07/03/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 07/03/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


Was political pressure put on the leader of one of Britain's


biggest business groups to resign after he spoke in favour


You might not have heard of him before today,


but the former head of the British Chambers


of Commerce John Longworth is at the centre of a big political


David Cameron is in Brussels meeting European leaders as they grapple


Can Turkey solve the EU's biggest problem, and what do they want


We'll be looking at Government plans to extend Sunday trading and hearing


And should satirical TV shows be allowed to use clips like this


All that in the next hour and with us for the whole


of the programme today two MPs who are beyond satire.


By which I mean of course we'd never think of poking fun at them.


It's Labour's Mary Creagh and Ukip's Douglas Carswell; welcome


Let's begin today by talking about the resignation of the head


of the British Chambers of Commerce, he's called John Longworth.


He told reporters at the BCC's annual conference last week


that the UK could have a "brighter" future outside the European Union.


He was expressing a personal view because the business organisation's


official position is to remain neutral ahead


The BCC said Mr Longworth had accepted his support for leaving


the EU was "likely to create confusion" and he therefore had


But leave campaigners have claimed he came under political


Conservative MP David Davis said he is a Brexit martyr.


This morning's Daily Mail front page refers to 'an honest man knifed


Downing Street says no pressure was put on the BCC to


Here's the Mayor of London and Leave campaigner Boris Johnson speaking


It is very sad that somebody like John Longworth,


who shares my view, who has great experience of British business


and industry, should have paid a heavy price for sharing


You said the agents of project fear had got him out by bullying,


No, he has been asked to step down for expressing what I think


is a passionate, optimistic view of this country's chances.


We're joined now from Bristol by Phil Smith, managing director


of Business West which is the chamber of commerce for the West


Mr Smith, are you pleased to see the back of John Longworth? He had to


go. When you pay someone to represent you and they don't do it,


there's only one conclusion, I'm afraid. Do you think there was


political pressure to remove him? Absolutely not. The members were


unhappy unth up and down the country. The BCC board recognised


that. There was no pressure for an internal decision. You don't think


project fear did fall for him in that sense? Absolutely not. Would it


be fair to describe the BCC as a pro-EU body? They've made it very


clear our stance is to be neutral on the EU and leaving, so I think if


John had come out on Thursday and said to vote to stay, I think we'd


have had the same response. So no, I think no pressure from Number Ten


and it was a neutral stance. So you said even if he expressed the


opposite view, you would have had to go anyway so you don't think any


senior figure in the BCC to your knowledge should express an opinion


about the EU at all? As a collective, as a membership body, we


have take an neutral stance. You pay somebody to do that. I represent my


members here in the West Country, I represent their views. John wasn't


representing his member's views, I'm afraid. What about renegotiation. Do


you think then that the BCC should express a view about whether that


was a good idea in the first place? I'm sure the BCC's always wanted,


well when they have polled members in the past, the majority would


prefer to stay and more would prefer to stay if we got a good deal out of


Europe. For this purpose for now, we have take an neutral stance. John


waivered from it on Thursday, it's brave of him, he sacrificed his


career for his own personal views and good for him but not the BCC


view. I'm afraid. Kim Conchie, CEO has said it's important for


Cornwall, should he have stayed silent? We are separate bodies,


federal organisations, if Kim wants to say that and they get lots of


money in Cornwall from Europe so you can see why he said it, each member


takes their view, but from our point of view, it was to stay neutral and


say nothing, John waiver and I can see why he's paid the price. Thank


you very much. Douglas Carswell, you tweeted Downing Street got their


man. What evidence have you got that there was direct pressure? There


does seem to have been some suggestion, not least in the


newspapers, that there seems to have been some pressure. There's been


some liaison between the BCC and Downing Street. But look, let's not


lose sight of the real issue which is what John long worth, a man who


spent years working with small and medium-sized businesses actually has


said. He clearly feels very strongly that EU membership is bad for small


and medium businesses. We know there are big corporate interest who is


rather like Brussels, they can afford to hire lobbyists. But he


spent his career working with small and medium businesses who believes


we'd be better off out. Does it it main the Remain argument weak. He


crossed the line didn't he though in terms of speaking out? The


organisations decided they should remain neutral, rightly or wrongly,


rather than talking about the substance of what he said. Do you


believe he crossed the line and therefore he had to go? Some have


expressed contrary views. At a regional level. This was the


national... I'm sure they would distinguish, but look at the broad


point of view of the Campaign. Rather than engaging in the


substance of the argument, they are having to resort to the removal


tactics. Let's say he'd come out in fave of staying in, would you expect


him to resign or stay? Given what we have seen, if he'd have argued down


a pro-Downing Street line, he wouldn't have been forced out. But


you don't have the evidence for him being forced out. Number


you don't have the evidence for him they didn't force him out. We have


heard from Phil Smith who says there is no evidence? 24 hours ago I hear


Downing Street was not ruling out the idea that there had been liaison


between officials and the BCC. Mary, did he cross the line and have to


go? He spent time working with ASDA and Tesco and this was his personal


view. Reading the accounts of what happened last week, it was clear


from people in the room that there was unhappiness from the members of


the British Chamber of Commerce. This is a membership organisation


and I know from my time working at Koranfield School of management with


MBAs and entrepreneurs, the membership of the BCC are two to one


in fave of staying as part of the European Union -- Cranfield School.


He is a paid representative of that organisation, that organisation has


a very particular stance which is, we are going to remain neutral.


There's Cornwall and the north-east that want to stay and there's


probably other parts of regions that want to leave, but in order to


manage that, they have decided on this neutral stance and he's broken


it. So you agree he had to go. Do you think Number Ten put pressure on


him? I have no idea but it's clear this is a decision for the British


Chamber of Commerce board not Number Ten and the board have sacked him?


The British Chamber of Commerce set out a series of criteria that they


wanted to see in a reformed Europe. David Cameron's deal's demonstrably


failed to achieve that and it's right and proper therefore that the


people in the Chamber of Commerce express the disappointment that his


new deal is not reforming Europe at all. The membership of the members


of the Chamber of Commerce are two to one in favour of staying in the


European Union. They know it's better for their businesses,


employees, staff and regulatory frameworks. They know that leaving


would mean we'd have to unpick Torith our trade deals and lose a


huge amount of foreign investment. I suppose there is a view about,


whether other influential people feel less likely to talk and speak


out on what is an extremely important issue. Should people be


new untilled that sense? If somebody works for an organisation, they


should not stray from that. That is clear from all organisations. A


Number Ten spokesperson has been briefing journalists and hasn't


denied there was contact. No pressure but there was contact. You


would expect that? It's a euphemism and I'm sure there would say there


was no pressure on the French President to bully us. Downing


Street and the Remain campaign are weak. They are backing out of the


idea of TV debate with the BBC. Downing Street feels it can't get


involved in the substance so they are having to play the man. The idea


of Francois Hollande or the Italian Finance Minister all warning about


the domino effect, if the UK leaves the European Union, about the very


dangerous position that we are in if we do leave, not just for our


country but for the whole continent at a time of great security, unease,


at a tame when Russia is on manoeuvres in Ukraine and Russia,


these are issues people need to hear about. The idea that you can bully


Francois Hollande into anything is for the birds.


Thank you. We've learnt in the last few days


that Labour has allowed a leading left winger to rejoin the party,


to the consternation of some senior Who now proudly owns a shiny


new Labour party membership card? Is it a) Former Bradford


MP George Galloway. b) Mark Serwotka, General Secretary


of the Public and Commercial c) Former militant councillor Derek


Hatton. or d) The filmmaker and founder


of Left Unity, Ken Loach. David Cameron is in Brussels today


for a meeting aimed at tackling The UK is offering to send


a Royal Navy ship and helicopter to help tackle people smugglers,


but the big issue is whether the EU can cut a deal with Turkey that


will help curb a second wave of migrants from the


war-torn Middle East. Some 1.2 million people claimed


asylum in Europe last year. But more and more people


are attempting to make the journey Another 135,000 have arrived


on Europe's shores so far this year, more than six times the number


who arrived in the same EU leaders are keen to reach a deal


with Turkey, because that's the departure point for many


migrants crossing into Europe. The EU will press Turkey to take


back migrants who do not qualify In return, the EU could give Turkey


3 billion euros and resettle some The EU is also likely


to declare the route north Some 13,000 people are currently


stranded at Greece's border with Macedonia, with


the authorities preventing them Meanwhile, the UK is sending a navy


ship to help gather intelligence on people smugglers


operating in the Aegean. It will join other NATO countries


already policing this part However, this NATO mission is also


effectively a coastguard force, as ships will likely end up rescuing


migrants at risk of drowning. Well, David Cameron has arrived


at the summit in Brussels, let's hear what he had to say


to reporters waiting outside. It's important that we help the


continent of Europe to secure its external border. That's in our


interests and that's why we are sending British ships to do just


that. This does underline the special status that we have in this


organisation because, of course, we are not in the Schengen no-border


zone, we keep our own strong borders, so migrants that come to


Europe aren't able to come to the UK and that's important that everyone


understands that. Our correspondent Damian


Grammaticus is in Brussels. Is this monitoring exercise that the


UK is now taking part in meaningful? I think it's one of the important


things that the EU is putting in place, to try and deal with this


crisis. What their aim is, is to try to reduce the in-flow of people from


Turkey into Greece. That's the first thing they want to achieve. This is


one of the ways that they are trying to do that, using the NATO ships,


now the British contribution we know is going to be taking part as well


which will also involve, not just this one ship but also a couple of


coastguard cutters as well. The idea there will be, as you were hearing,


to pass information on to the Turks to try to get the Turkish coastguard


and police to try to intercept people and boats before they make it


into Greek waters. Once they do make it into Greek waters, most people


are in Europe and have to be dealt with and processed by the European


side. So the hope is that this can achieve something. But crucially, it


will all depend, to a large extent on cooperation from Turkey. That's


why what we are seeing here now is the first meeting today which is the


Europeans and Turkey sitting around trying to cajole Turkey to do more.


Right, but is it going to really actively do anything to stop the


people-smuggling trade? I think that's a very difficult question to


answer at this stage. It's an open question. The hope is, I think


amongst European countries, that by having these forces there, and it


won't just be the British, there are a number of other countries


providing ships too, they can provide information, they can


monitor the coastlines, they can try and spot where smugglers are


preparing boats, where people are gathering to set out on their


journey across the sea to Greece and then by passing that information to


Turkey urge the Turks to do something. I think the second thing


it would do as well is give European countries some leverage with Turkey


because if they are able to say, look, we identified all of these


occasions when people were getting on boats, you didn't do anything


about it, it gives them more opportunity to put pressure on


Turkey. That's one thing. The other things they are going to be talking


about is more money for Turkey, more efforts or ideas about trying to


offer a plan to take some refugees and resettle them in Europe anyway,


if Turkey takes part in this plan, and then sending people back, some


who do make it across, this is also being discussed but who may not


qualify for protection in Europe. I'm joined by Fadi Hakura


an associate fellowat Chatham House, an independent think tank focusing


on international affairs. Welcome. Another crisis summit, any


chance of a breakthrough this time? The likelihood is Turkey will accept


to take non-Syrian refugees back into Turkey. What would they like in


return? More money, a strong men from the EU to grant visa free


access to Turks travelling to mainland Europe, as well as a clear


strategy to resettle some of the refugees in Europe. Do you think


that is a price worth paying, having visa free travel in order for them


to take back either failed asylum seekers or non-Syrian migrants? The


Government position is a welcome change from the position 18 months


ago when ministers said they did not want any rescue missions because


they were acting as a so-called pull factor. I welcome that the Prime


Minister is working alongside our EU partners and in Nato. These are free


travel does not apply within the UK, because we are not part of the


Schengen no border zone. I think it is the right thing to do. This has


been a five-year conflict, a quarter of a million people have died, it


has been a war without law, without end, and our response as a rich


group of countries has been incredibly poor, we have taken just


1000 refugees. Should Britain have been part of some sort of quota


system? Given that we have a quarter of a million people now seeking


asylum, over a million people, we should have played our part as part


of the EU, but I would also like to see us move much faster to offer


safe and legal routes to people in those camps so that they are not


forced to make this difficult journey. Do you think it is a price


worth paying? Turkey is crucial in terms of trying to make some headway


with this crisis, but we are asking them to keep its border open with


Syria, close the border with Greece, take-back failed asylum seekers,


they have a right to demand a lot in return. Well done, Prime Minister,


for sending the Navy, but it is Nato on whom we can depend who have taken


the initiative. The EU has made the problem far worse, and if we have


what is already on the table, a proposal for a European institution


to allocate quotas on a pan-European level, we will lose the ability as a


country to decide how many refugees come here. If we vote to remain in


the EU, a Brussels institution will allocate how many refugees come


here, that is on the table already. That is what people will get. The


Prime Minister has rejected that approach, he is wrong. As the fifth


richest country in the world, with this huge crisis on our borders, we


should be voluntarily signing up to that, and we can do that as part of


our opt out for justice and home affairs. Should the EU by Turkey's


cooperation in the way it appears? Any deal will be difficult to


implement. There will not be a durable solution unless there is a


permanent settlement to the Syrian crisis. If not, the flow of refugees


will continue. No amount of security, waltz, quotas or other


mechanisms will prevent people wanting to come to mainland Europe.


For Turkey, is this going to be a successful root for them to further


their EU accession talks and negotiations? The likelihood of them


joining the EU is extremely remote, not in my lifetime. The previous


European minister in Turkey said that in an interview to the Daily


Telegraph, Turkey will likely join Europe any time soon. -- unlikely.


What sort of numbers are we talking about if there is a quid pro quo


where these are free travel comes into operation? There is a fear in


France and Germany and the Netherlands that millions of Turks


will flow over the border into mainland Europe, so we will have


another problem, given that that is more Turkish migrants coming into


Europe already. But that happen? It is a possibility. Turkey is unlikely


to join the EU, but unless we get a grip, large numbers of people coming


through Turkey will join. We need to have a Government and Nato that is


prepared to take robust action. The EU has failed, it has made the


problem was. This deal is to try to control the numbers who might use


Turkey as a route through. The EU has had months, it has made the


problem worse. 1.2 million came across the Mediterranean last year,


it is Nato that is dealing with the problem, the EU has only made it


worse. The EU has failed, you say, it may be the fault of individual


countries, but when you look at it, the EU has failed to deal with this


problem, and if they cannot deal with a migrant crisis like this on


an EU basis, what is the point? It is a refugee crisis, the global


community has failed, we have allowed Vladimir Putin to be on


manoeuvres, we know he has air strikes against hospitals, and


schools, in the northern part of Syria, he is bombing the legitimate


opposition to the president, and they are using the refugee crisis as


a means of further destabilising Europe. It is why our referendum


debate is coming at such a difficult political time, because the risk of


the EU falling apart if Britain leads is not one that people in this


country fully understand. Those pressures need to be looked at. Our


party was wrong not to prevent President Assad once he had


committed those chemical weapons attacks, and from that we have had a


sea of human misery. This seems to be the crux moment with Turkey. But


do you think it is right for the EU to do business with a country whose


Government is growing, according to the media reports, more


authoritarian by the day? Absolutely. Should the EU not be


dealing with them's we have to, and we have to ask, why is the


Government becoming more authoritarian? They are becoming


destabilised with the refugee crisis on their borders. As is Lebanon and


Jordan. The fault is the failure to stem the tide of misery that is


Syria. I have comment does respect for Turkey, this is a failure of the


European project. Should we be talking to Turkey when they are an


authoritarian country? Of course, but the EU has failed to control its


currency, debt crisis and borders, it is a failed project. Is Turkey


being destabilised? Yes, they contributed to the refugee crisis by


allowing a lot of foreign fighters or at least a flow of foreign


fighters into Syria. There is already 2.5 million plus refugees in


Turkey, Turkey is in permanent warfare with the Kurdish


nationalists in the south-east, as well as in northern Syria will stop


they have to do a 180 degrees change in its policy to bring more


stability into Syria. At Europe's biggest shopping centre,


a special church service, a reminder that the shops may be


open legally for the first time on a Sunday, but it


is still the sabbath. This Centre in Gateshead, owned by


the Church Commissioners. It has now bowed to the inevitable. An


estimated 90,000 took advantage of the opening.


Brilliant, I work full-time, so it is ideal.


Sunday is fine for me, it is sometimes the only day


That was the last big deregulation of Sunday trading back in 1994.


And now the Government looks set to revive plans to allow local


authorities to extend Sunday opening hours for supermarkets


At present they're restricted to just six hours, a restriction


that doesn't apply to smaller convenience stores.


Well, it's expected to come to a Commons vote this Wednesday,


but not all Conservative MPs are happy and it looks


like the position of the Scottish National Party


Well, we're joined now by David Burrowes, he's


a Conservative opponent of the plan, and by the SNP's Stewart Hosie.


Do you have enough Conservative MPs on your side to defeat the


Government? We may have. I am concerned about our side.


It was not in the manifesto, the Prime Minister in April said if you


want to shop, you can, but also, if you want to retain that special


characteristic, which we just about have, you can keep that. How many


MPs do you have on your side? 24 signed up, a number of others, I


will not reveal how many, are also lined up, as well as ministers and


the like up and down the party. There are other things we should be


doing to support enterprise, this has come up from a bunch of loud


voices in the West End, Harrods and Knightsbridge, they wanted tourists


to shop until they drop, but let's not have a domino effect that will


impact on shop workers. The SNP need to ask themselves a question,


whether they want to put at risk the pay packets of Scottish workers,


there will be a delusion of workers' right and their pay. You have


changed your position, one of your colleagues said he would support


David Burrows. We will take a decision on Tuesday evening, in good


time for the amendment debate on Wednesday. We were very clear all


the way through, we have had Sunday trading in Scotland for 20 years, it


has been beneficial by and large, but the large businesses pay a


premium for Sunday working. Our specific concern, very specific, is


if this is in essence becomes a UK system, does it have the potential,


as many believe it would, to erode premium paid on a Sunday for workers


in Scotland? Do you have a concession from the Government? No,


the premium pay is not in legislation, it is done on the basis


of the goodwill of businesses. Were it in statute, it would be an easier


debate, but it isn't. Therein lies the difficulty. What is stopping you


making up your mind? We are still getting representations from both


sides. And the unions. Yes, some say it could have a detrimental effect


on pay packets in Scotland. That has to be our primary concern. You need


the SNP, you would defeat the Government. What are you talking


about? We would defeat the Government with the SNP. It is


looking at the evidence. If you look at the Edinburgh economic stake,


they say it will hit the pay packet, or the evidence on the high Street.


Mike small businesses, they have not said, we want you to make sure that


the big stores are open for more than six hours. It is not something


that is needed. If their strong feeling? I am a huge fan of David's,


but I go to church on Sundays and I love shopping on Sundays, we should


be able to do both. You can. But you have restrictions. Why not and are


people to make these decisions for themselves? You can purchase what


you want when you want online. Things will be delivered when you


want. Why force shops? Because of the issue of workers and whether it


is necessary. Let people decide. Workers cannot decide for


themselves, they are often pressurised into working on a


Sunday. We used to get double-time for a Sunday at BHS. It is great


that a third of workers in Scotland get that, but that does not happen


elsewhere. I have sat on the committee, I have signed your


amendment, David. The current plans strike a balance, we should be


keeping the rules as they are. It will mean that people can stay at


home and have time with their families. Men who work on a Sunday


spend less time reading with their families, doing leisure activities,


and this is worrying in terms of how families and the pressure that


families are under. In terms of ministers, are you


expecting resignations over this? Over the weekend, there's been at


least one that's saying they are wrestling with their conscience


because they didn't see this coming. You heard in your clip, the previous


debate, two years to debate this previously, we'll probably have two


hours if we are lucky. This is it, it's not just the voice of big


business. I have to say... I'm doubtful. Let me come back to


Stewart Hosie, could you do a deal with David Burrowes on this? It's


not about doing a deal, it's about looking at the evidence from both


sides, weighing up the protections and the statute and saying, if this


goes ahead on the balance of probability, will Scottish workers


have pay eroded orange? Right now we have to be on the side of workers so


not. So you would be doing a deal then. That won't be a good look for


your supporter? It's not a good look to help the Government get through a


deeply unpopular measure north of the border. You said that without


moving your lips, Stewart Hosie! If a UK-wide system led to the erosion


of terms and conditions and pay packets in Scotland, we couldn't


support that. Because the pay... You don't know that do you though as


such? No, but because the pay protection isn't in statute, it's


incredibly difficult to argue the other side of the case. Yes we can


get guarantees from some businesses but others have said to me, because


this will be deployed perhaps on an English local authority basis,


almost undeliverable full stop. Right. That makes it chaotic. Isn't


that the case that it would be local authorities in the end who'd make


the decision? Yes, it's a one-way valve. You can only further


deregulate, you can't restrict. What is wrong with that then? Why should


politicians in Westminster dictate? This is based on the Government


making the case without publishing all the analysis and evidence. They


are making the case that in the interests of deregulation, it makes


economic sense. On a local level, you will see a competitive


environment. It will be a race to the bottom. Each local council will


have a big voice loud and clear. They'll want to deregulate further.


Is that a glass half empty analysis? We are talking act using the law of


the land to prevent people from spending their Sundays the way they


want. Come on, we live in a free country, let people do what they


want. You have to look at the people, a lot of them will be


shopping if they want to, there are also workers. Most are having to


work on Sundays already. Most do not want to work the extra hours and do


not want to feel implied or explicit pressure. They're there for the


families who want the choice as we have. We have a decent compromise,


why unpick it now? It's unnecessary. Most Conservatives think... Is


anyone listening to you? The Government are looking at


compromises. One option is to zone into a tourist area, but many are


concerned by the principle of it. You are saying that might be


possible? It would be an idea if the big tourist magnets like West End of


London. That is an interesting experiment if it worked. It might be


something to look at. But I've sat on the Bill committee for this. The


way the legislation is drafted, it's not West End legislation, it's


national. Brandon Lewis's compromise about the red line around the high


street whatever that is, not out of town, in Wakefield, I have 5,000


people who work in retail, what does it mean if you are outside you don't


get it and if you do you can. It's confusion and it's confusing also


for the large stores. Sainsbury's, Tescos, Waitrose have all come out


saying they don't want this, because they don't want in Wakefield one


system and in Leeds another different system. Are you confident?


No. We'll wait and see what happens today. I'm confident that an


increasing number of my colleagues recognise this is unnecessary, not


needed, keep things as they are. We have a good British compromise and


let's carry on and get on with important issues of helping small


businesses and enterprise. Thank you both very much.


Now Harold Wilson won four general elections,


held the UK's last referendum on EU membership, abolished capital


punishment and promised to harness the famous white heat of technology.


This week marks the 100th anniversary of his birth,


and Mps are calling for him to be recognised as one of the 20th


As you know, Her Majesty The Queen has agreed to my request that


Parliament should be dissolved on Friday and the general election


will be held on Thursday 10th October.


This, believe it or not, is the first piece of political


television I can ever remember seeing.


I had no idea what was being said, I just remember the man


The irony is that for a man whose memories eluded him too early


in his life, his dementia may be the reason our memories and memorial


of him are perhaps less than some think he deserves.


Brilliant man, Prime Minister, but he had this debilitating


By the time he came to talk for me in the 1979 election,


he was still functioning, but his memory was slipping away,


and he had already suffered from letting people know that


Even when he was in the House of Lords, he was not in a condition


Denis Healey lived right into his 90s, very articulate,


speaking out about his career, his life, his contribution,


The members' lobby of Parliament, the atrium for MPs before they enter


the Commons chamber, has busts and statues of some former


The iconic ones are Churchill, Lloyd George, Attlee and Thatcher,


Some think Wilson ought to be another.


Especially since this Friday is the centenary of his birth.


Many of us have forgotten much of what Wilson did to change the way


Someone said the other day, Harold Wilson as Prime Minister


Both in terms of censorship, the rights of women being promoted,


homosexual law reform, the end of capital punishment.


That era, the 60s, that people think about the Beatles and a change


in life, Harold was at the helm, he wanted Britain to


He also knew that we had to do it with high skills,


innovation, facing the future as a modern nation.


So far, the Speaker's art fund has rejected plans for a full statue,


they say he has the bust and there is a Wilson Room.


But he says if the real obstacle is cash, not a problem.


If the Speaker says to me, or the art fund says,


And the Labour MP and historian Tristram Hunt is giving a speech


about Harold Wilson this evening, and he joins us now.


Lloyd George, Churchill, Atlee and Thatcher, does Wilson deserve to be


ranked amongst them? Harold Wilson most certainly does. He was a great


Labour Prime Minister and did the two things really that successful


insurgents need to do. He put the Labour Party on the side of a


patriatic British future, that great moment in 1964, The Beatles first


low pressure, lady chatterly's trial, Wilson caught this


progressive moment. What he also did was to reinvent socialism. Every


great Labour Leader updates socialism for the modern era so this


notion of a white heat of the scientific revolution. It's very


modern Jo because it speaks about automation and technological change


and change in society and how the Labour Party needs to put a kind of


active, what we'd call today an entrepreneurial state behind this


technology to deliver for citizens. He was seen as the great fixer and,


for many people, he was the Prime Minister and leader of the Labour


Party that sort of held the party together that that really was his


driving force. Do you think that is why perhaps some of the achievements


that you have outlined have been overshadowed? He is known as this


fixer. Barbara Castle used to talk about his eel-like qualities and


ability to keep the show on the road. But look at what came out of


that. Incredible legislation in terms of female rites, incredible


change to liberal reform, abolition of death penalty, change to divorce


law and abortion law. Also I think from a Labour perspective what was


impressive was his attack on inequality. This was a golden age of


capitalism with rising living standards which Wilson oversaw and


crucially, he put education as a real priority of every Labour


Government, the Open University, he was hugely proud of his University


of The year. Today, as well as busts, what we should also think


about, we are losing some of the edge on the Internet and education


and technology and social progress. I think, as well as the bustses, we


should think about how we reflect on Wilson's achievements and have a


push on the Internet on education. 1-1 of the achievements would be the


referendum in 1975. One of my colleagues... This is archive, Jo.


Yes. My colleague brought this in, the two leaflets for No and Yes at


this time. In pristine condition. Interesting to go for brown to vote


No. Hold them up to the camera, we don't want to be accused of being


unimpartial. At the time it was Labour that was so divided and


Harold Wilson's gamble paid off, if you like. Do you think there are


huge similarities between Wilson's dilemma then and Cameron's now?


There are extraordinary parallels. Wilson was trying to keep his party


together, trying to keep Labour in power and he was trying to keep


Britain in the European Economic Community and you could flip all


that for David Cameron today. What's interesting though is, where you see


a slight difference is, David Cameron is in a sense even more


enthusiastic for Europe than Harold Wilson was. Wilson was a slightly


reluctant campaigner but the difference crucially is that Wilson


made the progressive case for Europe and it was a case about high skills


and high wage and growth and it was I think a much more positive case


rather than some of the stuff we are seeing from the Prime Minister at


the moment. Crucially, he pulled it off, he won, succeeded. That was


obviously the result of that, it paid off for him. David Cameron will


obviously be hoping the same will happen this time around. Well, if


Corbyn is running your movement, you are going to look back fondly at the


previous Prime Minister apart from Tony Blair. I can see the attraction


of looking back. When Wilson talk about the scientific revolution,


it's a technocratic mindset. The revolution is built on that top-down


set. In the digital age, trying to arrange the age of millions is


doomed to failure. Fundamentally the world's changed from the old days


and I think the Government wanting people to vote to remain will lose


on this occasion. Rightly so. This is the interesting difference today.


Douglas is right in his response to the white heat was a status response


that you had to manage this and ended up with ayous. The response to


the Labour Party today is to be how do you emboyer citizens to deal with


technochange, so how do you create Trade Unions for the ubeer radio and


employment and maternity rights in self-employment so. Embrace the


modern white heat of uber, the Internet and super computers but


also have a strong Social Democratic response.


You two can join forces. Mary? We have the great Anglo-French


collaboration around Concorde and breaking the sound barrier. How did


that work? Well. Where is it now? It's been mothballed. Failure. A a


good metaphor for the European Union. The Airbus collaboration


creates thousands of jobs across the country and is one of the two major


manufacturers of aeroplanes and so there is this state thing that you


are very negative about. I think ah old would be looking at the European


Union now and saying it's evolved over time and how do we deal with


the networks. ATh Please can I come in. Concorde was a great triumph. It


was good at transporting rock stars across the Atlantic, like the


European Union, it subsidises rich bankers, they get bail outs,. .


European Union, it subsidises rich European Union also delivered


low-cost air travel across Europe. The Ryanair, easyJet revolution is


built upon... Deregulation is possible without being in the


European Union. They have cheap air travel in other places. Let me


return to the question. What would Harold Wilson make of Jeremy


Corbyn's Labour Party today? I think he'd look at it as a party that is


not making the progress that we should be making. Walter Harrison


was one of the whips in the Wilson government that kept that show on


the road. Well, I think what this post-war generation of politicians


had was an absolutely laser-like desire to keep power, win power and


change people's minds. Do you think that's gone? We are in danger


change people's minds. Do you think losing it and looking in on


ourselves and we need to keep looking out. Wilson believed the


Labour Party was the natural party of Government. He didn't believe the


Labour Party was a protest movement protesting outside other Party


Conferences. He thought it should be round the table delivering social


justice for the people that came into being to represent. He'd be


horrified by the tendency towards endless protests, rather than


thinking about how we get into power and do what Labour Governments are


about, tackling inequality, promoting education, dealing with


technology, putting us at the heart of Europe.


Well, it looks like we can expect another week dominated by the EU


referendum, but what else will be on the agenda?


Tonight sees the usual weekly meeting of the Parliamentary Labour


Last week Mr Corbyn addressed his MPs for the first time this year


Tuesday could mark a significant point in the campaign ahead


of the referendum on EU membership, as the governor of the Bank


of England Mark Carney goes in front of the Treasury Select Committee


to outline the possible implications for a vote to leave.


Also on Tuesday, leave campaigner and minister Priti Patel is expected


to speak at an event promoting Women For Britain,


a group which will try to persuade women of the case


Will Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday be overshadowed


by the start of the third strike by junior doctors in England?


The 48-hour action is part of their campaign against


the Government's decision to impose a new contract.


Labour MP Dan Jarvis gives a speech on Thursday


The former soldier is often spoken of as a future party leader.


And Friday sees the opening rally of the Liberal Democrats' spring


Joining me now from outside Parliament is the Spectator's Isabel


Hardman and Joel Taylor from the Metro.


The junior doctors strike, another one expected because they have not


reached an agreement or a compromise, the Health Secretary


said the Government will impose the new contract later this year. Is


there any hope of some sort of breakthrough? No, and Jeremy Hunt is


determined not to let the BMA win. Colleagues of his say that he talks


about the need to stand up to the doctors so it does not encourage


other groups to behave badly. What he seems to be tripping is that


doctors will stop supporting the BMA now that it is continuing to take


industrial action post imposition of the contract. What are we to think


in terms of public support? Is it still fairly consistently in favour


of junior doctors or waning? The doctors being part of the NHS gets a


lot of natural support from the public, but it will be a harder


test, with the 48-hour strike, thousands will see operations


cancelled, it cause increasing disruption. It will be put to the


test. Let's talk about the budget. We expect lots of leaks, but fuel


duty rising, we have had cheaper petrol prices compare to the past,


that lightly? The likeliness of anything depends on how angry Tory


MPs get over the next week and a bit. George Osborne knows the party


is in a fractious mood, and for him to introduce any measure that will


cause a row on top of the row about the referendum is unlikely, which is


why he has retreated from reforms on pension tax relief. If he wants to


press ahead with tax cuts for the middle classes, for most people, you


take it all the way down the tax rates, does he not have to do


something if he wants to keep a lid on Government borrowing? He will


have to find something. He is trying to maintain the balance with his


backbenchers. They don't want any further disruption and distractions


from the issues at hand. In terms of pension tax relief, that also is an


issue that Conservative MPs have been angry about. Is that looking


less likely? Much less likely. It's a shame, because it is the stage at


which you can attempt these radical reforms, but because of the mood in


the party it is unlikely he will want to do something that will end


up clobbering his natural supporters in the middle classes. Boris Johnson


gave his first broadcast interview since declaring for Brexit


yesterday, what was your assessment? He was afflicted with the problem


that a lot of Brexiters have, they failed to put an image forward about


what would happen afterwards. But there were excerpts talking about


Upland and great country that would appear warming to his supporters in


clips. It got a pasting in the papers, I don't know whether it was


because expectations had been raised or whether the style of the


interview was not to everybody's taste. He was quite rambling, I was


surprised at how people went at him, he has had bad reviews. He made a


compelling case for wanting to leave, if not for what would happen


once Britain did leave. There was a lot of pressure, because he is the


charismatic figurehead of the campaign. They are relying on him to


appeal to voters who are not particularly interested in


politicians generally, and he did not make that mark. David Cameron


has had a successful few weeks, scaring voters. What will he do now?


Will he be relatively quiet, or will he continue with his campaign? I


don't think it is in his nature to be quiet. He was not intending to


take a leading role for the campaign, but he is stuck with it. I


cannot see him shying away to frequently from sticking his neck


out. Thank you very much. It is the Parliamentary Labour Party


tonight, where you there last week? Yes. It was the first time Jeremy


Corbyn had come to address Labour MPs, and tonight he will take


questions. Last week he stated he was confident about what will happen


in the local Government elections in May and the Police and Crime


Commissioner elections, and I share that confidence, we have new young


members, I was on the doorstep for Sadiq Khan last Thursday, very


positive response in London. We should make gains in council that we


need to win. Will you? We absolutely should, Calderdale has been hit by


the floods, we only need to take one seat to take control of the council.


Just fill it, when asked if Labour could win the election, said


absolutely not. It is too early to say, this is the first electoral


test for Jeremy, he is up beat, as am I. It is important we keep our


eyes focused on the by-election in Sheffield Brightside, we had our new


candidate selected, she will be standing, and I have no doubt she


will be a brilliant MP, and what a courageous woman, to take part on so


soon after first husband died. Now, because the Daily Politics


is a high-brow news and current-affairs show -


no laughing at the back, please - we can show


you this happening. He was looking relaxed


now, but then... Mayhem, as parliamentary drama


turned into a circus. Let's speak to Nick


Robinson, who was there. I was sitting a few feet


away from Mr Murdoch, half a second before he was hit


in the face with a plate Yes, that was a foam pie


being thrown at media mogul Rupert Murdoch as he gave evidence


to a select committee back in 2011. But while we can show it to you,


footage from Parliament can't be used by any light-entertainment


programme or in political satire. Last week one MP pressed the House


of Commons to rethink the ban. Here's what Leader of


the House Chris Grayling had to say. Could we have a statement


on the uses of broadcast footage My constituent Charlie Brooker


has raised with me... He has raised that he is not able


to use it in his programme Screenwipe, whereas other


not-dissimilar It depends whether it is satire,


light entertainment or factual. Given how vague the boundaries


are and these rules were dreamt up 27 years ago, would he not agree


with me it is a good juncture to revisit this


and have a statement? If it is a matter that concerns her,


she should put a submission to the administration committee,


but I think it is important we make sure the coverage of this House


is used in an appropriate way. I am not in favour of it


being made available Well, we're joined now


by the former MP Tom Harris, who thinks it's time to let


the satirists get stuck in. That recording of the pie that we


showed can be used in a news report, but not in a satirical programme.


Does it make sense? Makes no sense. It is a rule that is nearly 30 years


old. In the late 80s when MPs were being strong bond to support for the


first time the televising of Parliament, they needed reassurance


that they were not going to be mercilessly mocked. In 2016, of


course they are going to be mercilessly mocks, that is life, and


they need to get over themselves and are now it to happen. Do we want MPs


to be overly ridiculed and exposed to ridicule if they are perfectly


able to do it themselves? Indeed they are. But the idea that you


would offer some special protection to Parliament, of all the


institutions, even the Royal family does not get that, so why would our


elected representatives? They are big and ugly enough to look after


themselves, to answer for themselves, they don't need this


protection. If they do, I wonder if they are up to the job. One might


say, you would say that now, you are not an MP anymore, I never heard


this clamour from when you were an MP. That is right. The wonderful


perspective one is given when you are no longer a member of the


chamber! From the comfort of your studio! In the spirit of John


Wilkes, who was banned from reporting what MPs said,


broadcasters should ignore this. There are ridiculous rules that the


House of Commons put into place, broadcasters should ignore it. I was


told I could not use Periscope to broadcast, and I ignored it.


Although it pains me to agree with Douglas, I do. Tom and I worked on


the shadow transport team for many years. The Internet means these


clips can be picked up, used, accused in whatever way. The idea


that you say that you cannot show something funny to John Stuart on


the capital at a show, it is Alice through the looking glass. Would


Chris Grayling make a good subject for satire? I described him last


week as somebody who looks like he had just been ejected from an


undertaker's convention for bringing everybody else down. I am sure he is


a light-hearted chap, but he needs to drag the house into the


21st-century. He is to drag the house into the


justify the old buffer culture. Will it change? It has do. In fairness to


the Speaker, when I first became an MP I could not put online clips of


me speaking in the chamber, I had to go through a bureaucratic process,


the Speaker has changed it, we need to go further. Argue about to


replace the Prime Minister's favourite columnist in the Daily


Telegraph? Who is he? Dan Hodges. Yes, I am. You are going to become


his favourite! I and the new Dan Hodges, but more clean-shaven and


probably slightly more right wing. You will say goodbye to your friends


in the Labour Party? No, I am sticking in there for the laughs. I


will be using this platform to speak truth unto powerlessness. For the


laughs, that this charming. How dare you, see me later! I will!


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


The question was, which leading left-winger has re-joined the Labour


A) former MP George Galloway, b) unions boss Mark Serwotka,


c) former Militant councillor Derek Hatton, or d) the filmmaker


Mocks what car. If he is nicer to me on question Time, it would be a good


thing. The 1pm is starting


over on BBC One now. I'll be here at noon tomorrow


with all the big political stories


Download Subtitles