will you will this is the business briefing. i'm sally bundock. the deadlock continues — as business leaders blast politicians over their handling of brexit. we hear from one who wants a clean breakfrom the eu. boeing promises a software fix for the 737 max by the end of the week — as pressure mounts on the plane maker over the safety of the jet. and on the markets asian shares follow the us lower as 10—year bond yields spiral downwards around the world. it's the dreaded ‘inverted yield curve‘ — where long term bonds give a worse rate of return than short term bonds. it has proved to be a reliable

indicator of a looming recession we start with brexit — because the confusion for the business world continues after members of the uk parliament failed to find a majority for any single plan for leaving the european union. they did overwhelmingly reject the option of leaving without a deal — one consolation for increasingly worried business leaders. but as it stands — if they fail to reach an agreement— britain could still face a no—deal exit on april 12. the head of the british chambers of commerce is today accusing politicians of ‘letting business down‘ — and risking ‘mass disruption‘. he‘s not alone. on wednesday the institute of directors warned there was "deep frustration and anger among companies" over the government‘s handling of brexit so far. the iod also published a survey of m00

of its members on their preferred brexit option. 6 out of 10 want to keep eu single market trading arrangements. on monday the confederation of british industry called brexit a "national emergency". it‘s among business groups across europe that have warned that nobody is ready for a possible no—deal brexit —which could mean disruption to flights, drug supply shortages and interruptions to vital data—sharing. there are ways of improving no deal a little bit more. know what is ready, not the uk, not the eu. no—one is going to be ready for no deal but there are ways we can make sure the costs for citizens on the uk and eu side are lower. tim martin is the founder and chairman of thejd wetherspoon pub chain and a vocal brexit supporter who gave financial backing

to vote leave campaign. what is your take on how parliament is handling this process? well, i think it‘s a painful process. there isa think it‘s a painful process. there is a real —— reason parliament doesn‘t make decisions, it‘s handed over to government. this has been a vexed issue. as a result of the fact that parliament couldn‘t make up its mind over 30 years. we decided to have a referendum. parliament voted overwhelmingly for that. the people in the referendum voted to leave. 0nce in the referendum voted to leave. once you vote to leave, absurd and ridiculous for the cbi and others to say, we must have a deal. if you vote to leave, you can‘t have a deal. it‘s just a vote to leave, you can‘t have a deal. it‘sjust a reflection vote to leave, you can‘t have a deal. it‘s just a reflection of you wanting to remain in the eu.“ deal. it‘s just a reflection of you wanting to remain in the eu. if we do leave, and assuming the uk does leave the european union, we do have to leave with a deal of some sort, some sort of withdrawal arrangement in which the uk operates and

organises what its future trade relationship looks like. that's what eve ryo ne relationship looks like. that's what everyone you interview said and it‘s absurd. surely you need a process by which to leave. it's like saying in divorce, you need a process to leave. you either leave or you don‘t leave. you either leave or you don‘t leave. there has to be terms and arrangements. everyone knows that's not true. you explained to me how that will work? if we leave it at a deal today, a lot of the public in the uk don‘t reflect the views that you‘ve heard from those remain supporters. leave today, we save £39 billion. you asked me the question. £39 billion because you don‘t have to pay anything. you eliminate tariffs. you can't leave a relationship like that when you have

financial obligations. you have to pay off debts and liabilities. sally, you‘ve got it wrong. the house of lords brexit committee looked into this. there is no legal liability to pay anything. you save 35 pounds. you eliminate tariffs on over 12,000 products, you don‘t want to hear my reply, do you? you increase the level of democracy. that happens on day one. on day one, the uk will be better off. you‘ve heard people saying it‘s chaos. now, unemployment is low, the government‘s tax receipts are highest, employment highest, the economy is doing well. household expenditure up li%. well, that‘s your perspective on things. business investment has fallen dramatically.

the growth has gone down significantly. tariffs will be operating within the world trade 0rganisation. all the different trading partners. we don‘t know what the tariffs will look like in the future. also, we must mention as well, if we leave without a deal. future. also, we must mention as well, if we leave without a deallj thought you wanted to interview me. i talk to people like the chief economist of the imf who say the uk economy will shrink to five and 7% if there is no deal. they said that if there is no deal. they said that if we voted to leave? it‘s independent analysis. sally, they said if we voted to leave in 2016, by today, we would have lost 500,000 jobs. we‘ve actually gained 500,000.

those are the people you‘ve just voted. perhaps they are farmers if there is a sudden influx of much cheaper goods in the uk which could happen if there is no deal. complete free trade. a lot of our exporters will struggle to come pete. you can eliminate tariffs on bananas, and rice. what about the dish brief? how will that compete? we fish around the uk waters. it‘s mainly sold to europe. are you just putting the case for remain? i'm not. i'mjust trying to counter what you are saying. if you eliminate tariffs on things we don‘t produce. the money

for those tariffs is collected by the uk government and sent to brussels. you can eliminate tariffs on thousands of goods without effective anyone in the uk other than lowering the prices in uk shops. the eu is a protectionist organisation. i'm just wondering if the economy were to shrink significantly, and most say it will, if that were to happen, what would the impact be? you rely on people go into your pubs, spending their money. and you made me important things. actually, it‘s your benefit in many ways. if there is a tariffs spot. the uk imports more than a desk sports. if we eliminate tariffs

which are currently remitted to brussels, the uk consumer population will be better off but so will businesses because all manufacturing businesses because all manufacturing businesses imports are tough. there are tariffs on car parts from around the world. you can‘t bring in car parts from around america. you are sticking with your opinion and your view on exit, despite how this has gone. do you accept that you are in a minority view within the business community? no, idon‘t. a minority view within the business community? no, i don‘t. the institute of direct ‘s, organisations we talk to. if you look at bbc, the cbi, parliament, are different views from people on the ground. people voted to leave. we had all these scare stories which you just said. the people who talk to an agreed with you, with regards

to an agreed with you, with regards to window deal and the benefits of that. what is the point of me giving you a list of businesses which have voted to leave. they are legion. the cbi wanted us to join the euro. they are medically in favour of it, medically in favour of voting remade and they have been proved wrong, they said we would go to hell in a handbasket if we weren‘t in europe. untrue. they said we would already have a recession right now and we haven‘t. i‘ve been right, they‘ve been wrong. well, tim, we will see. tim martin, chief executive ofjd weatherspoon ‘s. let‘s turn to the us now — where boeing has said it will submit a software update to aviation regulators by the end of this week for their 737 max fleet. it comes as senators in washington questioned regulators about the safety approval process for the jets —

which have been involved in two fatal crashes. samira hussain has this report. since the two deadly plane crashes, there have been questions about these aircraft are being saved to fly. american regulators were delegating much more of the oversight of boeing‘s engineering to the company itself. this is not an uncommon practice but it means the industry is left regulating itself. so lawmakers ask the acting head of the federal aviation administration, the federal aviation administration, the faa, why they didn‘tjust maintain all of the oversight. answer? money. an estimation that would require roughly 10,000 more employees to do that role and about

$1.8 billion for our certification office in the faa. lawmakers also asked why took the us days before it grounded boeing‘s 700 37 max fleet. in defending its decision, the faa said it took action only when there was up—to—date satellite information which showed a similar trajectory to the two planes that crashed. the united states and canada were the two countries and that‘s important, the ones that grounded it. when you ground aircraft for a reason, then you have something by which to underground them and when you‘ve mitigated that all solved it or found that link. there is no question the reputation that the united states being the leader of aviation safety has been badly damaged, both in the eyes of the world and by the american people.

0ur usually taken alerted by a colleague, working independently. professor anna steck gathered three beanbags of this stuff from the streets and flats around grand belltower. stuff from the streets and flats around grand belltowerlj stuff from the streets and flats around grand belltower. i would say this stuff is definitely not good for touching and having close to your mouth or nose. it is soil scrapings from window blinds inside flats with a lot of this. the burnt

red minutes of the home insulation fixed to the outside of the tower during its refurbishment. inside, we found a high level of contaminants released from the fire. with a close vicinity of the tower. we found a number of chemicals that are categorised as, for example, respiratory sensitisers, which might lead to asthma but also more focused on the carcinogens or chemicals classified as carcinogens. she says there is a high risk of cancer and asthma but it will take further studies to determine how high the risk. the government believes it is generally a low risk. yet people living in the tower have told us they‘ve suffered from what they call they‘ve suffered from what they call the grenfell cough, sometimes bloodied. they are deeply concerned. the area around the tower has been sampled in the weeks after the fire. no concern but this is the first

study of elution in soil and dust in flats. an estate, the ——in a statement, the government said: a new study has now been ordered, and more health screening. the headlines in the media across the world. earlier, theresa may promised to step down as prime minister if her deal is passed. but key allies refuse to back her.