29/11/2015 The Andrew Marr Show

So we're on the very edge of war in Syria.

With a vote expected this week, the Commons is on a knife edge.

This morning, the two men at the centre

In's guests include the Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, will he give

Labour MPs a free vote. And seeking to win support on all

sides, and from the public... The Defence Secretary,

Michael Fallon. But when it comes to

the Parliamentary arithmetic there's is the Scottish National Party

still in listening mode? Its deputy leader, Stewart Hosie,

joins me. There's acres of coverage of Syria

in the Sunday papers, Here to review them,

the deputy editor of the And Sarah Baxter,

deputy editor of the Sunday Times. And in case after all the talk

of war, you need something a little nostalgic and uplifting,

the familiar faces of Jools Holland and Ruby Turner are here to play us

out at the end of the show. But first the news with

Rachel Burden. Government ministers are stepping up

their efforts to persuade Labour MPs to support airstrikes against

so-called Islamic state in Syria. They say IS needs to be

put under more pressure. But the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn

says he's Our political correspondent

Carole Walker reports. RAF tornadoes and drones have

carried out more than 1600 missions against Islamic State targets in

Iraq. The government wants to extend those air strikes into Syria to

attack the headquarters of militants. The government source

said a vote looks increasingly likely. Michael Fallon has been

briefing Labour MPs on the government strategy this weekend. I

understand he is encouraged by his conversation, with many Labour MPs

saying they will vote on the merits of the argument whatever the party

line. Yesterday, demonstrators were on the streets of London and other

cities to protest military action in Syria. Jeremy Corbyn, vice president

of this organisation, shares their opposition but did not attend. The

Defence Secretary admitted that if the Labour MP tries to compel them

to vote against the government it would be more difficult to persuade

the doubters. The Labour Leader has faced a backlash from some of his

MPs over the handling of the issue and faces critical meetings with his

Shadow Cabinet tomorrow. Hundreds of thousands of people are

expected to take to the streets across the world today demanding

a deal to combat global warming The objective of the conference is

to achieve, for the first time in over 20 years of negotiations,

a binding and universal agreement on climate change,

from all the nations of the world. Commonwealth leaders, meeting in

Malta, have issued a joint statement calling for an "ambitious outcome"

from the climate talks in Paris. The organisation said it was

"deeply concerned" about what it called the "disproportionate threat"

to its most vulnerable members - The row over alleged bullying and

blackmail within the Conservative Party shows little sign of abating,

despite the resignation of the He quit yesterday over claims

that he failed to deal with allegations that young party

activists were being bullied. It follows the apparent suicide

of a 21-year-old party member I'll be back with the headlines

just before ten o'clock. Thank you. The front pages of the

newspapers... There is the Observer on the big story, Cameron to risk

the Commons vote. The Labour split story and the Commons vote are

intertwined as stories and they've got a very interesting interview

with people from Raqqa. In the Sunday Times, Cameron to order the

killing of Islamic State leaders. The other stories, the so-called

Tatler Tory story. A very different tone from the very

big Tory supporting papers. The mail on Sunday has a kind of justifiably

gloating front page. The? -- the question is over one of the major

Tory party donors. We're going to talk about Labour because there is

an extraordinary situation where Labour members think that Jeremy

Corbyn is doing an extraordinary job. Unfortunately, his

parliamentary party do not share that opinion and the Shadow Cabinet,

a large majority are in favour of bombing Syria. Jeremy Corbyn says he

could not think of a conflict which has been improved by military

intervention. The free vote would be absolutely extraordinary. Would make

Cameron Holm and free. The arithmetic is therefore David

Cameron. It is a question of what happens inside the Labour Party.

Jeremy Corbyn has made so many enemies now. We've got quotes about

people who are out to degrade and destroyed Jeremy Corbyn, never mind

Isis. That is how intense it is inside the Labour Party at the

moment. We have a rather interesting piece which touches on what Helen

was talking about. The little-known Andrew Marr. The crucial question

is, what is an MP for? IBM representative for the party and if

they are democratic, should they be speaking up for the party, or are

they a representative of all the people who voted for them? That is a

long-standing issue. Absolutely on the horns of a dilemma in Labour.

The astonishing thing is even if we have this vote early in the week and

Labour finds a way through it, Thursday is another huge test for

them. Oldham West was held by Michael Meacher with a majority of

15,000. One of the safest seats they have got left. Obviously things

would be different on a general election turnout. But you're not

hearing from anybody on the ground that they will walk it. Yet I don't

get the feeling Labour is going to lose it. Nobody thinks Ukip will

take it. There is just a slightly uneasy move. Ukip was a broken party

after the election in many respects and is being given the comeback of

its life by the Labour Party. It fell into chaos. Anyway, it is...

Let's stick with the Syria story. Robert Harris has an interesting

story on the front of your newspaper. He opposed the Iraq war

but he says if Labour cannot go to war against Isis, a particularly

nasty group which hurls homosexuals of buildings and rapes young woman,

and we are being asked to go to war by our socialist French ally, and we

have a UN resolution, what kind of nation are we? This is a nexus into

a crisis and it might split over this and the Rebels might form the

nucleus of another Labour Party. A lot of people ask, what use is a bit

of British bombing? There is an answer to that in the mirror.

Government are keen to make their case. We have these missiles, when

we have this conversation, the idea of collateral damage comes up. The

idea is that our capability is to be more precise. I'm not convinced by

this. The questions are, what can we do that nobody else can do and also,

what do we want to happen in the end. We have parked the idea that

many of the people who they are frightened of is basher al-Assad's

government. We have also not said what we are going to have it looking

like at the end. I support Robert Harris's view but I thought this

piece in the Observer... The other piece was very strongly boot. People

are trapped in Raqqa. A few thousand either bad guys -- are the bad guys.

We know there will be civilian casualties. I thought it was smart

to look at the people who are going to be on the sharp end of the

missiles. There was a very interesting piece by a German

journalist who spent time in Raqqa. He said the terrorists go

underground in bunkers if there is any threat of the strike and they

dispersed among the civilians. I feel to see how a missile is going

to distinguish between a real terrorist and somebody living in the

same house. That is why we move on to the discussion about ground

troops. I think that is where the discussion will go this week. Do

those people exist and will they be enough or are we looking to get

Iranian troops, Russian troops, Nato troops. Before we leave the paper

review we should not ignore this quite complicated Conservative

story. This is a guy who is accused of bullying, blackmailing, driving

somebody to suicide, he has been removed by the Conservative Party

but Grant Shapps wrote a letter saying he took responsibility. Is

this going to carry on running? It definitely is. The Tory chairman is

embroiled, and the father of the young man who sadly killed himself

is not letting this rest. He says he will take them all down. The new

target is Lord Feldman. He is a great charm of David Cameron. I was

going to ask about this story. It seems to me one of the things going

on is not just the grief of the family but also a sense on aspects

of the right of the Conservative Party that this is a way to get

Cameron and his friends. They sense there is a group of friends running

the party. I think so, and it is very dangerous when a story like

this get infected with factions. The other thing to mention is one of the

reasons the activist, who denies wrongdoing, was given such power is

because he was young, he was 38 and conservative activists are of

vintage ears. This was deemed to be quite exciting. A lot of complaints

were ignored by Tory Central office and that is why this scandal is

happening. The Federation of Conservative students was closed

down by Norman Tebbit because of their politics about hanging Nelson

Mandela. One final story, this is clearly a painting by Leonardo da

Vinci except it is not, it is Sally from the Bolton Co-op. The Sunday

Times's art critic as interviewed one of our most notorious art

forgeries, who insists he painted it, but it is Sally from the Bolton

Co-op. He has fooled many people with fake antiquities. He can make

anything. This is currently in private ownership. Believe nothing

you see or read. Good lesson. While Labour works out what to do,

if and when a vote on airstrikes over Syria is called, the other big

block on the opposition benches is united against military action.

It is of course the SNP, with more than 50 members of

Parliament, and the deputy leader, Stewart Hosie, joins me now.

Good morning. Have you been having conversations

with the government about this? There have been all sorts of

conversations. The key thing is we have had no answers to the key

issues we raised. Let's go through your big objections. We had said

they need to be a UN resolution which specifically allowed for

military intervention. Secondly, we needed to understand every element

of the bombing. A few more bombs might not make any difference. Dudes

will not mind if we go through these one by one. The UN resolution is

pretty clear and is backed by a lot of countries all around the world.

The specific resolution covers legality and shows the determination

of the international community to act as one. In the absence of that,

any agreement one might have could simply splinter and fall apart. I

would have thought that if the United States and Russia and France

are involved, if most of the Nato countries are going, the chances of

this being shot down legally is pretty slim. If the US, Russia and

France are united, there's no reason whatsoever why the Prime Minister

should not seek a proper UN resolution. Your second point is

what can we do that nobody else can do. The efficacy of the bombing.

Syria does not lack people dropping bombs on it. Any number of sides in

this multifaceted Civil War. We are yet to be convinced that the UN or

the UK rather flying a few more sorties over will make any

significant difference. We will be hearing from the Defence Secretary

later that these missiles can take out key people in Isis or whatever

we call it, Daesh. We have heard this in conflict after conflict. A

summer Bin Laden turned up in a military compound in Pakistan, no

amount of smart weaponry was able to take him out and I'm sceptical about

these laser targeted weapons that every country claims to have. Yet we

heard earlier in the newspaper review, the leaders scurry into

tunnels leaving the civilians to take it on the chin. What about what

happens at the end of this, how much is this your concern? That is vital.

Where is the plan for reconstruction and stabilisation? Because without

that we end up in an Iraq situation with an even bigger vacuum to be

filled with potentially even nastier people than IS. In Libya it is now

anarchy. These are powerful arguments I will be put into Michael

Fallon later in the show, however the big counterargument is that I

still have a territory about the same size of Britain now that they

control, and while they are there they can plot and plan attacks on

this country and send people to attack this country, and so long as

that is the case we are not safe. That will not keep the people of

Dundee or Glasgow very secure. We want to see Daesh degraded and

destroyed as much as anyone so the first thing we need to do is have a

truce between the non-Isis factions in Syria, they are the ones that

will take the fight to them on the ground. We need more forces for

peshmerga so they can take the fight to them on the ground. They are

selling oil, where is it going to? They are playing in huge amounts of

ammunition, who is supplying it? To be fair to them, the Americans and

Russians now are bombing these convoys, and on the broader

coalition this involves people who have been fighting to the death

against Assad's regime for years now and taking huge losses, suddenly

turning round and joining hands with the regime, and that seems

impossible to a lot of people. There are a lot of truces in Syria. They

have already agreed truces in many areas in order to fight Daesh and

that's the right thing to do because the other part of this argument in

terms of what will happen next, David Cameron talks about 70,000 SA

fighters, they probably don't exist and if they do they are in the wrong

place. In the absence of a non-Isis truce in Syria, goodness knows where

the fight is on the ground will come from. Last week your leader Nicola

Sturgeon said she was still in listening mode, but listening to you

now it sounds like the SNP has made up its mind which way to vote. We

have listened, we are still listening. Even on the day of the

Autumn Statement I asked the Chancellor what has been set aside

for reconstruction and stabilisation in Syria? The answer that came was

none. Many people want to avoid the anarchy of Libya, then of course we

couldn't vote for conflict in this climate. David Cameron said he has

set aside ?1 billion, what could he say to you that could change your

mind? He needs to answer the questions, he needs to say we will

seek a specific UN mandate, we will have a proper plan for stabilisation

and reconstruction, and he needs to demonstrate the efficacy of bombing

Raqqa because right now we are not convinced. Thank you.

Now to the weather, and it's been one

of those weekends when pretty much everything has been flung at us.

Over to Helen Willetts in the weather studio.

Stormy weather on the cards today because we have already got wind

gusting up to 60 mph, so it is even windier than yesterday. Why? We have

our third named storm of the season bearing down on us, that's Clodagh.

As well as that we have snow falling in Scotland. We will see significant

snow here even at low levels. That will be blowing around. Elsewhere it

is rain but it is heavy rain with hail and thunder in there and the

winds are strengthening all the time. We are talking about land

gales, gusts of wind up to 60 mph. One consolation, it is milder in the

cell, not that it will feel that way. Still cold in the north with

more snow showers to come. It will be icy in the north with warnings

out for eyes, and we could have a spell of snow tomorrow morning for

the rush-hour in Northern Ireland, southern Scotland, but at the moment

the warnings are out for the gales. Do be aware if you are travelling,

the risk of snow in the north and severe gales elsewhere.

The best advice is to staple the duvet to your shoulders I think!

Now we read in today's papers that if Jeremy Corbyn whips the

Labour Party against bombing, the Government might simply give up

But if he does, he may provoke a Labour split that

This isn't just about party management, this is a

matter of life and death, peace and war, and awesome responsibility.

Good morning. Firstly, what do you say to those Labour colleagues in

the Shadow Cabinet who are convinced now the case has been made for more?

I simply look very carefully at the whole issue, look what will happen

if we bomb Raqqa, look at the message from people who live there

who will -- who say there will be large numbers of civilian

casualties, and think through the whole thing. There is no ground

force to back it up, the Government has already ruled that out, and we

will be relying on groups in the Free Syrian Army, apparently who are

hundreds of miles away, whose main interest is inviting Assad. Two

years ago, the Government that is now asking us to link up with lots

of forces in Syria to oppose Isil asked us to joined the coalition to

fight Assad, we seem to be changing sides. The political process is

encouraging but slow, but the other one is cutting off arms, oil sales

and money to Isil. That is an area no government has done enough on.

Where are they getting money from? They are say -- selling oil. When

you have these conversations with Hilary Benn and so forth, do they

simply not understand this? We have many discussions and we will have

more, that's what politics is about, but you have got to ask yourself the

question, as appalling as events in Paris were, there has got to be a

security response there and elsewhere but also there has got to

be a recognition that if we bomb in Raqqa we will take out civilian

lives, not do much damage to Isil and we may make the situation worse.

The situation in Libya where there was no follow-up plan shows these

things can be dangerous. It sounds like you are against bomb and under

all circumstances, are you a pacifist? No, but I would describe

an act of violence and war as a last resort. You basically don't bring

about peace by bombing, you bring about peace by all of the other

processes, particularly the political process. Iran was not

brought on early enough because Iran was at Geneva one, not at Geneva two

but is in Vienna which is a good thing. I read the Labour Party

resolution which in party terms is the kind of foundation for

everything that follows, and in that the call for a UN resolution, which

has happened, there is a call for a better plan for refugees, which is

being put together now, and various other calls for things, many of

which the Prime Minister would say he has delivered. You set a high bar

Mr Corbyn, I have got over that, but you are against this under all

circumstances no matter what the Prime Minister says. If he picked up

the phone now and said, I have got a new thing to say to you, is there

anything that could change your mind? I would obviously listen to

what he had to say. The resolution talks about the UN resolution to be

carried. This is not a UN inspired attack. This is an attack on Isil

groupings in Raqqa which is a coalition between Britain, France

and the USA. Other countries such as Australia and Canada have already

withdrawn from this. This is not a chapter seven resolution. The Shadow

Cabinet members who disagree with you have gone through that

resolution, and said by and large we think it has been met, the hurdles

have been covered, but the trouble with Jeremy Corbyn is that in his

heart he is on the streets with the stop the War coalition and nothing

can be said to change his mind. There is nothing wrong with my heart

other than wanting a peaceful world. Let's go back to the issue of how we

deal with the problems of the region. Surely it is much better to

pursue the political option which will eventually bring about the

ceasefire, hopefully quickly, in the Syrian civil war. Hundreds of

thousands of people have already died in the Syrian civil war, it is

a crisis of unimaginable proportions and it is affecting Europe more and

more. Surely it is the political process that the key thing. This is

in effect a distraction from the political process. Your clear --

view could hardly be clearer on this, and you have written to Labour

Party members and encourage them to write to your MPs. Some of your

Shadow Cabinet people are upset you didn't tell them you are going do

that. I was elected with a large mandate and many supporters have

become party members. I was asked quite specifically by a number of

people what is my view. Straight after the Shadow Cabinet meeting on

Thursday, many colleagues who have a different view to me and want to

support the Government on bombing, and already fully informed the media

of what their position was, it would be a bit strange if my position was

kept a secret thereafter so what I have done is try to democratise the

way the party does things. Yes, I have sent an e-mail to party

members, and 70,000 have already replied with their views. I don't

know what all the views are obviously, I haven't read them all

but we will be analysing bows. In a democracy the Labour Party has a

large membership, they have a right to express their point of view, and

MPs have got to listen to it, have got to try to understand what is

going on in the minds of ordinary party members. How are you going to

resolve this? To simplify it rather. You've got the leader and a large

party membership think one thing, and in between them a lot of MPs who

think something entirely different. How do you resolve this? A lot of

MPs are yet to make up their minds, they are thinking the thing through

carefully, reading some papers. Then they are looking at a more balanced

approach, but also listening to people on the street. Many people

tell me they are frightened of what will happen if the bombing goes

ahead, they are frightened of the growth of intolerance within our

society, whatever it is, but there has to be a political process. When

you say people are frightened about what will happen if the bombing goes

ahead, are you saying if we bomb in Raqqa we will make the streets of

London less safe? Obviously I don't want the streets to be less safe, I

support the increase in security operations in Britain to protect

people, but the danger... I'm not really asking about that. The danger

is a small number of people become radicalised as a result of this. We

have got to reach out to communities and make sure people of all faiths

feel included. If Britain votes to bomb and it takes place you think

more people will be radicalised and will attack us. I would hope not,

and I would persuade them not to be, but unfortunately the whole

record since at Ganis than in 2001, Iraq 2003, Libya some years later,

has been a growth of radicalisation across the whole piece. That is

something we've all got to reckon with. We've got to reach out to

communities, be inclusive of them. This will remind some people of what

Ken Livingstone said, that they gave their lives as a result of what we

were doing. That caused a lot of offence. Do you agree with him? I've

prefer to remember the brilliant words Ken Livingstone used after

July the 7th 2005 when he united Londoners saying Christians, Jews,

Muslims, we will be united and not allow the bombers to divide us. When

we first spoke, it was about some of these issues. You said matters of

peace and war should be left to individual consciences. Are you

going to whip Labour MPs? No decision has been made on that yet.

Obviously there are strong views in both directions. We will have a

further discussion about this. You cannot really whip them, can you? My

view about the membership of the Labour Party as they must have a

voice. MPs must listen to that voice and understand where they are coming

from. They are elected as MPs and presumably need to use... Of course.

We would make that decision later on. I still ask you. I thought you

would. You cannot really whip Labour MPs to vote against the government

if they believe something else. Listen, I understand dissent, I

understand this agreement from leadership. I speak to people who

don't agree with me and people who agree with me. I was a backbencher

myself and I speak to people who I have had disagreements with. It does

not need to be abusive or personal. I am respectful of differences of

opinion within the party. To clear up the legal basis, the traditional

bases, Diane Abbott says this decision is for you alone. There has

been a suggestion this could be decided by the Shadow Cabinet. The

leader decides. You will make up your mind when? In due course. Do

you want to be the first to know? I was hoping! Let's move on to the

fundamental criticism made of your leadership overall which is in the

end people just don't think the streets of Britain would be safe

under Jeremy Corbyn. I want our streets to be as safe as they

possibly can. I am an MP for an inner-city multicultural community

and I work closely with the police and faith communities and non-faith

communities to make sure the streets are safe. The safest way to live in

Britain is to have policing by consent, respect for communities,

inclusion. Do we need a strong security presence to prevent people

doing terrible things? Yes. That is why I supported the government. The

government has retreated because of pressure on the cuts they were going

to make. Labour has had a big influence. They have retreated on

tax credit and the Saudi prison contract. I was encouraging you to

say you would not whip them but let me encourage you to say you would.

There is evidence the government would prove a vote and you would

win. Help the government understands there is a serious debate and it

should be a debate about the kind of foreign policy we've got, what we do

in a difficult area of the world, what our influence could be.

Instead, increasingly, Conservative ministers seem to be presenting this

in very narrow party political terms of seeking advantage. That is not a

responsible way of behaving. You've seen the military intelligence

briefings. There is a widespread view that as long as there are safe

havens for Isis in Syria we are not safe. They have a place they can

plan attacks from. They could attack this afternoon or tomorrow. We will

not be safe until those safe havens are eradicated. However reasonable

what you have said science, you are against eradicating those safe

havens. Those attacks could be planned absolutely anywhere. There

is a strong view among lots of military people that bombing without

any continuation of what we are going to do is a very risky thing to

do. The idea that we're going into a bombing operation supported by

ground forces hundreds of miles away, some of whom are jihadists,

there are not any reliable allies there. Look at what happened to the

Turkish shooting down of Russian planes. Is this a very sensible

process? Should we not be cautious? The Prime Minister said there were

70,000 potential Allied troops. Do you think that number is fictitious?

I seriously question the number, the motives, the loyalty of those

forces. They are either focused on fighting President Assad, each

other, or having a civil war between themselves, as some jihadists groups

do. This is not a standing army one can rely on. The process must be a

political one to end this ghastly conflict. Two years ago, the same

Prime Minister wanted us to go to war against President Assad, he now

recognises the latest process. It has been a terrible few weeks for

the Labour Party. Did you ever think it was going to be like this? It has

not been terrible at all. Party membership has gone up, we forced a

freeze on tax credits, police cuts, Saudi prison contract is that would

have involved British prisoners... What about your comments are not

shooting terrorists? My regret is the way that was spun by the media.

Can I explain? The issue was, I take the view of liberty that shooting to

kill on the streets of Britain should be illegal and dangerous is

purely based on suspicion. A direct response if somebody is going to set

off a bomb is a reasonable response. We can never trust what is being

said in the papers but there are stories about potential coups

against you. Some of your colleagues getting legal advice about stopping

you standing in subsequent leadership campaign. Do you feel

there are moves against you? I feel there are some people who have not

got used to the idea that the party is in a different place. It is much

bigger than it has been in my lifetime. I took part in 100 days of

an election campaign, a very long campaign. I spoke at 31 different

hustings, open to party members, I addressed 6070 other meetings. The

result was a very clear mandate for me. You're not going anywhere? I am

not going anywhere. I am enjoying every minute. Is all them a fair way

to test your leadership? We've got a great candidate and a great campaign

in Oldham. I was there for the start of the campaign. I'm very

confident. Am I looking at the next Prime Minister of Britain? I hope

you are. Thank you very much indeed. We've heard the case

for voting against the war this week but those in favour have at least

as many hard questions to answer. Before the Iraq war,

there was nothing like enough discussion about what was going to

happen after the fighting or Let's hope that this time we

don't make that mistake again. I'm joined by the Defence Secretary,

Michael Fallon. He has been making the case,

including two Labour MPs. Can I ask, have you been talking to Labour MPs

directly? Yes, all week, we have been giving them briefing and trying

to answer the questions they have been asking, about what more can be

done to stop the supply of oil or arms, we have been briefing them in

the mystery of the fence and I've been talking to them in Parliament.

-- Ministry of Defence. In your waters, do you think we will see a

vote this week? We would like to but we need to keep building the case.

The Prime Minister advanced the case. He answered questions for

three hours. You could see opinion beginning to shift. Do you think you

have the votes? Not yet come we are working at it. We need to keep doing

that. There are legitimate questions to answer and we are doing our best.

If you called your vote and Jeremy Corbyn won it, what effect would

that have? It would be hugely damaging to Britain's reputation

across the world. Our allies want us to help. France has asked us

directly to send the RAF. It would obviously damage our reputation

internationally and would leave us less safe. He has not decided

whether to whip Labour MPs against the strikes. Maybe he has decided

but does not want to tell us. This is not just a matter for

but does not want to tell us. This Party or the Conservative Party, it

is a matter on which individual MPs need to make up their minds. We are

doing our best to answer questions and explain that France wants us to

help. There are strong military reasons for using our aircraft. We

are making these arguments and I hope MPs will look at them

individually. I don't want to get too hung up on the process, because

it is the fundamental question, you will have seen the Observer, people

in Raqqa saying, for goodness sake, do not bomb us. There are hundred

thousand people and a few thousand will be bad guys. They go

underground into bunkers or disperse among the civilian population to

schools and houses. They use the civilians as human shields. If we

vote to bomb Raqqa we will kill large numbers of innocent people.

Absolutely not, we set very strict rules of engagement to minimise

civilian casualties. This is why the French and the coalition would like

the RAF involved, because we have the precision strikers that can take

out specific fighters at command posts, training camps, people

plotting against. They can be taken out precisely. Can they really?

Those brimstone missiles cannot go into underground bunkers and

distinguish between a supporter and somebody wearing a headscarf selling

shoes. We build up intelligence on the targets, they are individually

selected, they are approved, I approve them. The commanders last

week had 25 aircraft available with precision strike capability. Eight

of those were British. Of the unmanned aircraft flying, about a

quarter are British. We have a very large proportion of high precision

strike capabilities and that is why the French asked us to help and the

coalition would welcome the RAF participating. These bombs can find

their way into bunkers, can they? The RAF at been striking in Iraq for

over a year and our estimate is there has not been a single civilian

casualty because of the precision. The strikes have been carefully

targeted at command posts. With the greatest of respect that reminds me

of Robin Cook's notorious comment about going into Afghanistan with

not a shot being fired. We've had war in Iraq, a catastrophe that

killed huge sums of people. We've had the war in Libya which destroyed

that country and opened up migrant routes. Now you are saying, let's

try a third time. We've already got the mission to deal with them in

Iraq at the edges, helping the government push back. It makes no

sense to simply deal with them in Iraq when they have a headquarters

in north-east Syria. They are not just a threat to this region, it is

a threat to this country. Let me put it this way, last year there were 15

attacks worldwide, this year there have been 150. We've seen them not

just in Ankara and Beirut but in Paris. There is a very direct threat

to this country. There's a feeling supermarkets might

be targeted, is there evidence that? The current independent threat

assessment is that an attack on Britain is now highly likely. We

have got to do something about that. Of course Labour is right to say

there should be a political process to end the civil war in Syria, of

course they are right to say we should look at the coil and

financing of Isil but we have also got to defend ourselves and deal

with a direct threat to the country. Jeremy Corbyn say that if

we start to bomb in Raqqa, we will make it much likelier Isil will come

and attack us here. It is too late, Isil already regard Britain as one

of their top targets. We are attacking Isil already in Iraq. We

are part of this right. -- fight. France has passed a resolution

calling on all members of the United Nations to call on their capacities

to eradicate any safe haven for Isil. We also need to do this to

keep our own country safe. The Prime Minister spoke about there being

70,000 potential fighters in Syria at the moment. Jeremy Corbyn said he

has deep scepticism about this figure. Do you know who these people

are? Yes, we do, and this is an independent joint intelligence

committee assessment, it is not ministers making this figure. There

is the Free Syrian Army in the north, the southern front in the

self... There aren't many of these people standing up to Isil, and the

longer we wait there are fewer there will be. But the best estimate of

those who are not extremists who are prepared to support a new government

in Syria and are then prepared to take the fight to Isil is around

70,000. They are not perfectly drilled and organised outside

Raqqa... And they have been fighting in Syria. They are there and there

will be fewer of them if we don't start getting involved properly in

dealing with Isil in its headquarters. The biggest question

of all is that in 2013 was a vote of the House of Commons which the

Government lost but that was to attack Assad, who is now objectively

our ally in all of this. So what happens if somehow we win, what

happens if we do take ground or the Free Syrian Army takes ground from

Raqqa and we all move in there, Assad attacks Bevan? That was a vote

to stop Assad using chemical weapons against his own people, and look

what's happened since. We have had 11 million people displaced, 4

million people have left Syria. Assad is stronger than ever. He is

only in control of a quarter of his country but we've had this huge

Civil War and we need to bring it to an end. That doesn't mean we

shouldn't be dealing with Isil first. Isil is a threat not just in

Iraq and Syria but to western Europe as well. I set that Assad is in a

powerful position, he has the Russians at his shoulder. If Isil

are defeated, Assad will be stronger still, and if the Free Syrian Army

go into Raqqa, presumably the Russians will attack them. Have

there been conversations about what happens? Close neighbours like Iran

and Saudi Arabia and Russia are now involved in a political process.

That wasn't true last year or two years ago. They are working together

on a new type of government for Syria that can be genuinely

comprehensive, include all groups in Syria, Christian, Sunnis and Jews,

and build a more comprehensive government in Syria that is

moderate. Russia is part of that process. Philip Hammond is

representing Great Britain as part of that negotiation and it is a sign

of optimism but we cannot wait for that process to work its way through

without dealing with the terrorist threat from Isil two our own

country. That surely is the heart of this problem, on the one hand you

want to act now, on the other hand it is dangerous to act until we have

a comprehensive idea of what will happen next, then have to wait for

the Russians to change their mind over Assad and there's no sign of

that happening. Our argument is that it is pretty dangerous not to act,

when you see a direct threat to this country, when you are asked for help

from France, when you have the capability of a precision strike

aircraft that can deal with this death cult in its headquarters. It

is even more dangerous not to do something about it. What happened in

Paris a couple of weeks ago could happen in a British city, innocent

people slaughtered on a night out. Isil is not making demands, these

are terrorists prepared to go in and slaughter people with automatic

weapons and then blow themselves up. I understand that. My question is

whether in doing something about this, we trigger a whole series of

further wars and conflicts in that region and make things worse. There

is a war going on in Syria at the moment, it has been going on for

four years. We are helping the legitimate government of Iraq pushed

Isil back, but the headquarters of Isil is there in north-east Syria

and we have the capacity to help France and our allies do something

about it so the bigger question is why would we not help? Have we

actually had a conversation with the Russians about the endgame? Yes, the

Russians are involved in these negotiations now. Over the last few

months they are involved actively with Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey

and the various moderate in Syria to give Syria a better government. As

Defence Secretary, what assurance can you offer we won't have an RAF

jets shot down by the Russians or the Turks following the incident

last week? The Turks were defending their airspace. It is a very crowded

airspace. There is an understanding between the coalition and Russians

for aircraft operating in the area around Raqqa, we would be party to

that and our planes are already equipped with defensive aids. There

are always risks in war but there are greater risks from not doing

something about Isil and leaving our street form a ball to the kind of

slaughter we saw in Paris. One domestic issue which is causing a

lot of concern for the Conservative Party at the moment is this

scandal, Grant Shapps has resigned, there are calls for Lord Feldman to

resign, what are -- is your message to Elliot Johnson's parents? I would

ensure there is a full-scale investigation going on, and there

will be the coroners inquest as well, but the person directly

responsible for Central office, for campaigning, for the chairman, Grant

Shapps, who signed up Mike Clark's operation, he has accepted

responsibility and has resigned. Do you think Lord Feldman should go as

well? I think it is best now to see where the investigation takes us.

The family would like an independent inquiry because the lawyer involved

wants to be an MP himself. He is fully independent, it is a top

lawyer. You have been inside the Conservative Party for a long time,

what goes wrong with the Conservative Party youth wing? It is

trivial to say they get overenthusiastic when somebody has

done something Assad asked to take their own lives, but let me assure

you this will be fully investigated. -- as sad as to take

their own lives. The Defence Secretary Michael Fallon

has confirmed he has been personally briefing Labour MPs at meetings in

the MOD to win their support for extending air strikes to Syria.

Michael Fallon said the Government would like to hold a vote on the

issue in House of Commons this week, but he said it had not yet secured a

majority in favour. He added that losing the vote would be damaging to

Britain's international reputation and would leave the country less

safe. The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has

urged party colleagues who disagree with him about Syria to think

carefully before agreeing to air strikes. He said he had not yet

decided whether to allow Labour MPs a free vote on the issue, but Mr

Corbyn made it clear he didn't believe extending UK military action

would solve the problem of so-called Islamic State. There has got to be a

recognition that if we bomb in Raqqa, we may make the situation

worse, not better. Hundreds of thousands of people are

expected to take to the street across the world today demanding a

deal to combat global warming in Paris. The objective is to achieve a

binding and universal agreement on climate change from all the nations

of the world. The next news on BBC One is

at 5:50pm. In an hour's time,

Andrew Neil's guests on the Sunday Politics will include

Liam Fox MP and George Galloway, Next week, the actor Toby Jones,

star of that really compelling But we leave you now

as promised with music from Their new album is called, simply,

'Jools and Ruby' # The same old heart will be there

for you # Is the same old blues on your

mind? # Well my heart has an ear that's

kind # The same old heart will be there

for you # Is the same old blues on your

mind? # Well my heart has an ear that's

kind # Oh, the same old heart will be

there for you #. Who knew you were such a romantic,

Mr Valentine? Maybe I should go for a drink

after this. Hm! You turned your back on your patient

when he needed you the most.