13/06/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 13/06/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


The Remain Campaign wheel out the big guns, clearing the desks


for a set-piece speech from Gordon Brown as they attempt


to shore up Labour support for staying in the EU.


The Leave Campaign focuses on claims that officials have been


considering granting visa-free travel to the UK for Turkish


citizens, with one Cabinet minister Priti Patel suggesting 100,000 extra


migrants will come to the UK if Turkey joins the EU.


MPs insist the former boss of BHS Sir Philip Green must answer


questions in parliament about his role in the


We'll hear from select committee chairman Frank Field.


And if you're fed up with blue-on-blue arguments


over the EU referendum, stay tuned for a bit


of green-on-green, as we hear the green party arguments


And with us for the whole of the programme today,


the former chair of the Public Accounts Committee,


the Labour MP and Remain supporter Margaret Hodge,


of the Public Administration Committee, the Conservative MP


So, less than two weeks to go before referendum day


and the two campaigns are pulling out all the stops.


The Leave campaign is focusing on immigration and the possibility


of visa-free travel for Turkish citizens,


while the Remain campaign are handing Gordon Brown


the spotlight in an attempt to shore-up Labour voter support


We'll discuss immigration in a moment.


look at what the former Labour Prime Minister


Gordon Brown is making a speech this afternoon,


a vote to remain would allow the UK to champion five key policies


when it assumes the presidency of the EU in 2017.


The former PM says there could be EU-wide reforms that


resulted in 500,000 new jobs in the UK


He says a UK EU presidency could also improve living standards


through energy price cuts and action on environmental policy,


and that an EU strategy could be pursued to crack down


Mr Brown says workers on zero-hours contracts could have protections


and that greater co-operation on cross-border policy could help


relieve pressure on public services in areas with high levels


Speaking this morning, the leader of the Labour In For Britain


campaign, Alan Johnson, insisted Labour was fully behind


We have struggled to get into the media and I don't


A story of unity is less interesting than a story of disunity and Cabinet


colleagues knocking seven bells out of each other.


And we've struggled, frankly, to break into that blue-on-blue.


As I mentioned, we've been making this positive case for Europe


We haven't had the kind of coverage and a Loughborough University study


shows starkly that Labour representation in the media, 4-6%?


That was Alan Johnson. Why has it taken so long for the Labour Party


to realise that many of its core supporters particularly in northern


constituencies are either voting to leave the EU or will stay at home? I


think there's always been concerned about immigration, and what I'm


distressed about and I hope Bernard can come back on it, I'm up for a


conversation on immigration, I've been open to it for the last ten


years or so. But what I do object to is that this referendum on Europe is


being turned into a referendum on immigration and I think what you are


seeing is that I'm afraid of those people who want us to withdraw from


Europe are grasping at this straw, a really important issue to my


constituents, and people up and down the country, and trying to turn that


into the main issue. But you do admit... The one thing I was going


to say, Bernard, I hate false promises. I just hate it. People out


there alone with it and that's why people are moving away from politics


and distrusting politicians and this false promise you're somehow going


to magically cut through issues on migration when they get out of


Europe is simply a false promise. Answer that first but what you say


to that? I don't think anybody saying there was a magic wand but


what we do know is you can't control migration from the EU unless you


leave the EU. David Cameron stood up in front of the Conservative


conference and said he was going to address that in Europe, he won't


take no for an answer and there was absolutely no reform on the freedom


of movement in the EU. The only way to address that is to Vote Leave.


The idea that this is some kind of straw in the wind and irrelevant to


the debate, this referendum is about who governs and the fact is, the


British government and the British Parliament cannot govern our borders


with regard to European migration. I'm going to stop you there. We are


going to talk about immigration in a moment but you set out your stores


on this issue of immigration which we will deal with in a few minutes.


Gordon Brown is promising many things. We just outlined them, jobs,


cutting energy prices. He's not in a position to promise anything. He's a


former Prime Minister and we don't have a Labour government. What will


his intervention be? Here's someone who has a lot of credibility on the


international stage and what he did in the 2008 economic shock was


absolutely stunningly wonderful in working with international


colleagues, and he is setting out a positive agenda. I go to my


constituents every week and I held coffee afternoons in a ward by ward


bases and when the campaign started, they were quite interested. Last


week, when I said we should talk about Europe, everybody says, oh no,


and they want to talk about local issues. I think they have been


turned off by the negativity, the false promises, the exaggeration on


both sides and what Gordon is trying to do today is that a positive


agenda of how we can use Europe to tackle some of the very tricky


things. Here's a politician and can make statements and hopefully those


us who leave will then grasp the opportunity to change the world in


the way he has done. I think infrastructure and develop it is


really important. I think getting a European wide response to the


pressures that come from migration is important for size think working


on the environment is hugely important. Do you accept that Labour


has not been very present in this campaign in terms of the Remain


side? Whose fault is that? Yes, it's partly our fault and it's partly the


focus has been on the blue split. If this is the week in which we are now


focusing on the Labour Party coming forward, setting a positive agenda,


thank goodness. Do you think Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonald could have


done more? I think they could have come out early and do more but they


are out now and other people are out there, Alan Johnson, at last, some


women out there. There's been hardly any women in this campaign the


Cooper, Harriet Harman, talking about the benefits of Europe. And


the danger which could occur, the risks we could take if we vote


Brexit. One Labour MP said to me in her constituency, a northern


constituency with white working-class supporters, they've


not had a Labour message, they don't know what it is and when they hear


it, they don't like it. Out come back to this game. I think what has


happened now, I'm sorry, Bernard, that's my view, in desperation, too


many people have outrageously exploited the very complex issue of


immigration with a simplistic answer, get out of Europe, and


suddenly all the challenges we face around immigration, that is just not


true. Let's have a series discussion about immigration. When I talk to my


constituents, and I say to them, but is a false prospectus, they come


back to immigration and I can understand why, if you want to win


your vote for that what you do but I don't dig at a good way to do


politics and I don't like it. What about Gordon Brown, he did something


similar in the Scottish independence referendum and in the end, maybe


partly because of him, the people of Scotland voted to stay within the


union. How important is his intervention? David Cameron and


George Osborne only resorted Gordon Brown because they were desperate


and I think they are desperate now. There's blue on blue excuse, we


could have red on red, ask Frank Field what he's been saying about


immigration, they have been saying Labour MPs saying the same thing at


immigration as the rest of the other campaigners. The real problem the


Labour Party have is this a sensation amongst many colleagues


but you're not really representing your voters because they are the


people hit by this tide of very cheap labour coming in from Eastern


Europe which is completely unchecked for the why haven't wages gone up in


this recovery since 2008 banking crisis? Because there's an unlimited


supply of cheap labour and we've had masses of it. Answer that and then


we move on. We are much more united. Those Labour MPs. What about


supporters, Margaret Hodge? You'd not squared up to the issue of


immigration with them? I have been talking about immigration since the


BNP won 12 seats in Barking and Dagenham 2006. I think I understand


the issue as people feel it and I think what is so deeply unfair,


Bernard, you promise somehow that you will cut the numbers yet,


yesterday on the Andrew Marr show, Nigel Farage, where would you cut


the numbers? Will you allow families to come together? Will you stop the


Spanish and Portuguese nurses in my local hospital coming here? Of


course not. Will he 's top universities recruiting students


open air? Of course not. Will you kill a tourism industry? Of course


not. Stop making false promises and start addressing the issue. Let me


speak. People in my constituency feel the pressures of immigration


and school places, hospital places, start investing there. Let Bernard


answer for that what level would you like to see it coming down to? David


Cameron said we should not have EU migrants coming up the mess the job


to go to. That was one of his negotiation things. Most of them


have. Gordon Brown said British jobs for British workers. If it's 184,000


against 88,000, in terms of migrants from within the EU and those from


outside, you would increase the ones who come from the outside which


means they would still be similar levels? It's not about deciding what


the immigration policy should be but this... Let me finish, this is about


making British members of Parliament accountable for what immigration


policy is decided instead of being imposed by the EU. Let's go on to


immigration and Turkey has loomed large over the referendum campaign.


Will the country ever join the European Union - and if it


did, what would that mean for immigration?


It is a debate that reared its head again yesterday,


with new revelations about what the repercussions


of the deal between the EU and Turkey over Syrian


Leaked documents from the UK Embassy in Turkey raised


the possibility of visa-free travel for "special passport holders"


That usually applies to civil servants and their family members.


The document was sent in response to the EU deal with Turkey allowing


visa-free travel to inside Europe's Schengen area,


of which the UK is not a member, in return for accepting


Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond and Home Secretary Theresa May said


any suggestion of changes to the visa rules was


That didn't stop Justice Secretary and Leave campaigner Michael Gove


claiming yesterday that this was yet more evidence that the UK


was "actively working" towards Turkey's EU entry,


something the Prime Minister David Cameron dismissed


as a "complete red herring", saying there "is no prospect of


But Migration Watch today released estimates that if Turkey joined


the EU, then around 100,000 Turkish migrants could head to Britain


a year, with total net migration under those circumstances


And Alp Mehmet from Migration Watch joins us now.


Let's just put Turkey to one side for a moment. Your forecast for the


next 20 years is that net migration will be around 250,000, 60% of it


coming from the EU. That is of course lower than current levels of


migration, isn't it? It is and we are assuming that there will be some


impact from measures that are applied as we move ahead, but,


looking at what might happen in a low scenario and comparing that with


a high scenario, we have gone through the middle and said that it


will be around 265,000 net. That is the figure of fact that the Office


for National Statistics is also working on. The use that as their


high net migration scenario, so it's not so outlandish and that,


effectively, means it leads to around 500,000 people a year


additional to our population largely driven by migration. That's why it


needs to be addressed. It is 330,000 or around that and you


are talking about a significantly lower number. If Turkey does join


the EU over the next 20 years, let's say, your report suggests around


100,000 Turks would head to the UK every year. How do you calculate


that figure? We looked at what happened with remaining ins, with


Polish people, for example, where we made some forecasts in 2004. -- with


remaining in people. -- Romanian. We used the same methodology. Week


unpaid salary levels, the number of people already here, the Turkish


diaspora, according to the then Turkish Prime Minister, there are


around 400,000 who already. Taking these factors into account, we think


around 100,000 a year, once they are fully in, is not an unreasonable


figure. Alp Mehmet, thank you very much. Bernard Jenkin, David Cameron


has described Turkey as a red herring in this debate. Is he right?


He has flip-flopped on this. When he has been with the Turkish president,


he is saying how he is going to pave the way from Ankara to Brussels and


then he's saying, not until the year 3000. It's a bit difficult to note


it took it is government policy for Turkey to join the EU. It is but


Wendy of thing Turkey will join the EU in current circumstances? The


current assumption is that Turkey would join sometime in the 2020s and


the current restrictions on Turks would be lifted during the late


2020s. That doesn't seem unreasonable. Why did you put a


poster out saying Turkey is joining the EU? Because there is a process


which Turkey is already engaged with which is about joining the EU. But


saying Turkey is joining the EU sound like it will happen next week.


Are we going to have another referendum before Turkey joins the


EU if we stay in? This is the only referendum we are going to get. If


we don't want to be in an EU with Turkey, you have to Vote Leave. What


is the likelihood of Turkey joining the EU at all? Their first


application was made in 1987 and you would have to have the say so and


approval of the 28 member state of the European council and you know,


and everyone knows, that large number of those countries will never


agree to it. But it is the policy of the British Government for Turkey to


join the EU. But do you accept that people like France, Germany will


have access to? EU history is littered with assurances of things


that would blow the happen and there may happen. I remember John Major


saying he didn't think the single currency would ever happen and it


went ahead. So you do believe that Turkey, despite those criteria, you


think... It is the policy of the United Kingdom government that


Turkey should join the EU. Should the Remain campaign have just been a


bit more upfront about this? To say that, yes, this is the policy of the


British Government, David Cameron did say he wanted to pave the road


from Ankara to Brussels, and clearly there is work going on behind the


scenes, as, perhaps, there should be with the Foreign Office, rather than


trying to be done to didn't happen? This is Project Via. It is ironic


that the Leave campaign have been banging on and on... That wasn't my


question. This is Project Fear. You heard it from Bernard's mouthed. If


you don't want Turkey to join, vote to leave. This is Project Fear. Hang


on a minute, Bernard. Your key government ministers, the Prime


Minister, your Prime Minister, a Conservative Prime Minister, the


Home Secretary, your Home Secretary, a Conservative Home Secretary, the


Foreign Secretary... At Margaret Hodge, what is the answer to my


question in terms of being upfront? It is true that it is government


policy, it is also true that money is being spent on developing that


policy, whether it happens next year or not for 25 years. If you'd been


more upfront about that, do you think there would have been more


honesty on your side of the debate? No, because it is equally true that


it is taking so long to negotiate the terms of the Turkish entry into


Europe that it is so far down the line that by the time it happens,


Turkey will have changed so much as a community, and of course the whole


world will have got smaller. Your government completely underestimated


the forecast of migration. I agree with that. Margaret Hodge said that


was wrong and there would be a seven-year transition period and


that's only if all those hurdles were overcome. Is there going to be


another referendum? No, there isn't. You don't know. This is the only


referendum we've got. I would like Turkey to be in the European Union,


I just don't want to be in the European Union with Turkey. Why use


immigration, which is a very conflict issue, which you won't


control by getting out of Europe, why use that as the issue? Because


since the banking crisis, since the eurozone crisis, immigration has


rocketed from the European Union. It is out of control and your voters


think, who is accountable for this? Immigration is democracy,


immigration is the economy. It is said in their living standards,


their access to public services and you know that and your party has


abandoned your voters. That's why Ukip is in second place. I think


immigration is a hugely important issue, a very complexes should. I


think your pretence that you can control it by getting out of Europe


is dishonest. And I think the really important issue, which we haven't


thought about this morning on Europe, is what it will do two jobs,


what will do to growth, what will do to prosperity. Are on Home


Secretary, who is in favour of Remain, said, "It is harder to


control immigration as a member of the EU". What have you got to say to


that? Can I just ask, briefly, on that point, let's just put the


levels to one side because, in a way, you can't guarantee what the


levels would be, either. This is about how we decide our immigration


policy, who decides it. Let's talk about the point that Margaret just


raised about jobs, about the level of growth, some of which is down to


levels of migration and migrant workers here and the argument that


they contribute, many of them, to the economy and help to grow that


economy. What will happen if levels of migration were to go down, let's


say, to 80,000 a year? What would happen to the economy? What we are


talking about is a points -based immigration system, like we already


have for those coming from outside the EU. So why have we got more


people coming from outside the EU? If it is working so successfully,


why has it gone up. We have started to get them under control. I was


just going to say... Let Bernard answer my question. We can still


choose to admit the people we think are going to be good for our


economy. Has that worked? Not particularly well. It was introduced


by the last Labour government and we're trying to make it work better.


We could also introduce work permits for people coming from the EU, which


is what we used to have. They didn't require visas to come on holiday,


they could easily come here to study, but if they're going to stay


here to work, they had to have a work permit. Then you would be


crowding out people who have to look after their families here, who have


to pay housing costs here, who can't afford to take low-paid jobs. So you


would want higher levels of migration but from different parts


of the world? Not necessarily higher levels of migration but the point


is, we wouldn't have the downward pressure on wages. Even the chairman


of the Remain campaign said, if we leave the European Union... We


haven't heard from him again, have we? Wages will rise, he told the


Treasury Select Committee. On Turkey, Margaret Hodge, isn't the


problem that it is symbolic? That even if Turkey can't join now and


never joined in the foreseeable future, it does symbolise for a lot


of people, particularly Labour voters, if we are talking to you


about your own party, about the numbers of people from the EU who


could be legible to come to the UK, and that frightens people. -- be


eligible. I think what frightens people is not so much people coming


in, it's that when they come in, they jump the queue, they jump the


queue into the benefits system, they jump the queue into... But we know


that they don't claim benefits, they are working, as you keep saying.


What concerns people, Jo... I have a constituency where there is huge


concern about immigration and I think I understand where they are


coming from. If your community changes, if the goods are sold in


your shop changes, if your neighbours change, that causes some


concern and then you think, I can't get my benefit, I can't get my


house, I can't get my school plays, I can't get in my hospital. That


causes concern, so pretending - and this is what makes me so crossed-


that you deal with those concerns by pretending you can cut numbers when


you won't... We can't if we stay in the EU. It is nothing to do with the


EU. The figures at the moment, more are coming from outside. Even if you


got out of the EU, you would end up having to have the Portuguese,


Spanish nurses, having the European students coming here. You would end


up wanting European tourism, so the idea that you can control it is a


false promise. Let me come back to it and to that but just broadly, on


Turkey, because there has been a deal done, that they have


successfully controlled level of migration through Turkey and into


Europe, through one route, do we not know Turkey some concession because


otherwise they said they'll open the floodgates. This is a very serious


point. We are playing with fire here, Europe. Turkey is a very


important member of Nato and we are effectively promising Turkey


membership of the EU. We are not promising membership at the moment.


It is these free travel. The whole offer to Turkey was to be


integrated. That's why they are offering these are free travel. If


this is not going to happen, playing fast and loose with a country that


is half in the Muslim world and on the edge of this very, very


destabilised area... Should there not have been a deal done on Turkey?


Well, trying to push the migration crisis on to Turkey, bribing Turkey


to do with the migration crisis and keep the migrants themselves, this


is a very dangerous game and it is being played for reasons of European


politics and we've seen European politics blow up in Ukraine very


badly because of the incompetent EU foreign policy. I hope we are not


seeing something seriously going on in Turkey to dock we are going to


have to move on at that point. The so-called Islamic State group


has claimed responsibility for the deadliest mass shooting


in recent US history. The attack at the Pulse nightclub


in Orlando began at around 2am local 50 people were killed


and a further 53 were injured. The gunman has been identified


as 29-year-old US He took hostages after an initial


exchange of fire He was then shot dead hours later


after a full police assault We can talk now to Tom Rogan,


a foreign policy columnist for the National Review,


who joins us from Washington. Tom, tell us the latest in terms of


response in Washington. Great to be with you. This morning, there is a


mixture of obviously great sorrow in terms of the media reporting, in


terms of people attending events, especially LGBT of events around the


country. But the political dynamic, as well. Hillary Clinton from the


Democratic party is focusing on course for a gun ban in terms of


assault rifles. Donald Trump is talking about doubling down on his


ban on Muslims and he's just told Fox cut through news earlier this


morning that "We need to look very strongly at the mosques" so there is


this dichotomy in the political dynamic that is spurring fourth.


Because in this case this is a home-grown terrorist, a Muslim, but


a home-grown terrorist. Has that focused people's political and ten


I'm more sharply as a result? -- and I think it has. I don't think


Americans have fully come to terms with it yet. It is a change to the


landscape and it is the brutality and the durability of that


brutality, in the sense that this attack went on for many hours. I


think it is something that has shocked people to the court. What


about the gun laws? President Obama, when these tragedies do happen, does


always refer to the fact that it is so easy in the United States to buy


things like assault rifles. Will it actually make any difference? Will


this time be any different to previous times? One of the things I


think it is quite hard... I grew up in the UK but as an American who


grew up in the UK, it is different in terms of how people understand


it. The motion of firearms, both in American culture and in people's


everyday lives in terms of hunting but also security of home, is


something very imbued. And so the administration, yes, with Hillary


Clinton, will push for that. They will try to make it an issue going


forwards but I think it's going to be very hard for them because


ultimately, when it comes down to the crunch moment about legislation


in Congress, because of things like concern about magazine capacity


limits on handguns, the momentum and the public opinion actually centres


towards not reforming the law. Because of the divisiveness within


American politics, particularly seen through the prism of the


presidential campaign with Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, as you


mentioned, that is now going to, I presume, be used to further divide


that same community along the lines of Trump and Clinton.


Yes, this is the issue we have, it's likely Donald Trump will try to use


this to push down on his stance, in terms of bands -- bans and whatever


he means by looking into the mosques. The difficulty is, the real


thing you can do here, I, for example, argue for a more concerted


effort to dealing with Isis more quickly, because of the inspiration


quite frankly that their power they get from different groups around the


world, recruiting people on the periphery of society in Western


countries, but ultimately, in the domestic sense, the FBI and its


partners in terms of local law enforcement in alignment with the


intelligence community and foreign partners like the British


intelligence services, that's how you do with terrorism and the


political dynamics ultimately our campaign fodder in what is going to


be an extremely bitter campaign. Your viewers may think they've seen


about its going to get much, much more heated. I'm sure it will be.


Thank you very much. We've been joined in the studio by


Douglas Murray, associate director of the Henry Jackson Society,


a foreign affairs think tank. Thank you. In a sense, he was a lone


wolf and you're never going to completely be able to protect


communities from lone wolves with guns. No, not you could burn to be


able to. There are certain things you can do -- no, you're not going


to be able to do. You can make things harder. You need to have an


ideology, you need to have the compulsion to act in a violent way


on that ideology and the means to carry out an attack. In America,


it's a lot easier to get the means, that we shouldn't be too sacrosanct


about this. It's not illegal to get a Kalashnikovs in France but still


possible for the people who did it there. It's a lot easier in the USA.


The interesting thing so far about this is the Islamic State


connection, which is clearly not just for this young man but for a


lot of people, provided the ideological component of this. It


has given the opportunity for people like this murderer and terrorist, to


believe they are part of a bigger thing, believe they are part of a


movement. There's always been ideologists, left-wing and


right-wing, that drive people, their report this young man was mentally


unstable, that drive people to do these things so with anything


particularly special about being in accordance with Isis? We've seen a


lot of gun massacres in the USA and is usually an enormous interest in


the nippy ideology of the person has been propelled by. I'm very stuck in


cases like this, let me give you a quick example, if this government


had turned out to be from a Christian background, inspired by


some far right Christian group, by now the media in the UK, USA and


around the world will be looking at who he knew, which church he


attended, what preachers who listen to and what his contacts where. Will


they not be doing that here? It's striking how little of that has been


going on. It's the same in 2009. Let me just finish this point quickly.


Only two months ago, in Orlando, Florida, there was a scandal not


really picked up in the media, a preacher went to one of the main


mosques in Orlando, a Shia preacher from Manchester, and said, he


teaches this particular thing, homosexuals not only can be killed


but must be killed now. He said you have to kill the gays now. As I say,


if this had been a Christian preacher saying this, we would be


all over this stuff. People want to say mentally ill because it an


Islamic issue. Do you think that's true? We are finding this very


difficult because criticising fellow Christians is very much easier than


criticising somebody else's religion, but I think we've got to


get over this squeamishness and call a spade a spade. You think there is


a squeamishness? I feel part of it, it's understandable, I'm a Christian


myself and one hesitates to judge other people's religions, but you


just need to read Ed Hussain, the Islamist, a ten-year-old but, and


how you cannot say these attacks are nothing to do with Islam. And we've


got to get this lamb, the Islamic religion better to police itself,


huge efforts are being made in this country to do this, by the way,


amongst the communities, but they find themselves it difficult to talk


about. And you find it difficult to talk about it, Margaret Hodge? To


think there was more extremist ideology, taken in some part from a


slam even though most Muslims are not violent? I was going to make


that point. I talked to my Muslims, I have eight mosques in my


constituency and I talk about any extremism or fundamentalism emerging


amongst the young people? I think it's important to talk about it, of


course, it's a really tough issue to tackle but I got to come back to the


USA. I look at the figures this morning because I knew we would be


talking about it. 176 mass killings in this calendar year alone since


January 2013, there have been 1122 killings from mass killings, whether


it ideological in America, that has got to be done with a gun laws. I


said that at the outset. Do you think there's any evidence, even if


Hillary Clinton decides to adopt it for her presidential campaign, will


it make any difference to what is an extremely powerful and embedded gun


lobby in the states? This particular attack is primarily not about the


gun lobby but about Islamic conflict. If he had not had a gun,


he wouldn't be able to do that damage. Let's deal with the gun


issue. Will it ever be dealt with on the basis of politics? I wouldn't


have thought so. It's an American issue for Americans to deal with. I


wish they would make it harder to get assault rifles. People are


treating this as if this is in isolation. A couple of months ago a


poll was released about the attitudes of British muslins. That


poll said 52% of British Muslims want homosexuality to be made


illegal in Britain. Not on board with gay marriage, not cool with


civil partnerships, but make it illegal to be gay. That is a clear


line from that belief held by a majority of British Muslims to


somebody walking into a nightclub and gunning down people for being


games and it's time Islamic leaders around the world and in this country


except they're responsible at this hate. This comes back to be able to


say what British law is under way it stands. Is enough being done by


politicians like you to go in there and say not acceptable to condemn


homosexuality? I agree with that. It's an issue of changing cultures.


I go into my mosques and women sit on one side and amends on the other,


I find that does not fit in with my values. And I talk about it and say


why other women there? I haven't talked about sexuality. Perhaps I


should. I will take that away and think about that. Certainly, within


the Labour Party now, when we are thinking about anti-Semitism and how


that has risen, that raises a whole lot of difficult issues for us.


These are tough issues which we should talk about and we should be


clear at the British values on tolerance and equality, whatever


your gender, whatever the issue, ought to be paramount in UK society


so I'm with you on that. And you agree, not countering enough senior


people from perhaps outside and within the religion can sing that


ideology? Don't undress to how difficult that is. We now have laws


that make it almost illegal for comedians to make homophobic jokes,


OK? If those laws were applied to preachers in mosques, and the police


went in to deal with these crimes, I mean, just think about the tinderbox


you would be lighting. We need more understanding. We need to extend as


much support as we can to moderate Muslim people who believe in


integrating their religion into the values of our society, so it would


help them to isolate extremists. The extraordinary thing about the world


of Islam, particularly Wahabi Islam, is how exclusive it is and how you


are either a good Muslim or not. And it is like the most extreme forms of


Christianity. Except that Christianity has never, you know, we


don't have the violence... Douglas Murray, thank you.


Let's take a look now at how the political week


Tomorrow Jeremy Corbyn will give a speech putting forward the case


He'll be joined by union leaders Frances O'Grady and Len McCluskey.


Then in the afternoon, former Mayor of London Ken Livingstone


will be questioned by MPs about anti-Semitism.


On Wednesday it's the turn of Sir Philip Green,


the former owner of BHS, to go in front of MPs


to explain his involvement in the store closing down.


On Friday, MPs on the home affairs committee are publishing


And to end the week, Andrew Neil interviews his final guest,


Iain Duncan Smith, on - what else? - the EU referendum.


Joining me now to discuss the week ahead


is Rafael Behr of the Guardian, and Isabel Hardman


Welcome to both of you. Not long to go now. Gordon Brown making a speech


today as part of the Labour remained rebranding, it's a bit late, isn't


it? Gordon Brown will be hoping not and the Prime Minister will be


hoping not, as well, because what essentially has happened is towards


the end of last week, when the official Remain Campaign started to


get very nervous about the way things were going and what they


found is, while a lot of Conservative voters can be minded to


support the European Union, there's a big problem with the Labour vote


and what I have essentially done, then sit down on Friday to think


about what to do and they decided to more less clear the pitch at the


beginning of this week to get the Labour a load of Labour people out


to say, in case you realise, the Labour position is to support the


membership of the EU and this gets to a big cultural problem the Labour


Party has witches, traditionally, in any kind of vote, there's lots of


areas where you have Labour voters, and they just turn out in droves and


point them to the polling booth and say, you know what to do. But they


are doing something different, they don't want to stay in the EU? They


will hope it's not too late. Isabel Hardman, Jeremy Corbyn and John


McDonnell, it seems, have not been present enough when you look at the


statistics in terms of who is made more speeches, had more appearances,


it been left, it seems, to some of the former Labour leader is if we


look at Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Harriet Harman. Also there's a


postmortem of Labour's failed campaign on this. Alan Johnson also


will come in for criticism because he's barely been visible and he's


the leader for the Labour in campaign for that we barely had


speeches, read anything from him and I'm not sure what he's been doing to


infuse those Labour voters and that's exactly what you were


supposed to do, to take the role some thought Jeremy Corbyn could not


necessarily do because he's quite sceptical about Europe even though


he's officially campaigning to stay in. What about June 24? At the


weekend, there was talk about pensions and a triple lock, David


Cameron saying it could be at risk, but that government policy whether


we are in or out of the EU. Gordon Brown talk about jobs created if we


stayed in the EU. We do seem to be now squarely in what does happen on


June 24 in terms of manifestos and election promises. That point about


pensions is quite interesting because it's a wider argument that


the Remain people are trying to say, there would be less money for


everything. One interesting thing in this campaign is a whole frame of


politics and the economic argument before the EU referendum was about


fiscal crisis, I think we've more or less close that but can now and as a


whole new chapter. The league campaign says we have a huge amount


of money to spend on hospitals and schools and David Cameron saying the


leader spent on pensions. You will find a different structure to the


way the whole argument goes on about priorities and what the product of


governing Britain will be regardless of the result and that throws


anything up in the air. Who will be in charge then? Will it be Remain or


Leave? There's a big push to keep David Cameron even if there is a


Vote Leave. Many MPs think it would be a good idea for the country but


it would be very difficult for David Cameron to have authority as Prime


Minister, given he is made warnings like Brexit will put a bomb under


the economy. How will he reassure people that exactly what's happening


and how we carry out the wishes of the British people? We don't


necessarily know what model of Brexit he would go for and you would


have to work with those who campaigned for Leave to work on that


so it would be very tricky and it's quite significant he's had to talk


about that already and it shows he's not in the plate in his campaign


where he helped to be at this stage. Thank you to both of you.


If you've been following the news coverage of BHS, you'll know


that the former owner of the chain of high street stores,


Sir Philip Green, is refusing to appear in front of a House


of Commons committee to answer questions


Sir Philip said on Friday that he's not prepared to participate


with the evidence session this Wednesday, unless its chairman,


Sir Philip says Mr Field is biased and is conducting a trial by media.


Another MP on the committee, Richard Fuller, told Andrew Neil


yesterday there would be consequences if Sir Philip


I've always said that we have to wait for him to come and answer


What we've seen in the last few weeks is very serious


concerns about his behaviour and the behaviour of his directors.


If he doesn't come, I think, at that stage then, within the rules


of how you can be stripped of an honour, I think the committee


would very seriously look at that, yes.


At this point we had hoped to be joined by the chair of the Work


and Pensions Select Committee, Frank Field, but sadly he hasn't


But, of course, I have you to instead. So what are the sanctions,


Bernard Jenkin, that can be brought to bear on someone like filigree and


if he doesn't turn up? It is very serious to be in contempt of


Parliament but he would be subject to contempt of Parliament


proceedings. -- someone like Philip green. If he refuses to take part,


there are no criminal sanctions, no fines, but his reputation is in


tatters and the idea that he could retain his knighthood or anything


like that... It's stupid, actually, because he can come to the


committee, he is free to speak, he is free to say whatever he likes so


long as he is not actually misleading parliament. He is not


going to be constrained about what he says about other people for fear


of being sued and it is to its advantage to attend and the idea


that Ranville, of all people, is not open-minded and evenhanded, he is


picking on... I don't come under the same category as Frank. But he has


made a valid point, I think, by saying, if you've already made up


your mind, and you have lots of sessions where people said, we bang


to rights before we even appear, why should they appeared before what


they feel are biased proceedings? Goal but I think our sections are a


bit stronger than Bernard suggested. Until the 1880s, when people refused


to do something that the House of Commons ruled, we would take them


through the House of Commons and they would have a little period of


surgery to reflect. That sounds very ominous! They were


locked up in a room. You can't do that now, can you? Why not? It has


never been removed. Because of the Human Rights Act. We are not talking


about the EU referendum on the Human Rights Act. Go bye-bye think it has


been a great week of Parliament. The hearings that were held in front of


Ian Wright, what a fantastic... And you are talking about Mike


Ashley. You would never have got it in a court of law. You would never


have got Mike Ashley admitting in a court of law that he was not paying


minimal wage and the strength of the informality... But they've got to


turn up. If they think you are biased and have made up your mind,


and Frank field has even put up figure on the amount he should pay,


why should he turn up? It is to Philip Green's advantage of the ends


up. This is not a judicial process and is not going to result in any


consequences, judicial consequences for him, as a result of this. Not


even the Financial Conduct Authority, the department for trade


and industry, they cannot use what he says in that committee against


him in any way whatsoever. That is the advantage of the select


committee. Do you think he will turn up? I think he will and I agree with


Bernard. If he doesn't... You are going to lock him away? I'm going to


lock him away in Big Ben and take his knighthood. He would be served


with a rich. It happened Arthur Scargill. If you are running away


from a writ for Parliament, what have you got left of your


reputation? Lets leave it there. Philip Green, I hope you are


watching. Interviews with big


names are a mainstay But how do the big interviewers make


sure their grillings on TV In the latest of a series


of films about how BBC news programmes are put together,


Adam's gone behind the scenes of some of the BBC's


flagship political shows. Up the road at Broadcasting House,


it's rush hour as politicians arrive On first, Andrew Marr with a line-up


that includes the Mayor of London, the former head of MI6


and the Justice So sometimes you simply say what's


on your mind and sit Sometimes you have to really hit


them hard and carry on pursuing something they don't


want to talk about. Every interview is different,


but I'm basically there to get the interviewee to say the most


interesting things to two million plus people watching


that they can say on that day. Sometimes it doesn't go brilliantly,


like this interview with Boris. I'm going to tell you what I'm


going to cover. There are times when something more


than the intellectual give-and-take that we're looking for creeps


into the relationship with I try to look people in the eye


and ask always the obvious questions Right, off to the third floor to see


Pienaar Politics on 5 Live. RADIO: First for breaking news


and the best live sport. Even though his name


is in the title of the show, JP insists interviews


are never about him. You start from the position


that we are impartial Once you recognise there's no place


for your own prejudices and your own personal take


on things, it's not interesting Once you start from there,


all of your questions fall into the necessary category


and they make sense. You don't let any politician


just say what they have You test them or what's


the point of being there? What's the point of asking


questions? OK, it's 11 o'clock so time to go


to the basement again for The Sunday Politics


with Andrew Neil. Andrew is grilling the leader


of the Scottish Conservatives The catchphrase he uses when he's


prepping for interviews A team of researchers works


through what will be the best lines to follow,


do the fact-based research, go through all the documents, make sure


we know what we're talking about. I do the same myself,


I do a lot of research myself. We bring the two together


and we try to build a reputation for basing our interviews


on the facts and getting the politicians of all parties


to address the facts. And that's it for Sunday morning


with my much, much, much, much, Interviewing an interviewer


about interviewing. And you can see all Adam's films


about how the BBC ensures fairness In the final few weeks before


the referendum on 23rd June, we have been showcasing


the arguments for remaining in the EU and leaving it


in a series of short films. Today we're looking at how Green


supporters are approaching the vote. In a moment we'll hear


from the Green MP Caroline Lucas First, though, here's


the Green activist Mark Hill, Most of the political parties tell


us that we should remain in the European Union but just look


at the opinion polls. And many of those expecting to vote


Leave will therefore be Green We are reminding voters


that we are all in this together and we take this decision


collectively as citizens whatever Our key argument is that the major


parties all want us to stay in, claiming that we can reform


the European Union from within. We simply say that the


European Union is beyond reform. Protectionism against developing


countries, savage austerity in Greece and mass unemployment


amongst youth are the results, so look at our website which show


what left-wing figures like Tony Benn have had to say


about the European Union. Because to come and speak


at a public meeting, And here's Caroline Lucas,


former leader of the Green Party, with her case for remaining


in the EU. Now, it was so good we thought we'd


play you twice! We will try and bring new Caroline Lucas's in just a


moment but we've been joined in the studio by Mark Hill, the leader of


the Green KEN DOHERTY: Leaves campaign. -- the


green leaves campaign. And by the deputy leader


of the Green Party Shahrar Ali. Surely it is better to negotiate as


part of the major trading bloc than alone? I would say no. I would say


that the results on issues like climate change have been very mixed.


The emissions trading scheme has been less successful than some of


the projects that the government has undertaken unilaterally. Bilateral


treaties work extremely well. It would be wrong to say that the


European Union has been uniformly unsuccessful but there are certainly


many environmentally related responsibilities which it has not


exercised well. But are you really saying that Britain would have done


better at some of those targets than by being part of the EU? I suggest


that we should be very conscious of what the EU decides but not be ruled


by a. What do you say, Sharar Ali? With the greatest respect, I think


anybody who really understands green ethos, green ideology and the green


movement, we are through and through internationalists. That's why we are


firmly arguing for staying in the EU but not unreformed. Wheelie great


reform. But some of the things where we need cross border reform,


collaboration, climate change is one of the biggest issues of our time.


We've had an agreement amongst international leaders and it is much


much easier now for us to get EU leaders together and to try and make


the steps that are necessary, like 107 renewable energy by 2050. These


are not things that can be done unilaterally or bilaterally, and the


EU has been tremendous on environmental legislation generally.


Is Mark misguided, and is he very representative in terms of other


Green Party supporters? Unlike most parties, we have an official,


democratically decided position. People are able to dissent from that


but once it is decided I think it is great for the party to be


demonstrating the unity of that decision. However, I think it is


doubly problematic for Green is to be proposing and except for the EU.


This is one of the areas where we have proportional representation. We


have a far better mandate in the European Parliament than we do in


our own UK Parliamentary institutions. Caroline Lucas, first


past the post, one by 1 million voters. We are very aware that we


are standing for a referendum and reform to stay in. The House of


Lords, and an elected institution, we can't equate that institution


with the European Parliament, a farm more do credit regime. This seems to


go against some of the core principles of being a member of the


Green Party. I don't think so and for a long time the Green Party was


very ambivalent about the EU and that was part of a tradition that


existed across the left, including towering figures like Tony Benn. If


you look at the polls now, the Leave campaign would appear to be ahead.


That's empty can be on the back of disgruntled Conservatives and Ukip


supporters. -- that simply cannot be. Everybody that is arguing for


relief is ultimately against their political party and it would appear


from the breakdowns of the opinion polls that people on the left are


going to be roughly 30% or more voting for Leave in spite of what


you say, and I would claim that a lot of people are doing this


precisely for internationalist reasons, because they would like to


engage more deeply with the wide array of countries outside be you


that need our contact. One of the things Mark Reyes was about


austerity, because the policy since the crash has been pro-austerity,


rightly or only, and that in itself would not be a Green Party


printable. That definitely great against Green Party ethos and we've


been railing against austerity measures in this country, but that


isn't to say that people facing massive unemployment in Greece or or


facing those kinds austerity measures shouldn't get a bit of


solidarity from us. It is partly about what kind of people you want


to be, do you want to pull up the drawbridge and be Englanders or do


we want to express solidarity with our European colleagues and


neighbours and say, actually, we're with you and we're going to help


you, even if, as a relatively rich country, it is going to cost a


slightly more? I think the people of this country are very prepared to do


things not just for their own sake but for others to. We are sorry we


are unable to show the Caroline Lucas clip as promised but you can


watch it online on our website. Gremlins obviously exist.


Thanks to Margaret, Bernard and all my guests.


I'll be back here on BBC Two tomorrow at noon with


MUSIC: Send My Love (To Your New Lover) by Adele


Download Subtitles