:00:37. > :00:42.Boris Johnson hosts a summit of allies in London
:00:43. > :00:46.to discuss how to broker a peace settlement in Syria.
:00:47. > :00:49.But as war continues to rage, could "no-bomb zones" -
:00:50. > :00:51.thought to be backed by the Foreign Secretary -
:00:52. > :00:55.protect civilians, and how would they work?
:00:56. > :00:58.We were told by the Remain campaign that a vote to leave the EU would
:00:59. > :01:04.But with the economy growing and employment at record
:01:05. > :01:08.Can Theresa May make a decision on airport expansion
:01:09. > :01:11.without triggering a Conservative cabinet bust-up
:01:12. > :01:16.We look at what's at stake, as the PM prepares to choose
:01:17. > :01:31.In London, with a decision imminent on whether to expand Heathrow, is
:01:32. > :01:37.Brexit causing uncertainty in the aviation sector?
:01:38. > :01:39.All that to come before 12.15 - and the Scottish Secretary, David
:01:40. > :01:42.Mundell, on Nicola Sturgeon's plans for a second referendum
:01:43. > :01:47.And with me throughout - Tom Newtown Dunn,
:01:48. > :01:50.Julia Hartley-Brewer and Steve Richards.
:01:51. > :01:52.They'll all be tweeting their thoughts and comments
:01:53. > :01:58.So, in just over an hour, the Foreign Secretary,
:01:59. > :02:01.Boris Johnson, will host a meeting of foreign allies in London,
:02:02. > :02:04.including US Secretary of State John Kerry,
:02:05. > :02:07.to discuss military options in Syria.
:02:08. > :02:10.Last week, Mr Johnson said the public mood had changed
:02:11. > :02:13.after relentless bomb attacks on Aleppo
:02:14. > :02:22.and that more "kinetic action" might be possible.
:02:23. > :02:29.Has the public mood changed on Syria? There is a desire to end the
:02:30. > :02:34.horror, but has the public mood really changed? Not really. When
:02:35. > :02:39.asked, the Public say that something must be done and we must stop the
:02:40. > :02:45.slaughter, but when also asked whether to put British troops there,
:02:46. > :02:49.they say, probably not. We have a new Foreign Secretary and British
:02:50. > :02:53.government, and we will have a new White House come January for sure.
:02:54. > :02:59.So there is a feeling that what has gone so far in terms of not
:03:00. > :03:04.intervening, not trying to oppose or block Putin from doing what he wants
:03:05. > :03:09.in Syria has failed, so time to try something else. There was talk of a
:03:10. > :03:16.no-fly zone. There's not so much talk about it now. Now there's
:03:17. > :03:20.suddenly a no-bomb zone. Are we clear what that would be? It is
:03:21. > :03:26.meaningless without a no-fly zone and no one is willing to enforce it.
:03:27. > :03:30.For me, the biggest issue is, what is the point of the United Nations?
:03:31. > :03:35.With Russia vetoing any possible peace plan, we are in a situation
:03:36. > :03:39.where we are basically handing over our moral authority in the world for
:03:40. > :03:44.dealing with humanitarian disasters and war crimes being committed by
:03:45. > :03:49.the side regime and Putin to an organisation which is controlled by
:03:50. > :04:01.Putin effectively because he has a veto on the Security Council. The
:04:02. > :04:04.situation is untenable. We cannot sit and pretend we don't want to be
:04:05. > :04:07.involved in this war. We are already at war, and we will be at war. We
:04:08. > :04:10.need to get to grips with it sooner or later. If we are willing to say
:04:11. > :04:14.that we don't care about Syrian children dying... But we are not
:04:15. > :04:20.willing to say that, so we need to do something about it. We could care
:04:21. > :04:26.deeply but admits there is not something we can do about it.
:04:27. > :04:31.Indeed. When Julia says "Get involved", that does not translate
:04:32. > :04:37.to anything precise or specific. The problem is you go round in circles
:04:38. > :04:42.when it comes to reaction, because when people are then asked what the
:04:43. > :04:48.endgame is - and you do need to have a sense of the end and an aim, and
:04:49. > :04:52.one of the problems with Iraq was that there was not that - you can
:04:53. > :04:58.simply say, something needs to be done and we are involved and there
:04:59. > :05:02.should be military action, but that raises 10,000 other questions which
:05:03. > :05:05.no one is capable of answering. As I understand it, the no-bomb zone
:05:06. > :05:10.would be that we would designate areas where no bombing would be
:05:11. > :05:15.allowed. We wouldn't have planes to stop it happening, but if bombing
:05:16. > :05:20.did happen in those areas, we would use missiles to take out Syrian
:05:21. > :05:26.infrastructure. It seems complicated, and to not take into
:05:27. > :05:28.account what we would do if the Russians put anti-missile batteries
:05:29. > :05:35.around this Syrian infrastructure, as well they might. And you could go
:05:36. > :05:40.one step further. Your understanding is the same as mine. Doing something
:05:41. > :05:47.to prevent drops being -- ones being dropped in that area, but without
:05:48. > :05:54.engaging with Russia. You could fire cruise missiles into a runway, which
:05:55. > :05:58.we were warned could be done, but the problem is, you could have a
:05:59. > :06:04.Russian jet in the middle of that runway, or a bus of school kids. We
:06:05. > :06:09.know that they are capable of doing that. You are looking towards a
:06:10. > :06:12.confrontation with Russia, what ever you do. Boris Johnson would say this
:06:13. > :06:18.is the kind of HARDtalk we need to get the man to listen, because
:06:19. > :06:23.everything else has failed. Mr Kerry being there is significant, but at
:06:24. > :06:33.this stage in the election cycle, it's hard to sue what -- see what Mr
:06:34. > :06:38.Obama would do. We have no idea what to reason may's foreign policy is in
:06:39. > :06:45.terms of intervention. The last thing she would want to do is to get
:06:46. > :06:49.involved in a Middle Eastern war. But we are already involved. And the
:06:50. > :06:54.idea that our entire foreign policy should be based on not having a
:06:55. > :06:59.conflict in the Putin... The West as a whole is not wanting to have a
:07:00. > :07:06.conflict with him, and that is why he is acting how he is.
:07:07. > :07:08.Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister of Scotland, has repeated her
:07:09. > :07:11.warning that, if the UK leaves the single market, she will push for
:07:12. > :07:15.Speaking to Andrew Marr earlier this morning, Ms Sturgeon said
:07:16. > :07:17.she would not hesitate to protect Scotland's economic interests.
:07:18. > :07:19.There's a principle here about, you know,
:07:20. > :07:22.Does what we think, and what we say, and how
:07:23. > :07:26.And that's what's going to be put to the test, I think,
:07:27. > :07:30.Theresa May, perfectly legitimately, says she values the UK,
:07:31. > :07:33.In the Independence Referendum, Scotland was told repeatedly
:07:34. > :07:39.My message to the Prime Minister is, it's now time to prove these
:07:40. > :07:41.things, and demonstrate to Scotland that our voice does count
:07:42. > :07:44.within the UK, and our interests can be protected.
:07:45. > :07:46.Because if that's not the case, then I think Scotland
:07:47. > :07:49.would have the right to decide whether it wanted to follow
:07:50. > :07:58.I've been joined by the Secretary of State for Scotland, David Mundell.
:07:59. > :08:06.Welcome to the Sunday Politics. During the Scottish referendum
:08:07. > :08:09.campaign, two years ago, the ETA Together campaign claimed that the
:08:10. > :08:17.only guaranteed way for Scotland to remain in the EU was to stay in the
:08:18. > :08:22.UK. That turned out to be untrue. You owe the people of Scotland an
:08:23. > :08:27.apology. That isn't the full facts. It was made clear during the
:08:28. > :08:33.referendum in Scotland that there could be an EU referendum. Ruth
:08:34. > :08:36.Davidson, on many occasions, made it clear that people in Scotland would
:08:37. > :08:41.have the opportunity to vote on whether or not they remained in the
:08:42. > :08:46.EU. What was clear in that referendum, and you played a
:08:47. > :08:50.significant part in highlighting it, was that those who were advocating a
:08:51. > :08:56.yes vote could not set out a clear route for Scotland to get into the
:08:57. > :09:01.EU as an independent nation. They were told if they stayed in the UK,
:09:02. > :09:07.that was their best route to remaining in Europe. It turned out,
:09:08. > :09:11.it is obvious that that was untrue. It was a route that meant there was
:09:12. > :09:17.going to be an EU referendum. That was made very clear throughout that.
:09:18. > :09:21.People voted in Scotland decisively to remain part of the UK in full
:09:22. > :09:26.knowledge that there would be a referendum on whether the United
:09:27. > :09:30.Kingdom remained in the European Union. That is what the vote on the
:09:31. > :09:35.23rd of June in Scotland was about. It was about the UK remaining in the
:09:36. > :09:38.EU, not Scotland. The people of Scotland were told to vote for the
:09:39. > :09:47.union to be sure of staying in the UK. They also voted 62% to 38% to
:09:48. > :09:52.stay in the EU. Now they are being dragged out against their will.
:09:53. > :09:57.Surely that is grounds for a second Scottish referendum? I don't accept
:09:58. > :10:01.that. I've voted to stay in the EU, but I didn't do so on the basis that
:10:02. > :10:06.if I didn't get my own way that Scotland would be dragged out of the
:10:07. > :10:13.United Kingdom. We have had a once in a generation vote as to whether
:10:14. > :10:17.Scotland remained part of the UK. There was a decisive result in that.
:10:18. > :10:23.On the assumption that we would also remain part of the European Union,
:10:24. > :10:26.so a major change has taken place. I don't accept that analysis. People
:10:27. > :10:31.were told that there would be a vote on whether the UK remained in the
:10:32. > :10:35.EU. The reasons for Scotland remaining in the UK were
:10:36. > :10:40.overwhelmingly economic, and those issues remain today in relation to
:10:41. > :10:42.the UK single market. It is very odd that people who are concerned about
:10:43. > :11:00.the EU single market are quite willing to
:11:01. > :11:02.give up the UK single market, which is four times as valuable to
:11:03. > :11:04.Scotland, and responsible for a million jobs. If the Scottish
:11:05. > :11:06.Government demands another referendum, will the UK Government
:11:07. > :11:10.grant it? The UK Government will have two agreed to a referendum, but
:11:11. > :11:16.we want to argue that there shouldn't be another referendum. It
:11:17. > :11:20.is in Scotland's best interests at the two governments work together
:11:21. > :11:25.with 18 UK approach to get the best possible situation for Scotland...
:11:26. > :11:32.If the Scottish Parliament decides that we do want -- we do not like
:11:33. > :11:36.the terms of Brexit and we want another referendum, would you grant
:11:37. > :11:41.it? There would have to be an agreement between the two
:11:42. > :11:44.governments in the same form as the Edinburgh Agreement. The great shame
:11:45. > :11:49.of the Edinburgh Agreement, which the SNP used to quote repeatedly, is
:11:50. > :11:54.that they have not adhere to it, because a fundamental part of that
:11:55. > :11:58.would be that both sides would respect the result. Viewers will
:11:59. > :12:03.notice that you haven't really answered my question. Could Scotland
:12:04. > :12:07.remain inside the single market in Europe as part of the Brexit
:12:08. > :12:12.process? From the outset, I have said we would listen to any proposal
:12:13. > :12:16.that the Scottish Government brought forward in relation to Scotland's
:12:17. > :12:21.interests. We have had for months and no specific proposals have come
:12:22. > :12:26.forward. Nicola Sturgeon was talking about proposals this morning, but at
:12:27. > :12:33.this moment, I see it impossible that Scotland could remain within
:12:34. > :12:36.the EU whilst the rest of the UK leads. It would be difficult to see
:12:37. > :12:40.how that could be achieved. But we will listen to any proposals the
:12:41. > :12:45.Scottish Government bring forward in relation to achieving the best
:12:46. > :12:49.interests of Scotland. I am convinced that Scotland's best
:12:50. > :12:55.interests are being part of the UK. You praised Scotland's membership of
:12:56. > :12:59.the single market during the referendum. In March of this year
:13:00. > :13:04.you said it secured jobs, was vital to tourism and industry, inbound
:13:05. > :13:09.visitors and the rest of it. So why would you not want to retain it for
:13:10. > :13:14.Scotland? I agree with the benefits Scotland has received from the
:13:15. > :13:19.single market, but we are in a different situation now. The UK is
:13:20. > :13:23.negotiating its exit from the EU. The Prime Minister has said it is
:13:24. > :13:28.not going to be on the basis of existing arrangements, it will be on
:13:29. > :13:33.the basis of a new arrangement, and as part of that, we will want to
:13:34. > :13:39.secure the best arrangement for Scottish businesses. Given the
:13:40. > :13:42.history we have gone through, do you want to guarantee a special post
:13:43. > :13:48.Brexit status for Scotland. We leave the EU, but Scotland will have a
:13:49. > :13:53.distinct status? I'm willing to look at any proposal brought forward that
:13:54. > :13:57.looks at Scotland's interests. We have had no specifics from the
:13:58. > :14:06.Scottish Government. They say now that they have them. It is a bit rum
:14:07. > :14:09.to attack the Scottish Government. The principle is, could Scotland
:14:10. > :14:16.have a special position, and would you help that or not? I am willing
:14:17. > :14:20.to listen to any proposal brought forward. Will fishing and farming go
:14:21. > :14:26.back to Edinburgh? The devolution settlement are going to be a
:14:27. > :14:33.change,... Will they go to Edinburgh or to London? We will have a
:14:34. > :14:39.decision at the end of that process. I want to make sure we have the best
:14:40. > :14:43.arrangement for Scotland. You can't answer the question? We want to
:14:44. > :14:49.listen to what fishermen and farmers say, and the people of Scotland. It
:14:50. > :14:54.will be a package of arrangements, clearly, that need to be taken
:14:55. > :14:58.forward as a result of leaving the EU. One final question. If the
:14:59. > :15:03.Scottish Nationalist MPs vote against grammar schools, which are
:15:04. > :15:05.purely for England, isn't that proof that your English votes for English
:15:06. > :15:15.laws isn't working? It demonstrates all MPs in the
:15:16. > :15:20.Parliament have the opportunity to vote on all issues. You wouldn't
:15:21. > :15:31.mind if they voted to stop Grammar schools? Of course I wouldn't --
:15:32. > :15:39.would mind... I think we have got the balance right in that
:15:40. > :15:42.legislation. It is meaningless if they can vote to stop grammar
:15:43. > :15:48.schools when it doesn't affect Scotland. They have to answer for
:15:49. > :15:52.that, based on an opportunistic approach and cause resentment in
:15:53. > :15:53.England. Thank you for being with us.
:15:54. > :15:55.During the EU Referendum campaign, leading Remain supporters repeatedly
:15:56. > :15:58.warned that a vote to leave the European Union would cause
:15:59. > :16:02.Three months on, were their forecasts accurate?
:16:03. > :16:07.Since the vote on June 23rd, the economic news
:16:08. > :16:10.The value of the pound has been in pretty steady depreciation
:16:11. > :16:12.since referendum day, falling to a 31-year
:16:13. > :16:20.It was as low as $1.18 but has still rebounded a bit.
:16:21. > :16:24.The weak pound left Tesco in a situation.
:16:25. > :16:27.They stopped selling Marmite and other products for a day online
:16:28. > :16:31.And a leaked Treasury report said that Government tax revenues
:16:32. > :16:34.could be down by 66 billion a year in a post-Brexit economy.
:16:35. > :16:42.Though the report emanated from Project Fear days.
:16:43. > :16:43.However, many of the short-term economic fundamentals
:16:44. > :16:51.The dominant service sector grew a healthy 0.4% in July.
:16:52. > :16:54.In the same month, the unemployment rate dipped to under 5%,
:16:55. > :17:00.House-buying has also been rising since the referendum,
:17:01. > :17:03.nearly 110,000 properties were purchased in August.
:17:04. > :17:10.Is the economy already suffering from the Brexit blues or not?
:17:11. > :17:13.Joining me now is the former shadow Europe Minister,
:17:14. > :17:15.the Labour MP Pat McFadden, who was a Business Minister
:17:16. > :17:29.Do you know concede that nearly all the short-term economic forecasts
:17:30. > :17:34.made by the Remain campaign have turned out to be untrue at best,
:17:35. > :17:39.scaremongering at worst? No, I think this week was the week that the
:17:40. > :17:44.beginnings of the economic effects of Brexit began to take hold, most
:17:45. > :17:48.obviously on the currency fall. You talk about short-term, this began on
:17:49. > :17:53.the night of the referendum itself and was given booster rockets by the
:17:54. > :17:58.signals sent out by the Conservative Party conference. In terms of the
:17:59. > :18:02.warnings next to reality, the warnings about the fall of the
:18:03. > :18:08.currency speculated that it might fall in value by about 12%, the
:18:09. > :18:17.reality is closer to 20%. Let's look at some of the warnings. We will
:18:18. > :18:19.come back to the currency, but let's look at this. The Treasury report on
:18:20. > :18:33.maybe 23rd said the following: That turned out to be untrue, didn't
:18:34. > :18:38.it? What has happened here, which isn't in line with those warnings,
:18:39. > :18:42.is consumer confidence has remained high. The actions of the Bank of
:18:43. > :18:45.England in cutting interest have been important, so the short-term
:18:46. > :18:53.effect in terms of consumer confidence... So it is wrong? Hasn't
:18:54. > :18:57.turned out in line with that, but it would be complacent in the extreme
:18:58. > :19:01.to conclude that with the effects of the currency which we know also from
:19:02. > :19:07.the Bank of England's comments the other dates will feed into higher
:19:08. > :19:15.prices, which will hit lower income consumers hardest. But we don't know
:19:16. > :19:19.yet, I will come onto that but in the short term, I will show you
:19:20. > :19:21.another one. A month before the referendum, the Chancellor George
:19:22. > :19:34.Osborne said this: That turned out to be wronged too,
:19:35. > :19:38.didn't it? We are not in recession but if you look at the forecasts of
:19:39. > :19:43.growth over the next few years, the Bank of England have forecast growth
:19:44. > :19:52.next year to not be the 2.3% it thought before the referendum but to
:19:53. > :19:57.be 0.8%. Is it forecasting a recession? No, but it is forecasting
:19:58. > :20:02.a slowdown which would mean GDP after two years would be for the ?5
:20:03. > :20:06.billion less than the estimates before the referendum took place.
:20:07. > :20:13.And it might be wrong, because look, it was wrong about the recession. Is
:20:14. > :20:18.anybody now forecasting a recession? I don't know if anybody is
:20:19. > :20:21.forecasting a recession. The IMF are certainly forecasting a slowdown in
:20:22. > :20:28.a similar way to the Bank of England. George Osborne also said
:20:29. > :20:36.house prices will plummet by 18%. Any sign of that? House prices are
:20:37. > :20:40.not plummeting by 18%. Your side that you represent made much of the
:20:41. > :20:45.IMF's claim that provoked Leave would mean an immediate slide into
:20:46. > :20:52.recession, a collapse in house prices, and a crash in stock markets
:20:53. > :21:00.which of course are currently at record levels. Even the IMF admits
:21:01. > :21:05.there is none of that. There maybe longer term dangers but in the
:21:06. > :21:09.short-term it happen. In the short-term it didn't happen. In the
:21:10. > :21:14.short term what has happened here, as I said a moment ago, is consumer
:21:15. > :21:18.confidence has remained high, the Bank of England cut interest rates
:21:19. > :21:23.which put more money into people's pockets and I think the action they
:21:24. > :21:27.took was important, but I think it would be wrong to say imply that
:21:28. > :21:32.because these things haven't happened in the first few months
:21:33. > :21:36.that we are somehow out of the woods on the economy. I understand that,
:21:37. > :21:40.that's the last thing I would say, but here's the question - most of
:21:41. > :21:44.these forecasters are still pretty gloomy about the long-term but if
:21:45. > :21:50.they couldn't get the last few months right, why would you trust
:21:51. > :21:56.them for 2025 when they couldn't say what will happen in September? Why
:21:57. > :22:02.would you trust them to say what happens five years from now? People
:22:03. > :22:08.will ask the question but the big tangible we have is in the decline
:22:09. > :22:13.of the currency and that is a real and now effect. We can talk about
:22:14. > :22:17.whether it is lost or minus, but the Government said the other day this
:22:18. > :22:21.would bring inflation back, to use his words it is going to get
:22:22. > :22:26.difficult, particularly for people on lower incomes and that will feed
:22:27. > :22:30.into people's purchasing power. The international markets partaking of
:22:31. > :22:36.you have our future prospects and at the moment it is not a vote of
:22:37. > :22:40.confidence. Do you agree with the latest Remain mantra that people
:22:41. > :22:46.might have voted to leave the EU but didn't necessarily vote to leave the
:22:47. > :22:50.single market? I do agree with that. A lot of people have said people who
:22:51. > :22:54.voted to leave didn't know that's what they were voting for, so let me
:22:55. > :22:59.show you a clip of David Cameron at the height of the referendum
:23:00. > :23:04.campaign. The British public would be voting if we leave to leave the
:23:05. > :23:09.EU and the single market, we then have to negotiate a trade deal from
:23:10. > :23:14.outside with the European Union. There you have it loud and clear on
:23:15. > :23:19.BBC television, voting Leave means leaving the single market, not
:23:20. > :23:23.losing access to it but leaving the membership of it. We have George
:23:24. > :23:28.Osborne on tape saying the same thing, so why do you make out Leave
:23:29. > :23:33.voters didn't know what they were voting for? I think people voted
:23:34. > :23:37.Leave for a number of different reasons. For some it might have been
:23:38. > :23:42.immigration, for some it might have been the promise of more money for
:23:43. > :23:46.the NHS, but there are number of countries outside the EU which can
:23:47. > :23:51.have full access to the single market, we know about Norway and on.
:23:52. > :23:57.But they all have to pay in and have free movement. We can come onto that
:23:58. > :24:01.but what I'm saying is it's not the case that when you are outside the
:24:02. > :24:05.EU you necessarily have to be outside the single market and the
:24:06. > :24:09.reason this is important is because this has been a cornerstone of
:24:10. > :24:16.British economic policy for many years, particularly in terms of our
:24:17. > :24:19.inward investment, and the reasons why both manufacturing industry and
:24:20. > :24:25.financial services has invested and created employment in the UK, and I
:24:26. > :24:30.think it would be cavalier to begin this negotiation by closing the door
:24:31. > :24:34.on that. Is it Labour's policy, I know you don't speak for Labour
:24:35. > :24:39.leadership, but is it their policy to remain in the single market? You
:24:40. > :24:44.are right, I'm a backbencher, but it is the policy to have as full access
:24:45. > :24:51.as possible to the single market. At least what we have now in terms of
:24:52. > :24:54.goods and services. You can call it membership or not but that is what
:24:55. > :25:02.Keir Starmer and the Labour Party wants. The old party home affairs
:25:03. > :25:05.select committee is blaming Jeremy Corbyn's lack of leadership for
:25:06. > :25:12.creating a safe space for what they call vile anti-Semitism. Do you
:25:13. > :25:16.agree with that? I think this report should be taken seriously. The
:25:17. > :25:21.atmosphere in the Labour Party, there has been a lot of nasty things
:25:22. > :25:26.said on social media over the past year in particular. I hope we don't
:25:27. > :25:30.make the mistake of shooting the messenger, I hope we take the report
:25:31. > :25:34.seriously and I hope we don't fall into the trap that sometimes I see
:25:35. > :25:40.when these accusations are wielded, that we point to antiracism records
:25:41. > :25:45.and say look at our virtue in our record here, that must mean we
:25:46. > :25:49.cannot be anti-Semitic. Let me be clear about this, pointing to your
:25:50. > :25:53.own sense of righteousness is no excuse for nastiness or cruelty to
:25:54. > :25:58.someone else so we should take this very seriously indeed. Pat McFadden,
:25:59. > :26:04.thank you for being with us this morning.
:26:05. > :26:06.A third runway at Heathrow was first given the green
:26:07. > :26:08.light by Gordon Brown's government in 2009.
:26:09. > :26:10.Almost eight years on, could Theresa May be about finally
:26:11. > :26:12.to allow Heathrow expansion to go ahead?
:26:13. > :26:16.Or could she surprise everyone and back Gatwick instead?
:26:17. > :26:19.Maybe she will come out in favour of both of them!
:26:20. > :26:21.A decision is expected imminently, but it's not straightforward
:26:22. > :26:25.Several members of her cabinet are opposed to any plan to expand
:26:26. > :26:28.Heathrow, and reports suggest as many as 60 of her backbenchers
:26:29. > :26:31.Our reporter, Mark Lobel, has been looking at
:26:32. > :26:40.A growing number of people want to take more flights and some
:26:41. > :26:42.accuse the Government of dragging their feet over
:26:43. > :26:53.All the while, our airports are operating flat-out.
:26:54. > :26:59.So this is fully autonomous, you just have to press the start
:27:00. > :27:05.Matthew Hill is from a business-backed group campaigning
:27:06. > :27:09.We haven't had a full-length runway in London and the south-east
:27:10. > :27:14.Gatwick was built in the 1930s, Heathrow in the 1940s,
:27:15. > :27:20.Heathrow is full, Gatwick will be full in the next few years.
:27:21. > :27:23.Matthew's group claims the lack of a new runway is costing us
:27:24. > :27:30.I think there are huge economic benefits from the construction
:27:31. > :27:34.At the moment, because we don't have that new runway, we don't
:27:35. > :27:36.have that new capacity, the new flights to new markets,
:27:37. > :27:40.we are missing out on ?9.5 billion a year in lost trade.
:27:41. > :27:42.Until we get that decision and we get that runway
:27:43. > :27:46.built, we will continue to lose out on that trade.
:27:47. > :27:49.One airport that's eager to expand is Heathrow,
:27:50. > :27:52.either by expanding this northern runway, the one closest to us here,
:27:53. > :27:55.or, the Airports Commission's favourite proposal, building
:27:56. > :27:59.a new runway parallel to here, about a kilometre that way in place
:28:00. > :28:07.It's said that would offer 40 new destinations from the airport,
:28:08. > :28:09.carry lots more air freight, provide 70,000 new jobs
:28:10. > :28:14.and an overall boost to economic activity in the country,
:28:15. > :28:17.with a promise of no night flights, new environmental and community
:28:18. > :28:27.Heathrow's hub status also services many of the UK's other airports,
:28:28. > :28:33.On average, every year a quarter of a million passengers travel
:28:34. > :28:35.to and from this key exporting region via Heathrow,
:28:36. > :28:41.While we've been very strong supporters of a third runway
:28:42. > :28:43.at Heathrow, we think it's in the best interests
:28:44. > :28:46.of the north-east, we also think it's in the best
:28:47. > :28:55.Our services connect to many, many destinations across the world,
:28:56. > :29:02.and allow businesses to trade right the way across the globe.
:29:03. > :29:08.Gatwick Airport also wants to expand with another runway here.
:29:09. > :29:11.By doubling Gatwick's capacity, the plan would create 22,000
:29:12. > :29:14.new jobs, a vastly expanded short-haul network, and more
:29:15. > :29:20.I think the expansion of Gatwick will bring firstly
:29:21. > :29:23.the certainty of delivery, we can have spades in the ground
:29:24. > :29:29.in this Parliament and we can be operational in the next,
:29:30. > :29:31.so that's within ten years we can have a new runway,
:29:32. > :29:34.and Gatwick can provide the increased capacity at a price
:29:35. > :29:42.Now, before anyone gets carried away, there are of course some
:29:43. > :29:48.people who would far prefer no extra planes in the sky.
:29:49. > :29:50.We already fly more than everybody else,
:29:51. > :29:52.most of these are leisure flights, well who's taking
:29:53. > :29:58.Actually 70% of all of our flights are taken by 15% of the population.
:29:59. > :30:02.It's a wealthy frequent-flying elite.
:30:03. > :30:08.But with approval of a third runway looking likely,
:30:09. > :30:17.could more protests be on the horizon?
:30:18. > :30:20.I can tell you now, they are dusting off the handcuffs, you know,
:30:21. > :30:23.And you have to remember, Heathrow, if they choose to expand
:30:24. > :30:25.Heathrow, you are talking about hundreds of homes
:30:26. > :30:28.being bulldozed, whole communities being eradicated, wiped off the map.
:30:29. > :30:31.Over the last few years, since the last big protest around
:30:32. > :30:33.Heathrow, the relationship between local people around
:30:34. > :30:36.the airport and grass roots climate change activists
:30:37. > :30:41.Those guys are going to get together and just cause merry hell for people
:30:42. > :30:50.The Prime Minister, Theresa May, who once called for a better not
:30:51. > :30:53.bigger Heathrow whilst in opposition, will chair a select
:30:54. > :30:56.group of colleagues expected to decide imminently
:30:57. > :30:59.on whether to build a new runway and where.
:31:00. > :31:02.It will then take months for a national policy statement
:31:03. > :31:07.outlining the new works to get drawn up before MPs get to vote on it,
:31:08. > :31:11.leaving plenty of time for any further opposition to airport
:31:12. > :31:19.I've been joined by two Conservative MPs.
:31:20. > :31:21.Adam Afriyie is opposed to Heathrow expansion,
:31:22. > :31:42.Adam, the independent Daviess report into runway expansion said the case
:31:43. > :31:48.for Heathrow was clear and unanimous in the Commission. 180,000 more
:31:49. > :31:53.jobs, more than ?200 billion in economic benefits. So why are you
:31:54. > :31:57.putting the interests of your constituency before the national
:31:58. > :31:59.interest? I will fight tooth and nail for the interests of my
:32:00. > :32:03.constituents, but the wonderful thing about the binary choice
:32:04. > :32:08.between Heathrow and Gatwick is that it is not in the regional or
:32:09. > :32:16.consumers' interests to expand Heathrow. The Daviess report has
:32:17. > :32:22.already been largely undermined. There are 17 reasons why it doesn't
:32:23. > :32:29.work and is wrong. Number one, they said Gatwick would not have 42
:32:30. > :32:33.million passengers until 2024. This year, they already have 42 million
:32:34. > :32:38.passengers. Gatwick have increased their destinations to 20 now, which
:32:39. > :32:43.they didn't expect either. The Davies review was good in its day,
:32:44. > :32:50.but is it had a limited remit. They were talking about Heathrow as a
:32:51. > :32:55.hub, but the airline industry has changed. We have to pay to this for
:32:56. > :33:04.more than 15 years. The government White Paper in 2003 suggested we
:33:05. > :33:09.should expand Heathrow. ?20 million and 12 years later, the Davis Report
:33:10. > :33:12.came to the same conclusion. We are never going to get any form of
:33:13. > :33:18.progress on this is competing MPs are allowed to frustrate the
:33:19. > :33:23.process. You could have had about three people who are Gatwick MPs
:33:24. > :33:29.arguing very passionately against Adam's desire to expand Gatwick. The
:33:30. > :33:34.point is, we are in a paralysis. We are having a theological debate that
:33:35. > :33:40.will last decades, and Heathrow is... Why Heathrow? Why not expand
:33:41. > :33:44.Gatwick and increase the capacity of our regional airports? I thought the
:33:45. > :33:48.government's strategy was to rebalance the economy in favour of
:33:49. > :33:53.the North and the Midlands. If you listen to northern MPs, or people
:33:54. > :33:59.representing Northern or Scottish interests, they all say they want to
:34:00. > :34:03.increase Heathrow. The SNP said last week they wanted Heathrow to be
:34:04. > :34:07.expanded. If you want to help the economy is in those areas, listen to
:34:08. > :34:15.what they are saying. They are saying expand Heathrow. 32 regional
:34:16. > :34:19.airports support the expansion of Heathrow to maintain its position as
:34:20. > :34:24.one of the global hubs. Even the Scottish Government agrees with
:34:25. > :34:30.expanding Heathrow. They all say, we want to be a serious player in
:34:31. > :34:33.aviation. We need a global hub, and that is Heathrow. The interesting
:34:34. > :34:38.thing is that there is no argument that Heathrow is the UK hub, and no
:34:39. > :34:43.one is trying to get rid of that. But if you are adding a single new
:34:44. > :34:59.runway, is it better to add it at Heathrow or Gatwick, and for me it
:35:00. > :35:03.is overwhelmingly clear. Heathrow is the most expensive airport in the
:35:04. > :35:05.world. If you add another runway at taxpayer expense, you make it even
:35:06. > :35:07.more expensive. So flight prices go up. Whether or not Heathrow could
:35:08. > :35:11.ever be delivered is another question. My own Borough Council as
:35:12. > :35:17.part of the legal action... So even if the decision is made, we may not
:35:18. > :35:24.see the capacity. At Gatwick is dirt cheap. It can be delivered within
:35:25. > :35:28.ten years. But it is not a global hub airport. But the hub that we
:35:29. > :35:34.have at Heathrow is perfectly adequate for the next ten or 15
:35:35. > :35:41.years. It is running at 99% capacity. Every airline, the new
:35:42. > :35:45.planes being ordered... The airline have decided that the hub capacity
:35:46. > :35:53.is sufficient and they are moving to a different model. Let me ask you
:35:54. > :35:59.this. We haven't built a major new runway in London and the south-east
:36:00. > :36:06.for 60 years. Since 1946, so 70 years. Why not expand Heathrow and
:36:07. > :36:10.Gatwick? Personally, I would do both. If we are serious about having
:36:11. > :36:16.international trade and Golding links to the outside world,
:36:17. > :36:21.especially after Brexit, we have to get serious about aviation and
:36:22. > :36:24.accept that we need more capacity. I think it's scandalous we haven't
:36:25. > :36:28.managed to expand capacity for 70 years, when we think of the economic
:36:29. > :36:33.growth that has happened in that time. If we want to build a
:36:34. > :36:37.prosperous economy, it seems bizarre we are reluctant to increase
:36:38. > :36:42.aviation. Whatever the decision, do you think there will be a free vote
:36:43. > :36:55.on this? I think this is one area where I think the government does
:36:56. > :36:57.need to take a lead, and I hope they will make a rational choice for
:36:58. > :37:03.Gatwick. If the government comes out for Heathrow, will you defy the
:37:04. > :37:09.whips? Yes. I will always vote for Heathrow, because it doesn't make
:37:10. > :37:14.economic sense. If MPs are happy at the prospect of Heathrow... Does the
:37:15. > :37:19.figure strike a chord with you? I would hope there would be more, but
:37:20. > :37:23.it depends on the political position of Labour and the SNP. I hope that
:37:24. > :37:29.the government decides inclusively... Ad is doing what he
:37:30. > :37:34.feels is the best for his constituents. I think 60 is way off
:37:35. > :37:42.the mark. I don't know what journalists suggested 60 Tory MPs.
:37:43. > :37:45.My sense is that it is probably about 20 hard-core people in the
:37:46. > :37:53.House of Commons. I think it will be a free vote. If it is 20 hard-core,
:37:54. > :37:57.you will need Labour to get it through? Labour MPs were very keen
:37:58. > :38:04.on supporting Heathrow, in my experience. It may be delayed again,
:38:05. > :38:07.of course. After 70 years, what's another week here or there!
:38:08. > :01:11.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now
:01:12. > :01:15.We say goodbye to viewers has to be some degree of allowances
:01:16. > :01:18.in return for renewing vehicles. You.
:01:19. > :01:24.Will MPs get a vote on Theresa May's Brexit plans?
:01:25. > :01:27.Why are the Lib Dems throwing everything they've got
:01:28. > :01:29.at the by-election in David Cameron's old constituency?
:01:30. > :01:32.And what will happen next in the US presidential election?
:01:33. > :01:57.So this cross-party push to make the government come forward with the
:01:58. > :02:01.outlines of this negotiating strategy for Brexit, and put it to
:02:02. > :02:06.the Commons in particular, has that got traction? It has in that it is
:02:07. > :02:11.attracting a wide range of support in the House of Commons, which is
:02:12. > :02:18.now the crucial forum for these debates. Theresa May has said there
:02:19. > :02:22.will not be a vote before she triggers article 50. So we have two
:02:23. > :02:25.assume there will not be a vote. With this whole debate, there is a
:02:26. > :02:31.myth going about that we don't know much about what Brexit means. We
:02:32. > :02:37.know a heck of a lot about what it means. We know that when she opens
:02:38. > :02:41.her mouth, the pound falls. The pound is in a different position to
:02:42. > :02:45.the other Brexiteers. There is an accountability issue in terms of
:02:46. > :02:51.what the House of Commons will have a say in, and that could become a
:02:52. > :02:55.big story. Nicola Sturgeon has supported a second referendum. We
:02:56. > :03:06.know a huge amount, all of it dire, and I hope that MPs do get votes at
:03:07. > :03:09.some point. I suspect they will. For example, we are going to get one on
:03:10. > :03:13.this so-called repeal act, which is an act of consolidation. There will
:03:14. > :03:18.be others. We cannot leave the European Union without votes, but I
:03:19. > :03:22.don't think we will get one on Article 50. What they seem to be
:03:23. > :03:26.pushing for at the moment is a vote on the government's bargaining
:03:27. > :03:36.position. They are not saying they want all the details, although
:03:37. > :03:41.Labour has asked 70 questions. The Commons needs to improve them, it is
:03:42. > :03:48.said. Is that fair? It is absurd. You don't go into negotiating with
:03:49. > :03:51.Brussels talking about what was published in all the national
:03:52. > :03:57.newspapers last week about what our red lines are. I don't remember any
:03:58. > :04:04.other international trade deal being done in the public eye. Theresa May
:04:05. > :04:09.hasn't said a red line on immigration. She has uttered those
:04:10. > :04:14.words. There are lots of other intricate details. Of course they
:04:15. > :04:21.are, but we broadly know her position. And broadly we know the EU
:04:22. > :04:24.position. Broad knowledge is not the same as specific. The point is that
:04:25. > :04:29.the British Parliament, all these people who are so obsessed with the
:04:30. > :04:33.British Parliament having its say and democracy, they didn't care for
:04:34. > :04:38.very many years when they happily handed over powers. The Lisbon
:04:39. > :04:45.Treaty, which is like a new constitution. It handed over far
:04:46. > :04:48.more powers again and again. And there was an express vote not to
:04:49. > :04:54.have a referendum for the British people. But we have now given our
:04:55. > :04:57.say. Putting aside whether you are for or against, is it realistic that
:04:58. > :05:01.the government will come forward with some kind of green paper all
:05:02. > :05:07.white paper that gives a broad outline of the government's Brexit
:05:08. > :05:13.position? When you have the majority of between ten and 20, there is one
:05:14. > :05:18.thing you have to do as Prime Minister, and that is to learn to
:05:19. > :05:22.count. Theresa May hasn't done that. There will be a vote in the House of
:05:23. > :05:29.Commons. Whether it's binding or not, because MPs will make one. What
:05:30. > :05:34.will vote be on? They will demand that the government spelt out its
:05:35. > :05:38.Brexit strategy. It will not be binding, unless they tried to
:05:39. > :05:43.shoehorn something onto government legislation, which I don't think
:05:44. > :05:47.they will do. They will be unsure. The will of the House of Commons
:05:48. > :05:53.will express itself simply because there is a majority in the House of
:05:54. > :05:57.Commons, a clear one, for soft Brexit. There will be a vote, the
:05:58. > :06:02.government will lose it, and then it is up to Theresa May whether to pay
:06:03. > :06:07.any attention to it. But she has got herself into this problem because
:06:08. > :06:11.she has adopted the views of the 52 against the 48, dropping any sort of
:06:12. > :06:18.language about consensus and bringing the country back together.
:06:19. > :06:22.If the Commons votes against the government on this, it will be seen
:06:23. > :06:27.as a major setback for the government and the Prime Minister.
:06:28. > :06:31.Yes, seismic. Of course she can ignore it if you are talking about
:06:32. > :06:37.it in relation to triggering Article 50. In a way, it happened with
:06:38. > :06:41.Maastricht as well. The House of Commons will move centrestage, and
:06:42. > :06:50.that context is that tiny majority. She has a smaller majority than John
:06:51. > :06:52.Major had in the 90s, and it's going to be far more turbulent than
:06:53. > :07:00.perhaps her calm, assured a facade suggests. Theresa May is a serious,
:07:01. > :07:05.fully formed politician, with six years in the Home Office, but she
:07:06. > :07:09.has never had experience of the Treasury or the Foreign Office. This
:07:10. > :07:15.is massive, massive politics, and I don't think she's ready for it. I
:07:16. > :07:20.don't blame her for that. If it comes to a conflict between the
:07:21. > :07:25.result of the referendum and the position Parliament has taken, there
:07:26. > :07:29.is a chance she will call another election? Effectively, it will be a
:07:30. > :07:35.vote of no-confidence in her government. She should call another
:07:36. > :07:39.election. I think the British people be very clear. The remainers I know
:07:40. > :07:43.have all completely accept it that we are going to have this. There is
:07:44. > :07:47.a mandate for leaves and the Prime Minister should get on with it. I
:07:48. > :07:51.think the British people will not take kindly to any MP who gets in
:07:52. > :08:00.the way. We have two by-elections this week. One in Whitley and one in
:08:01. > :08:03.Batley and Spen, the seat held by Jo Cox. The main parties are not
:08:04. > :08:11.competing in that because of the appalling circumstances in which her
:08:12. > :08:17.terrible murder took place. The Lib Dems are coming big in Witney. They
:08:18. > :08:21.came fourth in the general election, rather forepaws, that they are
:08:22. > :08:25.bigging themselves up in this one. That wise? They've got to do
:08:26. > :08:34.something to get themselves attention. They need to get noticed.
:08:35. > :08:39.But what they have in their favour is that the constituency Witney
:08:40. > :08:44.voted 53% remain and 47% leave in the EU referendum. So they will be
:08:45. > :08:49.trying to get the remain a vote. This is the first test of their
:08:50. > :08:55.remain a strategy. It is interesting that Theresa May bothered to come
:08:56. > :09:03.out and campaign on Saturdays. There she is. The Prime Minister and the
:09:04. > :09:09.former Prime Minister out campaigning. They are not going to
:09:10. > :09:16.win, that they would have to come second. David Cameron had a 60% vote
:09:17. > :09:21.there, for goodness sake. The Tory candidate was a Leave campaign. The
:09:22. > :09:26.fact she is out campaigning isn't a sign of lack of confidence. She must
:09:27. > :09:31.be confident they will win, otherwise she wouldn't be seen near
:09:32. > :09:36.the place. OK, the American election. Just when you thought it
:09:37. > :09:41.couldn't get crazier. We are familiar with drug tests for
:09:42. > :09:45.athletes and cyclists, and all sorts of things in sport. But Mr Trump has
:09:46. > :09:50.now called for a drug test before the third and final debate coming up
:09:51. > :09:53.this Wednesday. Am I making it up? No, I'm not.
:09:54. > :09:56.I think we should take a drug test prior to the debate.
:09:57. > :10:01.We should take a drug test prior, because I don't know
:10:02. > :10:05.what's going on with her, but at the beginning of her last
:10:06. > :10:11.debate she was all pumped up at the beginning,
:10:12. > :10:14.and at the end it was like, uuh, take me down.
:10:15. > :10:18.So I think we should take a drug test.
:10:19. > :10:35.He's also talking about the election being rigged as well, which may be
:10:36. > :10:41.ground work for making his excuses. But here's the issue. That was
:10:42. > :10:46.yesterday. With everything that went before, overnight, the latest
:10:47. > :10:50.Washington post-ABC News poll. Mrs Clinton is ahead by only four
:10:51. > :10:55.points. It's almost within the margin of error. Down from about ten
:10:56. > :11:03.points after sexual assault gate. The simple reason why Trump got the
:11:04. > :11:08.Republican nomination, beating 50 or 60 Republican moderates, why he's
:11:09. > :11:12.been doing pretty well in the polls until the last two of weeks, people
:11:13. > :11:17.buy into the anti-establishment thing. All you need to do is stand
:11:18. > :11:20.there and say, of course they would say that, because they are all
:11:21. > :11:29.crooked. That is the single biggest thing he's got going for him. The
:11:30. > :11:33.Washington Post - ABC News poll suggests the whole business of the
:11:34. > :11:46.nude tapes actually haven't made that much difference. -- huge tape.
:11:47. > :11:56.-- lewd tape. Once you position yourself, you can almost say
:11:57. > :12:00.anything you like, and then respond by saying, the elite would say that,
:12:01. > :12:05.wouldn't they? You cannot really deal with that as an argument,
:12:06. > :12:11.because you would just say, oh, that's you lot, you would say that.
:12:12. > :12:16.There is a point where it becomes absurd, though, and I think this
:12:17. > :12:23.current thing on doping tests is laugh out loud stuff. That surely
:12:24. > :12:30.can't help him. You cannot think, what are the undecideds thinking
:12:31. > :12:33.about this? There was a lot of information, not in the century, but
:12:34. > :12:42.some information is more e-mails from Mrs Clinton are leaked. They
:12:43. > :12:51.are showing her to be very much a globalisation person, very close to
:12:52. > :12:58.Wall Street, talking about why... As Donald Trump said last week, it was
:12:59. > :13:03.good to have the shackles off. This is him with the shackles off. The
:13:04. > :13:08.reality is, all the stuff about Hillary not being very likeable and
:13:09. > :13:13.dishonest, that is already factored into the polls. All the stuff about
:13:14. > :13:17.Donald Trump being lecherous and racist is already factored in. What
:13:18. > :13:23.still blows my mind is that people are still undecided! He's given
:13:24. > :13:25.Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio. It is going to be very interesting to
:13:26. > :13:27.see. Jo Coburn has more Daily Politics
:13:28. > :13:31.tomorrow at midday on BBC Two. I'll be back next Sunday
:13:32. > :13:33.at 11am here on BBC One. Remember - if it's Sunday,
:13:34. > :13:38.it's the Sunday Politics.