06/11/2015 Daily Politics

Confusion in Sharm El-Sheikh as stranded British tourists are

told to go back to their hotels and more flights are cancelled.

Three police officers are hospitalised

Can this sort of direct action ever be justified?

He was one of UKIP's highest-profile ethnic minority candidates -

now he says he's the victim of racial discrimination in the party.

We'll be talking to Winston Mackenzie.

And the unmistakable figure of George Galloway emerges from the

I'll be asking the former MP and London mayoral hopeful

about his plans to enter the vintage clothing market.

All that in the next hour and with us for the duration today,

two doyens of political style - there's some substance to them too,

Kiran Stacey of the Financial Times and Julia Hartley Brewer.

First this afternoon - flights were supposed to be starting to bring

British holiday-makers back from the Egyptian resort of Sharm El Sheikh

today, but there's considerable confusion about the number of planes

that will be able to operate, and passengers are being told that

they will have to fly without their luggage, which will be

In a moment we'll catch up with our correspondent in Sharm.

But first let's talk to our political correspondent,

It is getting a bit messy now. Do we have a clear idea of the picture?

Are the flights happening? Some flights are but yes a messy picture

in Government as well as Sharm El-Sheikh. I'm just back from

Downing Street's briefing. It looks like one charter airline, monarch

are sending flights out and two easyJet flights have left for

London. They were already at Sharm El-Sheikh airport. However it looks

as though, what the Transport Secretary, Patrick McLaughlin was

talking about, that everyone who was meant to be home by Friday night

will be, there will be in excess of 20 flights, looks unlikely. Downing

Street is saying the situation is complex and fluid. Off the record,

as I understand t the problem is this - in effect they think an

agreement has been made with Egyptian officials to get the

flights in and people out but it is not clear whether the Egyptian

officials are withdrawing cooperation and making it as

difficult as possible or whether people on the ground at the airport

are simply saying, they are not used to having this extra capacity and

can't deal with it but the upshot now is that there can be no

guarantee that everyone who should have been back from Sharm El-Sheikh

by this evening, will be. The British Government has firmly fixed

it colours to the mast that this was a terrorist attack. The Egyptians

and the Russians, for their own reasons will be hoping it is not.

And indeed may not be that keen to cooperate to discover if it was. The

British Government could find itself at some stage in a rather

embarrassing stand-off with the Egyptians and the Russians as to

what actually caused this. That's right. It is not clear whether that

stand-off, which I think has already already begun given the comments we

have had from Moscow and some Egyptian officials, whether that is

delaying the evacuation of British tourists from Sharm El-Sheikh. I

asked the number Ten spokesman about 20 minutes ago whether there was any

new information relevant to the investigation of the crash that has

been shared with President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi who is at the MoD this

morning or the Russian allies. He said the situation hasn't changed.

He said based on intelligence and other factors, it is most like that

a bomb caused the jet to go down but they would not say whether there was

any information to reinforce that. He said simply there was a dialogue

and what they were sharing was an explanation for Britain's actions. I

understand the Defence Secretary, Michael Fallon, he has been using

this terrorist attack, as the British Government believes it is,

to talk about the broader threat from Islamic state? Yes, he has

talked about the broader threat in the region. Certainly there is some

charter about whether there was the Islamic State off-shoot in sign eye

who was responsible. But -- in Sinai. But he renewed his call for

an extension of British air strikes in Iraq to Syria.

I'm briefing MPs on the state of the campaign against Isil, and I'm

asking MPs particularly to reflect on the fact that the streets of

Britain, at the moment, are being kept safe by American, Australian

and French aircraft, striking at the heart of Isil

in north-east Syria, from where Isil is organised and directed.

Britain is playing its role in the campaign against Iraq

but it makes no sense for British aircraft to have to turn back

at an artificial border that Isis itself does not respect.

We put Michael Fallon's comments to Downing Street this morning. They

are saying the Prime Minister's view on Syrian air strikes hasn't

changed. Certainly the case has to be made but there needs to be a

consensus in the House of Commons. And that consensus is going to be

far more important, when it comes to air strikes, than anything that

mayville happened over the skies of Egypt. Thank you for that and

bringing us up-to-date. We can talk now to our Correspondent

Sally Nabil in Sharm El-Sheikh. Is the British evacuation now

getting under way? Yes, what we understand so far is that two

flights have left Sharm El-Sheikh already going back to the UK. But

there has been a lot of confusion over the past hour. We don't nose

the schedule for the rest of the flights today but the British

Ambassador has spoken to journalists a short while ago and said that the

Egyptian authorities haven't blocked or cancelled any flights, it was

just a matter of rescheduling. What we know is that the UK wanted to

send many flights at one go and the Sharm El-Sheikh airport is not a big

one, so logisticically speaking, it cannot take all of the flights at

one time. So they are rescheduling the flights and that might take a

much longer time to repatriot the British holiday-makers back to the

UK and people are growing really frustrated because they wanted to

get back home as soon as possible. So, as it looks to you at the

moment, Sally, the British people stranded there, they could be there

over the weekend and perhaps even into the early part of next week?

Yes, we have no time frame actually for how long this process is going

to take and many tourists I have spoken to this morning have been

complaining a lot about lack of information, lack of communication.

One of them told me that he has no money to extend his booking at the

hotel and he does not know what he is going to do. They were hoping to

get back home today but it seems that the process will be a bit

lengthy because what we understand is that the British and the Egyptian

authorities are co-ordinating to bring the holiday-makers back home

but things are much more complicated from a logistics point of view. Some

of the tourists now are back to their hotels until further notice.

Let me just ask you one final question, Sally. The British, those

that can get out, are being allowed out, but only with hand luggage.

Certainly with very restricted luggage. Is that an independencation

that the British still don't trust the baggage security at Sharm el

Sheikh? In a way, yes. Security measures have been tightened after a

British aviation expert visited the airport two days ago. We have seen

long queues of people waiting for check-in because the security checks

are taking a much longer time. Three or four days ago I was here and

things were much quieter, even on the day of the crash. The scene was

totally different from today. Now you can see long queues of people

inside the terminals waiting for their hand luggage to be checked.

The picture has changed after Britain decided to stop its flights

to Sharm el Sheikh. I asked the people how they saw the new security

measures. Some were growing impatient with T others told me that

it'll make them feel safer. -- with it.

We can see the queues behind you. Thank you for joining us live from

Sharm El-Sheikh. Let me come back to the gee yes

politics of this. If it -- the geopolitics. If it turns out to be a

terrorist attack. This will have been the most serious Islamist

attack on what you would call Western assets, Western people since

9/11. The implications of this are huge? If Russia accepts T we have no

idea if it was a deliberate attack on a Russian flight or it could have

been on an easyJet or monarch flight back to Britain. We don't know. We

don't know for sure. Clearly there are massive implications. There are

also implications for domestic travel and politics as well. The

theatre of security that we do see at our airports which we have had

since 9/11 and since sevenself here, particularly, the -- and since 7/7.

It meaningless. Certainly in developing countries where we have

seen people buying their pay past security. Perhaps we have to accept

that this is possibility that could still happen to any one at any time.

But the biggest threat, in terms of geopolitics and in terms of Russia,

if Russia does accept this has happened, is it good for Putin, in

terms of keeping tension out of what is going home in Russia, which is an

economic basket case, and actually focuses more attention on what they

want to do on Syria. Or will it mean that the Russian people will say -

look, we don't want to get involved. This is not for us, we don't want

Russians dying at the expense of you helping Assad.

If Islamic State has developed a capability to penetrate the security

arrangements of airports like Sharm El-Sheikh, there are plenty of

airports like that, not just around the world but in that region. That

is a new dimension that Islamic State has, which has huge potential

in how we handle it. I think what is worrying is, is we know that

Al-Qaeda in the Arabian peninsula has been trying this for years this.

Won't trigger a bomb that will trigger the metical detector. They

have tried it four or five times. Has it now managed to develop the

technology to almost leap frog, aldividia, with whom of course they

have fallen out huge lane do this sophisticated attack. I think at the

moment the Brits except it is not case and there is enormously lapse

security on the ground and something which triggered a warning didn't.

The Egyptian have said that we the British, sent our experts there ten

months ago and it seemed to be OK. They have the scansers but pay ?10

to get through. . Or if you go through and it beeps and the

security guard says - I'm too stressed on you. I think that's more

a reasonable explanation than developing new technology. Very

worrying. It is not the most clever technology they will have used. It

is not beyond the wit of your average university student. Or

someone managed to plant it into the baggage hold after it was full. This

story began with the plane coming down last Saturday. It has divom

nated the news this week. It'll continue, I suggest -- it has

dominated the news. It'll continue to dominate and there

will be further developments. whose giant effigy was burnt last

night at the infamous annual bonfire celebrations in the usually

peaceful Sussex town of Lewes? At the end of the show,

Julia and Kieran will give us Now, Labour party members and

supporters may have got the leader they wanted,

but Jeremy Corbyn was supported by just a handful of Labour MPs

in September's leadership election. Many turned down front bench

and shadow cabinet jobs, but now centrist Labour MPs -

amongst them some of Mr Corbyn's biggest detractors - have found

a new platform within the party. The Parliamentary Labour Party's

departmental back bench committees have been dubbed the "Shadow Shadow

Cabinet". And before his election as Labour

leader, Jeremy Corbyn declared himself

a big fan, saying there were, " Well, as elections for

the committees concluded last night, None of the 17 new chairmen had

backed his leadership campaign - a result which prompted one MP to

describe the committee chairmen They include the pro-Trident

John Woodock, who will chair This summer he warned if Mr Corbyn

was elected as Labour Leader, "We can wave goodbye to any hope of

electability." Tristram Hunt,

who has said he has "substantial political differences" with Mr

Corbyn, will chair the Communities And former Shadow Chancellor,

Chris Leslie - he's attacked the "starry-eyed,

hard left" economics of Mr Corbyn - To add to Mr Corbyn's potential

headaches, last night Jim McMahon was chosen to

be Labour's candidate in the The Oldham Council leader won 232

votes compared to 17 won by ex-MP and close Corbyn ally

Chris Williamson. And for a full list

of the declared candidates in the Oldham West and Royton

by-election, visit the BBC website. And joining me now is Mike Gapes,

who has been elected as chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party's

Foreign Affairs Committee, and Ronnie Campbell, a Labour MP

and supporter of Jeremy Corbyn. Welcome to you both. Mike Gapes, is

it just a happy coincidence that none of the shadow Shadow Cabinet

winners are Jeremy Corbyn supporters? I think we reflect the

views of the Parliamentary party. All of us who have been chosen to

chair these backbench committees stood. There was the election, in my

case, several contested elections, and people who have not nominated

Jeremy Corbyn were widely supported by our colleagues. Does that not

illustrate a systemic problem in the Labour Party, that the Parliamentary

Labour Party, and the Labour Party in the country have become two very

different animals. We will see how it works. The party in a country

voted for Mr Corbyn, and the Parliamentary party votes for people

like you. The Parliamentary party has a very important role over party

policy over the next few years. No leader can be successful if they

don't take their Parliamentary colleagues with them. Ronnie

Campbell, what do you make of it? Does it have the smell of a clue

about it? No, it doesn't, but these are talking shops, these committees.

They do not make policies. The Labour Party members and the

affiliates make policy. That's not what Jeremy Corbyn said before the

elections, he said they were very important and useful in developing

policy. Yes, within Parliament itself, they debate whatever the

issue is coming up, foreign affairs next week, of course they will be

debated, but they do not make policy. Mike Gapes, you tweeted, you

are quite a voracious tweeter, there is now no collective Shadow Cabinet

responsibility in our party, no clarity of economic policy, no

credible leadership. Will there be collective shadow Shadow Cabinet

responsibility? There is no shadow Shadow Cabinet. It's a nice

headline, but the reality is the Parliamentary party will want to

work collectively and cohesively. The backbench committees will play a

big role in the input to development of policy. For example, we will

choose to be pulled to be on a National policy Forum, to be part of

that process. Mr Campbell says you will not be able to decide policy.

Policy will be decided by the party overall, but the members of

Parliament are an essential part of the process and no party can win an

election without the support of leadership and membership and the

Parliamentary party working together. Do you think there's the

danger a growing division between the attitudes of the Parliamentary

party and the policies and demands and attitudes of the Labour Party in

the country? The Labour members of Parliament have to remember they are

selected by their local Labour Party and voted on by their constituents.

They are not the Labour Party, which is made up of members and

affiliates, and they are the ones who decide policy. They think they

will take over the Parliamentary Labour Party and run the party, they

are not running the party and never will. They are in Parliament. I'm

saying the Labour Party is a Parliamentary party which wins or

loses elections. Without members of Parliament, including those of us

who have been clearly elected by our colleagues campaigning and working

collectively, if we have an attempt to try to pick off MPs or drive MPs

into positions where we no longer are able to speak out for what we

believe, then that will be to the detriment of the Labour Party and we

will lose elections. We have got to get it right. We have to have a

leadership that listens and works with the Parliamentary Labour Party.

You are talking about deselection again. They are the only ones

mentioning it, as far as I am concerned, and the press. Any

policy, where ever, to deselect members of Parliament, that is up to

the Labour Party. The members. They will select and deselect. Ken

Livingstone said on Sunday, the former Mayor of London, if an MP was

seen not to represent the views of the constituency party, then the

constituency party would be within its rights to deselect and get

somebody who more accurately reflects what they want to believe.

As I said, the local Labour Party selects the candidate, and they can

deselect them. Not many candidates in my time, and I've been in

Parliament a long time, have been deselected. We have boundary changes

coming up so there might be a lot of need for reselection. That's another

matter. You might have two MPs fighting for one constituency. They

will have to put their names in the Hat and hope they can fight and win

the seat. That's not deselection. Mike Gapes, you said in the 1980s

you were never taken seriously on defence and there's a real danger

you could get into a similar situation. Yes, I was a candidate in

1983, the same time Jeremy was a candidate in Islington North, and I

was in Ilford North. In Ilford North we had huge rallies, big

demonstrations and enthusiasm among activists but a terrible election

result. We have to recognise as a Labour Party, that just entered

using activists is not necessarily going to win the election. We have

to cut through to people in England, in particular, who didn't vote for

us last time. We have to win 106 more seats to have a majority and we

have to recognise we have a big challenge. Is there a danger that

the kind of people who have joined into the Labour Party to help elect

Jeremy Corbyn, they have invigorated your party, and you have a lot more

members, but perhaps they are not representative of the wider

electorate? I don't know, I've had a big increase of nearly 600, but I

haven't met many of them. They might just be ordinary union members. I

don't know who they are. As far as I'm concerned, there is no takeover

of the Labour Party. It has gone to the left, of course, by collecting

Jeremy Corbyn. It's a different idea and tactic to the past, but we have

just lost two elections. We can't run alongside the Tories and have

better policies than them, we have been beaten twice. Should you get to

meet the new members? I have e-mailed all of them. Inviting them

into the party, now they have paid ?3, but I'm not getting many

responses. Have you met union members, Mike Gapes? I've had a

similar experience. I've e-mailed twice new members, my constituency

party has doubled. I've e-mailed twice to say to come out knocking on

doors with the Greater London Authority candidate, and both

occasions I've had a handful of new members come out, but no response

from the ?3 payers. Is it true, using the media shorthand of the

shadow Shadow Cabinet, that you have the toe of the shadow Shadow

Cabinet, that you have veto? I don't think the right of veto applies. I

will be working with Hilary Benn, Shadow Foreign Secretary, and the

pro-European shadow minister, to campaign and work for Labour

policies. Can you speak from the dispatch box? I would have thought

it was unlikely. Technically you have the right to speak. Technically

and theoretically. I would love to, but I don't think I will be asked.

Would you like to see Mike Gapes is big from the dispatch box at shadow

shadow foreign affairs member? I might have a bash myself! What

subject would you talk about? I would have a bash at the economy.

Looking at one other subject. Earlier this week Jeremy Corbyn

suggested British air strikes on ice is it in Iraq should be

reconsidered. -- on Isis. The government wants to extend air

strikes into Syrian territory because they say that is where the

supply lines and bases are. Mr Corbyn is now questioning whether we

should be in Iraq. I think he's wrong. I think Daesh, Isil, are a

fundamental threat to Iraq, other Arab countries and ourselves. The

reality is that British forces and other coalition forces are in Iraq,

at the invitation of the Iraqi government. It is in accordance with

international law and I think we should be doing more there. I know

you need to see the details and what the government is actually planning,

but on general principle you think Britain should take the fight into

Syria? I don't think it's logical to be hitting targets in Iraq and not

being able to carry on a few miles over the desert to hit targets in

their headquarters in Syria. It seems illogical. Mr Campbell, I

assume you don't want to extend bombing into Syria. I may be wrong,

you tell me, but do you agree with Mr Corbyn that we should be

reconsidering bombing in Iraq, which we have been asked to do by the

Iraqi government. The Russians have started bombing and they haven't got

an answer. And they have just lost a plane. Do you think the British

government is right, there is a clear connection? I think there is,

that it was a bomb. It will be there people who have done it. If we start

bombing, the consequences for us are there. Do you think we should stop

bombing in Iraq as well? Yes. I don't think bombing makes any

difference at all. You are killing a lot of innocent people to maybe get

half a dozen Isis people. It's an interesting proposition, terrible if

true, but do we have evidence that the British Tornado bombing has

killed innocent people? We had before. We don't know, because they

haven't been bombing. But the bombing in Iraq. We haven't been

doing that much. Not a great deal. Just to speak to my two guests. The

Labour Party story has a long way to go. It's clear listening to this, a

lot of matters to be reconciled, and clearly tensions between the

parliamentary party and the membership. They are now completely

separate entities. Two months into Jeremy Corbyn's leadership and they

are talking to themselves. Not to be electorate at large. A lot of these

journalists have never even heard of these committees inside the Labour

Party. I think it's extraordinary. 1117 parliamentary party chairs

nominated Liz Kendall. Perhaps as much as the whole membership! -- 11

out of 17 Parliamentary party chairs. What is interesting about

what these gentlemen are saying is that new members are not showing up.

I've heard it from activist friends in the Labour Party, they say the

new guys flooding in, they lumbered us with Jeremy Corbyn, and I'm

talking about centrist people here, they feel lumbered by Jeremy Corbyn,

but they are not turning up on the doorstep. There is talk of

deselection, but they are not there in numbers to engage with the Labour

Party. Long-standing Labour Party members were not given the chance to

vote for socialism, and not surprisingly, they voted for

socialism. If those members want to take over the party they have to

ring gauge. You mean me here today and gone tomorrow type?

I'm sure if Mr Campbell and Mike Gapes invite these members round for

a cup of tea they will be happy to join them and tell us what their

attitudes are and how important they will be for the party. I thank you

both for joining us. Now, remember, remember the 5th of

November - and if you were out in central London last night, you might

have had a little help courtesy of protesters wearing Guido Fawkes

masks. The Million Mask March, associated with a group called

Anonymous calls itself the "Largest They had events and other UK and US

cities. Police in London were said to be braced for a turnout of 18000

and warned of an element intent on criminality. There were five arrests

last night and three police officers were hospitalised. Didn't look like

18,000 on the streets. We kept an eye on what was going on.

The whole thing was organised on social media. Facebook said 18,000

people would come. We walked down Whitehall to Sarah 's of our

streets, not revolution. -- shouts of. I'm not sure where we will end

up, and I'm not sure this lot know either. A lot of us are saying that

enough is enough. If you know the realities of what's going on then

you would be joining in. Free hugs. It did get violent last year, didn't

it? I'm a peaceful person, and that's how I will remain.

Well, it has been going for less than an hour but already

Over the other side there is a line of police on police horses

The crowd has been pushing backwards and forwards

A lot of protesters running around and police running around.

Protesters shouting "kettle, kettle" they are concerned they are

Ie stuck in this area here and not being able to run off,

We have seen several thousand protesters but we are not

That seems to be the nature of this whole march.

We have found them and they are now on Pall Mall.

And certainly a big column of people walking up this way.

Is this going to make a difference, this march tonight?

I don't think it will, but I want us to hear the voices.

We don't want to fight but we are going to have to fight soon.

It is raining, you don't mind the rain?

Well, there was a flurry of activity,

suddenly the police arrived and quite literally blocked the road.

There have been some shouts that the kettle is on

but I imagine that's not the kettle being on in a good way.

The protesters were told they have to stop protesting after 9.00pm.

Quite what happens next I'm not sure.

In the end it didn't take long to clear them. Elsewhere there were

small pockets of violence and three police officers were injured,

needing hospital treatment. At least 50 arrests were made, mainly for

public order offences. And some of the protesters were disappointed

with how it turned out. It is about making a statement and saying - we

are not happy. We are not happy with what is going on. Do you think

tonight will have made any difference? Unfortunately it wasn't,

no. Of course it won't. It is not really a march. It is just people

standinger around in a corner. They are scattered around. They didn't

get together. If they did get together, it would have been a

revolution. I think the weather has put everyone off, to be honest. A

very British approach to the revolution, the weather.

And we're joined now by Adam Clifford of the Class War party, who

What was last night's march against? Against a lot of things, austerity.

The state that London is N the desperation of the people. There is

a lot of homeless at the moment. -- London is in. That's off the scale

at the moment. I myself am actually homeless at the moment. So I feel

very - yeah, I salute the guys who went out last night but it was

boring. It was such a police display, a military march. You know,

nothing could really happen. Are you worried that the whole - this whole

movement is running out of steam? There weren't that many people there

last night? ? It is just the sort of crunchdown, really. It is just the

police. There was as many police as there was protesters last night and

you know, in Trafalgar Square, all these sections were being read out,

that you couldn't cover up. It was police state. Orwellian, like 1984.

They couldn't find any of the organisers to deal with in advance

It is Anonymous, so there are no... That is That's what the thing is.

Have you undermined yourselves by being a bit unfocussed. There were

so many different protesters and issue last night. I was looking at

the general concept of being against capitalism. You mentioned

homelessness. Animal rights was one. What is happening to South Korean

dogs, paedophiles. Is there not a danger that you are firing on too

many fronts? No, I think all this stuff crosses over. I think it is a

march of the underdogs, really. It is the people, the other side of the

fence, that are really feeling it. You know, London is in this kind of

state at the moment. It has become Victorian again. You have the super

rich and the super poor. So, I mean, what are we meant to do? You say it

is the march of the underdogs. A number of people were tweeting who

watched T members of the public. One said - nice to see anti-capitalists

queueing patiently at McDonald's while on iPhones. Well, we are

underdogings, actually. We could not do anything last night with the

police in full-scale displaying all their techniques, doing all their

dances up and down and all that stuff with all their armour and guns

and tasers and all that business, really. Explain, what is the purpose

of the mask? Well, I mean, the bottom line is - say you had a job,

you were trying to get by and you don't believe this is a democracy or

something is not fair, you could go out on the street and go to a

protest and basically be profiled. There is this whole thing of joint

enterprise now, you could be picked up a few days after the event just

for going. Maybe you didn't do anything, anything violent and you

are named, shaped and framed and all the rest of it and probably lose the

basic prif larges you have. We have cover -- privileges. We have covered

these on years gone by, pretty huge ones. This one was smaller. For Guy

Fawkes night, I suggest it is a damp squib. It was boring. I went home

early. I don't think these protests that really work in the past will

work again in the future. I think there will have to be new protests.

That's the way it will have to go. Does the violence help by drawing

attention, or does it make it easier for your protests to be dismissed? I

mean throwing fireworks at the police horse, for example. You know

how much the British love animals? I love animals, too, but you have to

take a different approach with this whole situation, with animals and

what they are trained to do, charge at crowds. They weren't charging at

crowds. A little bit last night. They were simply around Buckingham

Palace and some people threw fire crackers at them. Was that a wise

thing to do? I don't about wise. I have seen police brutality. I have

seen police knock girls around and all sorts of things, I have no faith

in the police. Why are we taking it out on the horse? Why are we going

on about the horse? Because fireworks were thrown and smoke

grenades. The question I am asking you, is whether this does your case,

does it draw attention and you get coverage or people look at what you

are protesting for or does it make it easier for people to dismiss you.

That was my question. I don't think people that were on this march,

fighting for this particular cause, really care about being dismissed.

Because, you know - I mean this is a bit of a circus, it is a spectacle.

The media is a whole circus. We know what the media can do to us. It is

the bottom line. We just carry on, carry on fighting for what we

believe in. Is this getk anywhere? It doesn't look at it. That is your

point of view. What are you doing? I was interested you said the protests

might not have been working recently. That's what you said.

Would you say it is getting anywhere? Is it achieving what you

wanted? I don't think the one last night did but some other protests

have worked, raising awareness and could lead to a bigger thing that

could change things for a lot of people, sure. I remember thinking

this in 2010-11 when student protests were happening around

tuition fees. You felt - is this a moment, is this when the

Conservative Party in particular and obviously the Lib Dems will feel the

effect of the public anger brewing. It didn't happen because most people

don't feel T Most people, who is most people? The people who vote n

May, we had an election. That's how we find out. You are talking about

believe who belief in the establishment. Works really for you,

sweet heart. Thank you for patronising me. I would like to ask

a question. You talked about it big boring, I don't want to put words

into your mouth. My guess is you would have liked lots of violence,

attacking police officers and damaging public and private property

s that what you would have preferred S that your requesting anything"?

How did women get the vote? Have you seen the Suffragetteses film? It was

a crap film. For the huge numbers of young people, particularly young

people from poorer families who don't vote. What do you know about

poor families? Can I finish. You don't know. Well I'm just a

sweetheart or a word you called me before we came on air, rather more

rudely that we can't say Whatever. All right. We need young people to

get the vote, rather than smashing up London. I have a feeling this is

not going to go any further Well thank you. Hold on, let me read this

bit and then you can depart. Now - if you're spending ?27,000

on something you would expect Today

the Government are outlining reforms to the higher education sector

in a Green Paper that they hope will They'll let universities increase

their fees beyond the current ?9,000 a year

limit but only if they improve Earlier Jo Johnson,

the Universities Minister, was asked if this meant universities

that were under-performing would be There's a lot of excellence

in our higher education system. We have four out of the world's

top ten best universities. 38 out of

the world's top 100 universities. So there's a lot of excellence

in our system. But there is also the patchiness

and the bit of variability in the quality of teaching within

and in between universities. That's what we want to

constructively shine a light on, so we can all work together to lift

overall teaching standards, so students get

the best quality experience Taxpayers will benefit underwriting

the system, and employers will benefit because they will get

a better skilled workforce coming We're joined now by Dave Phoenix

of the "million plus" He's also Vice Chancellor of

the London South Bank University. What is your take on what the

Government is now saying? I'm pleased to see the Government

putting this paper forward. I think there are a number of really

important principles in there. They are reemphasising thor importance

and focus of widening access on social be mobility which we are

making in-roads on, but could do more and they are emphasising

putting students at the heart of the system which is always something

that universities need to continue to work on. They are looking at the

fact that the sector has changed substantially over recent years,

therefore, what will it look like in the future and what regulatory

framework do we need? It is positive to see them putting this forward.

Are the universities, the former polytechnics, are they fairly

unstigmatised places, as places of bad teaching. In my experience, you

get pretty bad teaching at Russell Group universities as well? I don't

think they are necessarily stigmatised. I think the challenge I

have with actually is the things like the phrase dock polytechnics.

But when you think, most universities like Egyptian officials

like mine have been universities since 1992. When the big switch-over

took place. Most of the students coming from school now weren't born

them. It doesn't have context now for a lot of the students coming

through. Do you charge ?9,000? We do. Does it make sense, in effect,

all the universities are really charging the same. Does it really

make sense - let's just take the London South Bank University. The

Guardian Higher Education Tables, you are 11th out of 119th higher

education institutions in the 2016 rankings but you charge the same as

Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial, LSE. Does that make sense? A couple of

points. If you look at the ?9,000 fee. It has been fixed for coming up

to five years. Therefore, we are in a position where actually delivering

that education, in many courses, actually costs more than ?9,000. It

is not that we have brought in the additional nvenlingt we have

actually seen a cut in grants from Government of about 80%. Additional

income. I understand why you are charging it. I would think if you

are a student, do you think - I will get to one of the most famous

universities in the world t costs me ?9,000, or do I go to London South

Bank University, not quite so famous t still costs me ?9,000 Let's look

at specifics. Maybe this is one of the opportunities that we have with

the paper about trying to puncture some of those myths. If we look at

London South Bank University we take a diverse range of students.

Graduate employment rates are comparable with many select

institution, top half of the table. According to the Guardian fewer than

50% of your graduates are in graduate level employment within six

months. It is the second-worst in the country. I think your data is a

little old. Currently the amount of students in graduate employment for

South Bank is about 75% and we are in the top 20 of graduate starters.

When did that? This year's data. This data is... It is out of date.

What was the revolution in two years? The main changes we have been

making, the same with every university, you focus on your

courses, look at how you develop. What we have been doing is focussing

much more on placement opportunities, on providing

additional guidance, and volunteering activity. Awe dress the

issues? It is around not just the teaching and what we deliver but it

is around the environment that students get access to. A lot of

students were telling us, one of the key aims was around career

progression. It is not true for every student. Some students want to

do other things. It is trying to meet the diverse requirement of the

student body and to celebrate the range and diversity of students we

have within the UK. Would you have more diversity if your fees were

lower? I'm in the too sure we would have more diversity. More students

from poorer backgrounds? There is no evidence for that. The area where we

have concerns is on part-time numbers. They have dropped

nationally. And that's got to be addressed. Because a lot of the

future potential for higher education, is around part-time

because a lot of people we need to retrain are already in jobs. If you

look at the entry to undergraduate course, those numbers have remained

stable. I think there is a need, as we move forward, to try to address

two things - one is making sure that the universities have the ability it

depeet globally because we do compete globally, whilst at the same

time looking at the tow tality of the total the student has to borrow

and see if we have the individual right between the student and state

and employer. It is not just the student. Many come from socio

economic backgrounds, so they are Borowski yoking to cope with

subsistence. To live in London. Yes and it is not cheap.

Because of these students are expecting some sort of return. When

I went there were no fees and you could do what you want and the job

would look after itself. Could we get to a situation where some of the

underperforming universities might close because students will say, I'm

not going there. And they should. I hate we start the debate from the

point of view of these of ?9,000 per year. It is wrong, Tony Blair

brought it in, and education should be free at undergraduate level. The

other issue is the ridiculous 50% target people going to university.

I've spoken to people who say, I don't see why I should take a job

working as a carer or waitress because I have a degree. And they

have a 2.2 in media studies from Bank! With all due respect, those

degrees are not worth the paper they are printed on. It looks like

there's a market failure going on. Worst performing universities are

still charging ?9,000. The signals are not working the way they should

be. The problem is, if you are a student, and you make the decision

for three years, and if you discover halfway through the teaching is not

up to scratch, it's difficult to go back on your choice. There is a high

dropout rate as well. There are two points, one is that a lot of people

are out of date with what the courses are like. Media is one of

the UK, creative industries. It's predicted around 80% of future jobs

will require a degree of higher-level education. I think a

lot of people are out of tune. We don't need to just look at current

universities, but what we can do is look at providers to upscale people

and provide all those with opportunities. Thank you for joining

us. Now,

he was one of Ukip's highest profile ethnic minority candidates and

their former Commonwealth spokesman, but now Winston McKenzie has quit

the party claiming that he's been Here's Nigel Farage lauding

Mr McKenzie earlier this year as proof of the party's appeal

amongst ethnic minority voters. Let this picture of me on the stage

with these wonderful men and women, from all their different backgrounds

and their united belief in being British and being part of this

country and in wanting this country to be free and independent,

and self-governing and proud. Let this be Ukip's

Clause Four moment. But from this moment on, please,

do not ever call us a racist party. Good to see you. Handshake, very

nice. Let me quote, earlier this week you said you were racially

discriminated against by people higher up in Ukip. Without naming

names, because the lawyers are watching, what evidence do you have?

I was receiving letters, phone calls, and the work I had done for

the party with regards to the infrastructure of Ukip in London was

profound. I created a training course that was so successful,

certain members higher up became jealous and angry of me. The

training class that I created, I personally trained 30 people...

Let's accept that you have done a great job for the party. I'm asking

you for the evidence that you suffered from racial dissemination.

When I initially came into the party, the Ukip website was people

issuing their comments about me. Racist comments that were so bad

that they had to pull down the site. Did you know these were Ukip

members? All sorts of websites have all sorts of trolling. The situation

got so bad I brought it to the party's Chief Executive. I spoke to

Nigel Farage and told him I was having problems. There were people

in the party that were racist. When I say racist, Andrew, I'm not

referring to Ukip members, these people are the salt of the earth.

I'm not referring to people directly involved with Nigel and the

leadership itself, I'm referring to four or five people within the party

who are blatantly racist. So is your complaint that Ukip is not

institutionally racist, but it has some members that are racist? Some

members in it are racist. As a man of my integrity, I'm a black man

trying to make better in society, and I will not stand for it in this

day and age. What would you say to some people who say it is just sour

grapes on your part after you were dropped from the front bench earlier

this year, did not become the London mayor candidate and did not become

one of the London assembly candidates, and maybe you have

concluded that your career in Ukip is going nowhere? They would love

for that to be the case. Every politician within Ukip or any

political party would love to be included in the list. To be the

mayor candidate, whatever. But the simple fact is that I pride myself

as a politician in democracy. Ukip prides itself in democracy. The

selection process for the mayoral candidates and the London assembly,

the Ukip membership was not included. It is this lackadaisical

form of organisation that are ignored me at the end of the day. Is

it true that you've been a member of every political party? I never

joined Labour. Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, Veritas, with

Kilroy. Unity was my party. And. You only have to look at the greats, and

I'm great. Looked at Churchill matter how many times did he move

his position? He won elections. I'm a new boy. I only want a shadow box

with you today, not spa. Didn't you audition for the X factor? That's

what's wrong with politics today, politicians need to put themselves

about and get involved in ordinary peoples' lives. I get around. I know

what's going on. They didn't choose you, but looking at the Ukip

candidates for the London assembly, they chose them a couple of weeks

ago and a third of them are from ethnic minorities. Thanks to Winston

McKenzie. But not you. So is racism... Would a racist party

choose a third of its membership from ethic minorities? Speak to any

member or activist, and ask them who is responsible for the influx of

black and ethnic minorities into Ukip, and they will say it was

Winston. You can never be a prophet in your own land! I'm a profit where

ever I go. I didn't need them to choose me because the work I did

will go on as a legacy. I wonder if Ukip took the view that as a

politician you could be a bit of a liability. After all, you once

described Croydon as a dump. It's a point of view, but probably not a

point of view you should have, if, as you were, the local election

candidate. Andrew, you have to speak the truth and tell it as you see it.

That's why you lost! The place is a dump. The whole of London is

becoming a dump. Go outside portcullis house and see the chewing

gum on the floor. I'm sorry I didn't include the rest of London. That's

obviously why they didn't choose you for the London assembly. When you

are growing up, did you see black bags and rubbish dumped everywhere?

Of course I did, I grew up in Paisley! I never saw that when I

came to this country when I was five years old, and the streets were

clean. It's a dump. It's about time we did something about it. Sounds

like the people weren't ready for your message. Most people think that

London is kind of... Having a render sums beyond belief. When I first

came to London after university it was a declining British city. It's

now one of the... If not the... Global cities of the world. It's a

shame Boris Johnson got voted out with regard to the water cannons. If

I was Mayor of London tomorrow I would have the streets washed with

water cannons. The whole town, Andrew, needs an enema. There is no

doubt about it. You have been complaining about racism in Ukip. I

understand you are not saying the party is institutionally racist. And

it's not aimed at the leader. I understand. You've had a few what I

might call politically incorrect positions. You said a gay couple

adopting a child was abuse. I'm entitled to my personal Christian

opinions. It's not very diverse or inclusive. If you claim to purport

to represent the people, a certain amount of people in various

different areas that need to be heard and you carry their voice. You

said you were dismayed that former boxing promoter Frank Maloney, now

Kellie Maloney, had a six change. I knew the guy well. I wish him all

the best as a woman. You are not dismayed any more? I'm not dismayed.

I'm sad at the loss of Frank Maloney. He was a great man. Has

Winston McKenzie been badly done by? It seems to be a bruised ego. The

only person with a justifiable bruised ego over the candidate for

Ukip for London mayor is Susan. She had a brief couple of days as party

leader, had name recognition, and would have been ideal candidate to

become fifth in the elections. Which is what will happen. I would love to

have seen a London mayoral candidate with the slogan, London is a dump.

It would have been great. If we are to talk the truth, speak the truth,

you go around London, and many of us don't walk with our heads down, but

London specifically is becoming the most atrocious place with regards to

hygiene. But it's also becoming a place that is welcoming to people of

many different backgrounds and people of different sexual

orientation. It's a liberal city with a small letter L. I'm

incredibly offended by somebody who uses God as a get out clause for

homophobia. What party will you join now? The Greens! My intention is to

support Ukip policies and stand as an independent mayoral candidate. If

any sponsors out there want to back me, come on board, join the Winston

McKenzie. If you stop talking, I will give you a mug.

Well, we asked Ukip for an interview to respond to Winston's claims

However, the party did send us a statement.

"We are sorry to say goodbye to Winston after six eventful years,

and saddened by the manner of his leaving.

We have enjoyed working with him, and he has kept us busy defending

his right to free speech, his imaginative schemes and his highly

We will miss him, and wish him well."

There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.

The question was whose giant effigy was burnt last night

at the infamous annual bonfire celebrations in the usually peaceful

I think Nigel Farage. I think it was Cameron.

A giant effigy of David Cameron and a dead pig's head was burnt

last night in Lewes at their bonfire celebrations.

The 15 foot puppet of the Prime Minister was wearing nothing

The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.

MUSIC: Lust For Life by Iggy Pop

There is a place where music comes to life,

With one foot in the past and one in the future.

..could be the best record you've ever heard.