:00:37. > :00:41.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:42. > :00:44."No deal" was the conclusion of the EU council president
:00:45. > :00:47.Donald Tusk when he left Number 10 last night.
:00:48. > :00:51.David Cameron says there's been progress and he still hopes
:00:52. > :00:54.to secure an early renegotiation of Britain's EU membership.
:00:55. > :01:00.Number 10 claims it all comes down to the next 24 hours.
:01:01. > :01:03.MPs looking into the collapse of the charity Kids Company aren't
:01:04. > :01:05.impressed - they accuse everyone from the founder down
:01:06. > :01:09.of an extraordinary catalogue of failures.
:01:10. > :01:12.Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own banknotes -
:01:13. > :01:14.should Wales get its own for the first time
:01:15. > :01:27.we'll be asking who wants to read about politicians, anyway?
:01:28. > :01:32.Why did you not like it? I den think they are that interesting, to be
:01:33. > :01:36.honest. -- I don't think. LAUGHTER
:01:37. > :01:42.Controversial! All that in the next hour
:01:43. > :01:45.and with us for the whole of the programme today I'm joined
:01:46. > :01:48.by three MPs who haven't yet had a book written about them,
:01:49. > :01:50.authorised or not. But they've told me they're
:01:51. > :01:52.very open to offers. It's the Conservative
:01:53. > :01:54.Anne-Marie Treveylan, Matthew Pennycook for Labour
:01:55. > :01:56.and the Lib Dem and former minister First today let's talk
:01:57. > :02:07.about the prime minister's renegotiation of Britain's EU
:02:08. > :02:10.membership, as what are being billed as crunch talks between the UK
:02:11. > :02:12.government and EU officials roll on. The European Council president
:02:13. > :02:16.Donald Tusk met David Cameron for dinner at No 10 last night,
:02:17. > :02:21.and over a meal of salmon, beef and pear and apple crumble,
:02:22. > :02:25.they tried to reach an agreement that Mr Tusk could then put before
:02:26. > :02:28.the other EU leaders ahead Well, after the meeting
:02:29. > :02:35.Downing St said there had been a "breakthrough" on restricting
:02:36. > :02:38.benefits for EU migrants. Mr Tusk tweeted: "No deal yet.
:02:39. > :02:46.Intensive work in next 24 crucial.". So what chance of a deal -
:02:47. > :02:59.well, our political correspondent Any more progress on this deal? We
:03:00. > :03:02.have come from an hour-long lobby briefing, from
:03:03. > :03:04.have come from an hour-long lobby official spokeswoman with
:03:05. > :03:08.journalists, and they sound official spokeswoman with
:03:09. > :03:11.upbeat. What they are emphasising comment we need to be careful, when
:03:12. > :03:15.upbeat. What they are emphasising we talk about a deal, the deal will
:03:16. > :03:18.take place if it does at the February summit of EU leaders. What
:03:19. > :03:23.we are likely to get, some February summit of EU leaders. What
:03:24. > :03:28.document from Donald Tusk tomorrow, possibly, and a discussion document
:03:29. > :03:30.regarding the proposals which he thinks can
:03:31. > :03:31.regarding the proposals which he deal, but there will be more
:03:32. > :03:36.discussions deal, but there will be more
:03:37. > :03:37.Street are careful to say that this is a significant breakthrough, the
:03:38. > :03:39.idea that is a significant breakthrough, the
:03:40. > :03:42.admitting that the is a significant breakthrough, the
:03:43. > :03:46.migration coming into the UK mean that
:03:47. > :03:46.migration coming into the UK mean emergency brake, and again we have
:03:47. > :03:47.to be emergency brake, and again we have
:03:48. > :03:55.of talks about many different breaks emergency brake, and again we have
:03:56. > :03:56.we are talking about and what the proposal is from the Prime Minister
:03:57. > :04:02.is that proposal is from the Prime Minister
:04:03. > :04:05.things like tax credits and housing benefit, for four years from the
:04:06. > :04:11.time they arrive, that might not benefit, for four years from the
:04:12. > :04:13.what other EU leaders want. They might say, over four use
:04:14. > :04:15.what other EU leaders want. They what you like, but then we return to
:04:16. > :04:20.normal, so that is up what you like, but then we return to
:04:21. > :04:25.negotiation -- over four years. We do look like we might have some kind
:04:26. > :04:30.of document, a detailed document, but not the final product, in the
:04:31. > :04:34.next 24 hours. Regarding the hours you have mentioned, regarding
:04:35. > :04:39.migrants and the emergency brake specifically, it is not clear if the
:04:40. > :04:43.European Commission is going to unilaterally say that Britain, you
:04:44. > :04:47.are allowed to have an urgency break of so many years on benefits to
:04:48. > :04:51.migrants, that would have to be ratified by the other 27 countries,
:04:52. > :04:57.is that how you think it will have to be? The question everyone is
:04:58. > :04:59.is that how you think it will have asking, whose foot is on the break,
:05:00. > :05:06.can the UK decide from this moment on, that we cannot give any more
:05:07. > :05:09.benefits to migrants? The UK Government sees this as a Paul
:05:10. > :05:14.factor which is encouraging migrants to come here rather than go to other
:05:15. > :05:18.countries, but I have to say, we don't know, we are not at the stage
:05:19. > :05:22.where we know and they will still be disagreement over this about exactly
:05:23. > :05:25.how it works. Is it the European Commission saint of Britain, we
:05:26. > :05:33.accept for the next seven years that you can restrict benefits? -- saying
:05:34. > :05:38.to Britain. Or is it David Cameron saying all migrants who come here,
:05:39. > :05:44.in the first four years, they can receive those kind of benefits?
:05:45. > :05:47.There is a big difference. The Prime Minister is not going to accept
:05:48. > :05:50.alternative to his proposal, that is what Downing Street are saying,
:05:51. > :05:55.unless it is as powerful and as effective as the one that he thinks
:05:56. > :06:03.he is proposing. A busy day to you, I feel. Anne-Marie, have you been
:06:04. > :06:06.won over? No, I haven't. If you are heading for a car crash, having a
:06:07. > :06:09.emergency brake is all very well, but I would like to be in charge of
:06:10. > :06:16.the steering wheel and what this feels like is EU technocrats
:06:17. > :06:18.controlling decisions. The point of having a referendum, the frustration
:06:19. > :06:21.of the British people is that more powers seem to come from Europe and
:06:22. > :06:26.we need to be in charge of these decisions. The primers that has been
:06:27. > :06:28.frustrated by those who do not understand how important this is for
:06:29. > :06:33.the British people -- the Prime Minister. There is nothing he could
:06:34. > :06:38.come back with which would satisfy you? He has not asked for much in
:06:39. > :06:41.the first place, and my frustration is that he is not even getting
:06:42. > :06:45.about, and I would like him to at least get through to those
:06:46. > :06:47.technocrats that this is about the British people and their
:06:48. > :06:51.frustrations, but they are not hearing that and that is a tough
:06:52. > :06:55.call all round. Anne-Marie does not think it adds up to very much, but
:06:56. > :06:59.symbolically, if you were presenting voters with a deal which included an
:07:00. > :07:06.emergency brake on access to in work benefits from EU migrants, without
:07:07. > :07:10.not be pretty powerful? I agree with Anne-Marie, this is pretty trivial,
:07:11. > :07:16.taken in the round, you have got to set aside, the political theatre
:07:17. > :07:18.which surrounds the negotiation. We are talking about pretty small
:07:19. > :07:24.staff, which I do not think we'll have much of the impact -- stuff
:07:25. > :07:29.which I do not think we'll have much impact. You would not support it? We
:07:30. > :07:33.do not know what it entails, there is so much uncertainty, who presents
:07:34. > :07:37.the break, what are the circumstances which mean that we
:07:38. > :07:40.qualify as being in an emergency situation which might give us
:07:41. > :07:45.certainty about when it applies in future. The European Commission is
:07:46. > :07:48.broadly in favour of agreement with David Cameron that there could be an
:07:49. > :07:52.emergency brake if there is an emergency brake on those benefits
:07:53. > :08:01.for four years, would Labour support it? We would be set auditing to stay
:08:02. > :08:07.in the EU -- we would be supporting. So it doesn't make a difference? Not
:08:08. > :08:11.really, it is about whether our future is in or out, and this is
:08:12. > :08:16.pretty small stuff in terms of the big picture. Are you in favour of it
:08:17. > :08:20.as a principle, restricting access to benefits? I have no difficulty
:08:21. > :08:27.with this, this is a reasonable proposition, but it is a damp squib,
:08:28. > :08:31.really, this is a sideshow. The big issue is, is our destiny and future
:08:32. > :08:36.in Europe or do we choose to retreat from that? If you think about the
:08:37. > :08:40.big issues which we confront, migrant flows and international
:08:41. > :08:47.crime, climate change, issues like tax evasion by companies like
:08:48. > :08:51.Google, much better able to confront those issues if we are working
:08:52. > :08:56.together internationally in the European Union rather than on our
:08:57. > :09:01.own. In terms of what else is being negotiated, what are the
:09:02. > :09:04.difficulties? One of the stumbling blocks is about the two tier Europe
:09:05. > :09:09.and the French disagreeing with the idea of safeguards being put in
:09:10. > :09:15.place for non-Eurozone countries, is that a good idea? I think that is
:09:16. > :09:20.rather important, yes. There is no prospect of us joining the euro any
:09:21. > :09:25.time soon, and probably never. We have to make sure that we and other
:09:26. > :09:29.countries outside the euro are safeguarded and that those countries
:09:30. > :09:33.within the euro cannot railroad things against our national
:09:34. > :09:40.interest. That is a substantial issue which I think does have to be
:09:41. > :09:42.resolved. This is what Steve Baker from conservatives for Britain had
:09:43. > :09:48.to say yesterday about the negotiations. Family Tory MPs are
:09:49. > :09:55.going to campaign for out? -- how many. About a fifth have made up
:09:56. > :10:01.their minds, and there has been a hardening, and I would expect
:10:02. > :10:05.between 50-70 with in that group. No more than 50-70 Tory MPs campaigning
:10:06. > :10:12.on your side of the referendum to leave? That would be my expectation
:10:13. > :10:18.at this stage. Are you disappointed gridlock only 50-7
:10:19. > :10:26.-- are you disappointed? Only 50-70 Tory MPs to campaign against. That
:10:27. > :10:31.is what I would expect. There is a core group that will want to leave,
:10:32. > :10:36.and there are those that would like to stay, and there is a big group in
:10:37. > :10:42.the middle. It is not many. I'm quite surprised, but this is just
:10:43. > :10:46.one of many issues, and therefore this is something they will
:10:47. > :10:50.consider. They have a valid point, this is a referendum for the people
:10:51. > :10:54.and how politicians choose to cast their vote is only one part of the
:10:55. > :11:01.process. Do you think the campaign to leave is lacking? If you have
:11:02. > :11:07.50-70 Tory MPs, you do not have a cabinet minister who is going to
:11:08. > :11:11.come out, so far, anyway, batting to leave the EU, so it is floundering?
:11:12. > :11:17.I think it is developing well, there's a broad set of voices on
:11:18. > :11:20.this referendum, and as it develops, and be Prime Minister reaches
:11:21. > :11:23.conclusions in the middle of feathery, we will move forward, and
:11:24. > :11:28.I think voices will become much stronger -- the Prime Minister
:11:29. > :11:32.reaches conclusions in the middle of February. Which voices are you
:11:33. > :11:37.hoping to hear from? Do you think some of them will vote to leave but
:11:38. > :11:40.they will not declare? I think some of those who will chair their
:11:41. > :11:44.constituency arenas and not put themselves into the firing line, and
:11:45. > :11:48.I think that is OK. This is a referendum for the people, but they
:11:49. > :11:52.have got to have the information to make their decision, which makes it
:11:53. > :11:56.a very important issue. Are you expecting any Cabinet minister to
:11:57. > :12:02.declare? Chris Grayling but the leader of the house. I don't have
:12:03. > :12:07.conversation, though, they are all very loyal to the Prime Minister and
:12:08. > :12:11.that is how it should be at the moment. -- the leader of the house.
:12:12. > :12:18.What did Tory MP Jacob Rees Mogg warn yesterday might be threatened
:12:19. > :12:25.At the end of the show we'll see if the panel know
:12:26. > :12:30.A report by a group of MPs into the collapse of the charity
:12:31. > :12:31.Kids Company hasn't pulled its punches.
:12:32. > :12:34.Its founder, trustees, government ministers,
:12:35. > :12:37.auditors and regulators all come in for strong criticism
:12:38. > :12:44.We'll speak to its chairman in a moment.
:12:45. > :12:46.But first, let's remind ourselves of the background to the story.
:12:47. > :12:54.The charity aimed to provide practical, emotional and educational
:12:55. > :12:56.support to deprived and vulnerable inner-city children in London,
:12:57. > :13:04.Its founder, Camila Batmanghelidjh was a high-profile figure,
:13:05. > :13:06.and it had supporters from across politics,
:13:07. > :13:14.The charity closed on 5th August last year after facing a series
:13:15. > :13:17.of claims about its financial management and administration.
:13:18. > :13:22.In June, the Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office,
:13:23. > :13:25.Richard Heaton, wrote to ministers Oliver Letwin and Matthew Hancock
:13:26. > :13:30.The grant was awarded a week before the charity closed,
:13:31. > :13:37.despite Mr Heaton's advising against the move.
:13:38. > :13:41.In the wake of the closure, Batmanghelidjh and Kids Company
:13:42. > :13:44.chairman and ex-BBC executive Alan Yentob were called before
:13:45. > :13:48.the Commons Public Administration Committee.
:13:49. > :13:52.Today, that committee has published a report roundly criticising
:13:53. > :13:55.the charity's trustees and the Charity Commission
:13:56. > :13:57.for an "extraordinary catalogue of failures".
:13:58. > :14:00.Camila Batmanghelidjh herself is to appear in a documentary
:14:01. > :14:07.on BBC One on Wednesday, in which she denies any wrongdoing.
:14:08. > :14:17.I am not sorry I gave the kids money.
:14:18. > :14:19.I am not sorry I bought the kids nice things.
:14:20. > :14:29.The only thing I am sorry about is, I didn't raise enough money.
:14:30. > :14:31.Well, we're joined now by the chairman of the committee
:14:32. > :14:42.He's the Conservative Bernard Jenkin.
:14:43. > :14:48.Your report described it as an extraordinary catalogue of failures,
:14:49. > :14:52.laying blame at the door of the trustees. Why haven't government
:14:53. > :14:57.ministers received more blame for overriding the advice of civil
:14:58. > :15:00.servants? We do look closely, actually, at ministers and I don't
:15:01. > :15:08.think they scape from our scrutiny. You used the word blame. We do not
:15:09. > :15:11.use that word. Why not? There is no point in finding blame. What we want
:15:12. > :15:15.to know is why this accident occurred and what can be learned
:15:16. > :15:19.from it. It is not about blame. There are lessons for the Charity
:15:20. > :15:25.Commission. They could have been much more proactive. They could have
:15:26. > :15:28.scoop top stories in the press. Why many more people did not take their
:15:29. > :15:32.concerns to the Charity Commission is a big question for the Charity
:15:33. > :15:36.Commission. They need more resources to support trustees in these
:15:37. > :15:40.charities than they have. There is lessons for the advisors. Why didn't
:15:41. > :15:44.the accountants ring the alarm bells more vigorously? There is lessons
:15:45. > :15:49.for the government. Why were ministers overriding civil servants'
:15:50. > :15:55.advice, went to some extent they were conflicted? This charity had
:15:56. > :16:00.become an emblem of something the governing party wanted to project,
:16:01. > :16:06.and I have to say, ministers of all parties were captivated by the
:16:07. > :16:08.charisma of Camila Batmanghelidjh, blinded away from their usual sense
:16:09. > :16:15.of judgment. This happened to the blinded away from their usual sense
:16:16. > :16:17.trustees, too. And it is the trustees who are accountable. Either
:16:18. > :16:21.they knew what was going trustees who are accountable. Either
:16:22. > :16:24.did not do something about it, or they didn't know what was going on,
:16:25. > :16:28.and they should have done. But in terms of blame, why shouldn't
:16:29. > :16:30.ministers be blamed for overriding civil servants, when they allowed
:16:31. > :16:33.millions of pounds of civil servants, when they allowed
:16:34. > :16:38.to be given to charity without civil servants, when they allowed
:16:39. > :16:42.due diligence or taking any notice of what was being presented to them?
:16:43. > :16:45.This is something about the philosophy of the way I lead this
:16:46. > :16:50.committee. I think too many select committees are interested in putting
:16:51. > :16:51.people up against the wall and just shooting and. It just creates a
:16:52. > :16:56.climate of fear around shooting and. It just creates a
:16:57. > :17:01.the public service so that people find it even more difficult to deal
:17:02. > :17:04.with the issues. I know that this is disappointing may be for the BBC and
:17:05. > :17:14.the media. But actually we wanted to learn the lessons. Disappointing for
:17:15. > :17:18.the public, too. It is about accountability and transparency. It
:17:19. > :17:23.is not me saying this at the BBC. We spoke to Paul Flynn, a member of
:17:24. > :17:25.your committee, and he has accused the committee of political timidity
:17:26. > :17:31.in not going further in investigating the links between Kids
:17:32. > :17:35.Company and the government. As you yourself have just said, they were
:17:36. > :17:44.captivated. We put that in the report. But why didn't you summon
:17:45. > :17:50.some of these ministers? We did, I am afraid you have not been briefed
:17:51. > :17:55.properly. I did watch the sittings. I'm afraid, Oliver Letwin came
:17:56. > :18:00.before the committee and we gave him a severe investigation. Maybe the
:18:01. > :18:04.liaison committee will summon the Prime Minister to explain himself in
:18:05. > :18:07.respect of this matter. That is a decision for all the select
:18:08. > :18:12.committee chair people, not just me. Should Camila Batmanghelidjh have
:18:13. > :18:16.had that unique, privileged access to top tiers of government? And we
:18:17. > :18:20.say she shouldn't. If she did she should not have used it in the way
:18:21. > :18:23.she did, to obtain money at the expense of other charities. One of
:18:24. > :18:27.our recommendations is that there needs to be new procedures in place
:18:28. > :18:33.so that when ministers become effectively conflicted between their
:18:34. > :18:36.political work with the charity and what they want to project
:18:37. > :18:38.politically from that, and applications from grants, straws are
:18:39. > :18:44.the last people who should be overriding civil servants' advice.
:18:45. > :18:48.Absolutely. In my time as a minister I was aware of an extraordinary
:18:49. > :18:52.process that you have to go through if you were a charity applying for
:18:53. > :18:55.government money. It was a really tight, proper process. Here, they
:18:56. > :19:02.just ride roughshod completely over it! The final payment of 3 million
:19:03. > :19:06.quid, I think... Which was only a week before it actually closed. It
:19:07. > :19:12.is outrageous. And surely there does have to be political accountability
:19:13. > :19:15.here. Should the ministers, Matthew Hancock and Oliver Letwin, made the
:19:16. > :19:19.decision against the advice of senior civil servants, to pay that
:19:20. > :19:23.money over. It is a total waste of public money. Looking at this
:19:24. > :19:27.report, and you will no doubt have followed the committee interviews
:19:28. > :19:30.that were done with Alan Yentob and Camila Batmanghelidjh herself -
:19:31. > :19:35.would you have liked to have seen more ministers being grilled in the
:19:36. > :19:38.way Oliver Letwin was? I am on the Public Accounts Committee and we
:19:39. > :19:41.looked at this very closely from the financial point of view. We are
:19:42. > :19:45.there to manage value for money for the taxpayer and to highlight when
:19:46. > :19:48.it has failed. In this case, absolutely we did not get value for
:19:49. > :19:52.money, the British people were not supported. And we grilled the
:19:53. > :19:58.permanent secretaries, of which there have been a few over the
:19:59. > :20:02.course of the life of Kids Company, about how they had continued to
:20:03. > :20:05.accent that money should be, and it was only in the last tranche but
:20:06. > :20:09.they asked for a letter to hand over this money, but actually they were
:20:10. > :20:16.allowing funds to go to a charity which was not meeting... It was not
:20:17. > :20:20.a national charity, it was very localised, there were so many areas
:20:21. > :20:23.where it was being overridden. We have looked at it in some detail and
:20:24. > :20:29.we need to make sure that there are much more rigorous systems in place
:20:30. > :20:32.within the civil service, so that the taxpayer knows that... There are
:20:33. > :20:36.many charities in the north-east which would have been thrilled with
:20:37. > :20:39.that 3 million. We could have done a great deal for many children in the
:20:40. > :20:44.north-east. And the total given of course was much greater. 42 million,
:20:45. > :20:50.yes,. Under all governance, I have to say. Absolutely. It had failed to
:20:51. > :20:54.meet government standards which would have got other charities the
:20:55. > :20:57.money, several times over. For work which was very worthwhile in some
:20:58. > :21:04.areas, but not in others. Is there any truth, Bernard Jenkin, in the
:21:05. > :21:07.allegation that Camila Batmanghelidjh herself was the sort
:21:08. > :21:12.of poster girl of the big society, that in a way it could not be
:21:13. > :21:16.allowed to fail, but that was the political imperative, which is why
:21:17. > :21:19.they seemed to turn a blind eye to what was going on financially? And
:21:20. > :21:25.that that is why in the end the Government let it happen, and the
:21:26. > :21:29.allegation that you were too timid? You're absolutely right, that is
:21:30. > :21:33.exactly what we set out in our report. I don't think we have been
:21:34. > :21:38.timid at all. What are you expect us to do beyond what we have put in our
:21:39. > :21:42.report? The fact is, you're exactly right, you have nailed it. You have
:21:43. > :21:47.read our report and you are repeating back to me what we have
:21:48. > :21:51.got in our report. A lot of money was spent in the pursuit of
:21:52. > :21:54.political objectives. It happened under the Labour Party and the
:21:55. > :21:59.coalition as well. This is something which has got into the political
:22:00. > :22:02.culture. Just skate booting one minister, if I may say, for signing
:22:03. > :22:07.a letter, is not the answer. We need everybody to take this on board. I
:22:08. > :22:10.will be raising this with the Prime Minister this afternoon. And will
:22:11. > :22:17.you come and tell us...? Probably not! Just thought I would ask!
:22:18. > :22:20.Talking of Oliver Letwin, he has released a statement saying he still
:22:21. > :22:25.believes it was the right thing to do to give this charity one last
:22:26. > :22:29.chance to restructure. Was he wrong? I'm afraid he was, and we say he was
:22:30. > :22:34.wrong in our report. Do you agree? I think the trustees were really not
:22:35. > :22:38.doing their jobs properly. I have been on many charity boards, and
:22:39. > :22:42.sometimes you have to take ethical decisions and you have to cut your
:22:43. > :22:47.cloth. They did not do that. Interesting that Bernard Jenkin is
:22:48. > :22:52.says the culture had already existed under Labour, do you accept that? I
:22:53. > :22:56.think he is right that this goes beyond one particular government. It
:22:57. > :23:00.is a problem with charismatic individuals and charities which are
:23:01. > :23:03.held up to be special cases, in that then it becomes very difficult in
:23:04. > :23:07.how government deals with it. There are clear lessons from the report in
:23:08. > :23:11.how government hands out noncompetitive grants. But while
:23:12. > :23:16.learning the lessons from this particular case, we have got to be
:23:17. > :23:20.careful not to slander the whole charity sector. Lots of trustees
:23:21. > :23:25.work extremely hard. Very professional, and if anything, need
:23:26. > :23:29.more support. There was at least one trustee who really did try and stick
:23:30. > :23:35.up for what should have happened. He resigned in March last year. And I
:23:36. > :23:41.think there were others. But the real question here is, how did this
:23:42. > :23:45.happen, and is it happening in other charities? Trustees reading this
:23:46. > :23:48.report needs to see for themselves and ask themselves, how do you get
:23:49. > :23:52.the conversations going which are not being had? How do you get people
:23:53. > :23:55.to tell you stuff that they are frightened of telling you because
:23:56. > :23:58.there is a powerful person in the organisation who does not want you
:23:59. > :24:03.to know? These are very difficult questions and indeed they apply to
:24:04. > :24:07.the BBC as well. There is a concern which we express in our report that
:24:08. > :24:12.Alan Yentob, his removal from his job, or his resignation, brushes
:24:13. > :24:16.under the carpet a question about attitudes of senior management in
:24:17. > :24:21.the BBC, which the trustees have not quite got a grip on. Have there been
:24:22. > :24:26.the conversations at the top of the BBC about how it was possible that a
:24:27. > :24:29.senior person in the BBC with a great reputation should finish up
:24:30. > :24:31.standing over the shoulder of a BBC producer while Camila Batmanghelidjh
:24:32. > :24:36.was being interviewed? Echoes these issues of conflict need to be
:24:37. > :24:41.discussed. It took a very long time for this even to be raised properly
:24:42. > :24:46.in the BBC. -- because these issues. I will leave that for you to
:24:47. > :24:51.investigate and pursue further. It shows that these issues of
:24:52. > :24:57.governance stretch into all... And indeed into the private sector. Yes.
:24:58. > :25:01.Before we let you go, on the EU renegotiation, we could not let you
:25:02. > :25:06.go without asking you about this... Everybody has resisted it this
:25:07. > :25:11.morning! Well, I am not going to! Are you now happy with the status of
:25:12. > :25:16.the campaign? I am supporting the campaign. Will you resign from the
:25:17. > :25:20.board if Dominic Cummings continues as its campaign director? Dominic
:25:21. > :25:27.continues and I continue to support it.
:25:28. > :25:30.England, Scotland and Northern Ireland can issue their own bank
:25:31. > :25:38.Plaid Cymru are calling for the new notes to put Wales
:25:39. > :25:40.on an equal footing with Soctland and Northern Ireland,
:25:41. > :25:44.and to allow Welsh figures to be represented on bank notes.
:25:45. > :25:46.In the 19th century, Wales did have their own notes,
:25:47. > :25:48.printed by small local banks, which could be used
:25:49. > :25:54.Here at the Daily politics we like to be helpful, so we've come
:25:55. > :25:58.The former 14th century Prince of Wales Owain Glyndwr,
:25:59. > :26:00.famous Welsh Prime Minister David Lloyd George,
:26:01. > :26:03.or if you wanted to be more current, how about
:26:04. > :26:13.Joining me now is Plaid Cymru's Hywel Williams.
:26:14. > :26:21.Another famous Welshman! What has brought this on? Well, there is a
:26:22. > :26:26.change, there is devolution, there is... It has been around for a
:26:27. > :26:30.while. Indeed but there are further changes.
:26:31. > :26:33.while. Indeed but there are further is for the watchers. And of
:26:34. > :26:35.while. Indeed but there are further there is the thing that Scotland and
:26:36. > :26:42.Northern Ireland are able to do this. So why did Wales not continue
:26:43. > :26:45.with its own banknotes? Because we are part of that mythical being,
:26:46. > :26:51.England and Wales. Inc before the Bank of England was set up. And of
:26:52. > :26:55.course, the rights issue notes were stopped in the middle of the
:26:56. > :27:00.19th-century. Scottish and Northern Ireland banks actually derive some
:27:01. > :27:01.value from this, there is economic benefit from it as well. Is there
:27:02. > :27:06.much demand for it, benefit from it as well. Is there
:27:07. > :27:12.it is symbolic of changed times. But is there a demand for it? Suddenly
:27:13. > :27:15.there is. My colleague Jonathan Edwards will be making that demand
:27:16. > :27:20.this afternoon. Apart from you two! Can
:27:21. > :27:25.this afternoon. Apart from you two! It you are the
:27:26. > :27:28.this afternoon. Apart from you two! already there in some respects.
:27:29. > :27:30.this afternoon. Apart from you two! is not a matter of principle. It is
:27:31. > :27:33.actually to reflect the is not a matter of principle. It is
:27:34. > :27:39.future settlements with Wales. That is not a matter of principle. It is
:27:40. > :27:44.support for it - do you think people care enough about it? If you were to
:27:45. > :27:45.ask a person on the street in Cardiff or Carmarthen, I am sure
:27:46. > :27:49.they would say Cardiff or Carmarthen, I am sure
:27:50. > :27:55.What about the extra cost? It would be minimal. Would it? Absolutely. Do
:27:56. > :28:05.you know what the cost would be? I have no idea. But it is a matter of
:28:06. > :28:11.the design and... Do you support it? I have no problem with it.
:28:12. > :28:17.the design and... Do you support it? notes in my wallet as often as
:28:18. > :28:19.the design and... Do you support it? have English notes. I have got no
:28:20. > :28:24.problem with it in principle. And who would you have on the notes? Who
:28:25. > :28:28.would I have? I will come back to you. What about you? I think
:28:29. > :28:40.identity is important and I understand. But I want a Norfolk
:28:41. > :28:44.note. That is not what I meant! Aneurin Bevan. Ryan Giggs.
:28:45. > :29:00.note. That is not what I meant! you like to see on the note? I think
:29:01. > :29:09.I would stick with Owain Glyndwr or possibly Michael Foot. Just before
:29:10. > :29:13.you go, would you worry about difficulty as I have experienced
:29:14. > :29:14.with Scottish notes sometimes coming home and then retailers will not
:29:15. > :29:21.accept them even though they are home and then retailers will not
:29:22. > :29:25.technically legal tender? Yes, it is a matter of popularising the image
:29:26. > :29:29.of the UK as four equal partners I think. When newsagents and others
:29:30. > :29:38.realise this, there will be no problem at all.
:29:39. > :29:41.Let's take a look now at some of the events likely to be making
:29:42. > :29:45.Registration for campaigners in the EU Referendum opens today -
:29:46. > :29:48.and they must start recording all donations and loans above ?7,500
:29:49. > :29:49.to the Electoral Commission from today.
:29:50. > :29:52.Tuesday now seems the likeliest day for
:29:53. > :29:55.European Council president Donald Tusk to circulate a letter
:29:56. > :29:58.to EU leaders setting out what progress has been made
:29:59. > :30:02.on the UK's membership renegotiation - assuming he and David Cameron
:30:03. > :30:08.On Wednesday after Prime Minister's Questions,
:30:09. > :30:11.Labour will try to keep the spotlight
:30:12. > :30:16.by holding a Commons debate on multinational companies
:30:17. > :30:24.On Thursday, a Syria donors' conference is being held in London
:30:25. > :30:26.to encourage participating countries to give more to tackle
:30:27. > :30:29.the humanitarian crisis caused by the conflict in Syria.
:30:30. > :30:32.And Saturday sees the first meeting of the National Committee
:30:33. > :30:34.of Momentum - that's the grassroots organisation set up in the wake
:30:35. > :30:46.So, a busy week in politics, and that means a busy week
:30:47. > :30:50.for journalists like Lucy Fisher from The Times and Rafael Behr
:30:51. > :30:55.from The Guardian - they're in College Green.
:30:56. > :31:02.How much damage has been done to the reputation of George Osborne over
:31:03. > :31:06.the Google tax row? A great deal of damage has been done, the Business
:31:07. > :31:10.Secretary Sajid Javid yesterday said this is not a major success, as
:31:11. > :31:15.George Osborne said, he says this is not a glorious moment, and Sajid
:31:16. > :31:20.Javid said he shared the sense of injustice that many companies feel.
:31:21. > :31:24.Also we had Google's spokesman Peter Barron himself on the airwaves
:31:25. > :31:28.saying that we need reform of tax laws, and in the light of that
:31:29. > :31:36.George Osborne should be very red cheeked. Obviously, a fruitful
:31:37. > :31:41.stream for Labour to pursue, and we will show our viewers the tax return
:31:42. > :31:47.that John McDonnell has published. Not sure what it says, but will this
:31:48. > :31:54.put more pressure on George Osborne and David Cameron to publish their
:31:55. > :31:59.own tax returns or pursue more transparency? It is a nifty device.
:32:00. > :32:04.To some degree it does put the pressure on, it says he has nothing
:32:05. > :32:08.to hide as the Shadow Chancellor, but I think it will have limited
:32:09. > :32:12.traction, because for a device like this to build up a head of steam you
:32:13. > :32:18.need other people do say, yes, we all want to do this, as well. In the
:32:19. > :32:21.wider sphere of power around the Chancellor and Prime Minister, there
:32:22. > :32:24.are not many people who are desperate to publish their tax
:32:25. > :32:28.returns and newspaper editors are not in a hurry and so I'm not sure
:32:29. > :32:32.this campaign will have much momentum, but it keeps the spotlight
:32:33. > :32:38.on this issue. There are Conservatives who are starting to
:32:39. > :32:41.appreciate that just being behind all business and commerce regardless
:32:42. > :32:44.of what it does, that is not action is such a great look for the
:32:45. > :32:49.Conservative Party, and if this does come to put more pressure on the
:32:50. > :32:52.Chancellor, it will be Conservatives saying they are getting on the wrong
:32:53. > :32:57.side of public opinion more than necessarily the things the Labour
:32:58. > :33:02.Party can do. What more can we actually hope will be revealed,
:33:03. > :33:07.Lucy? We have heard Peter Barron said there is no sweetheart deal
:33:08. > :33:10.which was struck with HMRC, and they are paying their share of
:33:11. > :33:15.corporation tax at the same level as everybody else. There might be an
:33:16. > :33:18.inquiry from a Parliamentary committee, but are we talking about
:33:19. > :33:26.a new tax regime for big multinationals? Back conversation
:33:27. > :33:30.needs to be had. There are more revelations to come which will keep
:33:31. > :33:35.the pressure in place, and I think the pressure will stay up there.
:33:36. > :33:38.People are saying, do we need to overhaul corporation tax and have a
:33:39. > :33:43.different levy on sale so people cannot structure their profits so it
:33:44. > :33:49.goes to tax havens like Bermuda? The principle is the main problem,
:33:50. > :33:53.people say these are private individuals, tax is not negotiable,
:33:54. > :33:56.but if you are a multinational corporation you can wrangle with
:33:57. > :34:06.HMRC and aside the tax you are going to pay. There has to be some
:34:07. > :34:09.measures proposed. -- and decide. The Shadow Chancellor John O'Donnell
:34:10. > :34:12.said by the end of the century national borders would be an
:34:13. > :34:18.irrelevance, what do you make of that? Quite interesting. He did say
:34:19. > :34:26.by the end of this century, so we have 85 years. It is quite
:34:27. > :34:29.revealing, it almost shows the Marxist training, eating is about
:34:30. > :34:35.these great historical forces in terms of historical destiny -- he
:34:36. > :34:38.thinks about. What people want from the Labour Party is someone who will
:34:39. > :34:44.talk about what a Labour government would do in five years' time, not 85
:34:45. > :34:46.years. Even though he might have unearthed some interesting
:34:47. > :34:49.discussion about globalisation and the world shrinking and people
:34:50. > :34:55.moving around and Borders dissolving, that is maybe an
:34:56. > :34:58.academic and people wants to have, but the Labour Party needs to
:34:59. > :35:03.reassure people that the Labour Party in government would have
:35:04. > :35:06.control over the borders which we do have at the moment, which some
:35:07. > :35:10.people do not think they care enough about at the moment. It might be a
:35:11. > :35:16.valid academic I'd meant to have, though. Thanks for joining us. --
:35:17. > :35:20.valid academic argument to have. It's been called the war
:35:21. > :35:22.the world forgot. The ongoing conflict in Yemen has
:35:23. > :35:25.seen thousands of deaths and millions of people
:35:26. > :35:26.internally displaced. A coalition of nine countries
:35:27. > :35:29.led by Saudi Arabia has been bombing rebel targets in support
:35:30. > :35:31.of the government, and the coalition yesterday announced it will form
:35:32. > :35:33.a "high-level independent committee" to investigate UN allegations that
:35:34. > :35:36.bombing raids have deliberately Back in the UK, questions have been
:35:37. > :35:44.raised about the role of British military advisers
:35:45. > :35:46.in the bombing campaign. One of those raising the questions
:35:47. > :35:57.is Shadow International Development What would you like this independent
:35:58. > :36:04.committee to verify exactly? We need to be clear first of all where the
:36:05. > :36:06.government stands in relation to law and in relation to arms treaties,
:36:07. > :36:15.because ministers have said there has been no deliberate humanitarian
:36:16. > :36:22.outrage, but it does not say it has to be deliberate, it says if there
:36:23. > :36:28.is a risk of humanitarian outrage is happening, and we can see that in
:36:29. > :36:31.Yemen there have been a series... There have been a four hospitals
:36:32. > :36:34.bombed, and we believe that the government might be in breach of
:36:35. > :36:40.treaties which it signed and that is what we should be looking at. You
:36:41. > :36:42.are worried about British personnel and British government being in
:36:43. > :36:48.breach of international law, what is it that you think British personnel
:36:49. > :36:53.have been involved with? We have been told that they have been
:36:54. > :36:56.helping the Saudis with targets to make sure there is no breach of
:36:57. > :37:02.humanitarian law, but they are clearly not being very successful.
:37:03. > :37:09.The accounts are that civilians have been hit, as you say, targeted or
:37:10. > :37:13.not. But as you say, British personnel have been involved, you
:37:14. > :37:17.think, in trying to minimise civilian casualties, is that not the
:37:18. > :37:20.point? We know they are involved, but we don't know what they are
:37:21. > :37:25.doing, and I think we need transparency. We also need an
:37:26. > :37:31.examination as to whether we are actually in breach of arms treaties
:37:32. > :37:36.which we have signed. Are the Saudis, the Saudi led Karen Isham,
:37:37. > :37:41.have they committed war crimes? -- Saudi led coalition. These are
:37:42. > :37:46.important things we have got to look into, but at the moment the United
:37:47. > :37:52.Nations says that Yemen is on the edge of a humanitarian crisis and a
:37:53. > :37:58.food crisis but so clearly that Saudi led coalition has created
:37:59. > :38:03.havoc in what is the second largest country in the area. People will be
:38:04. > :38:08.surprised here that British military personnel have been involved in
:38:09. > :38:15.assisting this Saudi led coalition in targeting rebels, as they would
:38:16. > :38:21.particular against the government. That is Britain involved in the war
:38:22. > :38:25.in Yemen? -- as they would put it come against the government. We need
:38:26. > :38:30.the review, to get an understanding of what the British involvement is.
:38:31. > :38:36.We have important long-standing relationships with the Saudis and
:38:37. > :38:39.supporting the work of democratic governments across the region, we
:38:40. > :38:42.need to be clear with our military personnel and the government, they
:38:43. > :38:47.are keen to make sure that there has not been any breaches and I
:38:48. > :38:50.support... Are you worried that British personnel are trying to
:38:51. > :38:55.assist, even if they are minimising civilian tragedies? I have no
:38:56. > :38:59.expertise in this area, but I want to make sure that we really are
:39:00. > :39:02.checking that they are there to do what is right and
:39:03. > :39:07.checking that they are there to do are not reaching any area of
:39:08. > :39:08.international law. -- preaching. Should they be there in the first
:39:09. > :39:23.place? -- breaching. Should they be there in the first
:39:24. > :39:24.world. We are all across the world. What do you make
:39:25. > :39:29.world. We are all across the world. government? It needs to be
:39:30. > :39:33.investigated, I want a review of our relationship with Saudi Arabia, this
:39:34. > :39:34.is a country which has been involved with the system breaches of human
:39:35. > :39:38.rights in a serious with the system breaches of human
:39:39. > :39:46.own country -- with this system. with the system breaches of human
:39:47. > :39:48.targeting civilians is a very serious allegation, and if we are
:39:49. > :39:53.involved with that campaign, we ought to know exactly what the role
:39:54. > :39:57.has been. There should be total transparency. Why is the government
:39:58. > :40:02.continuing to grant transparency. Why is the government
:40:03. > :40:07.sales to a regime which is guilty of attacks on civilian
:40:08. > :40:15.sales to a regime which is guilty of sales. I hope that is what the
:40:16. > :40:17.review will stab. This also highlights, Britain's involvement
:40:18. > :40:22.across the Middle East, the extent of our involvement, it highlights
:40:23. > :40:25.some fundamental issues about our role in that region and we need
:40:26. > :40:30.clarity about what those troops are doing and whether their role is
:40:31. > :40:33.direct or indirect, how many there are and whether their advice is
:40:34. > :40:38.being listened to. The Foreign Office minister says that people are
:40:39. > :40:46.naive to think that Britain cannot sell weapons systems to allies. This
:40:47. > :40:52.is the reality. I'm a fried. He has not read the treaties, we
:40:53. > :40:52.is the reality. I'm a fried. He has be selling arms to regimes where
:40:53. > :41:00.there is a possibility they will be be selling arms to regimes where
:41:01. > :41:05.-- I'm afraid. But we don't be selling arms to regimes where
:41:06. > :41:16.the moment, the committee has not reported. The law is about risk, not
:41:17. > :41:21.in town. It is actually about risk, and the risk is very clear. -- not
:41:22. > :41:26.intent. There is a very serious risk which this government is turning a
:41:27. > :41:30.blind eye to and we should not be colluding in humanitarian outrage is
:41:31. > :41:35.in Yemen. Who is to say it is right to continue to do it, just because
:41:36. > :41:39.we have always done it? Sometimes we have got to question the impact of
:41:40. > :41:45.our foreign policy. There is the reality on the ground, though.
:41:46. > :41:52.People in Yemen desperately need aid and they need help and working with
:41:53. > :41:57.the Saudi led coalition might be the only way to get that aid to them. Or
:41:58. > :42:01.it might be that the bombing and the deaths of thousands of people is
:42:02. > :42:05.making a humanitarian catastrophe worse, that is my view. We should
:42:06. > :42:10.suspend the sale of arms aren't we are clear that it is not our side
:42:11. > :42:16.and that we are not making the humour to situation worse. Would you
:42:17. > :42:23.back that call? We need to see the review, and then we can make a
:42:24. > :42:27.decision. Would you suspend sales of arms to Saudi Arabia while that is
:42:28. > :42:28.going on? We have got to make sure that we are not breaching
:42:29. > :42:33.international law. Yes, we should. Jeremy Corbyn may have had
:42:34. > :42:36.a political career spanning four decades, but up until his election
:42:37. > :42:39.as Labour leader, it was safe to say that publishers hadn't
:42:40. > :42:41.taken much of an interest Well, that's changed,
:42:42. > :42:44.with several new books vying for your attention -
:42:45. > :42:46.including one out today. But how many people actually want
:42:47. > :42:49.to read books about politicians? We've sent our Ellie
:42:50. > :42:51.out to see if she can, the new biography
:42:52. > :43:09.about Jeremy Corbyn. Now, people in the
:43:10. > :43:11.Westminster village love That is the question I'm
:43:12. > :43:17.asking this morning. I love a lot of biographies
:43:18. > :43:23.and autobiographies, Because I'm following
:43:24. > :43:30.what they say on a daily basis, so I don't feel I need
:43:31. > :43:33.an extra layer of information. Political biographies,
:43:34. > :43:36.are you interested? Erm, depends who has
:43:37. > :43:47.written it, I suppose. I would be happy to
:43:48. > :43:49.read that one on Anne Jeremy Corbyn, interested
:43:50. > :43:53.in any of these Yes, but not right now.
:43:54. > :43:56.OK. Do you want any of them?
:43:57. > :43:58.No, I'm good, thanks. Sure, you can take them.
:43:59. > :44:00.I'm fine. Do you want a book?
:44:01. > :44:02.No, thank you. I read mostly poetry and fiction,
:44:03. > :44:06.being a literature professor. And since my time is limited
:44:07. > :44:11.for contemporary politics, I would confine myself mainly to
:44:12. > :44:13.American politics. Fair enough.
:44:14. > :44:15.So this would be a waste of time. Spoken like a true
:44:16. > :44:22.professor, thank you. I am a chef, so I read
:44:23. > :44:31.more books about cooking. You can have a little look,
:44:32. > :44:40.see if there is anything Erm, if I need to buy it,
:44:41. > :44:51.yes, I will buy it. But you have to promise
:44:52. > :44:56.you will read it. Yes?
:44:57. > :45:01.He is a fascinating character. Thank you very much.
:45:02. > :45:04.You have made your morning. Thank you so much.
:45:05. > :45:11.Have a lovely day. So, they have not exactly
:45:12. > :45:23.flown off the shelves. In fact I have not
:45:24. > :45:26.really been able to But maybe people should not judge
:45:27. > :45:31.books by their covers. # Can't judge a book
:45:32. > :45:35.by looking at the cover... And the author of a new book
:45:36. > :45:38.about the Labour leader, Comrade Corbyn, is Rosa Prince
:45:39. > :45:49.of the Daily Telegraph Were you heartened by that?! Now,
:45:50. > :45:54.here is the book. I have got it here. Why was Jeremy Corbyn not the
:45:55. > :45:58.first choice for the left as a representative in the leadership
:45:59. > :46:02.contest? Well, I think nobody expected him to want to run. He had
:46:03. > :46:06.been in Parliament for such a long time and had had all sorts of
:46:07. > :46:09.interests, mainly to do with foreign affairs, and no-one thought he was
:46:10. > :46:13.up for it, really. Then they looked around and found that no-one else
:46:14. > :46:17.wanted to do it, and thought, why don't we try Jeremy? So it was
:46:18. > :46:25.literally going around the table to say, whose turn is it now? In a way.
:46:26. > :46:29.Diane Abbott, who was just here, she had run before. There were not that
:46:30. > :46:34.many lefties still left in Parliament to do it. What about Jon
:46:35. > :46:39.Trickett or Clive Lewis? Clive Lewis was a new MP. I think that was
:46:40. > :46:44.probably his problem. Jon Trickett I think quite a lot of people wanted
:46:45. > :46:49.him to run. I chatted to him about, I think his view was that he felt he
:46:50. > :46:52.had worked for Ed Miliband, he had actually also worked for Gordon
:46:53. > :46:56.Brown and Tony Blair. He felt it needed someone a bit more
:46:57. > :46:59.anti-establishment. His sense was that he was a bit too associated
:47:00. > :47:05.with what had gone before, that they needed someone completely would be a
:47:06. > :47:09.breath of fresh air. I don't think even the people who wanted Jeremy in
:47:10. > :47:13.the end thought that he would prove so popular and that it would take
:47:14. > :47:17.off like it did. I am sure they are all thrilled. What was your
:47:18. > :47:20.impression of the man at the end of the book, having done all this
:47:21. > :47:25.research, did it change dramatically? It did even though to
:47:26. > :47:29.the extent that I had been in the lobby for ten years... And you will
:47:30. > :47:33.have known him, like I did, he was always there. Always in the
:47:34. > :47:36.background, always taking up these issues which were very important to
:47:37. > :47:40.lots of people, but perhaps slightly on the periphery. He was not a
:47:41. > :47:43.leading light in Parliament and certainly he did never want anything
:47:44. > :47:48.to do with people like me, lobby journalists. He was a columnist on
:47:49. > :47:52.the morning Star. I did not know him very well. He was quite
:47:53. > :47:55.one-dimensional figure to me. Now I have learned that he has an
:47:56. > :47:59.absolutely fascinating back story. For any biographer, you want to have
:48:00. > :48:02.an interesting childhood and used, and he certainly had that. There
:48:03. > :48:06.were lots of things that I learned in that respect. I came away
:48:07. > :48:11.thinking that he is a very good man, a very decent man. It is what a lot
:48:12. > :48:15.of people say about him on both sides of the House. Yes, he cares a
:48:16. > :48:20.lot about people and he wants to do good. I think he genuinely puts
:48:21. > :48:25.other people first. And so I came away liking him and respecting him.
:48:26. > :48:29.Perhaps like lots of people, I had issues on various parts of his
:48:30. > :48:33.political stance, but as a man he is fascinating. In terms of whether he
:48:34. > :48:38.really wanted it, you said yourself he did not particularly think about
:48:39. > :48:42.it before he was sort of children. And there has been some talk that he
:48:43. > :48:46.would not enjoy it, that he would find it hard work being thrust into
:48:47. > :48:51.the centre, having been as you say an MP who had pursued his own pet
:48:52. > :48:55.policies - has that changed? I sense he is enjoying it a little bit more,
:48:56. > :49:02.only from observing him on screens and on radio. I think so, too. When
:49:03. > :49:07.he began his journey, at the start, he was very focused on trying to get
:49:08. > :49:12.onto the ballot. When he did do that, he was pleased, obviously. But
:49:13. > :49:15.a day or two later he had a panic, he was really worried about what the
:49:16. > :49:19.attention would be like for him. He is very private, he does not like
:49:20. > :49:22.talking about his family. He hates that his family are now in the
:49:23. > :49:27.public eye and he has a problem with that. And yet as time went on, think
:49:28. > :49:30.back to last summer, going to those wellies and appearing in front of
:49:31. > :49:34.thousands of people who think you're absolutely fantastic, it must be
:49:35. > :49:42.totally intoxicating. I don't know! Me, neither. I am sure I'm not sure
:49:43. > :49:47.-- I am sure anyone would enjoy that. Then we went back again and
:49:48. > :49:51.you get to the beginning of his leadership, the knock-about, the
:49:52. > :49:55.Shadow Cabinet, I think that is all quite difficult. And I think he had
:49:56. > :50:00.that process all over again. At the beginning it was like, oh gosh, what
:50:01. > :50:04.have I done? And now, I think he enjoys it. Do you know him? I have
:50:05. > :50:08.met him a couple of times. I do think he is starting to enjoy it
:50:09. > :50:13.more. He is a very decent man. I think if you are a Labour Party
:50:14. > :50:16.member or MP, or if you care about the Labour Party and its future, I
:50:17. > :50:21.think you have to admit that we're not where we need to be. We need to
:50:22. > :50:24.be doing more to hold the government to account and more to talk about
:50:25. > :50:29.what people out in the country are talking about. While I think Jeremy
:50:30. > :50:32.has a huge mandate, not just from a Phil Yates and supporters but from
:50:33. > :50:36.members, and deserves a chance to lead as he sees fit, with that
:50:37. > :50:41.mandate comes responsible to. Responsibility not just to win
:50:42. > :50:45.elections in May and beyond, but I think to start talking about the
:50:46. > :50:52.things that people out there care about, and coming up with solutions
:50:53. > :50:54.and answers for problems in the country today and in the future, on
:50:55. > :51:03.welfare, immigration, housing and other issues. The London mayoral
:51:04. > :51:06.election is seen as a big test, do you think, for Jeremy Corbyn and his
:51:07. > :51:11.leadership? Everybody reads into this what they want. People who are
:51:12. > :51:13.supporters of Jeremy would see a victory in the London mayoral
:51:14. > :51:15.election as a vindication of his leadership. I think London has got
:51:16. > :51:31.and he its own political culture. William
:51:32. > :51:34.and he candidate. Michael Douglas says he
:51:35. > :51:38.has got 99 days - do you agree with him? I'm not sure. We have got 4.5
:51:39. > :51:42.years until the election. But him? I'm not sure. We have got 4.5
:51:43. > :51:49.will be a very clear signal as to how we are doing out in the country,
:51:50. > :51:53.and whether Jeremy Corbyn's politics are resonating. That was the big
:51:54. > :51:56.pumice of his campaign, that we could pull back voters in Scotland
:51:57. > :52:02.and in parts of the country where people have not voted Labour. Have
:52:03. > :52:05.you had a goodly reaction from Labour activists? I have had a bit
:52:06. > :52:08.of nervousness from the Labour Party. And I think that as they read
:52:09. > :52:15.it they will be a bit Party. And I think that as they read
:52:16. > :52:16.because they did not want to have a muckraking, salacious read, and the
:52:17. > :52:18.first muckraking, salacious read, and the
:52:19. > :52:23.is not that. The muckraking, salacious read, and the
:52:24. > :52:27.there, poised to jump on me if it was that. Hopefully when they read
:52:28. > :52:31.it, they will learn that it is not. It really isn't. It is an
:52:32. > :52:34.examination of Jerry Corbyn as a man, and a biography, discussing
:52:35. > :52:37.what happened over the summer, and how he
:52:38. > :52:41.what happened over the summer, and impossible feat. Will you
:52:42. > :52:46.what happened over the summer, and Yes, it sounds very interesting! You
:52:47. > :52:49.cannot say no! And actually I think progressive politics in our country
:52:50. > :52:50.faces an enormous challenge. I wonder whether the Labour Party
:52:51. > :52:56.faces sort of two camps which are wonder whether the Labour Party
:52:57. > :52:58.ultimately irreconcilable. We wonder whether the Labour Party
:52:59. > :53:02.been through our own near death experience. And in the interests of
:53:03. > :53:06.democracy, it is critically important that the government has an
:53:07. > :53:09.effective, credible tonnage of. I desperately want a liberal,
:53:10. > :53:13.progressive force in this country which can take on the Conservative
:53:14. > :53:16.garment. Will you read it? I certainly will, I shall
:53:17. > :53:18.garment. Will you read it? I from the library, if that is all
:53:19. > :53:27.right! You're very brave to say that! I think he is a very
:53:28. > :53:31.interesting man. They are quite an intellectual group. I think
:53:32. > :53:35.governments should have a credible opposition. Quite often they are
:53:36. > :53:39.thinking, 85 years hence, which is all very well. But actually it is
:53:40. > :53:43.about what they would do, and the British people need to know. They
:53:44. > :53:51.have got a long-term economic plan, dare I say it!
:53:52. > :53:53.You may have noticed it's a presidential election year
:53:54. > :53:59.Rather a lot's been said before a single vote has even been cast,
:54:00. > :54:01.but overnight tonight Democrat and Republican voters in the state
:54:02. > :54:04.of Iowa will cast their ballots at the start of the process
:54:05. > :54:06.which will see the two parties select their candidate
:54:07. > :54:10.The BBC's Rajini Vaidyanathan is there, and she's been out to see
:54:11. > :54:12.how many candidates she could meet in a day.
:54:13. > :54:15.It is just after nine in Des Moines, Iowa,
:54:16. > :54:19.All the candidates are trying to crisscross the state to get
:54:20. > :54:21.as many votes as they can in the caucuses.
:54:22. > :54:24.So, I've got a list of where the candidates are going to be
:54:25. > :54:27.and I'm going to see how many of them I can meet.
:54:28. > :54:38.He is doing a coffee and bagels meeting.
:54:39. > :54:42.Just over there, we will see that we can get a word with him.
:54:43. > :54:44.Do you think you have a shot in this race?
:54:45. > :54:56.We've been in the car for two hours and we finally arrived at the place
:54:57. > :55:00.where we are hoping to catch the next candidate, but we're late.
:55:01. > :55:09.You have the right to exercise your Second Amendment rights.
:55:10. > :55:11.Are we allowed to place restrictions on that?
:55:12. > :55:14.Only in the most extreme circumstances, like if you're
:55:15. > :55:17.That was Chris Christie, the second candidate of today.
:55:18. > :55:25.Stop No 3 for a Bernie Sanders event.
:55:26. > :55:29.We're talking about making public colleges and universities tuition-
:55:30. > :55:42.We only had to drive a short way from our last one.
:55:43. > :55:46.We've met three candidates and there is a long queue
:55:47. > :56:03.for the next person we're going to see.
:56:04. > :56:06.It is 5.30 in the evening and we've driven all across this state
:56:07. > :56:10.searching the candidates and we're now in a place called Wilton
:56:11. > :56:13.and we're going to see one more candidate.
:56:14. > :56:16.And it protected the Second Amendment right to keep and bear
:56:17. > :56:23.So, we've travelled 350 miles and we've met four candidates
:56:24. > :56:28.and one former president who is married to a candidate.
:56:29. > :56:31.It made us realise that we're exhausted, so imagine
:56:32. > :56:33.what the candidates are going through on a daily basis
:56:34. > :56:49.I am exhausted just watching it! What you make of the presidential
:56:50. > :56:55.contest so far? It is really interesting, I think. Is that a
:56:56. > :56:58.euphemism? Horrified! For what I know, Iowa is a very different
:56:59. > :57:03.primary from the others. But the whole thing says to me, on both
:57:04. > :57:09.sides, just the rise of populism and the attack on traditional political
:57:10. > :57:13.elites, it is happening around the world but in America seems to be in
:57:14. > :57:19.its rawest form. Are you worried, horrified, as Norman Lamb said, or
:57:20. > :57:22.excited? More worried than excited. I think there is some extraordinary
:57:23. > :57:26.combinations which could come out of this. I think Iowa will not reflect
:57:27. > :57:31.what we will see over the next few months. It is a kick-start to a
:57:32. > :57:36.whole run of events but it is used as the straw poll to cushion what do
:57:37. > :57:40.you think will happen at this stage? I hope that ultimately, Hillary
:57:41. > :57:45.Clinton will prevail. It does not mean I am a great enthusiast. But
:57:46. > :57:48.ultimately I think in a democracy you want someone who can inspire
:57:49. > :57:55.people but also politics based on rational judgment and evidence. When
:57:56. > :57:59.you hear Donald Trump talking, I mean, it is just, it is a nightmare.
:58:00. > :58:03.The idea that the free world as it is called could be led by someone
:58:04. > :58:06.like him... We keep the making assumption that he will fall and
:58:07. > :58:08.crash but it does not happen. I don't think we can make any
:58:09. > :58:13.assumptions about the outcome of this. On issues of fairness and
:58:14. > :58:20.clarity in this programme, we showed a copy of John McDonnell's tax
:58:21. > :58:25.return, and I said I was not sure what we could see from it. Just to
:58:26. > :58:28.be clear, his office have called to say that the whole tax return has
:58:29. > :58:33.been published, and you can go and find it if you want to. Just time to
:58:34. > :58:43.find out the answer to our quiz. The question was, what did Tory MP Jacob
:58:44. > :58:51.Rees Mogg warned might happen? Was it...? Anyone know the correct
:58:52. > :58:55.answer? It was biscuits. It was. Stopping the trans fats being used
:58:56. > :59:13.to make Al biscuits delicious. Well done! That is it for today. Bye-bye.
:59:14. > :59:14.to the decline and fall of a charity empire.
:59:15. > :59:19.The Government thought it was the right thing to do.
:59:20. > :59:22.They're going to make me the demon of Peckham.