25/11/2016 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

It's the day after the day after the Autumn Statement,

but the Government's still being criticised over

forecasts suggesting a big squeeze on living standards.

But have the economic forecasters taken too gloomy a view

of what might happen post-Brexit, and do they have a record

We'll talk to the head of the Office for Budget Responsibility.

MEPs have voted to freeze EU membership talks with Turkey.

That's not pleased Turkey's president, who says if it happens

he'll open the gates for migrants to enter Europe.

It's the first ever conference of the Women's Equality Party,

and they say membership is growing fast.

But can it win many votes in a crowded political marketplace?

Tony Blair's coming back - no, we really mean it this time.

He says he's going to find a home for millions of the "politically

homeless", and could campaign for Brexit to be reversed.

And with us for the first half of the programme today,

a journalist so knowledgeable about all things political he thinks

Black Friday refers to a stock market crash rather than early

It's the political editor of the Sun, Tom Newton Dunn.

First today, let's talk about a bill being debated by MPs today that,

if passed, will make it an offence for people to wear military medals

Those found guilty will face a maximum penalty of six months'

Well, normally a private members' bill brought forward

by an individual MP would stand little chance of getting

But you might remember that when we covered this

earlier in the week, we spoke to the Armed Forces

minister, who confirmed that the Government will be

The hurt of someone as being as deceitful as wearing a Gallantry

Medal. It is not just like the Northern Ireland medal but that I

won, this is somebody who has gone beyond the call of duty in getting a

Gallantry Medal, and somebody is impersonating them. I will make sure

that I'm in the committee to present the Government's view.

Had bigger problem is this? We have medal fraud for awhile. We used to

get quite a lot of good copy out of hunting down and exposing these

quite appalling fruitcakes who would turn up at parades, normally with a

droopy moustache saying that they had done all these things. What has

increased as the number of medals that people now have because of Iraq

and if Khalistan, a whole load of people did a lot of things, and

maybe they are trying to keep up with the pace. It really is

incredibly offensive if you have been through all of this, and I

think it should be, and I am pleased that the Government is looking at it

as a type of fraud. You used the word fruitcakes. Isn't the risk of

having a risen sentence or a very large fine, is that really

disproportionately harsh on people who may have a mental health

problem, for example, or even though it is offensive, would people want

to see others going to jail? If you have mental health problems and are

a disturbed individual, they will not send you to prison, because they

never do anyway. But it is useful to have as a penalty, as a hard drop

background, to stop this type of fraud being permitted. It is conning

people into giving you respect or sometimes even money if you are

raising Fred Charity for something you haven't done. We will leave it

there, we will come back to it. And there's been a lot of talk this

week about Donald Trump's suggestion that Nigel Farage should be made

the UK's next ambassador to the US. But one Labour MP has come up

with a novel suggestion for who should be the next US

ambassador to Britain. John Mann has tabled an early day

motion in Parliament to ask fellow So, who does he think should be

America's man or woman in London? And a bit later on, Tom will give

us the correct answer. Now, it may be Black Friday

at the shops today thanks to an imported American marketing

gimmick, but is it also a bit of a black day for the economic

prospects of British workers? That was the view of several

think-tanks and forecasters, who yesterday gave us their now

traditional post-match analysis of Chancellor Philip

Hammond's Autumn Statement. And they were pretty gloomy

about what it all meant. The Institute for Fiscal Studies

described the outlook They say that workers will,

in real terms, earn less in 2021 That's the worst decade for living

standards "probably since Downing Street didn't like that,

saying that living standards The Prime Minister's spokeswoman

said that "real household disposable income" is the best way

to measure living standards, and that it's rising

under this Government. The impact that Brexit will have

on the economy has been a bone of contention since the independent

Office for Budget Responsibility published its forecast alongside

the Autumn Statement on Wednesday. It said the Government will have

have to borrow an extra ?58.7 billion over the next five

years because of Brexit. The OBR has come under fire from

Brexit-supporting Conservative MPs. Jacob Rees-Mogg said the forecasts

were based on "lunatic" assumptions And the former Cabinet minister

Iain Duncan Smith said the OBR was "very close

to the Treasury" and "pretty And this morning, leading Leave

campaigners including Michael Gove and Gisela Stuart have said

that the OBR's figures also reveal a "Brexit dividend"

of over ?10 billion a year. That's the money we'll no longer

send to the EU after we've left. They say that the money should be

spent on the NHS. Joining me now is the chairman of

the Office for Budget Responsibility, welcome to the daily

politics. Let's go back to the forecast during the referendum

campaign, because many people said they all turned out to be wrong,

because a lot of the economic institutions, the Treasury, the Bank

of England, the IMF, said that a Brexit vote would cause an immediate

downturn, and that hasn't happened. It hasn't, and we were not one of

the organisations that try to produce a forecast. As you say, some

people thought the impact of greater uncertainty would have a much more

dramatic and instantaneous approach, but then the picture would get

clearer in terms of the outcome of the negotiations as things went on.

The instant reaction has been less painful in terms of the economy, but

people are nonetheless not as much the wiser in terms of what the

Government's objectives are in negotiations and what the likely

outcome is going to be, so I think that will take some time to clear

up. And there has been a wave of criticism about so-called guessing.

You had a caveat that you didn't have that much information to go on,

so how seriously could we take this? It is a best estimate of what we

have managed to interpret current Government policy. We asked

explicitly in the run-up to the Autumn Statement, whether the

Government wanted to tell us and implicitly every body else any more

about their aims are expectations for the negotiations than was

already in the public domain, and they said they didn't want to do

that, so we have had to make some broad assumptions that you would end

up with imports and exports growing less quickly, that net inward

migration would be lower, so we have had to do it on that basis and we

can see when there is more information about the results of the

negotiations on what the Government is trying to get out of it to refine

that. But I don't think we will be much the wiser very quickly. David

Cameron said at the time that a lever vote would put a bomb under

the British economy, but looking at your growth forecasts, you do see

growth continuing. There is a deep in 2017/18, but it picks up again,

so in a way, even those forecasts don't see a great downturn. We are

somewhat on the more optimistic end of the spectrum, more optimistic

than the Bank of England and the average of outside forecasters.

There are two main thing is driving the weakening most people expect,

one of which is that uncertainty out of where we will end up on things

like trade and migration will weaken investment, and the other thing is

we have already seen a sharp fall in the pound which will push up import

prices and mean that the pound and the consumer's Hobbit will go less

far, so it is those things carrying on that leads to the weakness next

year. Isn't this playing politics by the Leave campaigners, they don't

want to hear this information because it undermines the whole

campaign and the drive to leave the EU? I think you will also find a few

Remain campaigners, strangely enough, politicians play politics.

The IFS agree with Robert Osman prognosis. How busy got to growth by

2019 when we are leaving the EU? My personal point of view, he was

supposed to forecast something that nobody had any clue how it could

work out, and he gave his own forecast only a 50% chance of coming

true, so I think he is beaten up to hard. I don't know how you are

wounded by criticism, I'm sure you are tough when this stuff is thrown

at you, but they are accusing you of being too close to the Treasury

leading Leave campaigners, and wrong on everything. Do you think you will

be the one that is caught between the two sides? You have to recognise

that we have seen this for months, and extremely heated debate, hotly

contested, and it is not surprising that tempers and emotions are

running high. All we can do under those circumstances is to set out

the assumptions we have made as transparently as we can. If you take

a more less optimistic view of where the negotiations will end up, if you

think the Government is going to exploit or not exploit the

opportunities to move policy in a more growth friendly direction, you

can take the numbers we have started with an go in one direction or the

other, so hopefully it is a useful exercise even if people don't why

the central conclusion. Jacob Rees-Mogg has said that you assumed

after we leave the EU we will apply the same tariffs to the rest of the

world that we currently apply, his point being that those tariffs may

not be there, that is the point of leaving the EU, we will have free

trade deals. Do you think that is a mistake? The consensus of people who

are experts in the way trade is modelled, the middle of the pack and

not the most optimistic or least as a mystic, there is a general

consensus that you would see imports and exports growing less quickly

over a 5-10 year period than you otherwise too, partly because you

have to get to the new set of trade arrangements, but then will it be

more difficult within the EU even if it is easier somewhere else? So you

are right in saying that if people like Jacob Rees-Mogg, Patrick

Minford though I think you were talking to recently, would favour a

much more liberal trade regime. Whether in a global context that is

the direction in which the trade policy will go, it is not our

decision but others' too, that remains to be seen. And there are

many views about how Brexit will actually be done, and that makes it

even more difficult to predict. There is no agreement at all on what

Brexit will look like. We don't think the Government still has a

plan yet, they are still doing their thinking. But it does beg the

question, Robert, if there is no conclusive path for all of this at

all, why do you not model several different outcomes, perhaps a soft

Brexit at, they hard Brexit outcome, because all Philip Hammond has done

is taken your numbers and borrowed a extra something that you say is

unlikely. I think the uncertainties around the broadbrush forecast, and

people's very justifiable realisation of how much trust you

should place in any forecast, if we were coming up with precisely

calibrated differences between what would happen if it was WTO or Canada

plus or Norway models, I'm not sure, I think the differences between each

of those scenarios would be dwarfed by the uncertainty around any one of

them, so the best thing for us to do is to take some broad assumptions

consistent with the bulk of external analysis and then we have to wait

until the fog clears in order to come up with something that is more

specifically tied to a particular outcome. Robert Chote, thank you

very much. There was much talk in the run-up

to the Autumn Statement about what the Chancellor might do

for low-income families. He took limited action in one

controversial area, by softening cuts to Universal Credit,

the new umbrella benefit gradually He offered claimants

partial respite by changing The Resolution Foundation said this

would save claimants up to ?300, but previous cuts may have cost them

more than ?2000. So what do Conservative MPs

who campaigned successfully last year against previous proposed

cuts to tax credits? Well we're joined by one of them

now, and Johnny Mercer Has the Government done enough? I

think they've made a strong step in the right direction. Would I have

liked more, clearly yes I would have done. But the Chancellor made it

clear that he thought about the evidence, he listened to everybody.

We made a step in that direction. He's done what he can. So I welcome

that. Would I have liked him to have done more, obviously I would have.

He has a huge balance to - a huge budget to balance and he has done a

good job. If you remember the rhetoric by Theresa May on the

doorstep of Number 10 where she said she wanted to help those people who

were just about managing. Even though he has put a certain amount

of money into mitigate the cuts to universal credit, they in no way

reverse them and those families are still going to be worse off. Yeah,

if this is taken in isolation you are right. Not even in isolation,

even if you take it in the round, the Government and the Treasury put

opt a statement to say you have to look at higher lf living wage, money

for child care, they'll still be worse off some of those families.

Some of those families, I believe, in particular percentiles will

struggle. That's why I say as far as I am concerned I would like it to go

further. I think it's disingeneralous to say we are not

looking after the just about managing or doing what we can for

the bottom 20% of society that people like me are involved in

politics for. I think if you look at somewhere like Plymouth, we keep

talking about it, but the single biggest driver in improving life

chances for our most vulnerable is having a job and that unemployment

has halved. Is there more we can do, of course there is, there always is.

I welcome this on Thursday and the fight goes on. Would you, right, the

fight goes on. What are you doing in terms of the fight? It sounds like

you would like George Osborne's cuts to work allowances to be ditched

altogether because then people can earn more before they actually lose

their benefits s that what you would like to see? I would like to see is

for the income tax threshold to continue to go up as it is, for

people to keep more of the money they earn and that is the direction

of travel we are taking. We are also balancing that against a very

difficult fiscal position against going through a transition, if you

like, from a high welfare state to making people less dependent on

state welfare and in places like play Moth that's transforming -- -

Plymouth. That's transforming. Could we have quicker? We have a huge

balance to - a huge budget to balance for and we are in tricky

times with Brexit and all of that. Philip's clearly working to that, as

well. Although he has loosened the target for balancing the books. So

he has a little bit more room Father manoeuvre in those terms. You

mentioned the fight goes on. What are you doing, are you lobbying the

Chancellor to try and go further in the next year or so on this? We just

need to make sure that as a team of Conservative MPs we follow through

on the promise to look after the most vulnerable in society. That's

across the pitch. Whether it's to do with universal credit or it to do

with halving the disability gap, for example, which is something we are

working on at the moment and there's a report out in January about this.

We are doing a good job on this. But we are not going as far as we said

in the manifesto. When I say the fight goes on, there are - most

Conservative MPs believe we judge ourselves by how we look after the

most vulnerable in the society and the fight goes on to make sure our

policies work for them. All right, but the criticism was pretty

damaging, the assessment from the resolution foundation, once they

crunched the krm numbers and the institute of fiscal studies, no

wonder Downing Street will be unhappy about it because they

haven't lived up to the rhetoric. I think Downing Street will be quite

cross somehow the narrative going into this Autumn Statememt was it's

going to be about helping just about managing. This new study says

something interesting which got lost amid the whole terrible headlines of

a lost decade of wage growth, which was Philip Hammond has prioritised

what money he had to spend on capital investment, fiscal stimulus

for the economy, road-building, etc as to helping the just about

managing. I think Johnny is being polite here, what he would like to

say if I am not putting words in his mouth is, I am sick to the back

teeth that the Government I want to support put 700 million of the

universal credit cuts back into what should have been 3. 4 billion.

That's barely a fifth of the reverse of the cuts. Is that what you think?

Can I come back on that. I would say is what Tom indicates there around

infrastructure, that is all towards growth. That's towards closing the

productivity gap which is all towards raising higher standards. So

I don't think these things are actually contrary to each other.

There are many ways of having this fight against poverty. One is to

improve the infrastructure. If you look at Plymouth and the railline

it's integral to getting jobs for opportunities for young people in

Plymouth and that's infrastructure. I see what Tom is saying but as much

as I always agree with Tom, on this occasion I may decline. You don't

always agree then. All right, thank you very much.

Is Tony Blair planning on making a comeback. It's been written about

more times, but this time it seems like it really might be happening.

The former Labour Prime Minister has announced he's

But this time the political driver wants to take a back-seat role

and build a platform for the political centre

In an interview in the New Statesman, Mr Blair explained

he wanted to provide "a service" to political leaders, in the form of

"I think in Britain today, you've got millions of effectively

"I think the absolute essence is to revive the centre."

"What I'm doing is to spend more time, not in the front

"There are elements of the media who would literally move to destroy

"But in trying to create the space for a political debate

about where modern Western democracies go and where

the progressive forces particularly find their place."

We're joined now by Matthew Doyle, he used to work for Tony Blair

at Number 10, and by the Ukip MEP Tim Aker.

Welcome to the programme. Explain exactly what Tony Blair wants to do.

I find it fascinating that nearly 20 years after Tony was first elect as

Prime Minister there is still so many column inches dedicated to what

he is doing, what he is saying, who he is thinking. Not favourable a lot

of course. There is also something depressing, it speaks to a bigger

problem in politics for the centre ground which in the problem he has

in a sense identified, why I think it's right that he uses the platform

that he gets through being a former Prime Minister to express a view on

this. Look, the 48% in the referendum lost but that doesn't

mean that the 48% should be denied a voice in the debate. I think it's

important that as we go forward with the discussions around Brexit, the

debate about what that looks like and what it means, is held in a way

that does give the 48% a voice. Does he want to reverse Brexit? Look, he

thinks it's a bad idea we are leaving the European Union, no

question about it. In terms of what ends up happening in terms of the

decision, then my personal view is I think it's clear, we are on a track

to leaving the European Union. The question is what the nature of that

happens. There are all sorts of promises that were made in the

course of the referendum campaign that said don't wrory it will be

fine, the Germans will still want to sell us cars, French will still want

to sell us cheese or whatever it was. If it turns us there is a

different scenario, just as John Major is also saying in the papers,

it's right the public gets a chance if it wants to, to say is hang on,

this isn't what we were told at the time. Are you pleased to see Tony

Blair return to politics in some form? It's Christmas come early. For

who? For my side of the argument surely. He is known for Iraq and the

mess that caused. And also it's the... And winning three elections.

He didn't create imdprags controls when the EU expanded. All of this

talk of centre ground and so on ignores the debate. There is the

Common Ground. Things have moved on. It's noticeable him talk being the

forgotten in politics. I remember the Welsh devolution referendum was

closer for the Brexit one. I think he is back to quell the Brexit

revolt and you will find that more people will look at Tony Blair's

record and see he is telling us what to do again, we are going to fight

back. I think he is a drain on those people that want a single market or

soft Brexit. Do you think he will help the people, the 48%, the 16

million, many of whom would not only like to stay in the EU but would

like to stay as a member of of the single market. I think it's a

problem that we haven't got more voices that are vocally speaking on

behalf of the 48%. Frankly, I think - part of the problem that the

Labour is in at the moment and I think it would be good for the

Labour to step up more and be more vocal. He doesn't believe Jeremy

Corbyn is the right man, but is Tony Blair the right man I would say he

is, he has the experience of Prime Minister and experience of previous

European negotiations, just as I would argue it's good that we hear

from John Major as he is quoted in The Times today on this debate. I

think the Government would be wise to listen to former Prime Minister

who is have been part of European negotiations and get a sense from

them of where they should proceed because they're making a mess at the

moment. What do you think in terms of Tony Blair trying to come back in

and add his voice to perhaps Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, the Remain

side, the 48% and do you think the Government wants more help? It's had

a suggestion of Nigel Farage to help in America and now Tony Blair on the

Brexit negotiations. Tony Blair for Washington DC ambassador, that would

be a way of solving that problem. Tony Blair's motives are

interesting. He is clearly a passionate pro-European. He spends

his entire premiership signing us up to all the great pro-eu causes,

probably would have been included in the single currency. So, clearly he

has belief by it. However, I do have to say I was in the press conference

room after the chill cot inquiry where Tony Blair was painfully aware

of how his entire reputation was going straight down the plughole

because of that one report. I wonder whether he now thinks Brexit is

something he can perhaps try and rehabilitate himself on. Tim

wouldn't see it that way. Make he can reverse some damage and make

this the flag he can be remembered for. Are you worried that big

personality, a big figure like Tony Blair throwing his weight behind the

discussion on Brexit could move to a softer departure from the EU? I

don't think so. During the referendum we had all the big

establishment figures, former prepare Ministers, big opinion

formers who said, no, Brexit will be terrible don't vote for it. This

reinforces the view that the establishment are fighting back,

they don't accept the result ap doing everything they can. On the

point just mentioned about Corbyn. There was a poll, we should not take

much emphasis on polls given how wrong they've been. They haven't had

a good record recently. One point separated them and that was a poll

in October, I believe. So, if he thinks he is more popular than

Corbyn and will change the mood of the country he has another thing

coming. Thank you to both of you. Now, the Women's Equality Party

was launched last year to campaign for gender equality

for the benefit of all. So far it's stood candidates

in London, Wales and Scotland without success, but it says it has

gained 65,000 members and registered supporters, and this weekend

is holding its first But with a female Prime Minister

in Number 10, does the public think We sent Ellie out with

the moodbox to find out. Welcome to Maidenhead,

the home of Theresa May, Britain's second ever female Prime

Minister. Evidence, surely, of equality

in the sexes in the upper What we're asking today is does

there need to be separate political party that deals with the issues

and interests of women? There is, it's called

the Women's Equality Party. You think it's

a good idea? No and the reason being

is you shouldn't stigmatise one particular part of a community,

so be it women, be it So it's all part of one

community, therefore, no. I think there should be more women

involved in the politics and constitutional rights

of everybody for equality and they should also

get a fairer wage. It's 2016, it's

all about equality, Sorry, I am being

a lady who lunches. We are about halfway,

it would seem the nos Women have different views to men,

I suppose. Good idea then to have a women's

party? I don't know, because it gives them

a voice, doesn't it? Should there be a separate political

party for women's I think multitasking

is the important thing. So a separate political party

would be a good idea? Sorry, I remember,

actually. Don't tell anyone

I gave you two votes. If you have a separate party

for women, then you would have No, because women and men shouldn't

be separated from each other. It was close and lots of people said

that politics is still far But, on balance, the good people

of Maidenhead say no. There need not be

a separate political party. # Sisters are doing

it for themselves... And the leader of the women's

equality party, Sophie Walker, joins me now from our

studio in Salford. Welcome. Theresa May has recently

become our second female Prime Minister, we have women running

devolved administrations in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Do we in

really need an equality party? The 1500 people gathering in Manchester

this weekend would certainly agree with you, and so with the members

and registered supporters of this party. There is a big difference

between having a female leader and a female leader who understands with a

leading of women's needs and experiences and prioritises that. We

have been working with the what women want survey, and we hear loud

and clear from thousands of women who are still asking for equal pay

and affordable childcare and still asking for fair pensions why none of

these things appear to be important enough for mainstream Westminster

politics. Tom Newton Dunn, why are these key issues still not been

resolved? I think Sophie put it very well. There is a huge dichotomy

between male and female workforces. Peya, especially coming back into

work if you have been away looking after a child. I suppose I can't

really answer that question. So do we need a party? There are male MPs

who maybe care about traditionally more male dominated things such as

defence, maybe we should have a female party to campaign for women's

issues. Except of course so far in terms of representation, Sophie, you

are not making any ground. You came sixth in the London mayoral

election, beating George Galloway. Did you expect to do better? We got

a quarter of a million votes in London for the London mayoral

election about ten months before we approved membership, and we just

narrowly missed out on getting an assembly seat, and we were pleased

with that result. The impact that had is being seen today because the

London mayor Sadiq Khan is today announcing the results of his gender

pay audit, that was our policy. We are the party that aims to get this

done by all means, so to see the other parties take on our policies

and start doing this and see that they will lose votes if this doesn't

become more of a priority, is effective. Imitation is the highest

form of flattery, so does it matter if you don't have that much

representation electorally if you can pressurise existing groups and

parties into taking annual policies? More representation of women in

politics is very important, and one of the things we want to do by

having this party be as effective as it is is to say to women, there is a

space for you in politics, you can make your voices heard. And that is

why we are so pleased that more than half of our membership say they have

never been a member of a political party ever before, and they are

coming to us because they are saying things like, finally, somebody sees

me and understands me and can help me to participate in politics. And

briefly on Hillary Clinton, do you think more women had a duty to vote

for Hillary Clinton in the election? I think the success of Donald Trump

is incredibly sad. It was a vote to say that misogyny doesn't matter,

racism doesn't matter, sexism doesn't matter, and it was also the

successful campaign of someone claiming to be antiestablishment who

is about as establishment as it gets. The idea that this person who

lives in a gold-plated penthouse who is representing the masses is

ludicrous. But the fact that that is out there now means that our job in

some ways is easier, because we can stop discussing whether sexism

actually exists. Enter your conference.

It's time now to find out the answer to our quiz.

The question was - who does John Mann MP think

should be the next US Ambassador to Britain?

What is the correct answer? The correct answer is the Boss, Bruce

Springsteen himself. Thank you, and well done.

Coming up in a moment it's our regular look at what's been

For now, it's time to say goodbye to my guest of the day, Tom.

So for the next half an hour we're going to be focussing on Europe.

We'll be talking about the vote by MEPs to freeze EU

membership talks with Turkey, the reaction in Brussels to a visit

by the Brexit Secretary, and we've been to Latvia to find out

First, though, here's our guide to the latest from Europe

In France, former PM Francois Fillon surprised winning the first

round in the centre-right Republican Party's contest to pick

a candidate for next year's presidential election.

He will face Alain Juppe in a one-off this weekend.

Former president Nicolas Sarkozy came a disappointing third.

The non-binding vote called for multinational forces and a joint

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she'd run for a fourth term

One challenger might be Martin Schulz.

The president of the European Parliament said he would swap

Ukip face multiple investigations after claims they misspent EU funds

And Brexit secretary David Davis met with Guy Verhofstadt, the EU

Had Mr Davies really called him Satan?

And with us for the next 30 minutes, I've been joined by the Conservative

MEP Ashley Fox and the Ukip MEP Gerard Batten.

Let's take a look at one of those stories in more detail,

and that's the visit by Brexit secretary David Davis

Ashley Fox, Manfred Weber says our Government has no idea what Brexit

means. Guy Verhofstadt said the process would be tough and very

intense. David Davis said it had all been rather fun and very useful. So

who isn't quite being straight? This was a getting to know you session,

the first time David Davis has been across to Brussels and Strasbourg to

get to know the key players. This is about loving relationships. The

negotiations don't start until March, so I am happy with how things

are going. In our way, we know what the leaders of the EU think, so

nobody should be surprised with what they say so far? The Government

doesn't have a plan. It doesn't want to leave anyway, in my view. What

makes you think that? Misses me was a remain, and if remain had won, she

would be saying that that was good. I wrote a plan two years ago on how

it would work, and Guy Verhofstadt confirmed to David Davis that the

four tenets of the EU are non-negotiable, so they have already

told us we can't have control over immigration, so what kind of plan do

we have? Jean Lambert is agreed MEP. What do you think of the tone of the

meeting between Guy Verhofstadt and David Davis? When you listen to

reports, you almost wonder whether they were in the same meeting. It is

true that my understanding is that at least their agreement is there

needs to be a strong European Union going into the future. So that has

implications I think Fathauer the EU handles their side of a negotiation.

I think it is also very clear from what I have been hearing that the UK

still hasn't really got its head around the magnitude of what it is

doing here, and even some of the technicalities, it would appear the

David Davis hadn't even realised the European Parliament gets a vote on

the article 50 outcome, so there are some of these things which you

really think the Government should have a handle on. Fairly basic. Do

you think David Davis didn't know? That is simply not true. Do you know

that? Yes, I do. I met him before he met Guy Verhofstadt, he was well

aware of the position. That would be pretty unbelievable, Jean Lambert,

who told you that? Somebody else who was actually in the meeting.

Somebody else in the meeting! Yes, the meeting with Verhofstadt. It is

the understanding of what is going on here, the timetabling of it, the

magnitude of it, the fact that you are not going to have everything

neatly wrapped up with a ribbon on it by 2019. You are still going to

have a transition period after that, I think it is still not really there

and clear in the negotiations. Is that the problem, though, with

Theresa May's mantra, that she is not going to give a running

commentary? If you don't give some detail and flesh out some of the

broad negotiating points, then, Jean Lambert quite rightly, and some of

her other colleagues and those on both sides of the political spectrum

will fill the gap for you. Lets just wait until March. People want, that

is my point. The smoke and noise in the media really doesn't matter.

What matters is the result at the end of the negotiations, and what we

will see is in the run-up to the negotiations, people like Jean

Lambert and others will create a lot of noise in the media, I am

concerned with getting a good result for Britain, and so is Theresa May.

There is no way that the EU is going to presenters with a mythical deal,

they have no reason to because they don't want us to leave. They might

let us leave but they might want to punish us. I think what Theresa May

wants to do is delay and delay in the event present us with something

like a Swiss or Norwegian model, where we still have open borders and

a large percentage of the laws, so we might not have bothered at all,

but there is a much easier way to leave, repeal the 1972 act, and all

the EU directives will remain in the UK Parliament, and we can repeal and

amend them as we go. Guy Verhofstadt, chief negotiator for

the EU, has spent his whole life campaigning for closer EU

negotiation, so was it sensible to appoint somebody as hardliners that

in terms of a federalist viewpoint, rightly or wrongly, to the role of

chief negotiator? One of the key negotiators is also Michel Barnier

of the commission, and it will be national governments that are

included in this. Verhofstadt is there to ensure the interests of the

European Union. The idea that you can somehow pull the plug and create

a whole sense of legal uncertainty in terms of even which jurisdiction

applies to things like cables between the UK and mainland Europe,

any of these other things, I think is absolute fantasyland. There needs

to be something here that is absolutely concrete in terms of

legal certainty, and that has to be part of the outcome, and we have to

engage not only the European Parliament but our national

parliament within this. The idea you can sideline elected buddies is

outrageous. But is it acceptable if there are going to be these

negotiations that Manfred Weber, for example, calls the Foreign

Secretary, Boris Johnson, unbelievably arrogant and say what

they like about the British government. Will that help smooth

the way? You could also argue whether Boris Johnson has been

smoothing the way. What Ashley is saying in terms of a lot of the

rhetoric is correct. There will be position taking, there will be

stretching things on either side, but in terms of the actual

negotiation, there are a lot of nuts and bolts that need to be sorted

through. This is not a quick and easy job as some seem to think.

There are things here which have enormous imprecations for business,

people's daily lives, and that needs to be taken seriously. And on the

other side, Boris Johnson threatened sales on prosecco if the Italians

didn't come on is that acceptable? Boris Johnson is a star. So you

think it is? He was illustrating the point that those countries in Europe

will want to continue to trade with us, and I'm confident we will get a

good deal. And do you think you will still have to apply as pretty well

all EU leaders have said, and the premise to Malta, you would have to

have some freedom of movement if you wanted full tariff free access to

the single market, and you would have to pay some contribution to the

EU? You need to distinguish between being a member of the single

market... I said full tariff free access. Canada has just negotiated

98% tariff free access, and I think we can do better than that and

retain control of our borders. This is a problem solved quickly, the

British government can now say to the European Union, we could

negotiate forever, but your choice, do you want continued tariff free

trade with the UK, or do you want World Trade Organisation rules, and

let's give them month to think about it, and they make the decision,

because ultimately they will do that anyway. Do you think the Alliance

for direct democracy in Europe, of which you are part, will end up

having to repay the 173,000 euros of allegedly misspent funds? I am not a

member of that, I was very briefly a member of it. There is a double

standard here, I have been assured by the people in charge of this that

all money was spent in accordance with the rules, and other groups

under... Have you been misled? I haven't been misled about anything.

The EU Parliament act as judge and jury and executioner in same case.

Other groups have spent the money in the same way on polling for example

which was available to everybody. So you are admitting it has been

misspent? No, I'm not. You said other groups are done the same

thing. I'm saying that it wasn't against the rules for them, and

political activity has not been funded, but there is a double

standard because there is a big six scandal growing in the European

Parliament, number of assistants have gone to the Brussels police and

made complaints about sexpert jobs, and it is a big scandal that affects

particularly EP EP... Police have gone to the parliament and they are

being impeded by the authorities. We will look into that, but I wanted to

just focus on... It is a double standard. We were living a

specifically about the allegedly misspent funds. It is nothing to do

with Ukip. Thank you. Jean Abbott, thank you very much.

Now, let's talk about one of the most significant votes of the week

in the European Parliament, and that was the decision by MEPs

to back the suspension of EU membership talks with Turkey

Politicians from right to left back a symbolic resolution condemning

the Turkish government's "disproportionate repressive

measures" after a failed military coup in July.

Well, our correspondent Damian Grammaticus has been speaking

to Gianni Pittella, the Leader of the Socialists and Democrats

in the European Parliament, and asked him why

After the coup, he put in jail thousands and thousands of people,

journalists, lawyers, politicians, leader of parties, everybody.

But without motivation in front of the situation we have decided

to take initiative and with other groups we reached a large,

a very large majority on this resolution.

But isn't it right that at this point in time what the people

on the other side of the debate say is that Europe needs Turkey,

Now is not the time to stop dialogue?

Absolutely, but the dialogue is not stopped.

We freeze the talks for accession, not the dialogue.

We need talking but we want democratic talk.

We want a country in which the citizens are free,

are free to discuss, are free to criticise,

are free to oppose themselves to the Government.

But the view of Erdogan is a liberal and -

If he wants to introduce the death penalty, the relationship

between the EU and Turkey will finish for always.

And what about refugees, because Europe relies on Mr Erdogan

for his side of the deal to stop the refugees coming?

One thing is not linked with the other things.

And I don't think, I don't believe that Erdogan

In any case, EU doesn't accept blackmail by Erdogan.

Ashley Fox, did you vote for the suspension of EU membership talks

with Turkey? No, my group abstained on this resolution. We think it's

unhelpful because we regard Turkey as a strategic ally, important in

NATO. We don't want to push them towards Putin. At the same time, we

are really concerned about what is happening in Turkey at the moment.

The arrests of journalists, opposition MPs, but the main

opposition party in Turkey say this is unhelpful in their help to

re-establish, in - in their trying to retaken democracy in Turkey, this

move is unhelpful. Do you not need to make a stand against the things

you have listed, 471-37, most MEPs voted to suspend those talks. We

regard this megaphone diplomacy by the European Parliament as

unhelpful. We want to carry on talking to the Turks, explain that

they are important to us. But that we want them to come away from the

autocratic system they're developing. This is non-legislative

resolution, it's no effect. You called it symbolic, I would call it

pointless. It temporarily freezes and everything will be all right in

the future. Turkey doesn't even fulfil the EU's own criteria for

being a member, it isn't a European country. When there is a progress

report on Turkish entry which there is every year or so, we always vote

against it, the Ukip MEPs and the Conservative, Lib Dem, I believe the

Greens vote for it, I am surprised at Ashley's position because the

Conservative Party haven't decided they're leaving the EU, why would

you bother to tell the - to tell the EU that Turkey would be a member in

the future. You would like Turkey to be a member? In the future? I

wouldn't and I think a... Why support accession talks at all? It

is a channel of communication to Turkey to encourage them along a

democratic path. The point of that is that Erdogan is extremely

important. His country is sitting in an extremely important decision,

sorry a position. He has already said that if this were to become

binding and I take your point that it's not at the moment, that he

would open the borders and allow the migrants that he has taken in from

the Middle East across into Europe. Why are we leading Turkey up the

garden path? They have continual progress reports the Conservatives

vote in favour of, including the... It probably suits the Turkish

politicians as much as the other politicians. No intention of letting

them in. Is there any intention... It's been going on 30 years now.

They even less fulfil the criteria for membership now than they did

ten, 15 years ago. They're going backwards in terms of human rights

and democracy. It was false to say during the referendum campaign

accession was about to happen? You have to ask the Conservative, Labour

and Lib Dems who always voted for Turkish... It was incorrect to

always claim that Turkish accession and 75 million Turks were coming to

Europe, because as you have said it's never going to happen. It was

true they are being asked to apply and that every time we have a

progress report it's voted in favour. It was legitimate of us to

say if they did join 75 million boo have -- would have a right to come

here. Is it a worry Erdogan could use the stick of opening up borders

even if it is not a binding vote against the EU? That is one of many

worries, so is Turkey's move to an autocratic system. It's a worry

people have been purged from their jobs since the coup in July. We need

to maintain a strategic dialogue with Turkey and this megaphone

diplomacy is unhelpful. We need to establish a proper talks with Turkey

about where their position is in relation to the European Union. I

very much doubt that is full membership. I don't suppose that

would ever get through the European Parliament. All right. We will leave

it there. Now, what does the election

of Donald Trump as US president mean It's a member of both the EU

and Nato, but during his election campaign Mr Trump suggested that

America might no longer defend Nato allies against military action

from neighbouring Russia. In the latest in our Meet

the Neighbours series, Adam's been to Latvia

to find out more. Friday 11th November and it's a big

day in the Latvian capital Riga. Lacplesis was a hero,

he was a man with bear ears, He killed a bear and he put those

ears so he had more power. Also known as Bear Slayer Day,

it marks the moment in 1919 when Latvians saw off foreign

fighters ensuring the But it's also their equivalent

of Remembrance Day and a chance for the Ministry of Defence to talk

about modern day threats. This is a Scimitar tank

from the Latvian Army. Here you will also find

troops from the US Army from the 107 3rd Airborne,

that's because in the last few months NATO has been

bolstering its presence in all three Baltic states to send a clear

message to their next Meet the Defence Minister,

a former Olympic weightlifter. Now grappling with what he sees

as a Russian build-up on his border. We saw what's happened around

borders and the scale of exercise We see strategic

bombers, not just close to our borders but close to UK

and Portugal borders too. Of course, this is real

rattling of sabres. For the adults, Russia provokes

a mixture of fear and resignation. We always between two big

enemies, Russia is one. Donald Trump is elected,

he said great things about Russia. 40% of the population

is ethnicically Russian Miroslav runs a small political

party that campaigns for them. I think that the industry

in United States and maybe in Europe also is interest in this tension,

because it will allow to sell more Second reason, European democracy

now is in some sort of deadlock Lacplesis Day ends with thousands

of candles laid by Riga Castle. It's to remember fallen soldiers

and it's really quite impressive. Latvia has been on the frontline

of history before, now its found Adam Fleming reporting. Can you

understand the fear of the Baltic states like Latvia since Donald

Trump's been elected? I am not a fan of Trump nor Putin. I think Donald

Trump won because he wasn't Hillary Clinton. That's about the best you

can say. I think he made a mistake by not backing NATO. Putin doesn't

have an ideology, but he is interested in winning prestige at

home by perhaps winning back the territories... So do you understand

the fear? I think Donald Trump needs to say he is 100% behind NATO and we

will protect NATO countries under the clause which says one attacked,

all day tacked. On that basis do you think why they're worried about the

future policy and relationship between Putin and Trump? Very much

so. It underlines the importance of NATO and unlike Trump and unlike

Nigel Farage, I don't admire Putin, I think he is a menace. What about

the problem of Russians, ethnic Russians or those who speak the

language in a state like Latvia, could you see it going the same way

as Ukraine? I think what happened the Russian who is wanted to return

to Russia when the Soviet Union broke up went back and I understand

the Russian speakers who lived there were happy by and large to be part

of Latvia, I am in the an expert but that's my understanding. Putin

doesn't need reality, it's like Hitler and Czech in 1938, he doesn't

need reality. He needs propaganda messages. He is dangerous. He is

rationale. He is a criminal. He works on the basis of increasing his

power and how much money he can steal. He might decide the West is

weak enough in order to try and take back some territories formally owned

by the Soviet Union. One of the potential solutions would be for

increased spending by other NATO members. That some people have said

would be enough to allay Donald Trump's reluctance to come in on

behalf of other states. Do you think that would work and do you think

that should happen? I think it's important all NATO members pay their

fair share, if don't made one valid point it was that Europe is

freeloading within the NATO all liance so United Kingdom, Poland,

Estonia, Greece, only four countries meet the 2% target and all of them

should. Would you like to hear a commitment from Donald Trump that he

would actually or America would come in on behalf of another NATO member

state in the event of any sort of aggression? Absolutely. It's very

important that NATO stands by all its members and the United States

stands by its European allies, we don't want to detach European

security from the security of the United States. But all European

countries that are members of NATO have that responsibility to pay

their fair share. We do that in Britain. All members should do so.

All right, thank you both very much. We agree. It's a good point to end

the programme. Thank you very much. From all of us, bye.