Amber Rudd The Andrew Marr Show

The Conservative Amber Rudd. Welcome. A lot of people watching

this and remembering what has happened this week will think after

Manchester, there has to be a step change, a completely different

attitude to security in this country. Do you agree with them? I

believe there is information we can gather and there are steps we can

take to improve his country's security. The threat level has been

severe now sensed 2014, an attack is highly likely. We have made sure

that we put the tools in place. There will be as many armed police

by the end of this year as there have ever been. We are stepping this

up. This has not come out of the blue. We have been preparing for

this. And another thing I would like to say is the reason why the

handling of this terrible atrocity was done so well in Manchester by

the emergency services which I would like to thank and buy everybody

involved, the people who volunteer, is because we had rehearsed for it.

Let's turn if I made to the latest, as it were. You have downgraded the

threat. We have heard that a large part of the group around this

terrorist have been apprehended and taken. Does that means of the group

are still out there? Potentially. It is an ongoing operation. The

operation is at full tilt in a way and until the operation is complete,

we cannot be entirely sure that it is closed. The security services to

a great job and all the rest of it but there are questions that must be

asked. How many times worthy security services tipped off about

Salman Abedi before he attacked? It is not for me to be drawn in on what

the security services mail or did not know. The fact is this is an

ongoing operation. There are other people that are going to be

potentially pursued. That is because of the strong relationship between

the services. People want to lug afterwards to see if there are

signals and how we can do this better but can I also point out that

since 2013, they have filed 18 separate props. They do a good job.

We are not frightened of learning and improving. Salman Abedi was

identified as a dangerous man by his friends on the community. They

formed the terror hotline five years ago and again last year. We know the

imam in his local mosque use the prevent strategy to get in touch and

say this guy is out of control and dangerous and apparently nothing

happened. Was Salman Abedi on a surveillance this? I don't know

those details because the intelligence services are still

collecting information about him and the people around him but I would

not rush to conclusions, as you seem to be, that they have somehow missed

something. People did from the terror hotline, as they are told to

do. The reason we put in place the terror hotline and the prevent

strategy is because we recognise the scale of the problem. What this

reminds us if we needed reminding is the skill of the problem that we

have. The enemy that we have that is trying to weapon eyes the young

people in our society. We have put in place measures to make sure that

we can protect ourselves but we have been at a level where in an attack

is highly likely. The Prime Minister has announced in the manifesto

before this event that there would be a commission for extremism to see

what else we can do to root out extremism and put legislation in

place to make sure we take action to stop extremism taking root in our

society. The problem with the manifesto is it now reads like a

pre-Manchester manifesto. It doesn't necessarily have the urgency that a

lot of people feel is necessary after the Manchester attack. This

government has always felt that urgency and that is why we have been

putting additional resources and also it is significant that the

commission for extremism is in the manifesto was putting me for

Manchester. We know that we need to do more. We recognise the scale of

the threat. How many serious potential jihadi 's should we be

worried about? They are looking at 500 different plots, 3000 on a sort

of top list and then 20,000 underneath that but that is all

it might just be a question about it might just be a question about

one of them or something serious with the topless. What I am

wondering is the question of whether Salman Abedi was red flagged at some

point. There are Sony people that they have to look at. One thing you

could decide to do is a step change in the size of MI5. -- so many

people. We won't shy away from finding out what else we can do to

keep people safe. The budget has already gone up significantly. We

are recruiting 1900 people for MI5 and we will look at this to learn

from it and make sure we keep people safe going forward. If there is

need for more secure at -- security need for more secure at -- security

and recruitment, we will do that. If you win the general election and go

back to the Home Office, will it be business as usual or would you say,

we need to change this and we need a bigger budget for that? We agreed to

uplift the budget to 15 billion. We will make sure we put the right

resources into keep the people safe, always. We were talking earlier on

about where Salman Abedi, we know he has been to Libya. We think he has

been to Syria. How many Jihadis have come back to this country, do you

think? We don't know the exact number. Engaging with the sit

authorities, we make sure that they have the tools to track them. If

somebody comes in from Heathrow, how can we possibly know if they had

been to Syria? It is all intelligence led. We have very good

intelligence services who help to collect that information to make

sure that we follow one track the right people who might be dangerous.

The government has introduced temporary extraordinary -- exclusion

measures. It is part of the toolkit that the Home Secretary has so that

we can keep people safe. Can I move onto some of the other the things

that people have speculated. You have an entire strategy in place for

trying to pick people up and identify them but you have got rid

of Labour's control orders. Under the Labour government, they were

highly controversial and they were civil liberties issues but they

seemed to be effective. They include curfews and electronic tagging. If

Salman Abedi had been subject to that, he would not have been able to

carry out the atrocity. We don't have control orders. We use them

effectively. We are in constant discussion with the intelligence

services and with the police. We need to make sure that we have the

right tools that they need and they have the ability to come to me as

Home Secretary and for me to sign them off. We will do that where we

need to. You have only used TPIMs six or

seven times so far. Slightly more than that but I cannot give the

exact number. It is for me to say to the intelligence services who will

keep us safe, tell me how many you need. What the evidences and we will

take them forward. Lord Carlile the former independent reviewer of

terror legislation said it was a grave mistake by the coalition

government to remove control orders and to produce something he said was

more Dialogue. I think that quote might be out of date because Mr

Anderson who was also the reviewer has said they represent the Michu

evolution following control orders and Max Hill, the reviewer, has told

us there is no more legislation needed currently. -- much you were.

I think we have the tools in place at the moment. The last and we

talked after another terrorist attack in London, we had a

discussion about end to end encryption. There was able lotta

comment afterwards about what was possible and was not possible. Can I

ask you to explain what your proposal is now? We are making

progress with the companies. Some of them have been more constructive

than others but we will continue to build a map. The area I am most

concerned about is the Internet companies who are continuing to

publish the hate material that is contributing to radicalising people

in this country. I also spoke about setting up an Internet forum. The

Prime Minister has agreed to do an international forum. We are

continuing to build on better relationships and ask the experts to

make those changes so that people don't get radicalised and the

terrorists don't have somewhere to hide. The problem with end to end

encryption is the software is out there freely available all over the

Internet. You can make your own. If a terrorist is using what sat for

instance and you make it give you a back door, they can move to another

messaging service and then another and another and eventually if you

close them all off, then they can build their own. The only way that

you can stop this is by banning end to end encryption completely. What

we are doing is challenging the people who are delivering to work

with us so that we have a way of keeping people safe. Nobody wants

terrorists to have a safe place to information and plot atrocities. I

believe we can get them to help us get some of that information.

Banning end to end encryption would destroy the Internet. It would

devastate the Internet economy in this country. Do you understand why

people were so shocked? What I have always said is the Internet provides

an incredibly important place for people to do business. Encryption is

important for banking and everything else but we need to do better to

stop terrorists being able to use it. In your interview in the Mail on

Sunday, you were asked whether getting a Labour government would

lead to more people being killed by terrorists, do you stand by that?

Look at the evidence. Jeremy Corbyn, Diane Abbott and John McDonnell have

a history of not supporting terrorist legislation. Jeremy Corbyn

boasted that he opposed all counterterrorism legislation. Diane

Abbott gave quite a good account of terrorist legislation which was

counter-productive and badly thought through. I thought she gave a very

poor account of not being able to engage with banning proscribed

organisations. We have banned a far right group as well. What I would

say to Diane Abbott is I have changed my hairstyle a few times in

the 34 years as well but I have not changed my views about how we keep

the British public safe. Let's turn to one election issue, the U-turn on

social care. You change the policy radically. It has been an

embarrassing U-turn. Is it not taking the British people for falls

to pretend there has not been a U-turn? We have been frank about it

and we have levelled with people. The Conservative Party is a party

that is very frank about these things, unlike the Labour Party. We

have put the most important element of that social care policy is we are

protecting people's assets and we are making sure that they don't have

to move from their house if they are using the equity from it while they

are either at home using social care or elsewhere. You said there would

not be a cap. After the manifesto was launched, the Health Secretary

Jeremy Hunt went on the radio and said we are getting rid of the cap.

Is there going to be a cap? The Prime Minister said yes. But we are

not sure where the cab was going to be. We have a Green paper to make

sure that we said it at the right level. It could be 200,000, 300,000.

All those people who are worried about this policy should still be

worried until they know the size of the cap. What people should realise

is we know that people are living longer. The next decade, there is

good to be another 2 million people over 75, which is great news but we

have to be frank that this is going to cost money. We have to find a way

that is fair for people to pay for it and this is the best way to pay

for it. Amber Rudd, thank you very much indeed.