:00:12. > :00:14.Hello and welcome to Thursday in Parliament.
:00:15. > :00:20.The Prime Minister outlines the case for bombing the terror
:00:21. > :00:34.If we will not act now when our friend and ally France has been
:00:35. > :00:37.struck in this way our allies could be forgiven for asking if not now,
:00:38. > :00:41.Jeremy Corbyn questions whether the proposed air strikes would succeed
:00:42. > :00:52.Does the Prime Minister accept that UK bombing of Syria food cause more
:00:53. > :00:56.of what the US President called unintended consequences?
:00:57. > :01:01.And peers warn about the future of Syria.
:01:02. > :01:04.Whatever piece we achieve will be even more messy. It will be a
:01:05. > :01:07.fractured peace. In the Commons, the Prime Minister
:01:08. > :01:10.laid out a detailed case for He told MPs he believed Britain had
:01:11. > :01:14.to strike at the heartlands of the so-called Islamic State,
:01:15. > :01:20.also known as Isil, in Syria to David Cameron began his statement
:01:21. > :01:23.by outlining the questions that Where are the ground troops to
:01:24. > :01:36.help us meet our objectives? What is the strategy that brings
:01:37. > :01:38.together everything that we are Is there an end to this conflict and
:01:39. > :01:53.is there a plan for what follows? He went on to address each
:01:54. > :01:55.of those concerns, In the last 12 months our police
:01:56. > :02:06.and security services have disrupted no fewer than seven terrorist plots
:02:07. > :02:09.to attack the UK. Every one of
:02:10. > :02:11.which was either linked to Isil or I am in no doubt that it is
:02:12. > :02:15.in our national interest for action to be taken to stop them
:02:16. > :02:30.and stopping them means taking Mr Cameron said
:02:31. > :02:32.the UK's allies were looking for help and that British forces had
:02:33. > :02:35.the unique capability to carry out We should not be content with
:02:36. > :02:44.outsourcing our security to If we believe that action can help
:02:45. > :02:47.protect us then, with our allies we should be part of that
:02:48. > :02:50.action, not standing aside from it. And from this moral point comes
:02:51. > :02:53.a fundamental question. If we won't act now when
:02:54. > :02:56.our friend and ally France has been struck in this way then our allies
:02:57. > :02:59.in the world could be forgiven The Prime Minister also laid out
:03:00. > :03:03.the legal basis of the move to carry out air strikes in Syria, citing
:03:04. > :03:06.the UN Security Council resolution. And he turned to the issue
:03:07. > :03:20.of ground forces. We believe
:03:21. > :03:22.there are around 70,000 Syrian opposition fighters, principally the
:03:23. > :03:24.Free Syrian Army, who do not belong to extremist groups and with whom
:03:25. > :03:27.we can coordinate attacks on Isil. In addition there are the Kurdish
:03:28. > :03:30.armed groups who have also shown themselves capable
:03:31. > :03:31.of taking territory, holding And crucially relieving
:03:32. > :03:34.the suffering that the civilian population had endured
:03:35. > :03:36.under Isil control. We can't defeat Isil simply
:03:37. > :03:38.from the air or through military It requires
:03:39. > :03:43.a full political settlement but the question is can we wait for that
:03:44. > :03:47.settlement before we take action? The Prime Minister said there would
:03:48. > :03:56.be no vote in the House of Commons unless there was a clear majority
:03:57. > :03:59.as he did not want to hand Some hours after the statement,
:04:00. > :04:02.the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn announced - in a letter to his MPs -
:04:03. > :04:06.that he could not support the Prime Minister's position
:04:07. > :04:10.and vote for air strikes. But in the Commons, he restricted
:04:11. > :04:12.himself to asking a number On the question about whether
:04:13. > :04:24.extending the UK bombing from Iraq to Syria is likely to reduce or
:04:25. > :04:27.increase that threat, and whether it will counter or spread the terror
:04:28. > :04:30.campaign Isil is waging in the Middle East, with that
:04:31. > :04:33.in mind is it his view that the air campaign against Isil areas can be
:04:34. > :04:38.successful without ground forces? If not does he believe that
:04:39. > :04:44.the Kurdish forces or the relatively marginal Free Syrian
:04:45. > :04:47.Army would be in a position to back up Isil-held territory,
:04:48. > :04:49.to take back Isil-held territory, if Does the Prime Minister think an
:04:50. > :04:57.extension of the UK bombing would contribute towards a comprehensive
:04:58. > :05:00.political settlement of the Syrian civil war which is widely believed
:05:01. > :05:03.to be the only way to ensure The Vienna conference last weekend
:05:04. > :05:09.was a good step forward In the light of the record
:05:10. > :05:17.of Western military intervention in recent years including Iraq,
:05:18. > :05:21.Afghanistan and Libya does the Prime Minister accept that UK
:05:22. > :05:25.bombing of Syria could risk more of what President Obama called
:05:26. > :05:32.unintended consequences? It is now my personal view that on
:05:33. > :05:39.balance the country would be best served by this House supporting his
:05:40. > :05:43.judgment that the United Kingdom should play a full role in the
:05:44. > :05:49.coalition to best support and shape the politics thus enabling the
:05:50. > :05:53.earliest military and eventually We strongly support
:05:54. > :06:01.the international initiative on Syria agreed in Vienna to secure
:06:02. > :06:05.a ceasefire in Syria, the transition to stable representative
:06:06. > :06:12.Government, and countering terrorist We believe that these gains
:06:13. > :06:17.will only be secured through agreement and a serious
:06:18. > :06:23.long-term commitment to Syria. May I ask the Prime Minister is
:06:24. > :06:26.the UK supporting the international Syria support initiative and other
:06:27. > :06:28.diplomatic efforts to secure that ceasefire in Syria, the political
:06:29. > :06:33.transition and combating terrorists like Daesh and planning
:06:34. > :06:35.for the long-term reconstruction Air strikes alone will
:06:36. > :06:37.not be effective. They have got to be in coordination
:06:38. > :06:45.with credible ground forces. The suggestion that there are 70,000
:06:46. > :06:47.non-Islamist moderate credible ground forces I have to say is
:06:48. > :06:51.a revelation to me and I suspect Adequate ground forces
:06:52. > :06:57.in my view depend on the So if the dictator Assad refuses
:06:58. > :07:07.to resign, which is the greater Syria under him or
:07:08. > :07:14.the continued existence Because you may have to choose
:07:15. > :07:22.between one and the other. Air strikes alone will
:07:23. > :07:28.not defeat Isil. The Prime Minister has already
:07:29. > :07:31.heard that he will need to give much more evidence to this House to
:07:32. > :07:34.convince it that the ground operations are sufficient, have the
:07:35. > :07:37.capability and the credibility to deliver on the ground, which is what
:07:38. > :07:42.he knows needs to be delivered. And what role could Saudi Arabia,
:07:43. > :07:45.the UAE, Qatar and other Gulf States play
:07:46. > :07:48.in delivering this victory if that is the direction in which we choose
:07:49. > :07:52.to go as a country, as a House? What a pivotal moment was that
:07:53. > :07:54.United Nations Security Council Can he confirm that it doesn't
:07:55. > :08:02.just permit all necessary steps Does it not just allow all
:08:03. > :08:11.necessary steps but that it actually calls upon member states
:08:12. > :08:15.to take all necessary steps? What would it say about our judgment
:08:16. > :08:18.if we failed to take heed of We on these benches know
:08:19. > :08:25.from long experience the consequences of appeasing and
:08:26. > :08:31.indulging terrorism for too long. Will the Prime Minister confirm
:08:32. > :08:36.today that unlike last time the action foreshadowed today is against
:08:37. > :08:45.Isil terrorists and nobody else? I ask the Prime Minister
:08:46. > :08:48.before he comes to this House again to put the case for more war to
:08:49. > :08:52.the vote that he should examine his conscience, that he should examine
:08:53. > :08:54.all choices short of bombing. It is a case of life and death
:08:55. > :08:57.and eventually for all I agree this is a matter
:08:58. > :09:09.of integrity and there is no part of me that wants to take part
:09:10. > :09:12.in any military action that I don't believe this 100% necessary
:09:13. > :09:15.for our own safety and security. Now, is expansion at
:09:16. > :09:24.Heathrow Airport in London vital Or would it be
:09:25. > :09:29.an environmental disaster? Heathrow is already running
:09:30. > :09:34.at 98% capacity. No fewer than 73 million passengers
:09:35. > :09:38.used the airport in the last year. A third runway, built to
:09:39. > :09:42.the north of the existing airport, is the central recommendation
:09:43. > :09:44.of the lengthy report drawn up It would cost ?18 billion to build
:09:45. > :09:51.and would create tens But not everyone wants the third
:09:52. > :09:57.runway, and in a Commons debate, There is no current trust between
:09:58. > :10:08.Heathrow Airport and the community. Why would
:10:09. > :10:23.a third runway increase the trust? The report talks of a
:10:24. > :10:25.noise levy. But for my residents they are
:10:26. > :10:33.not interested in a noise levy. They are interested
:10:34. > :10:35.in a good night's sleep. I therefore believe that it is
:10:36. > :10:41.impossible to have too many runways. I live about 300 or 400 yards north
:10:42. > :10:46.of the extended runway and so I see And I have to say that if you choose
:10:47. > :10:53.to live in Twickenham you have to take into account the airport which
:10:54. > :10:56.was there a long time before you And I am afraid the same
:10:57. > :11:07.applies to people in Richmond. Sadiq Khan is the Labour candidate
:11:08. > :11:11.to be the next Mayor of London. That joke came from the Conservative
:11:12. > :11:20.candidate for London Mayor. And to remind ourselves
:11:21. > :11:22.of the challenges we face in London last year alone almost 10,000
:11:23. > :11:25.Londoners died as a direct result There are children whose lungs are
:11:26. > :11:28.underdeveloped in parts of London And a couple of months ago the
:11:29. > :11:32.UK Supreme Court held that are there was in breach of the EU and UK
:11:33. > :11:35.air quality directive. In those circumstances I don't see
:11:36. > :11:42.how a new runway at Heathrow addresses the requirement we have to
:11:43. > :11:44.meet the Supreme Court's judgment. I do have to say that
:11:45. > :11:47.the honourable member for Tooting's position on this issue seems to ebb
:11:48. > :11:50.and flow with the weather. He seems to say one thing to one
:11:51. > :11:52.audience, His position on Heathrow is about as
:11:53. > :12:01.authentic as Donald Trump's hair. That joke came from the Conservative
:12:02. > :12:09.candidate for London Mayor. How do you accommodate 25
:12:10. > :12:11.million extra road passenger The Commission put the cost
:12:12. > :12:14.at ?6 billion. Heathrow puts the cost
:12:15. > :12:17.at ?1 billion. Transport for London has put
:12:18. > :12:18.the cost at around ?20 billion. And that is just some
:12:19. > :12:23.of the downside. You may consider accepting
:12:24. > :12:27.that downside if the economic But what is amazing about the report
:12:28. > :12:31.is that it makes the economic case There is a giant gap
:12:32. > :12:35.between the report itself Heathrow is absolutely vital to
:12:36. > :12:43.areas such as mine in Chesham, Amersham and in Buckinghamshire,
:12:44. > :12:46.where in Buckinghamshire we have over 700 companies headquartered
:12:47. > :12:50.in the region. And my constituents quite frankly
:12:51. > :12:53.would rather see an expansion at Heathrow which would benefit
:12:54. > :12:57.them economically than the building of HS2
:12:58. > :13:29.which does nothing for the economy. Even if it were built and could be
:13:30. > :13:31.full at the point of completion. And it does not deliver the extra
:13:32. > :13:39.connectivity that we all want. That does not hook up British business
:13:40. > :13:46.with those destinations in China and Latin America. According to the
:13:47. > :13:47.figures the number of new long-haul destinations would only increase by
:13:48. > :13:50.seven. Heathrow Airport Ltd may be winning
:13:51. > :13:53.on the amount spent on PR but this Parliament has a duty to assess what
:13:54. > :13:57.is the optimum solution and not be How long does she think
:13:58. > :14:02.that we can assess this? This is a debate that has
:14:03. > :14:05.been running for 20 years. How many more years do we need to
:14:06. > :14:07.debate this Will there ever be
:14:08. > :14:16.a conclusion to this debate? There will be if the Prime Minister
:14:17. > :14:18.considers the quicker, less costly You're watching Thursday
:14:19. > :14:22.in Parliament, with me, Will you give up your salary,
:14:23. > :14:30.Minister? the possibility of UK air strikes
:14:31. > :14:36.on Syria. The House of Lords won't be asked to
:14:37. > :14:40.vote on potential military action but with so much political and
:14:41. > :14:43.military experience between them, peers are keen for their voices
:14:44. > :14:46.to be heard. So David Cameron's statement
:14:47. > :14:49.was read out and debated For the first time
:14:50. > :14:54.in almost 300 years, we are facing a conflict that has a distinct
:14:55. > :14:58.theological and religious element We must realise that facing this
:14:59. > :15:06.conflict there must be an ideological response that is not
:15:07. > :15:11.only national in dealing with the threat of extremism here but is
:15:12. > :15:18.global in challenging the doctrines that draw so many people to
:15:19. > :15:24.support Isis internationally. Other people are already doing
:15:25. > :15:29.plenty of things. If one believes military action
:15:30. > :15:33.is counter-productive, But if one believes it is necessary
:15:34. > :15:38.for our own security, to suggest we should not employ
:15:39. > :15:42.that military capability because others already are
:15:43. > :15:46.is not only wrong but shameful. The intention is to improve
:15:47. > :16:14.our effectiveness against Daesh We cannot should our responsibility
:16:15. > :16:19.here. We see this ISAs force as a threat to our own way of life. -- IS
:16:20. > :16:22.force. The intention is to improve
:16:23. > :16:24.our effectiveness against Daesh and not pursue the Government's
:16:25. > :16:27.vendetta against Bashar al-Assad. It can't make the slightest sense
:16:28. > :16:30.while we are engaged in an involuntary and unavoidable war
:16:31. > :16:32.against Daesh, which we must win, to be fighting on the same
:16:33. > :16:36.territory another voluntary war I have to say that the Government's
:16:37. > :16:41.predictions, which I assume is part of their policy, they have made
:16:42. > :16:45.consistently over three years that Bashar al-Assad's regime
:16:46. > :16:48.is about to collapse I spent last weekend in Damascus
:16:49. > :16:54.and I was struck by the health of the economy and the resolution
:16:55. > :16:56.and morale of the regime. I fear the Government
:16:57. > :16:59.were very misconceived I hope now they will be able to
:17:00. > :17:04.focus on the real enemy What we achieve, I hope we do,
:17:05. > :17:10.in Syria, will be even more messy. This will not be
:17:11. > :17:12.a comfortable pace, it will be a fractured peace, and the best we
:17:13. > :17:16.can say about it is that fraction and uncertain and unsatisfying
:17:17. > :17:20.though it is, it is better than
:17:21. > :17:23.continuing this terrible war. If that is the case,
:17:24. > :17:26.that's good enough for me. What contact do we actually have
:17:27. > :17:31.a day to day with the Russians, the Iranians and, most particularly,
:17:32. > :17:35.I'm afraid the answer to this must that we are talking about
:17:36. > :17:44.military action on. Now, ministers are used to getting
:17:45. > :17:49.requests and suggestions from MPs. But the Education Secretary,
:17:50. > :17:52.Nicky Morgan, She was asked to give up her salary
:17:53. > :17:57.for the rest of the year to improve her understanding
:17:58. > :18:03.of the gender pay gap. Would the Secretary of State,
:18:04. > :18:06.who I know cares about this issue, symbolically forego her salary
:18:07. > :18:10.from 9th of November until the end of the calendar year so she knows
:18:11. > :18:13.from personal experience what it feels like to do the work of a male
:18:14. > :18:18.colleague but for 20% less salary? Wouldn't she say that all
:18:19. > :18:22.governments have failed in this field and now the time is
:18:23. > :18:25.not of declarations about change over a generation but to seize
:18:26. > :18:29.the legislative agenda for which she would have massive
:18:30. > :18:31.support across the House to finally bring equality
:18:32. > :18:35.to women in our country? The honourable gentleman
:18:36. > :18:39.can give up his salary if he feels so strongly about it
:18:40. > :18:42.and wants to make a statement. The important thing is that this
:18:43. > :18:45.government is taking action on an issue his party
:18:46. > :18:49.did not take action on for 13 years
:18:50. > :18:52.whilst they were in government. The honourable gentleman is right to
:18:53. > :18:56.say that this does now need to be tackled by legislation,
:18:57. > :18:58.which is why this government is going to be publishing regulation
:18:59. > :19:18.shortly to make that happen. What specific policies
:19:19. > :19:22.does the minister have Can I thank the chairman of the
:19:23. > :19:28.Select Committee very much indeed. I know this is an area the Select
:19:29. > :19:31.Committee will be looking at. She may be interested to know that
:19:32. > :19:34.in the latest gender pay gap figures published earlier this month,
:19:35. > :19:37.women aged between 40 and 49, saw a 1.6% drop
:19:38. > :19:40.in the gender pay gap and that is repeated in the other
:19:41. > :19:43.age gaps of over 50s and over 60s. But she is right to say that
:19:44. > :19:48.this does need to be tackled. And the Chancellor's announcement
:19:49. > :19:52.that VAT receipts from sanitary products would be used for
:19:53. > :19:57.women's causes came under review. The women's sector is under
:19:58. > :20:00.enormous pressure, especially specialist
:20:01. > :20:03.organisations which, for example, The charity Eaves was forced
:20:04. > :20:09.to close earlier this month. A body reported 67% of their
:20:10. > :20:12.members are uncertain about the future sustainability
:20:13. > :20:15.of their funding and generic providers
:20:16. > :20:18.are increasingly being commissioned Isn't it time for a proper
:20:19. > :20:24.sustainable funding strategy for services for victims of domestic
:20:25. > :20:28.and sexual violence rather than gimmicky short-term fixes like the
:20:29. > :20:34.tampon tax that only women pay for? I think it is a shame that
:20:35. > :20:37.the honourable lady While we are in the position
:20:38. > :20:42.where we have to pay this VAT, And I congratulate my honourable
:20:43. > :20:47.friend from Colchester for coming up with the idea, that we use this to
:20:48. > :20:50.provide additional support to those services and she is quite right that
:20:51. > :20:54.we need those additional services. Back to the Lords and the Government
:20:55. > :20:57.has faced renewed calls to introduce national identity cards in the wake
:20:58. > :21:00.of the Paris terror attacks. The National Identity Card scheme,
:21:01. > :21:03.which was set up by Labour, There were calls
:21:04. > :21:09.for the government to look again. But particularly
:21:10. > :21:12.in regard to the national security and the protection of all
:21:13. > :21:16.of our citizens in counterterrorism and the assurance that we can give
:21:17. > :21:19.this to them that the Government will consider again their position
:21:20. > :21:22.on this before it is too late. I welcome the fact
:21:23. > :21:26.the Government is not averse to U-turns, including very big ones,
:21:27. > :21:33.and I hope on this one that they can reconsider and no-one will score
:21:34. > :21:38.any political points because it is If it was a question
:21:39. > :21:46.of the effectiveness of this, our view is that it was not going to
:21:47. > :21:50.be effective because the very people you would want to catch would
:21:51. > :21:53.not be the people who would comply. That is the reason spending
:21:54. > :21:57.the money on better security, better surveillance, better use
:21:58. > :22:01.of intelligence, the investments we have announced in national security,
:22:02. > :22:05.the improvements to the funding of the police
:22:06. > :22:08.and cyber security are the right way Nearly all European countries now
:22:09. > :22:16.have national identity cards. Germany's latest card,
:22:17. > :22:19.which is highly secure, includes a photo, a digital photo,
:22:20. > :22:27.an electronic data function and biometric data
:22:28. > :22:32.which can include a fingerprint. In these difficult circumstances,
:22:33. > :22:37.when identity is at the heart of our problems, shouldn't all the
:22:38. > :22:42.political parties now reconsider their positions on national identity
:22:43. > :22:47.cards introduction. If other European
:22:48. > :22:50.countries can have confidence in their ID card systems,
:22:51. > :22:55.why can't we do the same? Times are changing,
:22:56. > :22:58.the world is very different. The decision was taken to
:22:59. > :23:02.abolish the national identity register and identity cards
:23:03. > :23:06.introduced by the last Labour It was ?85 million to run and nearly
:23:07. > :23:16.?1 billion to maintain the register. The second one was in terms
:23:17. > :23:19.of effectiveness. The very people we might want
:23:20. > :23:23.to have the identity of would be the last people to comply
:23:24. > :23:26.with that. That is not to say we are not
:23:27. > :23:29.doing anything about that. We are simply saying it is
:23:30. > :23:32.a different approach. We have passports, we have driving
:23:33. > :23:36.licences, passports at 84%, driving licenses at over 60%, and for all
:23:37. > :23:40.people who come from outside the UK to be in the UK for a period in
:23:41. > :23:46.excess of six months, they are also required to have a biometric
:23:47. > :23:52.permit in order to do so. Would it not have been better to
:23:53. > :23:56.have corrected the faults in the Labour Party proposals,
:23:57. > :24:00.put that under operation so that now we would have
:24:01. > :24:05.a system which was working? And isn't it odd that we are the
:24:06. > :24:10.only country in Europe that thinks that this system without identity
:24:11. > :24:17.cards is somehow or other superior? Should we not learn
:24:18. > :24:21.from others just occasionally? At a time when the principal concern
:24:22. > :24:25.we have is of national security, we have said we will choose to spend
:24:26. > :24:28.the investment required to put in place ID into better equipping our
:24:29. > :24:33.security forces, better securing our borders to make ensure we can
:24:34. > :24:38.keep people secure and safe. I welcome the minister saying there
:24:39. > :24:43.will be no rethink on identity cards because often the knee jerk reaction
:24:44. > :24:47.is the one that leads to massive I don't see why we should
:24:48. > :24:53.not try identity cards. Those of us who drive
:24:54. > :24:57.have to carry a driving licence, Otherwise there's difficulties
:24:58. > :25:03.with the police if you are stopped. I don't know why we shouldn't
:25:04. > :25:09.see whether it actually works. And finally, former Foreign
:25:10. > :25:12.Secretary William Hague has taken his seat
:25:13. > :25:14.in the House of Lords. Lord Hague of Richmond,
:25:15. > :25:16.as he will now be known, He stood down at this year's
:25:17. > :25:22.General Election after a year He is one of 45 new peers whose
:25:23. > :25:27.appointments were announced I, William, Lord Haig of Richmond,
:25:28. > :25:34.do swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear
:25:35. > :25:37.true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth,
:25:38. > :25:41.her heirs and successors, The latest addition to
:25:42. > :25:46.the red benches. I'll be back with the look at
:25:47. > :25:51.the week's events in Westminster tomorrow but, until then, from me,
:25:52. > :25:56.Georgina Pattinson, goodbye.