:00:38. > :00:41.Hello, and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:42. > :00:43.The Justice Secretary Michael Gove accuses his cabinet
:00:44. > :00:48."like children who can be frightened into obedience",
:00:49. > :00:52.but are Leave campaigners waging their own campaign of fear?
:00:53. > :00:56.The Chinese will do something about the over-production of steel,
:00:57. > :00:59.so says the business secretary, but does the UK steel industry need
:01:00. > :01:03.direct government intervention to survive?
:01:04. > :01:07.It's an age-old technique used by MPs to wreck legislation
:01:08. > :01:09.they don't like, but is full time about to be called
:01:10. > :01:21.And if it does, will it be televised?
:01:22. > :01:28.There is a tendency in the Labour Party to organise revolutionary
:01:29. > :01:31.politics in the Labour Party and outside it.
:01:32. > :01:34.All that in the next hour and with us for the whole
:01:35. > :01:37.of the programme today left-wing-activist-turned-journalist
:01:38. > :01:39.and writer, former Channel Four News and Newsnight
:01:40. > :01:46.Yesterday was George Osborne's turn, today Justice Secretary Michael Gove
:01:47. > :01:50.takes centre stage in the EU referendum debate, setting out why
:01:51. > :01:53.he believes quitting the EU would be an act of liberation
:01:54. > :02:02.It follows Treasury forecasts an exit could cost
:02:03. > :02:04.households ?4,300 a year - a figure that has been heavily
:02:05. > :02:11.Michael Gove warned that a vote to stay in the EU is 'the real
:02:12. > :02:13.danger', arguing that Eurozone countries have a permanent
:02:14. > :02:20.and unstoppable majority allowing them to overrule British interests.
:02:21. > :02:23.And that "Britain has lost control of a vital area of power
:02:24. > :02:24.and the European Court will increasingly decide
:02:25. > :02:33.Turning on his opponents, Mr Gove said the Remain campaign,
:02:34. > :02:36.led by Prime Minister David Cameron, "treats people like mere children,
:02:37. > :02:40.capable of being frightened into obedience by conjuring up
:02:41. > :02:48.The Justice Secretary's speech comes the day
:02:49. > :02:53.argued that Britain would be "permanently poorer" outside the EU.
:02:54. > :02:57.But Michael Gove argued: "The report from the Treasury is an official
:02:58. > :03:01.admission from the IN campaign that if we vote to stay in the EU then
:03:02. > :03:03.immigration will to continue to increase by hundreds of thousands
:03:04. > :03:12.One of the most striking things about the debate on Britain's future
:03:13. > :03:16.relationship with Europe is that the case for staying
:03:17. > :03:20.is couched, overwhelmingly, in negative and pessimistic terms.
:03:21. > :03:23.While the case for leaving is positive and optimistic.
:03:24. > :03:26.Those of us who want to leave, believe that Britain's
:03:27. > :03:32.That our country has tremendous untapped potential,
:03:33. > :03:38.which independence would unleash and our institutions,
:03:39. > :03:40.values and people will make an even more positive
:03:41. > :03:44.difference to the world, if we are unshackled from the past.
:03:45. > :03:47.I'm joined now by the Justice Minister and leave Campaigner,
:03:48. > :03:49.Dominic Raab and the Labour MP Chuka Umunna from
:03:50. > :04:02.First of all, is the Remaining campaign treating people like me are
:04:03. > :04:09.children capable of being frightened into obedience by conjuring up a new
:04:10. > :04:15.bogeyman every night? No, and if everyone is conjuring up anything it
:04:16. > :04:18.is the leave campaign. Me and Dominic have particular views, we
:04:19. > :04:25.are not impartial and we want our side to win, but there is a bank of
:04:26. > :04:29.independent people from the IMF and Unison and unite who argue that we
:04:30. > :04:37.are better off in. The Leave campaign would have you believe that
:04:38. > :04:42.the Unite and Unison are working together with a band of socialists,
:04:43. > :04:46.all raucous rated by President Obama on George Osborne's behalf, to
:04:47. > :04:54.oppose bricks it. It is pure fantasy. Are you indulging in
:04:55. > :04:59.fantasy politics, accusing other team -- sides of conjuring up the
:05:00. > :05:04.bogeyman? We have cross-party consensus and unions like the RMT
:05:05. > :05:08.right the way through to economists like Nigel Lawson, the former
:05:09. > :05:12.Chancellor, making the Case for going out. There is a risk reward
:05:13. > :05:17.calculation on both sides. What Michael Gove wants to do is say,
:05:18. > :05:20.hang on, you are talking about the risks of leaving the EU but what
:05:21. > :05:27.about the risks of staying in with the Eurozone crisis. Also today,
:05:28. > :05:31.critically, he set out the positive vision outside of the EU. What was
:05:32. > :05:37.the positive vision? The majority of what Michael Gove said this morning,
:05:38. > :05:41.hearing the interview this morning, saying it was all about the fear of
:05:42. > :05:46.staying in. Take your time and have a read of the whole thing. It repays
:05:47. > :05:52.it. First of all, there is no lottery ticket say that being in the
:05:53. > :05:55.EU or outside is a win, it is a balance of risk and reward. But he
:05:56. > :05:59.set out the brighter prospects outside the EU. The ability to
:06:00. > :06:04.control regulation. You can take different views, but it has a huge
:06:05. > :06:08.impact on small businesses. The EU commission concedes it hits small
:06:09. > :06:13.businesses ten times as hard as normal businesses. In this country
:06:14. > :06:17.small businesses create 85% of new jobs. Secondly he talked about the
:06:18. > :06:20.brighter prospects if we are independent and more energetically
:06:21. > :06:25.trading from Latin America to Asia. The EU has been a poor negotiator of
:06:26. > :06:28.trade agreements and it doesn't have a single agreement with a big
:06:29. > :06:33.economy. We can argue that there are a whole range of positive
:06:34. > :06:38.opportunities outside the EU that people like Chuka Umunna completely
:06:39. > :06:42.discard. Isn't that the problem for the remaining campaign? They can
:06:43. > :06:48.talk about Project Fia, but the idea of a brighter future of change and
:06:49. > :06:53.looking beyond what we have now does feel like an easier case to argue in
:06:54. > :06:58.a more passion away than for the status quo which is more difficult
:06:59. > :07:02.when you rely on establishment bodies and institutions like the
:07:03. > :07:06.IMF. Lave McCluskey and Dave Prentice might have something to
:07:07. > :07:10.say. I don't buy the idea that we get trampled over by our partners in
:07:11. > :07:14.the European Union and we don't get our way. Nine out of ten times we
:07:15. > :07:19.are on the majority side when there are votes on the European Council.
:07:20. > :07:22.And it is suggested that some how things are imposed on high and we
:07:23. > :07:25.don't have a role to play in the rules and regulations that come out
:07:26. > :07:31.from it. But I see this in bigger terms. I think we are dealing with a
:07:32. > :07:33.lot of cross-border issues, whether it is terror, the environmental
:07:34. > :07:41.contrast Rafiq unfolding with climate change. Those things do not
:07:42. > :07:45.know borders. -- catastrophe. When you are looking at these things, and
:07:46. > :07:48.Paul has written a lot about it, the power of multinational companies
:07:49. > :07:51.which seek to play different jurisdictions against each other
:07:52. > :07:54.saying if you don't adopt a lower level of labour protection in that
:07:55. > :08:01.country we will take business elsewhere. And what actually the
:08:02. > :08:03.European Union enables us to do is set minimum standards and prevent
:08:04. > :08:08.that race to the bottom. We will come back to security in a moment
:08:09. > :08:12.because one of the big problems for Leave is what does it look like.
:08:13. > :08:19.That question is repeatedly posed because you don't have a document to
:08:20. > :08:22.actually answer this. We can't negotiate with the EU before the
:08:23. > :08:29.referendum. That is an aunt Sally. You can provide an alternative. We
:08:30. > :08:32.have. I'm not saying it's a criticism but there was no document
:08:33. > :08:38.are put through so in certain terms you are doing something that may
:08:39. > :08:43.happen but you don't know for sure. That is the same as the Remain
:08:44. > :08:51.campaign. We know what it looks like. Look at the Eurozone crisis on
:08:52. > :08:57.the way it unfolded. The EU feels like it is on a permanent state of
:08:58. > :09:01.crisis. The truth is there is far greater uncertainty around the
:09:02. > :09:06.prospect of the EU than there are in making, modestly, but in clear ways,
:09:07. > :09:12.the very concrete areas where we can actually change things. Like border
:09:13. > :09:15.controls. You couldn't anticipate the migration crisis in the way it
:09:16. > :09:21.unfolded and the EU has not been able to deal with it. That migration
:09:22. > :09:26.crisis would be there, notwithstanding whether the EU would
:09:27. > :09:30.be there or not. But one might say if the EU cannot deal with a
:09:31. > :09:36.migration crisis... So it has no pull on a migration crisis? Let me
:09:37. > :09:41.finish my sentence. If you look at what is driving the migration
:09:42. > :09:45.crisis, we had growing jihad is in Africa and more coming into the EU
:09:46. > :09:48.zone from Africa and also the problems in the Middle East. Those
:09:49. > :09:53.things would subsist whether we were in or out of the European Union. I
:09:54. > :09:56.am by no means saying the European Union is perfect and it needs
:09:57. > :10:01.reform, and you can only reform it if you are at the table, not outside
:10:02. > :10:06.the room. What about the Eurozone crisis? You couldn't have predicted
:10:07. > :10:09.that? We are not in the Eurozone but George Osborne said we did feel
:10:10. > :10:15.buffeted by the crisis. This goes to the heart of one of the Leave
:10:16. > :10:20.campaign's biggest weaknesses. They say if we leave we will be part of
:10:21. > :10:23.the single market so we have all the benefits but we will not have to pay
:10:24. > :10:26.a fee and we won't be subject to any of the rules that come with being
:10:27. > :10:32.part of the single market. No country outside of the EU has that
:10:33. > :10:36.kind of arrangement, and why would members that we leave in the EU, why
:10:37. > :10:41.would they give us a deal that they have not given themselves? That is
:10:42. > :10:44.the problem with the Michael Gove speech. Many German and French
:10:45. > :10:49.menaces have articulated that argument. Dominic Raab, I'm going to
:10:50. > :10:53.put this to you, the French economy minister suggested that Britain
:10:54. > :10:57.would be completely killed in trade talks if the country chose to leave
:10:58. > :11:01.the EU. I'm not saying he is right, but this is the response we get, and
:11:02. > :11:05.maybe they would say that at the moment because they don't want
:11:06. > :11:09.Britain to leave the EU. But you have to ask yourself, if you want a
:11:10. > :11:13.trade deal with all the pluses and advantages and none of the tariffs
:11:14. > :11:18.and quid pro quo freedom of movement is, why would they give it? First of
:11:19. > :11:23.all, I hope the French economic minister keeps talking. The idea
:11:24. > :11:27.that Britain would be apocalyptically off the cliff edge
:11:28. > :11:32.if we left the EU is silly. Neither the head of the CBI, the British
:11:33. > :11:38.ambassador to the EU, nor the Prime Minister takes that position.
:11:39. > :11:43.Thereau risk and reward ratios with in or out. The reason I think we
:11:44. > :11:45.would have a strong trading relationship is that we are the
:11:46. > :11:50.fifth biggest economy in the world and the EU firms sell 60 billion
:11:51. > :11:55.more than we sell them. There is a strong mutual interest. The only
:11:56. > :11:59.reason we would be in trouble is if the EU was going to behave in an
:12:00. > :12:02.utterly vindictive, spiteful way. And that would run against its own
:12:03. > :12:09.interests. I would say this, is that the kind of club you want to be part
:12:10. > :12:13.of? I'm not saying, because it is a bit of a strawman argument, that we
:12:14. > :12:17.would not be able to trade with our European partners. But there would
:12:18. > :12:21.be a deal to be done. It is a question of the terms. In terms of
:12:22. > :12:26.the risk and reward we are talking about, 44% of exports go to the EU.
:12:27. > :12:34.On average, if you look at the other 27 member states, just 5% goes. But
:12:35. > :12:44.the point is, for hours, we have far more to lose on imports and exports.
:12:45. > :12:48.Let him finish his point. On world trade, I led a delegation, trade
:12:49. > :12:52.delegation to Beijing in 2013 and you know what the Chinese said to
:12:53. > :12:59.make and I went to the International Department of the Chinese Communist
:13:00. > :13:02.Party, as you do, and they said to me, we don't understand why are
:13:03. > :13:06.there some people who want to leave the European Union in your country?
:13:07. > :13:11.When you negotiate with us, whatever it may be, intellectual property, a
:13:12. > :13:15.concern of small businesses in China, you are sitting on one half
:13:16. > :13:19.of the table with half a billion other people negotiating with 1.3
:13:20. > :13:24.billion, why do you want to sit in the corner on your own? Can I ask
:13:25. > :13:29.about China? So why does the EU not have a trade deal with China but
:13:30. > :13:32.Switzerland does? But Switzerland has a deal that Michael Gove doesn't
:13:33. > :13:37.want to emulate my got the impression. We have surely got
:13:38. > :13:44.bigger economic clout than Switzerland. Paul Mason, on the
:13:45. > :13:49.figures, one with talk about the Leave campaign quoting ?350 million
:13:50. > :13:54.but has been argued against, that we pay, they say, to the EU, and we
:13:55. > :13:58.hear that households would be worse off, maybe not individually, but the
:13:59. > :14:04.June ?4300 per year, does it resonate the public? -- to the June.
:14:05. > :14:08.It doesn't resonate with me because I've been on the end of so many Bank
:14:09. > :14:12.of England reports where you cannot see the inner workings and I never
:14:13. > :14:17.trust them. The idea you can put a figure on it per family is
:14:18. > :14:22.ridiculous. The Brexit debate will be about principle. I am convinced
:14:23. > :14:26.of the principle that Michael Gove outlined there, that the European
:14:27. > :14:30.Union is not democratic and is incapable of becoming democratic.
:14:31. > :14:35.That is why, philosophically, I would support Brexit. My problem is
:14:36. > :14:38.that what we have gone on to is what is the proposal? Michael Gove says
:14:39. > :14:43.we are like a hostage in the back of the EU car. I don't want to be a
:14:44. > :14:46.hostage in the back of the car of Michael Gove and Boris Johnson.
:14:47. > :14:50.Given the choice on the 23rd of June, I think Brexit will happen
:14:51. > :14:53.anyway for the reasons David Cameron suggest because we got a deal in
:14:54. > :15:00.Brussels that we are already half out. In ten years, we will be out. I
:15:01. > :15:04.just don't want to come out with an ultra right wing Tory government and
:15:05. > :15:10.no chance for the left or social democracy to have its say within
:15:11. > :15:17.that framework. Is that the problem for attracting voters to your side?
:15:18. > :15:24.The co-chairman of the Leave is there and Stuart Digby Jones. I take
:15:25. > :15:28.Paul's point. The reality is that the anyway the British people have a
:15:29. > :15:31.choice is between those two models is if we are outside of the EU, so I
:15:32. > :15:34.understand that people feel different way on the left in
:15:35. > :15:38.relation to things like the working Time directive. They don't get a say
:15:39. > :15:45.at all if they are outside. Isn't it true that this is less about the
:15:46. > :15:49.merits or not remaining in the EU but more than the viewers have
:15:50. > :15:53.become spectators of the war in the Conservative Party? You could say
:15:54. > :15:59.the same on the left? It's not the same as the blue on blue attacks.
:16:00. > :16:03.Jeremy Corbyn is being attacked left right and centre for being
:16:04. > :16:07.passionate about it. That is a good deflection, but it has been, as a
:16:08. > :16:11.result of a split in the Conservative Party, you must accept
:16:12. > :16:14.it? There are different views in the Labour Party on both sides and
:16:15. > :16:17.different views on the Tory party, and the average person watching
:16:18. > :16:21.probably thinks that's healthy. The overwhelming majority of the labour
:16:22. > :16:24.movement is absolutely behind continuing with membership of the EU
:16:25. > :16:29.because we think it is best for security, prosperity and jobs. One
:16:30. > :16:33.thing I would ask you to consider, Michael Gove, kind of weird seeing
:16:34. > :16:36.them next to each other like that, doing this speech from the position
:16:37. > :16:40.of being a champion of democracy, and one of the things that is
:16:41. > :16:43.curious is he has a lot to say about democracy with the EU but very
:16:44. > :16:47.little to say about democracy here where you can get into government
:16:48. > :16:52.with less than 25% of the support of registered electors. It illustrates,
:16:53. > :16:57.does this by care about democracy or is there something else. Before I
:16:58. > :17:02.let these two go, Paul Mason, Jeremy Corbyn's conversion, is it credible?
:17:03. > :17:09.I think it is. Does he believe He is attempting to lead a party. You
:17:10. > :17:13.cannot criticise him for not trying to build consensus in his party.
:17:14. > :17:16.Like me, there are many people in the Labour moment who are sceptical
:17:17. > :17:21.of Europe. I'm sceptical mainly on dome crass sane free movement but,
:17:22. > :17:25.you know, the choice will be, on 23rd, whether or not to hand over to
:17:26. > :17:30.Boris and Michael Gove and they could have come and said - let's do
:17:31. > :17:33.something, let's create the debate about the future Britain outside
:17:34. > :17:37.Europe beforehand, but they didn't. That's been their choice. It is
:17:38. > :17:43.clearer and clearer this week, that that is not their choice. I will
:17:44. > :17:47.have to stop it there. I promised I would do security, and I did not. I
:17:48. > :17:49.will come back. When you are invited.
:17:50. > :17:54.The question for today is which leading politicians has
:17:55. > :17:55.spent ?10,0000 on their official parliamentary
:17:56. > :17:59.Was it a) The Home Secretary Theresa May?
:18:00. > :18:04.c) The Lords Speaker, Baroness D'Souza?
:18:05. > :18:06.or d) Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon?
:18:07. > :18:08.At the end of the show, Paul Mason will give us
:18:09. > :18:21.Now, the Business Minister, Sajid Javid, was meeting with other
:18:22. > :18:23.steel-producing nations yesterday, trying to persuade the Chinese,
:18:24. > :18:27.The Chinese deny that they're dumping steel on the world market,
:18:28. > :18:29.leading to huge losses at steel plants like Port Talbot,
:18:30. > :18:31.which is threatened with imminent closure.
:18:32. > :18:35.This is what Sajid Javid had to say after that meeting.
:18:36. > :18:38.Well overproduction is the number one issue to tackle.
:18:39. > :18:41.I don't think anyone expected an overnight solution to that
:18:42. > :18:44.but the discussion today, with all of these countries coming
:18:45. > :18:46.together, something we pushed for and pushed for China's
:18:47. > :18:48.participation, will help make the difference.
:18:49. > :18:50.With regard to Tata, the sales' process, the formal
:18:51. > :18:56.We are starting to be approached by interested parties.
:18:57. > :18:59.It is too early to say much about them at this stage
:19:00. > :19:02.but the important thing is, as we said all along,
:19:03. > :19:11.we will do everything we can to help with that sales' process.
:19:12. > :19:13.The steelworkers of Britain deserve nothing less.
:19:14. > :19:16.And we're joined now by the Conservative MP, John Redwood.
:19:17. > :19:20.Does the outcome of the talks mentally change anything? I hope
:19:21. > :19:25.it'll lead on to a resolution. We know the Chinese have said they will
:19:26. > :19:28.take out a lot of capacity in their own domestic market which would be
:19:29. > :19:31.extremely good news but we also know, of course, the big export
:19:32. > :19:36.threat to the UK steel industry has come from the continent of Europe,
:19:37. > :19:40.not from China and the rest of the EU exports about six times as much
:19:41. > :19:44.into the UK as the Chinese do. So we still have a problem, even if the
:19:45. > :19:47.Chinese take out enough capacity. Do you agree that will make a ditches,
:19:48. > :19:52.even if they lower capacity it could then Hayesen a resolution? Very,
:19:53. > :19:56.very slowly. They have a social unrest issue in China. Number one,
:19:57. > :20:00.as Mr Redwood says, there is also the issue of what is the balance of
:20:01. > :20:04.the European steel industry in Europe? And for us, for me in the
:20:05. > :20:07.Labour Party, people I speak to in the Labour movement, what is
:20:08. > :20:14.important is we save every job. That's one thing. That's what we are
:20:15. > :20:17.not hearing, a plan right now. You can't rush around fwrusles to
:20:18. > :20:23.Beijing without a plan for steel. Even Thatcher had a plan for coal,
:20:24. > :20:26.didn't she? There doesn't seem to be the ability for this Conservative
:20:27. > :20:29.Government to have a plan for anything. Do they not have a plan?
:20:30. > :20:34.Is the Government sort of making it up as it goes along by saying it is
:20:35. > :20:38.not going to happen overnight, it is still too early to say, we are not
:20:39. > :20:42.going to commit our sefts to saving every job in the way that Paul Mason
:20:43. > :20:46.has just outlined, is that because there isn't a plan? I think there is
:20:47. > :20:49.a developing plan. The Government isn't in full charge. They have to
:20:50. > :20:52.deal with EU requirements. They have to deal with the very difficult
:20:53. > :20:56.steel market. They have to deal with the people who currently own the
:20:57. > :21:04.assets. The Government doesn't own everything, it is not all powerful.
:21:05. > :21:07.But rhetoric... I believe the businessminister and the Prime
:21:08. > :21:11.Minister when they say they want to save the Port Talbot works. I'm not
:21:12. > :21:16.saying they are going to save every job, of course we want to save as
:21:17. > :21:19.many as possible but we need to save capacity and the technology related
:21:20. > :21:23.to it. Is it sustainable in the long term, even if you reduce pension
:21:24. > :21:26.liability and did something about energy costs which are are the
:21:27. > :21:34.things we could do something about, is it sustainable in the lock term?
:21:35. > :21:38.When McDonald's automated part of the restaurant do touch screen they
:21:39. > :21:44.said they weren't losing a single job, they are not doing it to get
:21:45. > :21:46.rid of jobs, it is to reorder the business. A commitment like that
:21:47. > :21:52.from the Government would be one thing. If you ask is it viable,
:21:53. > :21:57.there is an argument in the steel industry, we have Conservative
:21:58. > :22:01.governments who have not taken seriously industrial policy. I'm in
:22:02. > :22:05.favour of doing it f it had to happen. It didn't work, before, did
:22:06. > :22:12.t nationalising steel It did. In what way The steel industry
:22:13. > :22:16.functioned and had a competitive. Was it competitive If you
:22:17. > :22:20.nationalise t it doesn't have to. You can do things for the good of
:22:21. > :22:24.the country, security and jobs The nationalised industry lost aer if
:22:25. > :22:28.tune, created false hopes, and created five, very, very large works
:22:29. > :22:34.and -- lost a fortune. Most have gone or are now under threat T
:22:35. > :22:39.started with the awful problems over Ravenscraig. Let's in the Dell in
:22:40. > :22:43.the past. We have the same aim - to save as many jobs as possible and
:22:44. > :22:46.keep a businessic steel-making capacity and technology of the
:22:47. > :22:52.sophisticated steels which has to belinged. The plan surely must be to
:22:53. > :22:55.get a buyer, an organiser, entrepreneur, a company to stand
:22:56. > :22:58.behind. Why are they not lining up? I understand there are buyers in
:22:59. > :23:03.discussion, but it depends on what we are allowed to do EU subsidy
:23:04. > :23:08.rules limit what the Government can offer by way of financial cross. EU
:23:09. > :23:12.domestic rules and energy rules many dear energy. I want the Government
:23:13. > :23:15.to do much more on cheaper energy. One of the reasons the German
:23:16. > :23:19.industry sells so much into Britain is they have had much more energy
:23:20. > :23:23.subsidy than we have in or been allowed to have in the EU. Would you
:23:24. > :23:29.like to hear the Government saying they want it save every job at Port
:23:30. > :23:32.Talbot. I would like them and they will say they will save as many jobs
:23:33. > :23:36.as possible at Port Talbot. You shouldn't give false hope to people.
:23:37. > :23:41.It is a difficult situation. You have to allow that the a new owner
:23:42. > :23:45.may have to make adjustments. If a new owner can't be found. You say
:23:46. > :23:48.there are some in discussion. But I haven't seen that much evidence of
:23:49. > :23:54.people queueing up to take-to-. Paul Mason is right in a sows, you can
:23:55. > :23:57.make a priority F it is so important and such an intrinsic part of our
:23:58. > :24:01.manufacturing history and life in the UK, why not put the money in? We
:24:02. > :24:04.do it for other things. We did it for the banks and their balance
:24:05. > :24:08.sheets arguably are still not that healthy. Why don't we do it for
:24:09. > :24:12.steel? Government has said it is prepared to put money in, but it has
:24:13. > :24:16.to do it within the rules. The Belgium Government is having a levy
:24:17. > :24:20.to get money back which the state offered part of the Belgium
:24:21. > :24:26.industry. The Italian industry Sunday a commission. I think the
:24:27. > :24:30.Germans have defied the shengen agreement and Dublin 3. Occasionally
:24:31. > :24:35.a country can say - we are doing it ourselves, take us to the ECJ. Do
:24:36. > :24:38.you think ideology are tonight Tories going forward with that?
:24:39. > :24:42.There is the European element but the problem with the ideology, is
:24:43. > :24:47.Sajid Javid sitting there and thinking it would solve itself. If
:24:48. > :24:50.they said to Tata Steel, this country profound by believes in the
:24:51. > :24:53.steel industry and we will back whoever own it is with money and
:24:54. > :24:58.state aid, with fighting against dumping, for all I accept it is not
:24:59. > :25:01.the main issue here with some smaller plants, if it had done, that
:25:02. > :25:04.the Government sets rules of behaviour and big international
:25:05. > :25:12.businesses move in and they say - OK, we can predict what can going to
:25:13. > :25:15.happen for ten years. I think the market forces ideology, made them
:25:16. > :25:19.take their eye off the ball and now 40,000 people are going to pay for
:25:20. > :25:24.what. What I would do, Mr Redmond, I would stick money in upfront and say
:25:25. > :25:28.- there is money for whoever buys it upfront, state aid and see who ko.s
:25:29. > :25:32.I think I'm certain that is the reason why some of the interested
:25:33. > :25:35.parties areaway right now. I think the Government is saying - there is
:25:36. > :25:40.Government money available under the rules but the Government has to take
:25:41. > :25:44.legal advice and it cannot low noeingly break European law. The
:25:45. > :25:48.Civil Service interrupt European rules. Tell them to butt out They
:25:49. > :25:53.will be telling ministers the Italians and Belgians are already in
:25:54. > :25:54.deep trouble over this very thing. I will finish it now. Thank you very
:25:55. > :26:02.much. Now, roll up, roll up,
:26:03. > :26:04.roll up your sleeves and get your working hands
:26:05. > :26:06.on the hottest economic Proving there is nothing taxing
:26:07. > :26:10.or sinister about going left, Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell has
:26:11. > :26:12.invited his favourite economists to get out of Westminster
:26:13. > :26:14.and deliver a series John McDonnell, Shadow Chancellor
:26:15. > :26:23.welcomes the world On the new Economics Bill,
:26:24. > :26:27.there has been advice from the brightest left side
:26:28. > :26:29.of the brain, Mariana Mazzucato. Then economic cocktails served
:26:30. > :26:31.with a bowl of Joseph Stiglitz. Empressario John McDonnell himself
:26:32. > :26:33.chatted to Danny Dorling, not to be confused with Dany Dyer,
:26:34. > :26:36.although that would have been Then, there was the wisdom
:26:37. > :26:42.of Ha-Joon Chang, followed by the economic equivalent
:26:43. > :26:46.of being hit by a scooter driven by a well-groomed Greek rock
:26:47. > :26:50.star, Vanis Varoufakis. Top of the bill tomorrow,
:26:51. > :26:55.the gritty growl of reformed revolutionary,
:26:56. > :27:13.TV personality, Paul Mason. What a performance there from Giles
:27:14. > :27:14.with his guide it Labour's economic lecture tour.
:27:15. > :27:16.But what policy is emerging from all this economic wonkery,
:27:17. > :27:19.and will it help Labour win the next election?
:27:20. > :27:21.Well, to discuss that we're joined by the Blairite
:27:22. > :27:34.Blairite commentator? Let's have that discussion afterwards.
:27:35. > :27:37.Paul Mason, Ed Balls said in January 2014, there will be no more
:27:38. > :27:42.borrowing from day-to-day spending. Last month John McDonnell said they
:27:43. > :27:45.believe the Government should not need to borrow to fund day-to-day
:27:46. > :27:51.spending. The same thing. I don't think it is. I think the fiscal
:27:52. > :27:56.policy he underlined is looser on current spender. It can be looser if
:27:57. > :28:00.we hit the zero band with interest rates and we have. At a time like
:28:01. > :28:04.this, I would interrupt that - I'm in the Shadow Chancellor - but I
:28:05. > :28:07.would say we have nor leeway on current spending and certainly on
:28:08. > :28:12.investment spending and as I'm going to be outlining in my lecture for
:28:13. > :28:17.him this week, in any case, fiscal policy is not the main thing. Once
:28:18. > :28:23.you have an unor the docks monetary policy as we have, printing money,
:28:24. > :28:28.guaranteeing no interest rate rises for a certain period, you have a
:28:29. > :28:31.spill-over between fiscal and monetary policy that allows a future
:28:32. > :28:35.Labour Chancellor to stimulate the economy. It is not radically
:28:36. > :28:38.different. Ed Balls talked about stimulating the economy. The
:28:39. > :28:42.Government is strangling the economy. Even if you stimulated it
:28:43. > :28:47.mildly, I would argue, it would feel a lot divan, and again, you would
:28:48. > :28:52.have a predictable environment for the expansion of the NHS, and the
:28:53. > :28:56.education sector and in science and R that isn't happening right now.
:28:57. > :29:02.Well, John McDonnell has said he is against austerity and that those
:29:03. > :29:06.cuts that the Tory Government - - well, he has said he wouldn't put in
:29:07. > :29:08.place the sort of cuts the Tory Government is proposing because
:29:09. > :29:11.there would be growth in the economy from the investment that the Labour
:29:12. > :29:15.Party would make. That is a departure from Labour before Well
:29:16. > :29:21.reforically, yes, but we are just - I have come here to commiserate with
:29:22. > :29:24.Paul, you know, he's backed John McDonnell, who was the campaign
:29:25. > :29:28.manager for somebody called Jeremy Corbyn. He should have been the
:29:29. > :29:31.campaign manager for Liz Kendall, Liz Kendall was saying those things
:29:32. > :29:34.during the leadership campaign, you have to balance the current
:29:35. > :29:41.spending... She was a good candidate. She was a very good
:29:42. > :29:47.candidate. And she argued for fiscal responsibility which John McDonnell
:29:48. > :29:53.has now adopted. I know you want to get out of what is said by invoking
:29:54. > :29:58.the lower bound escape hatch. But you can't possibly agree with Liz
:29:59. > :30:00.Kendall's approximatelicy which John McDonnell has adopted for normal
:30:01. > :30:03.fiscal times. He is talking about fiscal responsibility. He needs to
:30:04. > :30:07.try to get the public to trust Labour and he is really doing the
:30:08. > :30:12.same things As certainly the previous Labour fwroencht and almost
:30:13. > :30:16.the Tory Government. The reason all governments have had fiscal rules is
:30:17. > :30:20.because they make sense 678 there is a cross-party academic agreement
:30:21. > :30:24.that, this is how it works - if the economy hits a rough patch, you
:30:25. > :30:27.spend some more now, to make it grow and then later the growth helps you
:30:28. > :30:31.pay back what you borrowed. That's the basic principle of all fiscal
:30:32. > :30:36.policy, but to formalise it stops you. This is I think the reason why
:30:37. > :30:40.McDonnell has done this. It stops your own supporters, the unions,
:30:41. > :30:45.people in the Labour momentum, etc, thinking that everything can be
:30:46. > :30:48.sorted by tax rises on the rich, or, you know, spending boosts. It
:30:49. > :30:53.signals to your own party that there are limits to these things and that
:30:54. > :30:55.other things have to take over, like industrial policy, like
:30:56. > :31:00.nationalising the steel industry and like boosting monetary growth. But
:31:01. > :31:02.he is going to, John McDonnell and if Labour were in power, add to the
:31:03. > :31:13.deficit. If you add the deficit you run over
:31:14. > :31:19.the debt. The deficit thing is doable. The thing is, Ed Miliband
:31:20. > :31:23.failed to get elected with those sorts of arguments, the Tory
:31:24. > :31:27.arguments, talking about fiscal responsibility, saying he'd balance
:31:28. > :31:34.the books and saying he would be responsible. Those aren't Tory
:31:35. > :31:41.arguments. That is what Ed Miliband echoed. Isn't it time for Labour to
:31:42. > :31:47.choose a different path? Paul has admitted they had chosen the same
:31:48. > :31:53.path, having debt as a share of trade in GDP by the end of the
:31:54. > :31:55.parliament and that is something that you and Jeremy Corbyn
:31:56. > :32:05.supporters condemned as neoliberalism. Wait until they, we,
:32:06. > :32:08.get our hands on the Office for Budget Responsibility and when it
:32:09. > :32:11.starts to calculate the real impact of fiscal stimulus on growth there
:32:12. > :32:18.will be a lot more allowed, even under the John McDonnell rules. And
:32:19. > :32:23.you can do more QE. That is what I will say in the lecture. So you
:32:24. > :32:30.don't want an independent Office for Budget Responsibility? I wanted to
:32:31. > :32:32.be independent of the Treasury, not using the Treasury Dome of fiscal
:32:33. > :32:40.multipliers that don't agree with the IMF. We should use fiscal
:32:41. > :32:43.multipliers that say... Osborne's kind of does. The Obi produce the
:32:44. > :32:47.answers he wanted without producing any of the growth he wanted -- the
:32:48. > :32:52.Office for Budget Responsibility. That is why he is reversing out of
:32:53. > :32:57.austerity. He is 4.5 billion out of his own austerity plan. He has
:32:58. > :33:04.reversed a position occupied by Ed Balls in the last Parliament. John
:33:05. > :33:08.McDonnell and his supporters do not disrespect Ed Balls's plan but we
:33:09. > :33:13.just need a different one going forward. In the end what will be
:33:14. > :33:16.more credible for the public? Fiscal rules, whether you stick to them,
:33:17. > :33:21.whether they are artificially made, do they make any difference question
:33:22. > :33:34.it showed by the last election they clearly did make a difference, even
:33:35. > :33:37.if the Tories argue that way. Labour will be Prime Minister, strange
:33:38. > :33:40.though it might seem to the Westminster bubble, if they tell the
:33:41. > :33:44.British people that is a believable story about how children get decent,
:33:45. > :33:46.secure jobs and have a diva -- decent lifestyle without having to
:33:47. > :33:51.win the X factor will be a professional footballer. I would
:33:52. > :33:55.actually agree with that. I think that is how Labour could win an
:33:56. > :34:02.election. But I don't see how they can possibly do so under Jeremy
:34:03. > :34:05.Corbyn. Why not? Because that is not what they are offering the British
:34:06. > :34:09.people. They are offering the British people anti-American is and
:34:10. > :34:16.fantasy economics and that is not a programme that the British people
:34:17. > :34:20.will want. What about this fantasy economics you spoke about? What is
:34:21. > :34:24.the fantasy bit? The fantasy is what they really believe as opposed to
:34:25. > :34:29.what John McDonnell has said before the budget suddenly it decided to
:34:30. > :34:32.adopt that, which is conventional economic thinking, that you should
:34:33. > :34:36.balance the books over the economic cycle. You think that would be
:34:37. > :34:40.abandoned if they came to power and they would revert to some sort of
:34:41. > :34:43.socialist doctrine you think they still hold by? I don't think John
:34:44. > :34:47.McDonnell really believes it, so I don't think he has any credibility
:34:48. > :34:51.in arguing for it but I think that is the base from which any party
:34:52. > :34:58.hats to approach the general election, and you cannot convince
:34:59. > :35:02.people to give you that vote. He is not saying to balance the books over
:35:03. > :35:08.the cycle. Balance the current books. It does say that, in five
:35:09. > :35:11.years' time. It was Gordon Brown who had an economic cycle -based rule.
:35:12. > :35:20.The rules of Ed Balls the current government are not cycle -based.
:35:21. > :35:25.What does infrastructure involved? A lot of it is not just building
:35:26. > :35:28.tunnels under the Pennines, it is about building the capacity of the
:35:29. > :35:33.workforce. There's a lot you can do under the label of infrastructure
:35:34. > :35:39.that actually cascades not into steel construction for example. At
:35:40. > :35:43.the end of the cycle, over five years, under the current fiscal rule
:35:44. > :35:47.that Labour is trying to implement all would implement, you would get a
:35:48. > :35:50.big infrastructure boost early on in any parliament and it would
:35:51. > :35:55.stimulate growth and draw jobs in. What would happen to the debt and
:35:56. > :35:59.deficit? The deficit might rise over the short-term, but that is the
:36:00. > :36:03.idea, but debt would come down as a part of GDP because over time the
:36:04. > :36:10.growth would come. Are you going to be a convert? If they're going to
:36:11. > :36:15.convert to conventional economics, fiscal responsibility, then I am all
:36:16. > :36:19.for it. The Blairites in the Labour Party have always been in favour of
:36:20. > :36:22.that and it's good to hear them come on board. The question is whether
:36:23. > :36:24.they really believe it. John Rentoul, thank you.
:36:25. > :36:27.Now, the pavements of Britain are thronged with sweaty, lycra-clad
:36:28. > :36:28.runners training for Sunday's London Marathon.
:36:29. > :36:31.Our Ellie's amongst them, and she's gathered together some fellow
:36:32. > :36:32.Westminster Village runners about to embark
:36:33. > :36:44.The weather is getting better, the sun is shining, the temperature has
:36:45. > :36:46.lifted and what else would you want to do on a Sunday morning banged
:36:47. > :36:56.over a gentle 26.2 mile I have three Labour MPs with me and
:36:57. > :37:01.we like to keep them on their toes at the Daily Politics, and here they
:37:02. > :37:06.are, running towards me. I don't normally get politicians running
:37:07. > :37:11.towards me. Hello chaps. Amanda, this is your first London Marathon.
:37:12. > :37:14.How do you feel? Incredibly nervous. I am excited because I'm assured
:37:15. > :37:19.that the crowd will carry you along, but very, very nervous about the
:37:20. > :37:22.whole thing. Dan Jarvis, a long way to be carried. How many have you
:37:23. > :37:27.done? This is my sixth London Marathon. Always hard work but a
:37:28. > :37:30.great event. The atmosphere is wonderful and the opportunity to
:37:31. > :37:35.raise money for Cancer Research is to good an opportunity to miss. You
:37:36. > :37:39.are the first Cabinet minister to run the marathon. No pressure. I've
:37:40. > :37:45.got to complete it. This will be my fit and I have to complete it --
:37:46. > :37:50.fifth. I have been running much in the last month, I can tell you.
:37:51. > :37:58.Getting his excuses in early. Amanda, apparently there is
:37:59. > :38:02.something called maranoia. Have you got any of that? I know that I want
:38:03. > :38:05.to do it and I want to think all the way through why I am doing it, and I
:38:06. > :38:10.think it's one of those things that will carry me through to the end. Is
:38:11. > :38:13.it paranoid or mad? It is madness, but it would be mad not to do it
:38:14. > :38:17.such a good cause. There is something lovely about this week in
:38:18. > :38:21.particular. You don't need to do any more running, just eat a load of
:38:22. > :38:26.carbohydrates. I haven't done a huge amount of running before these
:38:27. > :38:29.weeks, so I'm getting the excuses in again. We can look forward to the
:38:30. > :38:32.race. The atmosphere is wonderful and the level of support is
:38:33. > :38:36.incredible. I think it's really important we come together to
:38:37. > :38:42.contribute and be involved and do our bit. You said jokingly, but
:38:43. > :38:46.having the time to do it, but it does take a lot of time. Why do you
:38:47. > :38:51.do it? What is about running that goes with politics? The first is to
:38:52. > :38:55.raise money for a good cause and the charities and the impact they have,
:38:56. > :38:59.and the is quite selfish, you feel $1 million crossing the line. And in
:39:00. > :39:03.the training running up to it there are a lot of MPs running around the
:39:04. > :39:08.parks of London, late at night, and you are running through it --
:39:09. > :39:11.through Green Park, and it gives you a structure and stops you drinking
:39:12. > :39:17.and eating too much and it is a focus from Christmas until the end
:39:18. > :39:20.of April. Danny Connor you are sandwiched between some
:39:21. > :39:23.conservatives, and there are five Conservatives doing this and five
:39:24. > :39:28.Labour politicians but none of the other parties are taking part. Is
:39:29. > :39:35.there any rivalry here? Yes there is. I have been reasonably close in
:39:36. > :39:39.previous years and he has given me a bluff about some problems with his
:39:40. > :39:44.knee. I'm not buying it at all. I think we will be close to each other
:39:45. > :39:47.on Sunday. A bit of friendly rivalry, I think. I should point out
:39:48. > :39:50.it isn't just the politicians running this Sunday, there are some
:39:51. > :39:54.very dedicated political journalists who will be trying to give these
:39:55. > :39:58.politicians a bit of a run for their money. But we will see. It's a long
:39:59. > :40:14.way to go. Hey, wait for me, guys. That could have been very nasty. I
:40:15. > :40:18.actually ran with LA last weekend, no it can't be last week in, it
:40:19. > :40:23.feels like ages ago and I did a half marathon I thought I might need a
:40:24. > :40:27.hip replacement at the end. You have run a marathon? Yes, 20 years ago.
:40:28. > :40:31.The London Marathon is superb. A great social occasion and one of
:40:32. > :40:34.these institutions that holds the country together. It's great to see
:40:35. > :40:45.the MPs having a go. What was your time? 3.5 two. That's quite good.
:40:46. > :40:49.It's better to go slowly, carefully and finish. Did you run the whole
:40:50. > :40:55.thing? I ran like a whip into the first six miles and then had to be
:40:56. > :41:01.almost carried around after that. -- I ran like with it. It does take a
:41:02. > :41:02.big chunk out of your life, and not drinking in London, as one of those
:41:03. > :41:05.MPs said, quite difficult. Now MPs use the technique to talk
:41:06. > :41:08.out legislation they don't like. But a committee of MPs is proposing
:41:09. > :41:10.reforms aimed at putting an end to what's sometimes
:41:11. > :41:12.known as a "filibuster", calling it "a fraud
:41:13. > :41:15.on the people we represent". Here's the Conservative MP,
:41:16. > :41:16.Philip Davies, speaking at the debate on a bill to end
:41:17. > :41:19.hospital car parking So if we are already
:41:20. > :41:26.seeing this huge increase in parking fees for people,
:41:27. > :41:29.I don't want to introduce a bill which would see people
:41:30. > :41:31.have to pay even more. This is something
:41:32. > :41:33.that was highlighted by the British Parking Association
:41:34. > :41:37.back in 2009, following the scrapping of hospital carparking
:41:38. > :41:40.charges in Scotland. They say car parks need to be
:41:41. > :41:42.physically maintained, Charges were not introduced
:41:43. > :41:47.to generate income but rather to ensure that key staff,
:41:48. > :41:49.bona fide patients and visitors Without income to support car park
:41:50. > :41:56.maintenance, funds which should be directed to health care
:41:57. > :41:59.have to be used instead. There is also a very big
:42:00. > :42:03.geographic inequality... Mr Deputy Speaker, this speaker has
:42:04. > :42:09.already been speaking for an hour and nine minutes
:42:10. > :42:12.and what we are getting now And the Conservative MP
:42:13. > :42:22.Philip Davies and Labour MP Julie Cooper, who introduced that
:42:23. > :42:32.bill on hospital car Why did you do it, Philip Davis?
:42:33. > :42:37.Isn't it a bit of a low rent technique to adopt, filibustering?
:42:38. > :42:44.Filibustering is not allowed, and the speaker will pull you up. But
:42:45. > :42:48.that is filibustering, isn't it? Lots of people, on a Friday with
:42:49. > :42:52.bills that are ill thought through, worthy sentiments, and this is a
:42:53. > :42:57.prime example, but it hadn't been given proper consideration on the
:42:58. > :43:02.detail and application and it would have seen five out of six carers
:43:03. > :43:05.paying more than car parking. It was ill thought through, so this bill
:43:06. > :43:11.did not deserve to go through. But should it be talked out? Every
:43:12. > :43:15.parliamentarian uses whatever procedures are in place to deliver
:43:16. > :43:18.the outcome they want. This is how the Labour Party got into the Jeremy
:43:19. > :43:22.Corbyn situation by MPs saying they did not want to be the leader of the
:43:23. > :43:25.party, but let's give him ago and they ended up with a leader they
:43:26. > :43:29.want. You have to use what procedures you have got at your
:43:30. > :43:32.disposal to get the outcome you want, and every MP uses procedures
:43:33. > :43:37.to get the outcome they want. If they didn't they would not be used
:43:38. > :43:41.-- doing their job properly. Let's pick up on that it was ill thought
:43:42. > :43:45.through. Julie, do you want to come back? I totally disagree. I spent a
:43:46. > :43:48.lot of time researching the bill and I spoke to people on all sides of
:43:49. > :43:54.the house, including some Conservative members, Liberal
:43:55. > :43:58.Democrats, Scottish National party, the Green party, various supporters
:43:59. > :44:03.of the bill. I had been advised earlier on when selecting the
:44:04. > :44:07.subject that it was wise, if you hope to have any progress, that you
:44:08. > :44:10.had an issue that was noncontroversial and every party
:44:11. > :44:15.thought they could get behind. The whole point of the bill committees
:44:16. > :44:19.that follow one in the second readings are to iron out the details
:44:20. > :44:23.and I spent a lot of time with people far more experienced than I
:44:24. > :44:28.am preparing bills and there was a sound prospect in the bill but it
:44:29. > :44:33.was not to be thanks to filibustering. What do you say to
:44:34. > :44:37.the claim that MPs can and should adopt any technique that is
:44:38. > :44:42.available to their disposal if they think believes, as he put it, ill
:44:43. > :44:46.thought through? What happens is outrageously dishonest and
:44:47. > :44:50.undemocratic. I welcome the work done by the procedure committee
:44:51. > :44:54.since that episode that is actually looking to bring reform, because one
:44:55. > :44:59.thing my bill to do was to raise the whole issue in the public mind. Had
:45:00. > :45:04.I been successful, a million carers and their families would have
:45:05. > :45:07.benefited. Just to correct what Philip said, no carers would have
:45:08. > :45:10.paid extra charges and a million carers would have benefited, so it
:45:11. > :45:16.had a lot of public attention. And they were quite rightly disgusted at
:45:17. > :45:20.what they saw was spoiled on the part of some MPs. Is that not what
:45:21. > :45:25.it is? It is bored, because you do it because you can, speaking for one
:45:26. > :45:28.hour and 52 minutes, and were you being undemocratic? I was blocking a
:45:29. > :45:33.bill I thought was ill thought through. It's not the first time
:45:34. > :45:38.you've done it. Lots of bills go through. It's noncontroversial. But
:45:39. > :45:41.you did it on the compulsory emergency first aid education bill.
:45:42. > :45:45.That was a bad bill as well. The point about Julie's bill, if you
:45:46. > :45:49.don't mind me saying so, five out of six carers it wouldn't have applied
:45:50. > :45:53.to and only applied to people with an underlying claim to carers
:45:54. > :45:57.allowance. We had no idea how the hospital would determine that claim,
:45:58. > :46:00.how it would be managed, whether if there was a dispute between the
:46:01. > :46:04.hospital and the carer whether there would be some new parking ombudsman
:46:05. > :46:07.who would resolve complaints, whether the money to pay for this
:46:08. > :46:10.would come from the hospital on the doctors and nurses, from the
:46:11. > :46:13.government or from higher parking charges and everybody else which
:46:14. > :46:16.would have meant five out of six carers would have paid more. Julie
:46:17. > :46:20.couldn't and is the questions. She hadn't even spoken to Burnley
:46:21. > :46:26.Hospital. She had spoken to other parties. This was very much a soul
:46:27. > :46:32.campaign, not a party campaign, so you took it upon yourself to wreck
:46:33. > :46:35.the bill. The point is this. If a hundred MPs turn up on Friday to
:46:36. > :46:39.support a bill and it passes through, irrespective of what I do
:46:40. > :46:44.over how long anybody speaks, if Julie couldn't muster 100 MPs out of
:46:45. > :46:48.650 to support the bill and she claimed she had all the support,
:46:49. > :46:53.where were they? If a hundred MPs had turned up, it have passed. The
:46:54. > :46:57.point is that more senior MPs have sat through so many sessions that
:46:58. > :47:01.they know how it works on a Friday, but Philip and a couple of his
:47:02. > :47:05.colleagues sit there Friday after Friday, every time a Private members
:47:06. > :47:12.Bill comes through. Did you get the support? Yes, I did get the support.
:47:13. > :47:16.Where were they? The important thing is that going forward the committee
:47:17. > :47:21.looks at improving the process so we can have a fair situation and an
:47:22. > :47:26.honest boat. A number of colleagues -- an honest boat. A number of
:47:27. > :47:31.colleagues said that they support carers in Parliament and then they
:47:32. > :47:34.refused to vote against it. Many of the issues that Philip mentioned I
:47:35. > :47:38.had discussed with the Minister before the bill was presented and he
:47:39. > :47:43.made it plain that the government did not want to support it, so let's
:47:44. > :47:47.have an honest debate. Should there be moves to get rid of this option?
:47:48. > :47:55.No. I think the system works well in the sense if the bill has the
:47:56. > :48:00.support of 100 MPs it can go through without anybody blocking it but
:48:01. > :48:03.gives a mechanism to block bills. Otherwise people come with a worthy
:48:04. > :48:08.sentiment and expect everybody to faun all over it and pass it on the
:48:09. > :48:11.nod. We are passing legislation, it it is serious business, it should
:48:12. > :48:14.the be able dom with a worthy sentiment and go through. Do you
:48:15. > :48:19.think it is worth keeping? Absolutely not. The balance is not
:48:20. > :48:23.what happens in Parliament. If a large corporation wants the law
:48:24. > :48:29.changed they don't ask an MP to put a Friday morning bill in. They go
:48:30. > :48:35.and get an ordering counsel, they get statute changed and ministerial
:48:36. > :48:38.decisions and they are in there, as we speak, consultants being paid
:48:39. > :48:42.tens of thousands a week to do that. Business can get any change it wants
:48:43. > :48:46.to into government but the public has to go through petitions which
:48:47. > :48:52.are never listened to or private members bills and somebody pops up a
:48:53. > :48:57.and stops them. The minimum you can do, is streamline and make clear but
:48:58. > :49:01.a there are some crazy ones. Make clear that the private member's
:49:02. > :49:05.bill, that the procedure - but in the end, I think it is only the
:49:06. > :49:09.beginning of participatory democracy, which is what we need in
:49:10. > :49:12.this country. Do you think it'll put people off, other MPs coming forward
:49:13. > :49:17.with private members bills Absolutely definitely. I would think
:49:18. > :49:20.ten times, 100 times before I give up a Friday to support a private
:49:21. > :49:24.member's bill, even on a very worthy issue. It is a total waste, and a
:49:25. > :49:27.disrespect of British Parliament and even more than that, it is a
:49:28. > :49:31.disrespect to the British public. It is insulting for them for them to be
:49:32. > :49:36.- 1 million careers could have benefited and many of them and their
:49:37. > :49:40.families tuned in that morning tloisen to see the -- to listen it
:49:41. > :49:44.see the charade that passed for debate. All right. Thank you for
:49:45. > :49:54.both of you. I won't let you talk out the rest of the programme.
:49:55. > :49:58.Talk of a steel crisis reminds us of a time, not so long ago,
:49:59. > :50:00.when workers were out on strike, stock markets were crashing
:50:01. > :50:03.and the far left in British politics were agitating for a revolution.
:50:04. > :50:05.Including, it appears, one young journalist from Wigan.
:50:06. > :50:08.Times have now changed and these days Paul Mason has recanted his
:50:09. > :50:10."revolutionary marxism" in favour of "radical social democracy".
:50:11. > :50:13.In a moment we will find out why, and hear from Peter Taaffe,
:50:14. > :50:15.the General Secretary of the Socialist Party
:50:16. > :50:17.and former chief of militant, about why he thinks a revolution
:50:18. > :50:21.But first, let's go back to 1987 and hear the views
:50:22. > :50:32.There undoubtedly was the demand for a forum where the left could come in
:50:33. > :50:35.from the cold. For many be the so-called outside left the Labour
:50:36. > :50:39.Conference was a disaster. Since then it has been greatly lifted but
:50:40. > :50:43.the problems of the world stock market. The world will never be the
:50:44. > :50:49.same again. There is no way back for Thatcher and Reagan and it'll be the
:50:50. > :50:53.end of monetaryism. Tony Benn had hoped it could be a family reunion
:50:54. > :50:57.for the left but it was a family with immense strain. As well as over
:50:58. > :51:03.1,000 Labour MPs, there were many people from way outside the party
:51:04. > :51:13.like Socialist Work and entryist like Workers Power. There a tendency
:51:14. > :51:14.within the Labour Party To do what? Build revolutionary politics inside
:51:15. > :51:16.the Labour Party. I'm joined now by Peter Taaffe,
:51:17. > :51:18.General Secretary of the Socialist Party and founder
:51:19. > :51:20.of the entryist Militant Group which caused Labour so many
:51:21. > :51:29.problems in the 1980s. Welcome to the programme. I hope you
:51:30. > :51:34.enjoyed doing yourself. That jumper was superb. Why didn't you show me
:51:35. > :51:39.at that age. You were part of a ginger group... Ginger. Well a
:51:40. > :51:44.groups agitating for revolutionary politics but when George Osborne
:51:45. > :51:50.accused of you being a revolutionly Marxist, you denied it. Why? Because
:51:51. > :51:53.I'm in the one now. Thatcher destroyed the miners, we had
:51:54. > :51:56.extrajudicial force used against working class people. There were
:51:57. > :52:00.riots on the streets. We were fighting a battle for the survival
:52:01. > :52:06.of working class communities, which we lost, which I am terribly sorry
:52:07. > :52:09.about. There are people in emmer vale and Wigan, Leigh, where I come
:52:10. > :52:14.from, still living with that and we were right to fight it. Why aren't
:52:15. > :52:19.you still fighting? The world that has emerged is different. The global
:52:20. > :52:24.economy, the possibility for social just tis that is has emerged have to
:52:25. > :52:28.be recalibrated from where you start with. For me, personally ut journey
:52:29. > :52:32.I have taken, I think the revolutionary left politics of the
:52:33. > :52:35.197 #0gs and 80s had a fatal weakness of failing to understand
:52:36. > :52:40.that what most working class people, ordinary people that work now, let's
:52:41. > :52:43.leave aside the labels, what they want is an area of self-control
:52:44. > :52:48.within capitalism, within the system. That's what people like Nye
:52:49. > :52:51.Bevan fought for that.ings a what, as a trade unionist and MP, and
:52:52. > :52:54.that's what I would fight for now. Are you disappointed by this change
:52:55. > :52:58.of heart. Paul Mason says he is adapting to the world as it is
:52:59. > :53:03.today. You are stuck in the 1970s and 80s? No, I think he has changed
:53:04. > :53:07.his position and it is greatable, as he has explained. I think there is
:53:08. > :53:12.more of a case today for the battles we fought 30 years ago and they won
:53:13. > :53:16.some of those battles. It wasn't all losses. We are the people, that was
:53:17. > :53:20.Militant, now the Socialist Party who took on thatch-and-a-half in
:53:21. > :53:25.Liverpool and defeated her. She was forced to give big concessions to
:53:26. > :53:29.the working class of people. We also mobilised 18 million people to
:53:30. > :53:34.defeat the poll tax. If you read Mrs Thatcher's biography, you will see
:53:35. > :53:39.she admit in there that that battle, Paul, led to her resignation. It
:53:40. > :53:43.wasn't the EU. Those lessons are relevant today. What does Jeremy
:53:44. > :53:48.Corbyn's election to the leadership of the Labour Party represent? What
:53:49. > :53:54.does the Bernie Sanders phenomena in America represent? Where he has
:53:55. > :53:57.talked about revolution, you have articulated that. You have left at a
:53:58. > :54:01.time when perhaps, Britain and America are ripe for revolution.
:54:02. > :54:04.Bernie Sanders talk of revolution is about a political revolution in
:54:05. > :54:10.America, throwing money out of politics. You as co-thinkers inside,
:54:11. > :54:14.I think in is he atle you have one City Councillor Yes. But there is a
:54:15. > :54:19.big thing happening, horizontally among young people. We mean by that,
:54:20. > :54:25.not involved in hierarchial groups. There are people on the streets of
:54:26. > :54:28.Paris, every night fighting for social justice, not a Leninist
:54:29. > :54:33.revolution. The poblted of that has gone. Number two, yes, the struggle
:54:34. > :54:38.we won things through fighting the poll tax, your own collaborator,
:54:39. > :54:43.Tommy Sheridan was heroic I would argue and Scottish people followed.
:54:44. > :54:49.Yes, jailed in that time. And the point is what do we do now, it has
:54:50. > :54:53.to be a mixture of resisting the austerity and the injustice that is
:54:54. > :54:59.have been inflicted be o people and parliamentary action. Why don't you
:55:00. > :55:04.- why don't you just come in, join the Labour Party, give yourselves -
:55:05. > :55:09.as we did... On the last question. As we did in '97. I was part of the
:55:10. > :55:14.Labour Party. Why don't you? We would like to join the Labour Party.
:55:15. > :55:18.In the same way as the... Do you still want a Leninist mai,
:55:19. > :55:23.coalition? In the same way as the co-op. The idea of Leninism as a
:55:24. > :55:29.hierarchial, centralised... Do you still believe in it? We believe in
:55:30. > :55:32.parties. We don't believe we will be a spontaneous movement that can
:55:33. > :55:34.overthrow the most ruthless, capitalist class we have had in
:55:35. > :55:40.history. They are absolutery ruthless. They have been trained to
:55:41. > :55:44.rule. The phenomenon you have mentioned, it is a step forward. The
:55:45. > :55:48.Jeremy Corbyn movement is a step forward. Because would you like it
:55:49. > :55:53.to be the sort of party you want it to be, this overthrow of the
:55:54. > :55:56.capitalist class. We believe that will be arrived at by democratic
:55:57. > :56:01.discussion and debate. We would like to be part of the Labour Party. Paul
:56:02. > :56:07.wrote a very interesting article in the Guardian in which he said - it
:56:08. > :56:12.can't be now that - centralised, a topdown party. We agree with that.
:56:13. > :56:15.Why not a featheration, different organisations in different parties.
:56:16. > :56:18.Do you think there is still, a swell of support for that sort of
:56:19. > :56:23.sentiment? Stls not among young people and young people, in other
:56:24. > :56:27.words, are way ahead of the kind of fossilised leftism of the 20th
:56:28. > :56:29.Century. They have realised that you can have your own personal
:56:30. > :56:34.revolution, you can do quite a lot on your own and the key difference
:56:35. > :56:39.for me is that so many people have decided that, you know, in spending
:56:40. > :56:46.your entire life to enforce labour to do things or Knight night or the
:56:47. > :56:50.RMT, do it yourself -- or Unite. The point is you don't need a
:56:51. > :56:53.hierarchial organisation and structure, you don't need T with a
:56:54. > :56:58.cell phone you can do more than you can. I think that's childish,
:56:59. > :57:03.frankly. What you have explained in your book about post capitalism, is
:57:04. > :57:08.the enormous oppressive apparatus that the ruling class worldwide has
:57:09. > :57:13.bilted up. You give a good phrase where you said think about Manila in
:57:14. > :57:16.Gothenberg. You talked about the head of Prudential insurance saying
:57:17. > :57:21.the minimum wage is the enemy of young people. They are ruthless. Do
:57:22. > :57:26.you think that by coming together in the kind of general discussion, that
:57:27. > :57:30.we will be able to overthrow this capital class, it is childish? The
:57:31. > :57:35.only way is by building a mass party. Social counter-parlance. Are
:57:36. > :57:39.you still close to Jeremy Corbyn? In a sense, yes, we support Jeremy
:57:40. > :57:42.Corbyn. We would like to be part of his project but Jeremy Corbyn is
:57:43. > :57:48.unfortunately, he is trapped behind enemy lines. Who is the enemy? Who
:57:49. > :57:51.is the enemy? Some are the Blairites, one of whom you have had
:57:52. > :57:55.in here today. They don't want what Jeremy Corbyn stands for. Paul know
:57:56. > :57:58.this is. We have two parties in one in the Labour Party. We have the
:57:59. > :58:02.Jeremy Corbyn Labour Party and we have the old, discredited remnants
:58:03. > :58:06.of the Blairites. We want a real struggle to build a party that
:58:07. > :58:11.represents the overwhelming majority. Briefly, do you think
:58:12. > :58:15.Peter and his supporters are threatening the potential success of
:58:16. > :58:18.Jeremy Corbyn? 123450 not so far, they can't win a single election
:58:19. > :58:22.against him. Labour San alliance of the left and right. It is unusual
:58:23. > :58:25.the left is leading. That's what the Blairites can't get their head
:58:26. > :58:28.around. I will have to finish it there. Thank you very much. Now time
:58:29. > :58:33.to find out the answer to our quiz: The question was which leading
:58:34. > :58:35.politicians has spent Was it a) The Home
:58:36. > :58:40.Secretary Theresa May? C) The Lords' Speaker,
:58:41. > :58:43.Baroness D'Souza? Or D) Scottish First Minister,
:58:44. > :58:49.Nicola Sturgeon? It is the Lords' speaker. Nearly
:58:50. > :58:53.?10,000. It is, it is Lady D'Souza. Well done you. You don't get a cash
:58:54. > :58:56.prize but you can probably take a mug.
:58:57. > :58:58.Free membership of the Socialist Party for a year. From all of us,
:58:59. > :59:04.goodbye.