55:31You have to remember that, at this present moment,

0:55:31 > 0:55:35quite a large number of moderate Labour Members of Parliament

0:55:35 > 0:55:38are being threatened by Momentum for no reason,

0:55:38 > 0:55:41not that they're not good MPs but because a large number of people

0:55:41 > 0:55:44have joined the Labour Party in recent months to get rid

0:55:44 > 0:55:45of a particular candidate.

0:55:45 > 0:55:50We know the Sheffield Hallam constituency Labour Party

0:55:50 > 0:55:53met on Friday night.

0:55:53 > 0:55:56If you were them, would you perhaps be looking potentially for another

0:55:56 > 0:55:59Labour candidate in case this comes to a by-election?

0:55:59 > 0:56:02I don't know.

0:56:02 > 0:56:04I really don't know.

0:56:04 > 0:56:08My early answer is, I will not rush to judgment until I know more

0:56:08 > 0:56:09about this young man.

0:56:09 > 0:56:11Everyone deserves to be...

0:56:11 > 0:56:16To have a proper evaluation of what is alleged to have been said

0:56:16 > 0:56:19and the reaseons he said it.

0:56:19 > 0:56:21I have only met him twice.

0:56:21 > 0:56:23He's clearly on the disability spectrum.

0:56:23 > 0:56:26I don't know the nature of that disability.

0:56:26 > 0:56:28Some disabilities, certainly on the autism spectrum,

0:56:28 > 0:56:33lead you to use language in a very careless way.

0:56:33 > 0:56:37Now, I am sorry, that is the truth and I want to know the facts

0:56:37 > 0:56:40of the matter before we decide.

0:56:40 > 0:56:42Briefly, Stuart Andrew, do you think there will be

0:56:42 > 0:56:43a by-election in Sheffield Hallam?

0:56:43 > 0:56:46I think it will be increasingly difficult, certainly if the recent

0:56:46 > 0:56:48accounts come out to be accurate and if there is more.

0:56:48 > 0:56:52I think it will be very difficult.

0:56:52 > 0:56:55I think you're right - this shows how important it is that

0:56:55 > 0:57:00political parties actually do make sure that people they are putting up

0:57:00 > 0:57:02for selection in constituencies have been properly checked.

0:57:02 > 0:57:05It was one of the things we had to do in a rush.

0:57:05 > 0:57:08I remember being in our head office are seeing a gang of people

0:57:08 > 0:57:11going through hundreds of applications, but it

0:57:11 > 0:57:13was necessary to do it.

0:57:13 > 0:57:15Probably sadly it was an example of where it went wrong.

0:57:15 > 0:57:17There's no perfect system, is there?

0:57:17 > 0:57:18No, there isn't.

0:57:18 > 0:57:20Especially with the rush election.

0:57:20 > 0:57:22You've got to get candidates in the seats in a hurry.

0:57:22 > 0:57:27And so there will be some quite unexpected people pitching up

0:57:27 > 0:57:29in the House of Commons that didn't expect to be there

0:57:29 > 0:57:32in the first place.

0:57:32 > 0:57:35Let us be seriously independent.

0:57:35 > 0:57:39Let's be kind to people.

0:57:39 > 0:57:42We shall see what happens with that.

0:57:42 > 0:57:44Let's get some more of the week's political news now.

0:57:44 > 0:57:49Alistair Gill has our round-up in 60 seconds.

0:57:49 > 0:57:55The Vice Chancellor of the University of York says

0:57:55 > 0:57:59he is deeply concerned by a request which went to universities

0:57:59 > 0:58:03across the country from leading Brexiteer Chris Heaton-Harris.

0:58:03 > 0:58:05He had requested information regarding what universities

0:58:06 > 0:58:08are teaching about Brexit.

0:58:08 > 0:58:11York's Vice Chancellor Professor Koen Lambert says he will not

0:58:11 > 0:58:13provide the information but will write back and explain

0:58:13 > 0:58:18the importance of academic autonomy.

0:58:18 > 0:58:21Policing anti-fracking protests at the site in Kirby Misperton have

0:58:21 > 0:58:25cost the North Yorkshire force £180,000 so far.

0:58:25 > 0:58:28Police and Crime Commissioner Julia Mulligan says this is likely

0:58:28 > 0:58:32to have an impact on policing across the county.

0:58:32 > 0:58:35The sort of normal policing teams are not as they would normally be

0:58:35 > 0:58:38because the resources have had to be moved.

0:58:38 > 0:58:43And a Yorkshire MP can claim she owns Parliament's top dog.

0:58:43 > 0:58:47Rocky the Labrador belongs to Batley and Spen MP Tracy Brabin and Rocky

0:58:47 > 0:58:50has been crowned Westminster Dog of the Tear by the Dogs

0:58:50 > 0:58:56Trust and Kennel Club.

0:58:56 > 0:58:58Well done to Tracy and Rocky.

0:58:58 > 0:59:03Stuart Andrew, are our universities a hotbed of anti-Brexit propaganda?

0:59:03 > 0:59:05Do you know, I have spoken to Chris about this letter

0:59:05 > 0:59:09and he was genuinely trying to find out what is being discussed

0:59:09 > 0:59:12in our universities.

0:59:12 > 0:59:14You know, I don't know whether he now regrets

0:59:14 > 0:59:15having said that letter.

0:59:15 > 0:59:17My view is...

0:59:17 > 0:59:20My view is, one of the things that is great about our

0:59:20 > 0:59:26universities is that freedom for academic independence.

0:59:27 > 0:59:28That is important.

0:59:28 > 0:59:31It would be interesting to know what is being discussed

0:59:31 > 0:59:34in the whole era of Brexit, it would be interesting to know

0:59:34 > 0:59:37what topics are being talked about in those

0:59:37 > 0:59:40university lecture seminars.

0:59:40 > 0:59:45It's a lot of information to get.

0:59:45 > 0:59:46Was it the best thing to do?

0:59:46 > 0:59:47Probably not.

0:59:47 > 0:59:48It is interesting.

0:59:48 > 0:59:51There was a YouGov poll which said 90% of academics believe that Brexit

0:59:52 > 0:59:54would have a negative impact.

0:59:54 > 0:59:57You might not be surprised by the result but there is clearly

0:59:57 > 1:00:00an anti-Brexit feeling on campus, isn't there?

1:00:00 > 1:00:03The truth is, when you look at who voted to remain,

1:00:03 > 1:00:08most of them were the better educated people in our country.

1:00:08 > 1:00:10What?

1:00:10 > 1:00:13That is controversial.

1:00:13 > 1:00:14Absolutely.

1:00:14 > 1:00:21It is absolutely true - you could see the pattern.

1:00:21 > 1:00:24All the university towns voted to remain.

1:00:24 > 1:00:25You stand by that?

1:00:25 > 1:00:27You're seriously saying that better educated people voted for remain

1:00:27 > 1:00:29and thick people voted to leave?

1:00:29 > 1:00:30Absolutely they did.

1:00:30 > 1:00:31I didn't use the other expression.

1:00:31 > 1:00:32You used that.

1:00:32 > 1:00:33That's the connotation.

1:00:33 > 1:00:35Am I allowed to answer?

1:00:35 > 1:00:38You asked me a question and I'm trying to answer you.

1:00:38 > 1:00:42The fact of the matter is, we know that what we call the barmy

1:00:42 > 1:00:45army from the Brexit camp run the Conservative Party now.

1:00:45 > 1:00:49They really are the lunatic fringe who have taken over his party.

1:00:49 > 1:00:51I watch them and I see them.

1:00:51 > 1:00:55It is amazing that this character, who I have never heard speak

1:00:55 > 1:00:59in the House of Commons, doing a McCarthyite sort of tactic

1:00:59 > 1:01:03of trying to frighten campuses, frightening university students.

1:01:03 > 1:01:04That's not what he's doing at all.

1:01:04 > 1:01:07This man went to Wolverhampton Polytechnic.

1:01:07 > 1:01:11Who does he think he is - trying to frighten my University

1:01:11 > 1:01:15of Huddersfield because they have high-class intellectuals

1:01:15 > 1:01:18teaching kids?

1:01:18 > 1:01:20Most people with a good education know that Brexit

1:01:20 > 1:01:22will damage the lives...

1:01:22 > 1:01:25We don't have time to go into the whole Brexit debate

1:01:25 > 1:01:26but I'll let you respond.

1:01:26 > 1:01:27I'm astounded by this snobbery.

1:01:27 > 1:01:29First of all, anyone who voted Brexit is...

1:01:29 > 1:01:30Intellectual snobbery.

1:01:30 > 1:01:31Yeah.

1:01:31 > 1:01:34And the fact that Chris went to some polytechnic is some problem.

1:01:34 > 1:01:36I didn't go to university.

1:01:36 > 1:01:37Is that an issue?

1:01:37 > 1:01:39That I didn't go to university?

1:01:39 > 1:01:41I have never heard such snobbery in all my life.

1:01:41 > 1:01:44In terms of people who have taken over political parties,

1:01:44 > 1:01:46Barry, my goodness me, with the Momentum issue you have

1:01:46 > 1:01:48got, that is a dangerous view.

1:01:48 > 1:01:51Barmy Army.

1:01:51 > 1:01:54I think we would have been safer discussing the Westminster Dog

1:01:54 > 1:01:55of the Year contest.

1:01:55 > 1:01:57It was all going so well before that.

1:01:57 > 1:02:00I wanted a Yorkshire breed to win.

1:02:00 > 1:02:01There's always next year.

1:02:01 > 1:02:03Thank you for both for your time today.

1:02:03 > 1:02:04An interesting thought.

1:02:04 > 1:02:06Thank you to Barry Sheerman and to Stuart Andrew,

1:02:06 > 1:02:08who is wearing the same tie as me, purely accidentally.

1:02:08 > 1:02:11Let's go back now to Sarah Smith in London.

1:02:24 > 1:02:26Now, the much anticipated EU Withdrawal Bill,

1:02:26 > 1:02:30which will transfer EU law into UK law in preparation for Brexit,

1:02:30 > 1:02:34is expected to be debated by MPs later next month.

1:02:34 > 1:02:37Critics have called it a "power grab" as it introduces so-called

1:02:37 > 1:02:40Henry VIII powers for Whitehall to amend some laws without

1:02:40 > 1:02:44consulting parliament, and it faces fierce resistance

1:02:44 > 1:02:47from opposition parties as well as many on the government's

1:02:47 > 1:02:52own backbenches, with 300 amendments and 54 new clauses tabled on it.

1:02:52 > 1:02:55We're joined now by the Conservative MP Anna Soubry who has been a strong

1:02:55 > 1:03:00critic of the legislation.

1:03:00 > 1:03:04Thank you very much for joining us. Before we talk about the withdrawal

1:03:04 > 1:03:09bill, I would like to bring up with you that the Prime Minister has just

1:03:09 > 1:03:13sent a letter to the Commons Speaker John Bercow asking for an

1:03:13 > 1:03:18independent body to be established to investigate claims of sexual

1:03:18 > 1:03:22harassment in Parliament. What are your thoughts on that?A very good

1:03:22 > 1:03:27idea, sounds like a great deal of common sense. I had already this

1:03:27 > 1:03:30morning sent a request to the speaker asking for an urgent

1:03:30 > 1:03:34statement from the Leader of the House as to what could now be done

1:03:34 > 1:03:40to make sure that any complaints actually against anybody working in

1:03:40 > 1:03:42Parliament, to extend the protections that workers throughout

1:03:42 > 1:03:47the rest of businesses and in other workplaces have, they should now be

1:03:47 > 1:03:51extended into Parliament and asking for an urgent statement from the

1:03:51 > 1:03:56leader. Clearly the PM is well onto this and it is a good idea. We have

1:03:56 > 1:04:00to make sure everybody who works in Parliament enjoys exactly the same

1:04:00 > 1:04:05protections as other workers, so I welcome this.This should maybe have

1:04:05 > 1:04:09happened a long time ago. We hear stories of harassment that has been

1:04:09 > 1:04:13going on for decades, but until now it has been difficult to work out

1:04:13 > 1:04:18who you could complain to about it. It is my understanding that my Chief

1:04:18 > 1:04:23Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip, and Milton, shared that view

1:04:23 > 1:04:28and have shared that view for some time but found it difficult to get

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

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

1:04:44 > 1:04:47my Chief Whip and the previous deputy Chief Whip wanted this done

1:04:47 > 1:04:49some time ago.That is an interesting point. Let's move on to

1:04:49 > 1:04:51the much anticipated EU withdrawal bill which will finally be debated.

1:04:51 > 1:04:54You have put your name to an amendment which is calling for a

1:04:54 > 1:04:56vote on the final agreement in essence, do you really believe that

1:04:56 > 1:05:00that will be a meaningful both offered to the Commons?Yes, if you

1:05:00 > 1:05:05look at the terms of the amendment, it would deliver exactly that. It

1:05:05 > 1:05:10would give members of Parliament the opportunity to debated and voted on

1:05:10 > 1:05:14it. It would be an effective piece of legislation and would go through

1:05:14 > 1:05:20both houses and should be done. One of the problems with this process is

1:05:20 > 1:05:24that Parliament has been excluded from the sort of debate and

1:05:24 > 1:05:29decisions that would have enabled the government to move forward in

1:05:29 > 1:05:39progress and form a consensus so we get the very best Brexit deal.We

1:05:39 > 1:05:42have been excluded, that has been wrong in my view, but by the end we

1:05:42 > 1:05:44should not be excluded. The government have made it clear that

1:05:44 > 1:05:47whilst there may well be a boat if you win on this amendment, it will

1:05:47 > 1:05:52be a take it or leave it vote. This is a deal you should accept, or

1:05:52 > 1:05:59there will be no deal.If you look at the amendment we put forward

1:05:59 > 1:06:02there will be other alternatives. This is all hypothetical because we

1:06:02 > 1:06:06want a good deal and it is difficult to see that the government would not

1:06:06 > 1:06:11bring a good deal to the House in any event. But this is hypothetical,

1:06:11 > 1:06:17it would mean Parliament would say to government, go back and seek an

1:06:17 > 1:06:22extension as we know it is there in Article 50. It is perfectly possible

1:06:22 > 1:06:27with the agreement of the other members of the EU to seek an

1:06:27 > 1:06:31extension so we continue the negotiations and we get a deal that

1:06:31 > 1:06:35is good for our country. It keeps all options open and that is the

1:06:35 > 1:06:40most important thing.How many Conservative MPs really would take

1:06:40 > 1:06:45that option in those circumstances? It is only if you get enough votes

1:06:45 > 1:06:48that you would be able to ask the government to go back and

1:06:48 > 1:06:58re-negotiate.

1:07:01 > 1:07:04Have you for that?For give me, but you are jumping way down the line. I

1:07:04 > 1:07:07am talking about an amendment that keeps the options open. I am not

1:07:07 > 1:07:10speculating as to what would happen, I am not going there, it is far too

1:07:10 > 1:07:14speculative. Let's get this bill in good shape. The principle of this

1:07:14 > 1:07:19bill is right and we need to put into British domestic law existing

1:07:19 > 1:07:24EU laws and regulations into our substantive law. We all agree that

1:07:24 > 1:07:29must happen. It is the means by which we do it that causes problems

1:07:29 > 1:07:36and we have this argument and debate about what we call the endgame.I am

1:07:36 > 1:07:39sure we will talk about this many more times before we get to that

1:07:39 > 1:07:45vote. I will turn to our panel of political experts. Listening to the

1:07:45 > 1:07:51tone of what the remainders are trying to achieve with the EU

1:07:51 > 1:07:56withdrawal bill, will be achieved? You can hear that tussled there,

1:07:56 > 1:08:00they want the maximum space and room for Parliament to have a say. But

1:08:00 > 1:08:07they have to be careful. The reason is that clock is ticking and if you

1:08:07 > 1:08:13have a situation which may seem to be more interested in finding

1:08:13 > 1:08:17different things to object to and saying no to, it is not getting a

1:08:17 > 1:08:21good deal and it does not look good for the remainders in this argument

1:08:21 > 1:08:26and they will have to come through with their proposals. I do not mind

1:08:26 > 1:08:29Parliament saying it should have a big say, but what do you do if

1:08:29 > 1:08:35Parliament says this is not good enough? The government must simply

1:08:35 > 1:08:41say, I am sorry we have run out of time. The 27 will say they cannot be

1:08:41 > 1:08:45bothered to have another round either. They have to be strong, but

1:08:45 > 1:08:49realistic about what their role in this is.Do you think the people

1:08:49 > 1:08:54putting this amendment who say they want a binding vote in parliament

1:08:54 > 1:08:58are doing it because they think Parliament should have a say or

1:08:58 > 1:09:02because they want to obstruct it? They do not think people should have

1:09:02 > 1:09:07a say in the first place, they think people got it wrong, so they need

1:09:07 > 1:09:14more clever people than the voters to have final say.Or they believed

1:09:14 > 1:09:18taking back control means Parliament should have the final say.

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

1:09:21 > 1:09:27people. This is the issue. It seems to me that people like Anna Soubry

1:09:27 > 1:09:31are trying to delay of the transition period a bit longer.

1:09:31 > 1:09:36These negotiations will take as long as they have got. The EU will take

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

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

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

1:09:52 > 1:09:58undermining them. They undermined the government at every single stage

1:09:58 > 1:10:01and they undermine Britain's interests.It is the timing of all

1:10:01 > 1:10:05of this that is crucial and whether the government can get a deal in

1:10:05 > 1:10:11time.There will be a meaningful vote, whether it is an shined in

1:10:11 > 1:10:16legislation or not, there cannot be an historic development as big as

1:10:16 > 1:10:21this without Parliament having a meaningful vote. I meaningful,

1:10:21 > 1:10:26having the power to either stop it or endorse it. You cannot have a

1:10:26 > 1:10:28government doing something like this with no vote in the House of

1:10:28 > 1:10:36commons. When you say it will go to the last minute I completely agree,

1:10:36 > 1:10:40but last-minute in reality means next summer. It has got to get

1:10:40 > 1:10:44through the European Parliament and the Westminster Parliament and quite

1:10:44 > 1:10:51a few others as well.The trouble with invoking Parliament is if it is

1:10:51 > 1:10:56driven solely by remain, I would love to say what people in the

1:10:56 > 1:11:03league side think. I disagree with Julia, I do not think you could say

1:11:03 > 1:11:07people had their say and the terms with which we leave are left open

1:11:07 > 1:11:10and only the government should have a say in it, Parliament clearly

1:11:10 > 1:11:19should have a say in it.Do we want a good deal or not?It does not mean

1:11:19 > 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 > 1:11:37another of these binary votes were you accept the deal or no Deal.

1:11:37 > 1:11:43There has to be some space.How can a few MPs in the House of Commons

1:11:43 > 1:11:49change a deal that has been agreed by the member states?Because of the

1:11:49 > 1:11:54sequence, a huge if by the way, if they vote down the deal that the

1:11:54 > 1:11:57government has negotiated, the government will have to re-negotiate

1:11:57 > 1:12:01or there will have to be an election. This will be a moment of

1:12:01 > 1:12:04huge crisis, our government not getting through its much topped

1:12:04 > 1:12:14about...It is a mini Catalonia.I think it would be as big as

1:12:14 > 1:12:16Catalonia, but with the implication that there would have to be a

1:12:16 > 1:12:20practical change in the deal because if Parliament has not supported

1:12:20 > 1:12:26it...It is a remain fantasy that this deal can be put off and off

1:12:26 > 1:12:30until they get something that is as close to remaining as they can

1:12:30 > 1:12:35possibly get. I am very much for trying to get the best and avoiding

1:12:35 > 1:12:42the worst, but there is an unreality to that position if you keep trying

1:12:42 > 1:12:48to do it again and again, at some point people will want clarity.I

1:12:48 > 1:12:53labour putting forward a realistic proposition?I thought Hilary Benn

1:12:53 > 1:12:58was very realistic this morning, I wish he was more in the driving seat

1:12:58 > 1:13:03of Labour policy. He made clear where he disagreed and he made clear

1:13:03 > 1:13:06where he thought the negotiations had gone off track or were bogged

1:13:06 > 1:13:14down. I worry a bit about the Labour position being incoherent, but that

1:13:14 > 1:13:18is kept that way by the present leadership because as far as they

1:13:18 > 1:13:22are concerned the government is suffering enough, why should they

1:13:22 > 1:13:27have a position? Hilary Benn said we needed to have clarity about the

1:13:27 > 1:13:31timetable. It is like reading an insurance contract and finding the

1:13:31 > 1:13:34bit where you might get away with it. That is not a policy.

1:13:34 > 1:13:36That is not a policy.

1:13:36 > 1:13:38That's all for today.

1:13:38 > 1:13:40Join me again next Sunday at 11 here on BBC One.

1:13:40 > 1:13:45Until then, bye bye.