harley—davidson, for deciding to move some production outside the us. it says it made the decision to avoid retaliation by the eu against new american import duties. mr trump said he was surprised the firm was the first to "wave the white flag". the pentagon has confirmed that two military bases in texas will be used as temporary camps to house migrants. last week, president trump said he would end the practice of separating these migrants from their children. it's not known if families will be allowed to stay at the camps together. members of parliament in britain have approved controversial plans to build a third runway at heathrow airport. it's claimed the project will create tens of thousands ofjobs and help britain compete internationally. critics say the impact on local people and the environment will be devastating. now on bbc news, monday in parliament. hello and welcome to monday in

parliament. our look at the best of the day in the commons in the lords. on this program: cleared for takeoff— on this program: cleared for ta keoff— mps vote on this program: cleared for takeoff— mps vote for a third runway at heathrow. we have been debating this issue for 20 or 30 or a0 years. and they know it is not on the cards, but i would support a fourth and fifth runway, actually. a church, a temple, community centres, open spaces, even our hospice is now threatened. that is what it means for our community. but the government gives a thumbs down to a project for a new tidal lagoon to generate clean energy. can i tell

the current secretary of state for energy that his statement is wrong, wrong, wrong? and all that leaping peugeot when england goal goes in, is it time to allow supporters to stand up to support their kids in the premiership? i am puzzled as to why it the government thinks standing up in safer as the football gets worse. and mps have voted in favour of the controversial £ia billion expansion of heathrow airport in west london. the new ru nway airport in west london. the new runway will increase the annual capacity of the airport, europe's busiest, from 85 million passengers to 130 million. hundreds of homes may have to be demolished for the runway. heathrow expansion has been argued overfour decades runway. heathrow expansion has been argued over four decades with environmentalists strongly oppose and governments consistently delaying the final decision. business leaders say a third runway is vital for the uk economy. it is

instruction is not likely to be finished before 2026. all five of london's five airports will be full by the 20 30s. what is happening is that we are seeing business live united kingdom and go to airports like frankfurt, amsterdam, paris, that have made additional capacity provision. and if you set with your plane fined up and look at what is lying ahead, we are losing connections to other countries and losing the investment around those connections to other countries. this proposal was first published in 2002. hong kong publish as in 2011. those will be built within five years. if we are to remain internationally competitive, does my right honourable friend not think we should get on building? opposing the expansion, boris johnson was should get on building? opposing the expansion, borisjohnson was not of

the debate. a party colleague defended his absence. the debate. a party colleague defended his absencelj the debate. a party colleague defended his absence. i know it is on the cards but i would support a fourth and fifth runway, and at gatwick. but does my right honourable friend accept that when contingency matters, just like at hs2, coming to the issue, it is understandable why some feel that they are unable to vote for this government motion and might find themselves called away? but other conservative opponents were there. we are talking here about 80,000 people measured against the convenience of many hundreds of thousands of people directly under those flight paths, many of them, to be the speaker, are some of the most economically productive people in this country, paying a lot of taxation, and, therefore, we should not ignore the issue of living under the flight paths. if you are spent, we re the flight paths. if you are spent, were the most backward looking, ill thought through, poorly articulated,

bad value for money, most polluting airport plan i could find, this would be it. and it is usually polluting form my local community. and to only have a four— hour debate on such a monumental infrastructure decision is an absolute disgrace. and i'm staggered, actually, that this house is even seriously contemplating voting for such fa nta sy contemplating voting for such fantasy economics. 4000 homes will go. 8000— fantasy economics. 4000 homes will go. 8000- 10,000 fantasy economics. 4000 homes will go. 8000—10,000 people forcibly removed from their community. the biggest possible removal since the scottish highland clearances. a church, a temple, community centres, open spaces, even our hospice is now threatened. that is what it meant to my community. two schools, will they

go? it is no good offer in 125% compensation was that you cannot compensate for the loss of your whole community. we have a housing prices that we have not seen since the second world war. we cannot how is our existing population. where will they go? in heathrow airport we have seen investment already over the past ten years in a bigger airport at £12 billion. i think that has been beneficial to the airport and to us as a country, too. but residents are conflicted because they want heathrow to grow, but they wa nt they want heathrow to grow, but they want a they want heathrow to grow, but they wanta fair they want heathrow to grow, but they want a fair deal. and it is vital that they have a fair deal. that was told me that they support expansion but when it comes in as compensation in particular, they have felt neglected. waking up before 5am if plans are coming into land too early, unable to open the windows in the summer for the noise, early, unable to open the windows in the summerforthe noise, noise early, unable to open the windows in the summer for the noise, noise from hangars at heathrow their homes, pollution from cars stuck in

traffic, nightlights, respite and other protections are critical for the quality of life. i contrast what we have done with hong kong airport. the the difference is that it is owned by the state and there is a clear commitment and understanding that investing in infrastructure helps your country grow. the seven leading regional airports, everyone of them, and wrote to manchester, birmingham, east midlands, bristol, and others, they have made it clear that they oppose heathrow expansion, because it inhibits their own potential for developing point—to—point routes to other parts of the world. if heathrow is particularly important for freight, particularly important for freight, particularly to countries outside europe, a one flight to heathrow‘s close to china would add £60 million per annum to close to china would add £60 million perannum to our close to china would add £60 million

per annum to oui’ economy close to china would add £60 million per annum to our economy per annum, pretty 530 jobs, and this cannot be done without expansion of heathrow. it was a gigantic legal challenge backed by local authorities, city hall, and numerous organisations waiting around the corner from this vote today. and this is what is proposing. why would we choose the most polluting, destructive, least deliverable option when the alternative is at least as economically beneficial and lastly simplerto economically beneficial and lastly simpler to deliver? and it is not because heathrow will deliver more collectivity. by every metric, gatwick and heathrow deliver the same. is an extraordinary thing that of all big advanced economies in the world, britain should we spend so much time and effort debating building notan much time and effort debating building not an airport were not too are building an airport — but we are talking about building a single ru nway talking about building a single runway at that has had no increase in capacity for 50 years. and i think it is a shame and i am

embarrassed that it has taken us this long. and at the end of the debate, mps voted for the motion backing expansion. now, its supporters that would provide enough energy for more than 150,000 homes, but the government has pulled the plug on a proposed tidal lagoon in swa nsea plug on a proposed tidal lagoon in swansea bay. a private company, it titled lagoon power, wanted the government to offer subsidies for the energy produced at swansea bay and at five other lagoons. but the business secretary said the government's analysis showed the scheme was too expensive. there were cries of shame from opposition mps as he announced his decision. the conclusion of this analysis, which has been shared with the welsh government, is that the project and the proposed programme of lagoons do not meet the requirements for value for money. and so would not be appropriate to lead the company to believe that public funds could be justified. greg clark said energy created by these once lagoon would

cost three times as much as offshore wind and only create jobs indirectly. the conclusion is that the matter how novel and appealing it is, even with these factors taken into account, the cost that would be incurred by consumers and taxpayers would be so much higher than alternative sources of low carbon power that it would be responsible to enter into a contract with the provider. securing our energy needs into the future has to be done seriously. and where much cheaper alternatives exist, no particular project or technology can proceed at any price. and that is true of all technologies. labour called the decision shameful. i am afraid this statement is evidence of another failed government policy, a missed opportunity for both the domestic economy and for our export potential, and the government should be ashamed by what we have heard

from the secretary of state to date. greg clark said the government had to be responsible stewards of public money. and as for economic development in wales, it would be cheaper to write a cheque for £50,000 for every single household in wales rather than subsidise this proposal. so i'm supposed to make —— so proposal. so i'm supposed to make —— soiam proposal. so i'm supposed to make —— so i am surprised that the matter how wonderful it is of taxpayers' money that is being suggested. can i tell the current secretary of state for energy that his statement is wrong, wrong, wrong? the evidence that the bitter price of future tidal lagoons will fall dramatically after the one at swansea bay. tidal lagoons will fall dramatically after the one at swansea baym tidal lagoons will fall dramatically after the one at swansea bay. it is the second broken promise from the 2015 tory manifesto on top of the

cancellation of adjudication. as swa nsea cancellation of adjudication. as swansea mp targeted the welsh secretary, alun cairns, who was sitting alongside greg clark. you will never understand the frustration and anger felt in my city today. and it begs the question just who is standing up in wales? because it is not the secretary of state. we have not had a letter we have not had a tidal lagoon. if you don't do thejob have not had a tidal lagoon. if you don't do the job properly, time to move on, ifear. hear, hear. greg clark said alun cairns had been vigorously engaged in the analysis of the lagoon. and it was rationed to the libyan announcement over in the house of lords. the rejection of the house of lords. the rejection of the swansea tidal lagoon is a bitter pill to swallow. it feels like yet another betrayal of the people and the economy of wales. the government had cancelled rail, electrification -- rail

had cancelled rail, electrification —— rail electric patient to swansea, and now reject the swansea tidal lagoon. —— wail of adjudication. —— rail electrification. we have felt the relative benefit around our shores of having power which is predictable, not intermittent but predictable, not intermittent but predictable, in a way that other technologies have not. and we would bea technologies have not. and we would be a world leader in this. as a deeply —— i am deeply disappointed by the government's decision today. i think it is shortsighted and a missed opportunity. the government, rightly, insists that the tidal lagoon should represent value for money. at the governed has consistently failed to any price. now with the country, or england, anyway, good buy the world cup, it may be time to debate how we watch football. is it time to allow

supporters to watch in safe standing zones, such as this one at celtic ‘s football ground in glasgow. in england, or stadiums are currently all seated venues. it is the result of safety rules brought in after the hillsborough disaster of 1989. but many supporters believe that standing should now be allowed at premiership and championship games, and an online petition has attracted the support of 100,000 people, triggering a debate in westminster hall. we have seen the introduction of rail seating in several european stadiums, particularly in germany, notably seeds in borussia dortmund's stadium which can be a allowed to lock up right, allowing people to stand, and each row has a safety barrier to improve car control. in re ce nt barrier to improve car control. in recent years, the court changed —— the calls for change has grown louder. there has been a call for

some standing whether in terracing was on standing. the rail seating syste m was on standing. the rail seating system operates in the same way as the existing seats, where each ticket holder is allowed our own seat in the stadium, and this allows for the seat to be folded and locked up for the seat to be folded and locked up right, allowing supporters to stand. each row has a safety barrier which spectators are able to use to both hold onto and lean against for stability. these barriers are to seat car control and restrict movement around the terrace. chief executive of brentford football cloud has recently said and i quote, it is clearfrom our discussions with supporters that when the fans want the option to stand to watch their football. new stadiums, even older stadiums like griffith park, now is safe places to

stand —— to attend matches. griffith park, now is safe places to stand -- to attend matches. this is not about bringing safe standing in the grounds, it is already there. when fans travelled to countless stadiums in the league, they see countless stadiums operating safe standing sections. but any top two tears, it is not allowed. i'm puzzled as to why the government thinks standing becomes safer as the quality of football gets worse because of this is true, then southampton fans should be made to sit. there are laws that are made for good reason and goodness knows, this law was made for good reason. no one could deny that, but in the implementation they do not always work in the way in which they were intended. this is one such normal andi intended. this is one such normal and i am pleased that the minister is open—minded about changes.

and i am pleased that the minister is open—minded about changeslj and i am pleased that the minister is open-minded about changes. i do not believe it is right for this debate to be, concluded, the changes to be made to the current arrangements without those affected by the hillsborough disaster being fully consulted, their voices heard, their views considered. how can it be right that those who have the most to say about this cannot publicly say what they think or why, while those who wish to promote the change had no such constraints upon them? you're watching our round-up of the day in the commons in the lords. still to come, the latest thinking on how best to reduce obesity in childhood. the plane maker airbus warned last week that it could pull out of the uk, if the uk were to make a no deal brexit deal with the european union. airbus employs more than 20,000 people at

two sites in britain. its bosses said no deal scenario would lead to catastrophic consequences. at the weekend, jeremy hunt is accused airbus of making inappropriate threats. a labour mp has raised the issue in the commons as an urgent question. does he agree with me that the continued operation of airbus in the continued operation of airbus in the uk is vital to the uk economy and we need to take seriously their worries and concerns? or does he support the comments of the trade secretary, who said we should ignore the views of business? or does he agree with the health secretary, said it was inappropriate for airbus to raise concerns? mr speaker, any company and any industry that supports the livelihoods of sony working in this country is entitled to be listened to with respect. the government has been clear that we are determined to secure a deal with the eu that meets the needs of our aerospace firms and those whose

livelihoods depend on them. what airbus has said was consistent with what they have said before, consistent to what they have said to select committees of this house, and very importantly it was addressed equally to the european commission and to member states of the european union, because it is is very clear that in order to have the agreement that in order to have the agreement that we see, it is necessary that right sides of the discussions should participate in that. and would he also agree with me that if at the end of our negotiations, we start erecting new tariff barriers, new customs procedures, a new regulatory divergences, it is perfectly obvious that we are going to the term inward investment from companies like airbus, it bmw, siemens, and many others with long—lasting damage to our economy in? this government is so insecure,

so in? this government is so insecure, so at odds with itself and the country that it cannot stand scrutiny. their chaotic handling of brexit is dividing the country, not bring it together, and risking our industrial base. they should abandon their red lines, rule out no deal, except that a new customs union and the single market is in all our interests, and give business and workers the certainty they need. airbus's risk assessment is sobering news for those drunk on the fantasies of brexit, severe disruption and interruption of production in the uk have been hmmfi production in the uk have been fore ca st by production in the uk have been forecast by airbus, forcing them to switch investment planning away from the uk. airbus said this is not project fear but adorning reality. the fact is business after business is shouting praise, brace. at the heart of this is the lack of any plan, any sense over the customs

union from this government. can i ask my honourable friend, it airbus made good on their ridiculous threats, and i don't believe they will fall one minute, how much of the billions of pounds worth of british taxpayer subsidy paid for by the british taxpayer they would have the british taxpayer they would have the payback? agreed my honourable friend that i think what the company has done is set out what they require to be agreed in the negotiations in order for them to be able to continue to prosper. allows the secretary what is he think is in the secretary what is he think is in the minds of the leading brexiteers when they hear warnings like these, which are anything but ridiculous? does he think that they really taken to heart or do they in the end believe that this is a price worth paying because the overall imperative of controlling immigration comes before any economic impact? both sides of the negotiations will be what will

determine a solution that is in the interests of both sides, that is what i am determined to pursue. when companies offer evidence, as others are completely free to do, i think it should be considered in a serious and sober way and used to inform those discussions. ministers have unveiled the second chapter of their plan to tackle childhood obesity. chapter one, published two years ago, included the sugar tax on soft drinks. this time the focus is on reducing the promotion of unhealthy foods by supermarkets and advertisers. there will be a debate on banning advertisers on tv and online, at labour it is the government of serving up more phage. today, i announce the second chapter to ourfighting today, i announce the second chapter to our fighting obesity plan. today, i announce the second chapter to ourfighting obesity plan. this plan sets the national ambition to reduce childhood obesity, and

significantly reduce childhood obesity in the most deprived areas by 2030. childhood obesity is one of the largest challenges this country faces, with the number of children classified as obese rising to a third by the time they leave. this bill will ban the advertising of products high in and sugar on tv and online, as well as in shops. as well as this, mr speaker, we want to arm at parents with information they need to make healthy decisions about what they are eating when they are and about. no guidelines on school standards, no plans to limit expansion of takeaway is near schools, nothing on billboards around schools, no extension of the sugar tax the milky drinks. and he was disappointed with the proposals on tv advertising. what did the secretary of state announced

yesterday? he is quote, called on industry to recognise the harm that consta nt industry to recognise the harm that constant adverts for food high in fat, sugar and salt can cause, and we will consult. so not even an intention to ban the advertising of junk food, it just a consultation. surely this former culture secretary has not given in yet again the big vested interests, mr speaker. we will bring forward legislation to ban the advertising ofjunk food on television. we have a childhood obesity crisis. the government should be introducing restrictions on the advertising of phage, not serving more of it up, mr speaker. we bear in mind that when it comes to cause or banning advertising before nine o'clock, such a measure would do huge damage to the economics of commercial broadcasters, just at a time when fewer and fewer young people are actually watching scheduled television and they are instead now watching the ondemand services, which are the direct competitors of commercial tv stations.|j

which are the direct competitors of commercial tv stations. i take the gentleman's is very seriously but we wa nt gentleman's is very seriously but we want to protect children from advertising of these products in higherand advertising of these products in higher and saturated fat and sugar, are going to cook assault on introducing a 9pm watershed. he mentions online at catch up on social media, and that is one of the reasons why this is a very, very important area for us to assault on, because we want to make sure we get this right. why are the poorest children disproportionally amongst the batters? is not because they watch more adverts, is it? no, it could be that, mr speaker, but it is a job of education and it is about helping their parents make sensible choices because it is the poorest in society that seemed too, that miss out what we get this wrong. it is what the prime minister described as a burning injustice and she was first elected as prime minister, and i agree with that. finally, despite the often made criticism that the house of lords is too large, with

this numbering just under 800, new peers continue to be added to its membership. the latest peer is a former conservative cabinet minister. lord pickles, as he will now be known, is a former local government and cabinet secretary. before entering parliament, he had beenin before entering parliament, he had been in local government act in the 805, he was the conservative group leader on bradford council. in that i5 leader on bradford council. in that is it for this programme. this mccarthy will be here for the rest of this week and now, to me, goodbye. —— alicia mccarthy. we have got many more days of this very we have got many more days of this very warm, we have got many more days of this very warm, if not hot weather.

across the country, ju5t very warm, if not hot weather. across the country, just a bit of fairweather cloud here and there, thati5 fairweather cloud here and there, that is pretty much it. monday was the hottest day of the year so far. we broke 30 celsius in london and in many areas, the temperatures were in the mid or high 205. thejet 5tream i5 the mid or high 205. thejet 5tream is way to the north of that. we had been forecasting this week, it is certainly where we expected it to be. to the south of that, we have the high pressure which is very much and could acro55 the high pressure which is very much and could across the southern part of the uk, some parts of scandinavia, and this whole 5wathe of europe you is really starting to feel the heat. very little happening on the weather front. just clear skie5, light wind5, a pretty warm start of the day on tuesday in many major town5 start of the day on tuesday in many major towns and cities across central and southern britain, temperatures will be around the mid teen5. a little bit fresher in eastern scotland in the north—east of england. tuesday, there is going to be just of england. tuesday, there is going to beju5t a of england. tuesday, there is going to be just a little of england. tuesday, there is going to beju5t a little bit more

of england. tuesday, there is going to be just a little bit more of an onshore wind, we think, closer to the eastern coast here. that means as the temperatures ri5e, it is actually going to build a little further to the east. —— the heat is going to build. that is perhaps where the highest temperatures will be. norwich no longer that hot. the 5un be. norwich no longer that hot. the sun is very strong, the temperatures may be only in the low 205. london could be around 27 or 28. we could be hitting somewhere around 30 degrees around the east midlands, for example. i would degrees around the east midlands, for example. iwould not degrees around the east midlands, for example. i would not be surprised that it is 30 again in london. the pressure across europe and parts of southern scandinavia here, but look towards the mediterranean. so italy, greece, the balkans, not so great there. great thunderstorms, so just because balkans, not so great there. great thunderstorms, sojust because it balkans, not so great there. great thunderstorms, so just because it is hot here, it does not mean it is great across europe. a little bit of a breeze there. hold down the norwich will probably see cooler temperatures in that heat a little bit cooler towards the west.

temperatures he will probably be hiddink 30 degrees in one or two spots. —— warmer. outlook forthe next few days, temperatures will be hitting around 30. i drive. —— bye—bye. welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. my name is lewis vaughanjones. our top stories: iconic motorcycle firm harley davidson says it's shifting some production abroad because of eu tariffs. president trump accuses the firm of ‘waving the white flag'. the pentagon says two military bases in texas are to be used as temporary camps to house migrants. it's not known if families will be allowed to stay there together. cleared for take off: controversial plans to expand heathrow airport get the green light. the search is set to resume in thailand for 12 teenage footballers and their coach — they've been trapped in a flooded cave since saturday. and drama and delight in the world cup as portugal and spain make

the knockout stages.