01/02/2016 Daily Politics

Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.

"No deal" was the conclusion of the EU council president

Donald Tusk when he left Number 10 last night.

David Cameron says there's been progress and he still hopes

to secure an early renegotiation of Britain's EU membership.

Number 10 claims it all comes down to the next 24 hours.

MPs looking into the collapse of the charity Kids Company aren't

impressed - they accuse everyone from the founder down

of an extraordinary catalogue of failures.

Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own banknotes -

should Wales get its own for the first time

we'll be asking who wants to read about politicians, anyway?

Why did you not like it? I den think they are that interesting, to be

honest. -- I don't think. LAUGHTER

Controversial! All that in the next hour

and with us for the whole of the programme today I'm joined

by three MPs who haven't yet had a book written about them,

authorised or not. But they've told me they're

very open to offers. It's the Conservative

Anne-Marie Treveylan, Matthew Pennycook for Labour

and the Lib Dem and former minister First today let's talk

about the prime minister's renegotiation of Britain's EU

membership, as what are being billed as crunch talks between the UK

government and EU officials roll on. The European Council president

Donald Tusk met David Cameron for dinner at No 10 last night,

and over a meal of salmon, beef and pear and apple crumble,

they tried to reach an agreement that Mr Tusk could then put before

the other EU leaders ahead Well, after the meeting

Downing St said there had been a "breakthrough" on restricting

benefits for EU migrants. Mr Tusk tweeted: "No deal yet.

Intensive work in next 24 crucial.". So what chance of a deal -

well, our political correspondent Any more progress on this deal? We

have come from an hour-long lobby briefing, from

have come from an hour-long lobby official spokeswoman with

journalists, and they sound official spokeswoman with

upbeat. What they are emphasising comment we need to be careful, when

upbeat. What they are emphasising we talk about a deal, the deal will

take place if it does at the February summit of EU leaders. What

we are likely to get, some February summit of EU leaders. What

document from Donald Tusk tomorrow, possibly, and a discussion document

regarding the proposals which he thinks can

regarding the proposals which he deal, but there will be more

discussions deal, but there will be more

Street are careful to say that this is a significant breakthrough, the

idea that is a significant breakthrough, the

admitting that the is a significant breakthrough, the

migration coming into the UK mean that

migration coming into the UK mean emergency brake, and again we have

to be emergency brake, and again we have

of talks about many different breaks emergency brake, and again we have

we are talking about and what the proposal is from the Prime Minister

is that proposal is from the Prime Minister

things like tax credits and housing benefit, for four years from the

time they arrive, that might not benefit, for four years from the

what other EU leaders want. They might say, over four use

what other EU leaders want. They what you like, but then we return to

normal, so that is up what you like, but then we return to

negotiation -- over four years. We do look like we might have some kind

of document, a detailed document, but not the final product, in the

next 24 hours. Regarding the hours you have mentioned, regarding

migrants and the emergency brake specifically, it is not clear if the

European Commission is going to unilaterally say that Britain, you

are allowed to have an urgency break of so many years on benefits to

migrants, that would have to be ratified by the other 27 countries,

is that how you think it will have to be? The question everyone is

is that how you think it will have asking, whose foot is on the break,

can the UK decide from this moment on, that we cannot give any more

benefits to migrants? The UK Government sees this as a Paul

factor which is encouraging migrants to come here rather than go to other

countries, but I have to say, we don't know, we are not at the stage

where we know and they will still be disagreement over this about exactly

how it works. Is it the European Commission saint of Britain, we

accept for the next seven years that you can restrict benefits? -- saying

to Britain. Or is it David Cameron saying all migrants who come here,

in the first four years, they can receive those kind of benefits?

There is a big difference. The Prime Minister is not going to accept

alternative to his proposal, that is what Downing Street are saying,

unless it is as powerful and as effective as the one that he thinks

he is proposing. A busy day to you, I feel. Anne-Marie, have you been

won over? No, I haven't. If you are heading for a car crash, having a

emergency brake is all very well, but I would like to be in charge of

the steering wheel and what this feels like is EU technocrats

controlling decisions. The point of having a referendum, the frustration

of the British people is that more powers seem to come from Europe and

we need to be in charge of these decisions. The primers that has been

frustrated by those who do not understand how important this is for

the British people -- the Prime Minister. There is nothing he could

come back with which would satisfy you? He has not asked for much in

the first place, and my frustration is that he is not even getting

about, and I would like him to at least get through to those

technocrats that this is about the British people and their

frustrations, but they are not hearing that and that is a tough

call all round. Anne-Marie does not think it adds up to very much, but

symbolically, if you were presenting voters with a deal which included an

emergency brake on access to in work benefits from EU migrants, without

not be pretty powerful? I agree with Anne-Marie, this is pretty trivial,

taken in the round, you have got to set aside, the political theatre

which surrounds the negotiation. We are talking about pretty small

staff, which I do not think we'll have much of the impact -- stuff

which I do not think we'll have much impact. You would not support it? We

do not know what it entails, there is so much uncertainty, who presents

the break, what are the circumstances which mean that we

qualify as being in an emergency situation which might give us

certainty about when it applies in future. The European Commission is

broadly in favour of agreement with David Cameron that there could be an

emergency brake if there is an emergency brake on those benefits

for four years, would Labour support it? We would be set auditing to stay

in the EU -- we would be supporting. So it doesn't make a difference? Not

really, it is about whether our future is in or out, and this is

pretty small stuff in terms of the big picture. Are you in favour of it

as a principle, restricting access to benefits? I have no difficulty

with this, this is a reasonable proposition, but it is a damp squib,

really, this is a sideshow. The big issue is, is our destiny and future

in Europe or do we choose to retreat from that? If you think about the

big issues which we confront, migrant flows and international

crime, climate change, issues like tax evasion by companies like

Google, much better able to confront those issues if we are working

together internationally in the European Union rather than on our

own. In terms of what else is being negotiated, what are the

difficulties? One of the stumbling blocks is about the two tier Europe

and the French disagreeing with the idea of safeguards being put in

place for non-Eurozone countries, is that a good idea? I think that is

rather important, yes. There is no prospect of us joining the euro any

time soon, and probably never. We have to make sure that we and other

countries outside the euro are safeguarded and that those countries

within the euro cannot railroad things against our national

interest. That is a substantial issue which I think does have to be

resolved. This is what Steve Baker from conservatives for Britain had

to say yesterday about the negotiations. Family Tory MPs are

going to campaign for out? -- how many. About a fifth have made up

their minds, and there has been a hardening, and I would expect

between 50-70 with in that group. No more than 50-70 Tory MPs campaigning

on your side of the referendum to leave? That would be my expectation

at this stage. Are you disappointed gridlock only 50-7

-- are you disappointed? Only 50-70 Tory MPs to campaign against. That

is what I would expect. There is a core group that will want to leave,

and there are those that would like to stay, and there is a big group in

the middle. It is not many. I'm quite surprised, but this is just

one of many issues, and therefore this is something they will

consider. They have a valid point, this is a referendum for the people

and how politicians choose to cast their vote is only one part of the

process. Do you think the campaign to leave is lacking? If you have

50-70 Tory MPs, you do not have a cabinet minister who is going to

come out, so far, anyway, batting to leave the EU, so it is floundering?

I think it is developing well, there's a broad set of voices on

this referendum, and as it develops, and be Prime Minister reaches

conclusions in the middle of feathery, we will move forward, and

I think voices will become much stronger -- the Prime Minister

reaches conclusions in the middle of February. Which voices are you

hoping to hear from? Do you think some of them will vote to leave but

they will not declare? I think some of those who will chair their

constituency arenas and not put themselves into the firing line, and

I think that is OK. This is a referendum for the people, but they

have got to have the information to make their decision, which makes it

a very important issue. Are you expecting any Cabinet minister to

declare? Chris Grayling but the leader of the house. I don't have

conversation, though, they are all very loyal to the Prime Minister and

that is how it should be at the moment. -- the leader of the house.

What did Tory MP Jacob Rees Mogg warn yesterday might be threatened

At the end of the show we'll see if the panel know

A report by a group of MPs into the collapse of the charity

Kids Company hasn't pulled its punches.

Its founder, trustees, government ministers,

auditors and regulators all come in for strong criticism

We'll speak to its chairman in a moment.

But first, let's remind ourselves of the background to the story.

The charity aimed to provide practical, emotional and educational

support to deprived and vulnerable inner-city children in London,

Its founder, Camila Batmanghelidjh was a high-profile figure,

and it had supporters from across politics,

The charity closed on 5th August last year after facing a series

of claims about its financial management and administration.

In June, the Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office,

Richard Heaton, wrote to ministers Oliver Letwin and Matthew Hancock

The grant was awarded a week before the charity closed,

despite Mr Heaton's advising against the move.

In the wake of the closure, Batmanghelidjh and Kids Company

chairman and ex-BBC executive Alan Yentob were called before

the Commons Public Administration Committee.

Today, that committee has published a report roundly criticising

the charity's trustees and the Charity Commission

for an "extraordinary catalogue of failures".

Camila Batmanghelidjh herself is to appear in a documentary

on BBC One on Wednesday, in which she denies any wrongdoing.

I am not sorry I gave the kids money.

I am not sorry I bought the kids nice things.

The only thing I am sorry about is, I didn't raise enough money.

Well, we're joined now by the chairman of the committee

He's the Conservative Bernard Jenkin.

Your report described it as an extraordinary catalogue of failures,

laying blame at the door of the trustees. Why haven't government

ministers received more blame for overriding the advice of civil

servants? We do look closely, actually, at ministers and I don't

think they scape from our scrutiny. You used the word blame. We do not

use that word. Why not? There is no point in finding blame. What we want

to know is why this accident occurred and what can be learned

from it. It is not about blame. There are lessons for the Charity

Commission. They could have been much more proactive. They could have

scoop top stories in the press. Why many more people did not take their

concerns to the Charity Commission is a big question for the Charity

Commission. They need more resources to support trustees in these

charities than they have. There is lessons for the advisors. Why didn't

the accountants ring the alarm bells more vigorously? There is lessons

for the government. Why were ministers overriding civil servants'

advice, went to some extent they were conflicted? This charity had

become an emblem of something the governing party wanted to project,

and I have to say, ministers of all parties were captivated by the

charisma of Camila Batmanghelidjh, blinded away from their usual sense

of judgment. This happened to the blinded away from their usual sense

trustees, too. And it is the trustees who are accountable. Either

they knew what was going trustees who are accountable. Either

did not do something about it, or they didn't know what was going on,

and they should have done. But in terms of blame, why shouldn't

ministers be blamed for overriding civil servants, when they allowed

millions of pounds of civil servants, when they allowed

to be given to charity without civil servants, when they allowed

due diligence or taking any notice of what was being presented to them?

This is something about the philosophy of the way I lead this

committee. I think too many select committees are interested in putting

people up against the wall and just shooting and. It just creates a

climate of fear around shooting and. It just creates a

the public service so that people find it even more difficult to deal

with the issues. I know that this is disappointing may be for the BBC and

the media. But actually we wanted to learn the lessons. Disappointing for

the public, too. It is about accountability and transparency. It

is not me saying this at the BBC. We spoke to Paul Flynn, a member of

your committee, and he has accused the committee of political timidity

in not going further in investigating the links between Kids

Company and the government. As you yourself have just said, they were

captivated. We put that in the report. But why didn't you summon

some of these ministers? We did, I am afraid you have not been briefed

properly. I did watch the sittings. I'm afraid, Oliver Letwin came

before the committee and we gave him a severe investigation. Maybe the

liaison committee will summon the Prime Minister to explain himself in

respect of this matter. That is a decision for all the select

committee chair people, not just me. Should Camila Batmanghelidjh have

had that unique, privileged access to top tiers of government? And we

say she shouldn't. If she did she should not have used it in the way

she did, to obtain money at the expense of other charities. One of

our recommendations is that there needs to be new procedures in place

so that when ministers become effectively conflicted between their

political work with the charity and what they want to project

politically from that, and applications from grants, straws are

the last people who should be overriding civil servants' advice.

Absolutely. In my time as a minister I was aware of an extraordinary

process that you have to go through if you were a charity applying for

government money. It was a really tight, proper process. Here, they

just ride roughshod completely over it! The final payment of 3 million

quid, I think... Which was only a week before it actually closed. It

is outrageous. And surely there does have to be political accountability

here. Should the ministers, Matthew Hancock and Oliver Letwin, made the

decision against the advice of senior civil servants, to pay that

money over. It is a total waste of public money. Looking at this

report, and you will no doubt have followed the committee interviews

that were done with Alan Yentob and Camila Batmanghelidjh herself -

would you have liked to have seen more ministers being grilled in the

way Oliver Letwin was? I am on the Public Accounts Committee and we

looked at this very closely from the financial point of view. We are

there to manage value for money for the taxpayer and to highlight when

it has failed. In this case, absolutely we did not get value for

money, the British people were not supported. And we grilled the

permanent secretaries, of which there have been a few over the

course of the life of Kids Company, about how they had continued to

accent that money should be, and it was only in the last tranche but

they asked for a letter to hand over this money, but actually they were

allowing funds to go to a charity which was not meeting... It was not

a national charity, it was very localised, there were so many areas

where it was being overridden. We have looked at it in some detail and

we need to make sure that there are much more rigorous systems in place

within the civil service, so that the taxpayer knows that... There are

many charities in the north-east which would have been thrilled with

that 3 million. We could have done a great deal for many children in the

north-east. And the total given of course was much greater. 42 million,

yes,. Under all governance, I have to say. Absolutely. It had failed to

meet government standards which would have got other charities the

money, several times over. For work which was very worthwhile in some

areas, but not in others. Is there any truth, Bernard Jenkin, in the

allegation that Camila Batmanghelidjh herself was the sort

of poster girl of the big society, that in a way it could not be

allowed to fail, but that was the political imperative, which is why

they seemed to turn a blind eye to what was going on financially? And

that that is why in the end the Government let it happen, and the

allegation that you were too timid? You're absolutely right, that is

exactly what we set out in our report. I don't think we have been

timid at all. What are you expect us to do beyond what we have put in our

report? The fact is, you're exactly right, you have nailed it. You have

read our report and you are repeating back to me what we have

got in our report. A lot of money was spent in the pursuit of

political objectives. It happened under the Labour Party and the

coalition as well. This is something which has got into the political

culture. Just skate booting one minister, if I may say, for signing

a letter, is not the answer. We need everybody to take this on board. I

will be raising this with the Prime Minister this afternoon. And will

you come and tell us...? Probably not! Just thought I would ask!

Talking of Oliver Letwin, he has released a statement saying he still

believes it was the right thing to do to give this charity one last

chance to restructure. Was he wrong? I'm afraid he was, and we say he was

wrong in our report. Do you agree? I think the trustees were really not

doing their jobs properly. I have been on many charity boards, and

sometimes you have to take ethical decisions and you have to cut your

cloth. They did not do that. Interesting that Bernard Jenkin is

says the culture had already existed under Labour, do you accept that? I

think he is right that this goes beyond one particular government. It

is a problem with charismatic individuals and charities which are

held up to be special cases, in that then it becomes very difficult in

how government deals with it. There are clear lessons from the report in

how government hands out noncompetitive grants. But while

learning the lessons from this particular case, we have got to be

careful not to slander the whole charity sector. Lots of trustees

work extremely hard. Very professional, and if anything, need

more support. There was at least one trustee who really did try and stick

up for what should have happened. He resigned in March last year. And I

think there were others. But the real question here is, how did this

happen, and is it happening in other charities? Trustees reading this

report needs to see for themselves and ask themselves, how do you get

the conversations going which are not being had? How do you get people

to tell you stuff that they are frightened of telling you because

there is a powerful person in the organisation who does not want you

to know? These are very difficult questions and indeed they apply to

the BBC as well. There is a concern which we express in our report that

Alan Yentob, his removal from his job, or his resignation, brushes

under the carpet a question about attitudes of senior management in

the BBC, which the trustees have not quite got a grip on. Have there been

the conversations at the top of the BBC about how it was possible that a

senior person in the BBC with a great reputation should finish up

standing over the shoulder of a BBC producer while Camila Batmanghelidjh

was being interviewed? Echoes these issues of conflict need to be

discussed. It took a very long time for this even to be raised properly

in the BBC. -- because these issues. I will leave that for you to

investigate and pursue further. It shows that these issues of

governance stretch into all... And indeed into the private sector. Yes.

Before we let you go, on the EU renegotiation, we could not let you

go without asking you about this... Everybody has resisted it this

morning! Well, I am not going to! Are you now happy with the status of

the campaign? I am supporting the campaign. Will you resign from the

board if Dominic Cummings continues as its campaign director? Dominic

continues and I continue to support it.

England, Scotland and Northern Ireland can issue their own bank

Plaid Cymru are calling for the new notes to put Wales

on an equal footing with Soctland and Northern Ireland,

and to allow Welsh figures to be represented on bank notes.

In the 19th century, Wales did have their own notes,

printed by small local banks, which could be used

Here at the Daily politics we like to be helpful, so we've come

The former 14th century Prince of Wales Owain Glyndwr,

famous Welsh Prime Minister David Lloyd George,

or if you wanted to be more current, how about

Joining me now is Plaid Cymru's Hywel Williams.

Another famous Welshman! What has brought this on? Well, there is a

change, there is devolution, there is... It has been around for a

while. Indeed but there are further changes.

while. Indeed but there are further is for the watchers. And of

while. Indeed but there are further there is the thing that Scotland and

Northern Ireland are able to do this. So why did Wales not continue

with its own banknotes? Because we are part of that mythical being,

England and Wales. Inc before the Bank of England was set up. And of

course, the rights issue notes were stopped in the middle of the

19th-century. Scottish and Northern Ireland banks actually derive some

value from this, there is economic benefit from it as well. Is there

much demand for it, benefit from it as well. Is there

it is symbolic of changed times. But is there a demand for it? Suddenly

there is. My colleague Jonathan Edwards will be making that demand

this afternoon. Apart from you two! Can

this afternoon. Apart from you two! It you are the

this afternoon. Apart from you two! already there in some respects.

this afternoon. Apart from you two! is not a matter of principle. It is

actually to reflect the is not a matter of principle. It is

future settlements with Wales. That is not a matter of principle. It is

support for it - do you think people care enough about it? If you were to

ask a person on the street in Cardiff or Carmarthen, I am sure

they would say Cardiff or Carmarthen, I am sure

What about the extra cost? It would be minimal. Would it? Absolutely. Do

you know what the cost would be? I have no idea. But it is a matter of

the design and... Do you support it? I have no problem with it.

the design and... Do you support it? notes in my wallet as often as

the design and... Do you support it? have English notes. I have got no

problem with it in principle. And who would you have on the notes? Who

would I have? I will come back to you. What about you? I think

identity is important and I understand. But I want a Norfolk

note. That is not what I meant! Aneurin Bevan. Ryan Giggs.

note. That is not what I meant! you like to see on the note? I think

I would stick with Owain Glyndwr or possibly Michael Foot. Just before

you go, would you worry about difficulty as I have experienced

with Scottish notes sometimes coming home and then retailers will not

accept them even though they are home and then retailers will not

technically legal tender? Yes, it is a matter of popularising the image

of the UK as four equal partners I think. When newsagents and others

realise this, there will be no problem at all.

Let's take a look now at some of the events likely to be making

Registration for campaigners in the EU Referendum opens today -

and they must start recording all donations and loans above ?7,500

to the Electoral Commission from today.

Tuesday now seems the likeliest day for

European Council president Donald Tusk to circulate a letter

to EU leaders setting out what progress has been made

on the UK's membership renegotiation - assuming he and David Cameron

On Wednesday after Prime Minister's Questions,

Labour will try to keep the spotlight

by holding a Commons debate on multinational companies

On Thursday, a Syria donors' conference is being held in London

to encourage participating countries to give more to tackle

the humanitarian crisis caused by the conflict in Syria.

And Saturday sees the first meeting of the National Committee

of Momentum - that's the grassroots organisation set up in the wake

So, a busy week in politics, and that means a busy week

for journalists like Lucy Fisher from The Times and Rafael Behr

from The Guardian - they're in College Green.

How much damage has been done to the reputation of George Osborne over

the Google tax row? A great deal of damage has been done, the Business

Secretary Sajid Javid yesterday said this is not a major success, as

George Osborne said, he says this is not a glorious moment, and Sajid

Javid said he shared the sense of injustice that many companies feel.

Also we had Google's spokesman Peter Barron himself on the airwaves

saying that we need reform of tax laws, and in the light of that

George Osborne should be very red cheeked. Obviously, a fruitful

stream for Labour to pursue, and we will show our viewers the tax return

that John McDonnell has published. Not sure what it says, but will this

put more pressure on George Osborne and David Cameron to publish their

own tax returns or pursue more transparency? It is a nifty device.

To some degree it does put the pressure on, it says he has nothing

to hide as the Shadow Chancellor, but I think it will have limited

traction, because for a device like this to build up a head of steam you

need other people do say, yes, we all want to do this, as well. In the

wider sphere of power around the Chancellor and Prime Minister, there

are not many people who are desperate to publish their tax

returns and newspaper editors are not in a hurry and so I'm not sure

this campaign will have much momentum, but it keeps the spotlight

on this issue. There are Conservatives who are starting to

appreciate that just being behind all business and commerce regardless

of what it does, that is not action is such a great look for the

Conservative Party, and if this does come to put more pressure on the

Chancellor, it will be Conservatives saying they are getting on the wrong

side of public opinion more than necessarily the things the Labour

Party can do. What more can we actually hope will be revealed,

Lucy? We have heard Peter Barron said there is no sweetheart deal

which was struck with HMRC, and they are paying their share of

corporation tax at the same level as everybody else. There might be an

inquiry from a Parliamentary committee, but are we talking about

a new tax regime for big multinationals? Back conversation

needs to be had. There are more revelations to come which will keep

the pressure in place, and I think the pressure will stay up there.

People are saying, do we need to overhaul corporation tax and have a

different levy on sale so people cannot structure their profits so it

goes to tax havens like Bermuda? The principle is the main problem,

people say these are private individuals, tax is not negotiable,

but if you are a multinational corporation you can wrangle with

HMRC and aside the tax you are going to pay. There has to be some

measures proposed. -- and decide. The Shadow Chancellor John O'Donnell

said by the end of the century national borders would be an

irrelevance, what do you make of that? Quite interesting. He did say

by the end of this century, so we have 85 years. It is quite

revealing, it almost shows the Marxist training, eating is about

these great historical forces in terms of historical destiny -- he

thinks about. What people want from the Labour Party is someone who will

talk about what a Labour government would do in five years' time, not 85

years. Even though he might have unearthed some interesting

discussion about globalisation and the world shrinking and people

moving around and Borders dissolving, that is maybe an

academic and people wants to have, but the Labour Party needs to

reassure people that the Labour Party in government would have

control over the borders which we do have at the moment, which some

people do not think they care enough about at the moment. It might be a

valid academic I'd meant to have, though. Thanks for joining us. --

valid academic argument to have. It's been called the war

the world forgot. The ongoing conflict in Yemen has

seen thousands of deaths and millions of people

internally displaced. A coalition of nine countries

led by Saudi Arabia has been bombing rebel targets in support

of the government, and the coalition yesterday announced it will form

a "high-level independent committee" to investigate UN allegations that

bombing raids have deliberately Back in the UK, questions have been

raised about the role of British military advisers

in the bombing campaign. One of those raising the questions

is Shadow International Development What would you like this independent

committee to verify exactly? We need to be clear first of all where the

government stands in relation to law and in relation to arms treaties,

because ministers have said there has been no deliberate humanitarian

outrage, but it does not say it has to be deliberate, it says if there

is a risk of humanitarian outrage is happening, and we can see that in

Yemen there have been a series... There have been a four hospitals

bombed, and we believe that the government might be in breach of

treaties which it signed and that is what we should be looking at. You

are worried about British personnel and British government being in

breach of international law, what is it that you think British personnel

have been involved with? We have been told that they have been

helping the Saudis with targets to make sure there is no breach of

humanitarian law, but they are clearly not being very successful.

The accounts are that civilians have been hit, as you say, targeted or

not. But as you say, British personnel have been involved, you

think, in trying to minimise civilian casualties, is that not the

point? We know they are involved, but we don't know what they are

doing, and I think we need transparency. We also need an

examination as to whether we are actually in breach of arms treaties

which we have signed. Are the Saudis, the Saudi led Karen Isham,

have they committed war crimes? -- Saudi led coalition. These are

important things we have got to look into, but at the moment the United

Nations says that Yemen is on the edge of a humanitarian crisis and a

food crisis but so clearly that Saudi led coalition has created

havoc in what is the second largest country in the area. People will be

surprised here that British military personnel have been involved in

assisting this Saudi led coalition in targeting rebels, as they would

particular against the government. That is Britain involved in the war

in Yemen? -- as they would put it come against the government. We need

the review, to get an understanding of what the British involvement is.

We have important long-standing relationships with the Saudis and

supporting the work of democratic governments across the region, we

need to be clear with our military personnel and the government, they

are keen to make sure that there has not been any breaches and I

support... Are you worried that British personnel are trying to

assist, even if they are minimising civilian tragedies? I have no

expertise in this area, but I want to make sure that we really are

checking that they are there to do what is right and

checking that they are there to do are not reaching any area of

international law. -- preaching. Should they be there in the first

place? -- breaching. Should they be there in the first

world. We are all across the world. What do you make

world. We are all across the world. government? It needs to be

investigated, I want a review of our relationship with Saudi Arabia, this

is a country which has been involved with the system breaches of human

rights in a serious with the system breaches of human

own country -- with this system. with the system breaches of human

targeting civilians is a very serious allegation, and if we are

involved with that campaign, we ought to know exactly what the role

has been. There should be total transparency. Why is the government

continuing to grant transparency. Why is the government

sales to a regime which is guilty of attacks on civilian

sales to a regime which is guilty of sales. I hope that is what the

review will stab. This also highlights, Britain's involvement

across the Middle East, the extent of our involvement, it highlights

some fundamental issues about our role in that region and we need

clarity about what those troops are doing and whether their role is

direct or indirect, how many there are and whether their advice is

being listened to. The Foreign Office minister says that people are

naive to think that Britain cannot sell weapons systems to allies. This

is the reality. I'm a fried. He has not read the treaties, we

is the reality. I'm a fried. He has be selling arms to regimes where

there is a possibility they will be be selling arms to regimes where

-- I'm afraid. But we don't be selling arms to regimes where

the moment, the committee has not reported. The law is about risk, not

in town. It is actually about risk, and the risk is very clear. -- not

intent. There is a very serious risk which this government is turning a

blind eye to and we should not be colluding in humanitarian outrage is

in Yemen. Who is to say it is right to continue to do it, just because

we have always done it? Sometimes we have got to question the impact of

our foreign policy. There is the reality on the ground, though.

People in Yemen desperately need aid and they need help and working with

the Saudi led coalition might be the only way to get that aid to them. Or

it might be that the bombing and the deaths of thousands of people is

making a humanitarian catastrophe worse, that is my view. We should

suspend the sale of arms aren't we are clear that it is not our side

and that we are not making the humour to situation worse. Would you

back that call? We need to see the review, and then we can make a

decision. Would you suspend sales of arms to Saudi Arabia while that is

going on? We have got to make sure that we are not breaching

international law. Yes, we should. Jeremy Corbyn may have had

a political career spanning four decades, but up until his election

as Labour leader, it was safe to say that publishers hadn't

taken much of an interest Well, that's changed,

with several new books vying for your attention -

including one out today. But how many people actually want

to read books about politicians? We've sent our Ellie

out to see if she can, the new biography

about Jeremy Corbyn. Now, people in the

Westminster village love That is the question I'm

asking this morning. I love a lot of biographies

and autobiographies, Because I'm following

what they say on a daily basis, so I don't feel I need

an extra layer of information. Political biographies,

are you interested? Erm, depends who has

written it, I suppose. I would be happy to

read that one on Anne Jeremy Corbyn, interested

in any of these Yes, but not right now.

OK. Do you want any of them?

No, I'm good, thanks. Sure, you can take them.

I'm fine. Do you want a book?

No, thank you. I read mostly poetry and fiction,

being a literature professor. And since my time is limited

for contemporary politics, I would confine myself mainly to

American politics. Fair enough.

So this would be a waste of time. Spoken like a true

professor, thank you. I am a chef, so I read

more books about cooking. You can have a little look,

see if there is anything Erm, if I need to buy it,

yes, I will buy it. But you have to promise

you will read it. Yes?

He is a fascinating character. Thank you very much.

You have made your morning. Thank you so much.

Have a lovely day. So, they have not exactly

flown off the shelves. In fact I have not

really been able to But maybe people should not judge

books by their covers. # Can't judge a book

by looking at the cover... And the author of a new book

about the Labour leader, Comrade Corbyn, is Rosa Prince

of the Daily Telegraph Were you heartened by that?! Now,

here is the book. I have got it here. Why was Jeremy Corbyn not the

first choice for the left as a representative in the leadership

contest? Well, I think nobody expected him to want to run. He had

been in Parliament for such a long time and had had all sorts of

interests, mainly to do with foreign affairs, and no-one thought he was

up for it, really. Then they looked around and found that no-one else

wanted to do it, and thought, why don't we try Jeremy? So it was

literally going around the table to say, whose turn is it now? In a way.

Diane Abbott, who was just here, she had run before. There were not that

many lefties still left in Parliament to do it. What about Jon

Trickett or Clive Lewis? Clive Lewis was a new MP. I think that was

probably his problem. Jon Trickett I think quite a lot of people wanted

him to run. I chatted to him about, I think his view was that he felt he

had worked for Ed Miliband, he had actually also worked for Gordon

Brown and Tony Blair. He felt it needed someone a bit more

anti-establishment. His sense was that he was a bit too associated

with what had gone before, that they needed someone completely would be a

breath of fresh air. I don't think even the people who wanted Jeremy in

the end thought that he would prove so popular and that it would take

off like it did. I am sure they are all thrilled. What was your

impression of the man at the end of the book, having done all this

research, did it change dramatically? It did even though to

the extent that I had been in the lobby for ten years... And you will

have known him, like I did, he was always there. Always in the

background, always taking up these issues which were very important to

lots of people, but perhaps slightly on the periphery. He was not a

leading light in Parliament and certainly he did never want anything

to do with people like me, lobby journalists. He was a columnist on

the morning Star. I did not know him very well. He was quite

one-dimensional figure to me. Now I have learned that he has an

absolutely fascinating back story. For any biographer, you want to have

an interesting childhood and used, and he certainly had that. There

were lots of things that I learned in that respect. I came away

thinking that he is a very good man, a very decent man. It is what a lot

of people say about him on both sides of the House. Yes, he cares a

lot about people and he wants to do good. I think he genuinely puts

other people first. And so I came away liking him and respecting him.

Perhaps like lots of people, I had issues on various parts of his

political stance, but as a man he is fascinating. In terms of whether he

really wanted it, you said yourself he did not particularly think about

it before he was sort of children. And there has been some talk that he

would not enjoy it, that he would find it hard work being thrust into

the centre, having been as you say an MP who had pursued his own pet

policies - has that changed? I sense he is enjoying it a little bit more,

only from observing him on screens and on radio. I think so, too. When

he began his journey, at the start, he was very focused on trying to get

onto the ballot. When he did do that, he was pleased, obviously. But

a day or two later he had a panic, he was really worried about what the

attention would be like for him. He is very private, he does not like

talking about his family. He hates that his family are now in the

public eye and he has a problem with that. And yet as time went on, think

back to last summer, going to those wellies and appearing in front of

thousands of people who think you're absolutely fantastic, it must be

totally intoxicating. I don't know! Me, neither. I am sure I'm not sure

-- I am sure anyone would enjoy that. Then we went back again and

you get to the beginning of his leadership, the knock-about, the

Shadow Cabinet, I think that is all quite difficult. And I think he had

that process all over again. At the beginning it was like, oh gosh, what

have I done? And now, I think he enjoys it. Do you know him? I have

met him a couple of times. I do think he is starting to enjoy it

more. He is a very decent man. I think if you are a Labour Party

member or MP, or if you care about the Labour Party and its future, I

think you have to admit that we're not where we need to be. We need to

be doing more to hold the government to account and more to talk about

what people out in the country are talking about. While I think Jeremy

has a huge mandate, not just from a Phil Yates and supporters but from

members, and deserves a chance to lead as he sees fit, with that

mandate comes responsible to. Responsibility not just to win

elections in May and beyond, but I think to start talking about the

things that people out there care about, and coming up with solutions

and answers for problems in the country today and in the future, on

welfare, immigration, housing and other issues. The London mayoral

election is seen as a big test, do you think, for Jeremy Corbyn and his

leadership? Everybody reads into this what they want. People who are

supporters of Jeremy would see a victory in the London mayoral

election as a vindication of his leadership. I think London has got

and he its own political culture. William

and he candidate. Michael Douglas says he

has got 99 days - do you agree with him? I'm not sure. We have got 4.5

years until the election. But him? I'm not sure. We have got 4.5

will be a very clear signal as to how we are doing out in the country,

and whether Jeremy Corbyn's politics are resonating. That was the big

pumice of his campaign, that we could pull back voters in Scotland

and in parts of the country where people have not voted Labour. Have

you had a goodly reaction from Labour activists? I have had a bit

of nervousness from the Labour Party. And I think that as they read

it they will be a bit Party. And I think that as they read

because they did not want to have a muckraking, salacious read, and the

first muckraking, salacious read, and the

is not that. The muckraking, salacious read, and the

there, poised to jump on me if it was that. Hopefully when they read

it, they will learn that it is not. It really isn't. It is an

examination of Jerry Corbyn as a man, and a biography, discussing

what happened over the summer, and how he

what happened over the summer, and impossible feat. Will you

what happened over the summer, and Yes, it sounds very interesting! You

cannot say no! And actually I think progressive politics in our country

faces an enormous challenge. I wonder whether the Labour Party

faces sort of two camps which are wonder whether the Labour Party

ultimately irreconcilable. We wonder whether the Labour Party

been through our own near death experience. And in the interests of

democracy, it is critically important that the government has an

effective, credible tonnage of. I desperately want a liberal,

progressive force in this country which can take on the Conservative

garment. Will you read it? I certainly will, I shall

garment. Will you read it? I from the library, if that is all

right! You're very brave to say that! I think he is a very

interesting man. They are quite an intellectual group. I think

governments should have a credible opposition. Quite often they are

thinking, 85 years hence, which is all very well. But actually it is

about what they would do, and the British people need to know. They

have got a long-term economic plan, dare I say it!

You may have noticed it's a presidential election year

Rather a lot's been said before a single vote has even been cast,

but overnight tonight Democrat and Republican voters in the state

of Iowa will cast their ballots at the start of the process

which will see the two parties select their candidate

The BBC's Rajini Vaidyanathan is there, and she's been out to see

how many candidates she could meet in a day.

It is just after nine in Des Moines, Iowa,

All the candidates are trying to crisscross the state to get

as many votes as they can in the caucuses.

So, I've got a list of where the candidates are going to be

and I'm going to see how many of them I can meet.

He is doing a coffee and bagels meeting.

Just over there, we will see that we can get a word with him.

Do you think you have a shot in this race?

We've been in the car for two hours and we finally arrived at the place

where we are hoping to catch the next candidate, but we're late.

You have the right to exercise your Second Amendment rights.

Are we allowed to place restrictions on that?

Only in the most extreme circumstances, like if you're

That was Chris Christie, the second candidate of today.

Stop No 3 for a Bernie Sanders event.

We're talking about making public colleges and universities tuition-

We only had to drive a short way from our last one.

We've met three candidates and there is a long queue

for the next person we're going to see.

It is 5.30 in the evening and we've driven all across this state

searching the candidates and we're now in a place called Wilton

and we're going to see one more candidate.

And it protected the Second Amendment right to keep and bear

So, we've travelled 350 miles and we've met four candidates

and one former president who is married to a candidate.

It made us realise that we're exhausted, so imagine

what the candidates are going through on a daily basis

I am exhausted just watching it! What you make of the presidential

contest so far? It is really interesting, I think. Is that a

euphemism? Horrified! For what I know, Iowa is a very different

primary from the others. But the whole thing says to me, on both

sides, just the rise of populism and the attack on traditional political

elites, it is happening around the world but in America seems to be in

its rawest form. Are you worried, horrified, as Norman Lamb said, or

excited? More worried than excited. I think there is some extraordinary

combinations which could come out of this. I think Iowa will not reflect

what we will see over the next few months. It is a kick-start to a

whole run of events but it is used as the straw poll to cushion what do

you think will happen at this stage? I hope that ultimately, Hillary

Clinton will prevail. It does not mean I am a great enthusiast. But

ultimately I think in a democracy you want someone who can inspire

people but also politics based on rational judgment and evidence. When

you hear Donald Trump talking, I mean, it is just, it is a nightmare.

The idea that the free world as it is called could be led by someone

like him... We keep the making assumption that he will fall and

crash but it does not happen. I don't think we can make any

assumptions about the outcome of this. On issues of fairness and

clarity in this programme, we showed a copy of John McDonnell's tax

return, and I said I was not sure what we could see from it. Just to

be clear, his office have called to say that the whole tax return has

been published, and you can go and find it if you want to. Just time to

find out the answer to our quiz. The question was, what did Tory MP Jacob

Rees Mogg warned might happen? Was it...? Anyone know the correct

answer? It was biscuits. It was. Stopping the trans fats being used

to make Al biscuits delicious. Well done! That is it for today. Bye-bye.

to the decline and fall of a charity empire.

The Government thought it was the right thing to do.

They're going to make me the demon of Peckham.