:00:38. > :00:39.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:40. > :00:42.British politics looks set to have another leadership election
:00:43. > :00:44.as Nigel Farage announces he is stepping down
:00:45. > :00:50.Mr Farage says he has achieved his lifetime ambition
:00:51. > :00:52.to get Britain to leave the European Union, and the time
:00:53. > :01:05.Theresa May says she will work tirelessly to control immigration
:01:06. > :01:08.But as Home Secretary, the numbers have reached record highs.
:01:09. > :01:11.So is she the right person to get a grip on migration?
:01:12. > :01:15.We speak to her former Home Office minister.
:01:16. > :01:17.Jeremy Corbyn begins another day as Labour leader,
:01:18. > :01:20.as senior figures call for calm and a process of negotiation
:01:21. > :01:22.to find a way out of the party's current crisis.
:01:23. > :01:35.All that in the next hour and with us for the whole
:01:36. > :01:38.of the programme today are the Conservative MP and former
:01:39. > :01:43.He once worked for Theresa May at the Home Office so I guess
:01:44. > :01:46.And we're also joined by the Shadow Energy
:01:47. > :01:49.and Climate Change Secretary, Barry Gardiner, who's been in his
:01:50. > :01:52.job for a whopping seven days which, in these strange times,
:01:53. > :01:54.makes him one of the more experienced members
:01:55. > :02:00.So, you wait ages for a leadership contest,
:02:01. > :02:05.In the last hour Nigel Farage has announced that he is stepping
:02:06. > :02:14.I have never been and I've never wanted to be a career politician.
:02:15. > :02:16.My aim in being in politics was to get Britain out
:02:17. > :02:22.That is what we voted for in that referendum two weeks ago
:02:23. > :02:27.and that is why I now feel that I've done my bit, that I couldn't
:02:28. > :02:31.possibly achieve more than we managed to get in that
:02:32. > :02:34.referendum, and so I feel it's right that I should now stand
:02:35. > :02:50.He's a Ukip member of the Welsh Assembly and an MEP.
:02:51. > :02:58.Welcome. We've been here before, of course. Nigel Farage resigned and
:02:59. > :03:04.then didn't resign. If he definitely going this time? I believe he is. He
:03:05. > :03:08.said this is it. He campaigned on the big message that we want our
:03:09. > :03:12.country back and then he said during a speech he wants his life back. I
:03:13. > :03:18.believe he really does. As you just said in that clip, he's not a career
:03:19. > :03:22.politician. He's never pretended to be one. He has achieved the greatest
:03:23. > :03:28.pinnacle that any politician in British history could achieve, he's
:03:29. > :03:30.one our country back, he has won back our democracy, our sovereignty,
:03:31. > :03:34.and is going out on a high full foot it would be foolish not to. So who
:03:35. > :03:39.on earth could replace him? Pretty big shoes to fill and without a
:03:40. > :03:44.doubt, we are a very diverse party, with a lot of very skilled and
:03:45. > :03:49.talented people on the sidelines. What about you? I've not really
:03:50. > :03:53.considered it because it comes quite a shock. Nobody knew that this was
:03:54. > :03:58.going to happen. You didn't know even though you are close to Nigel
:03:59. > :04:01.Farage? I suspect because it was not telling anybody what the meeting was
:04:02. > :04:05.going to be about today, what the press conference was going to be
:04:06. > :04:09.about. He would not tell anybody, not even his closest confidants so I
:04:10. > :04:14.suspected he would get his life back. Will you consider it? We will
:04:15. > :04:17.have a meeting of the MEPs after, when we get to Strasbourg tonight,
:04:18. > :04:22.and we don't want to fall into the same trap as the Conservatives, this
:04:23. > :04:26.huge civil war for that we want to do this in a dignified way. We have
:04:27. > :04:30.lots of talent, so let's see what happens and who is willing to
:04:31. > :04:35.consider filling those big shoes. What's next for Nigel Farage, what
:04:36. > :04:40.should you do? I think he needs to rest. We've all worked very hard,
:04:41. > :04:44.we're all very tired. I think what he will do, he's going to be the
:04:45. > :04:49.canary in the mine shaft. He's going to continue to go to Brussels. He's
:04:50. > :04:53.going to keep an eye on the negotiations and he will lead the
:04:54. > :04:57.British people, as will the rest of the MEPs, where we go wrong and if
:04:58. > :05:01.we feel that article 50 is not going in the direction it should be going.
:05:02. > :05:06.He also said in a press conference, he talked about the need for
:05:07. > :05:09.experienced negotiators to be part of the Brexit team and Andrea
:05:10. > :05:13.Leadsom, one of the leadership contenders for the Conservative
:05:14. > :05:17.Party, was asked whether she would work with him and she didn't say one
:05:18. > :05:23.way or the other. Could you see Nigel Farage in some way advising
:05:24. > :05:29.and Andrea Leadsom team? I could see advising any team to be perfectly
:05:30. > :05:31.honest with you. Any conservative? Absolutely, his greatest skill, no
:05:32. > :05:35.one has more knowledge of the inner workings of the European Parliament
:05:36. > :05:39.than Nigel Farage. You would be foolish not to have him in there,
:05:40. > :05:43.even as just an adviser and let's face it, the 17.5 million votes we
:05:44. > :05:46.got, great dealer that was because of the efforts of the work of Nigel
:05:47. > :05:47.Farage. OK, thank you. Joining me now is Douglas Carswell,
:05:48. > :05:56.the party's only MP. Your reaction to Nigel Farage
:05:57. > :06:02.stepping down? I want to be generous. He spent 20 is pushing for
:06:03. > :06:07.a referendum. We had the referendum and it was won by 17.5 million
:06:08. > :06:12.people and he played a role in that. You are pleased to see him go? Six
:06:13. > :06:17.months ago I was talking about the need for change. I do think all
:06:18. > :06:21.parties benefit, it may not look like it today, this week, but all
:06:22. > :06:25.parties ultimately benefit from having these internal democratic
:06:26. > :06:30.inclusive contests to generate new ideas and allow the most able to get
:06:31. > :06:34.to the top. Don't hold back, you treated us :-) when he announced he
:06:35. > :06:39.was stepping down. I treat :-) is all the time, I'm very optimistic.
:06:40. > :06:45.You are happy about it? There's a huge opportunity here. The cartel
:06:46. > :06:49.party in Westminster, have, for years, taken for granted their
:06:50. > :06:51.electorate. 17% of Labour MPs represent constituencies where a
:06:52. > :06:55.majority of people wanted to leave the EU with a noble exception of
:06:56. > :07:04.people like geezer Stuart, most are out of touch with the people. That
:07:05. > :07:10.huge opportunity for us. And for you, as a successor? The chances of
:07:11. > :07:14.me standing as leader are between Miller and zero. My role is to steer
:07:15. > :07:20.Ukip away from the temptations of becoming an angry nativist party.
:07:21. > :07:25.Has that happened? We went too far and I criticised it when we went too
:07:26. > :07:28.far. It's not just morally wrong but electorally disastrous. This is a
:07:29. > :07:31.decent, generous country. People have a right to feel anger with
:07:32. > :07:35.their politicians but the answer to that is not to play on people's
:07:36. > :07:39.fears and anger, but to promise the hope of something better and if we
:07:40. > :07:43.can do that, we can be part of a great change of I never want to be a
:07:44. > :07:45.party with the Archbishop of Canterbury feels compelled to
:07:46. > :07:50.criticise the things people say. Is that why you were critical of Nigel
:07:51. > :07:55.Farage's breaking point poster? Yes, because it was deeply wrong at every
:07:56. > :07:59.time I see someone in politics who tries to get votes by playing on a
:08:00. > :08:04.sense of other, whether on the left trying to demonise the 1% or on the
:08:05. > :08:08.right, demonising the outsider, it's incumbent upon us to speak out and
:08:09. > :08:11.say it's wrong. Do you accept it was disloyal? It was loyal to my
:08:12. > :08:16.constituents and the hope of a happy about a country. What will it do to
:08:17. > :08:20.your future in the party? Nigel Farage has decided his future in
:08:21. > :08:23.Ukip but yours hangs in the balance so just to be cleared to viewers,
:08:24. > :08:27.are the executive going to expel you from the party because of my
:08:28. > :08:34.criticism? I don't know. I've been two different parties in as many
:08:35. > :08:37.years for that you can join a party for 25 quid online. Some parties are
:08:38. > :08:43.good and others are less good provided decent people get involved,
:08:44. > :08:49.this is about in politics and my main determination is to make sure
:08:50. > :08:52.Brexit works. 48% of these people have doubts about leaving and we now
:08:53. > :08:55.need to make sure there's a new national consensus, which is far
:08:56. > :09:00.more important to me than Tweedledee versus Tweedledum in Westminster. So
:09:01. > :09:08.who should lead Ukip? Someone generous and decent. I want to make
:09:09. > :09:12.sure it a general liberal inclusive script, no Tim Akers of, and need to
:09:13. > :09:17.offer angry voters the promise of something better. Do you think the
:09:18. > :09:21.anger was stirred up by Nigel Farage, and this returned to decent
:09:22. > :09:24.politics was because is not decent and Nigel Farage? There's been many
:09:25. > :09:29.occasions in the past 6-12 months where I have spoken very clearly,
:09:30. > :09:33.after the old by-election, implying postal vote and by extension a
:09:34. > :09:38.particular type of voter is somehow at fault was wrong. I spoke out
:09:39. > :09:41.clearly against that at the time. All of this is wrong, the poster, I
:09:42. > :09:46.don't think it's decent for political leaders in this country to
:09:47. > :09:50.try to attract votes by demonising. Look, politics is about getting
:09:51. > :09:53.everyone to mark their cross on the same bit of paper. It should be
:09:54. > :09:57.about bringing people together and I think, if we have a leader whose
:09:58. > :10:02.values are in tune with that, the sky is a limit, we can displace.
:10:03. > :10:08.When it's your dinner party if it's not fulfilling the criteria? That
:10:09. > :10:13.will it be your party? I'm more interested in trying to make Brexit
:10:14. > :10:17.work and play not ever go like an injury that. Political parties are
:10:18. > :10:21.not the be all and end all. Politics are like cookies in the nest. Maybe
:10:22. > :10:28.we need a different type of party. What you to that? Political parties,
:10:29. > :10:33.but some are better than others and I applaud him for his stance against
:10:34. > :10:40.the excesses of Nigel Farage, the nudge nudge, a bit racist, the
:10:41. > :10:44.phrase, I'm not racist but, could be invented the things Nigel Farage has
:10:45. > :10:50.done. You're not saying he's actually racist? No, I'm not, but he
:10:51. > :10:53.encourages feelings that are unhelpful and destructive and that's
:10:54. > :10:58.what is always done in a split a good career, so it generous, I don't
:10:59. > :11:03.dislike him personally, but I'm glad he's leaving front-line politics. I
:11:04. > :11:08.think it's good for politics in this country. What is your reaction to
:11:09. > :11:14.his resignation? I am very pleased he has decided to take a back-seat.
:11:15. > :11:18.I would be surprised if he does. If he does take a back-seat? You think
:11:19. > :11:25.you be back in the front line politics in what way? In some form
:11:26. > :11:31.or other, I think he's... He's somebody addicted to the camera. I
:11:32. > :11:36.think that's an addiction that former politicians find very
:11:37. > :11:42.difficult to break away from. Do you agree that Nigel Farage can't give
:11:43. > :11:46.it up? You need to talk to Nigel about this. I'm interested in making
:11:47. > :11:50.sure we leave the EU and have a new national consensus. We are basically
:11:51. > :11:54.a liberal outward looking country and I campaigned for 20 is to get us
:11:55. > :11:58.out of the EU because I think the EU is actually contrary to the liberal
:11:59. > :11:59.open tradition. OK, thank you very much.
:12:00. > :12:02.Theresa May's leadership campaign has had a significant boost this
:12:03. > :12:03.morning with the endorsement of her Cabinet colleague,
:12:04. > :12:07.Writing in today's Telegraph, he says Mrs May has
:12:08. > :12:10.the character and qualities to take Britain forward.
:12:11. > :12:12.And he also says it's crucial to end EU free movement
:12:13. > :12:17.Immigration is a key issue for the next leader so what are
:12:18. > :12:22.All five candidates stood on the Conservative election
:12:23. > :12:27.manifesto to bring migration down to the "tens of thousands".
:12:28. > :12:31.But last year, net migration topped 330,000, of which EU-only net
:12:32. > :12:41.Yesterday, Theresa May insisted that the message from the referendum
:12:42. > :12:44.was that the government needed to "bring control into movement
:12:45. > :12:50.of people" coming into the UK from the EU.
:12:51. > :12:53.But she hinted that the status of EU nationals in the UK and Britons
:12:54. > :12:56.living on the continent would also have to be part of any negotiations
:12:57. > :13:02.Launching his campaign last week, Stephen Crabb, the other contender
:13:03. > :13:06.for the Conservative leadership who backed the Remain campaign,
:13:07. > :13:08.said control over immigration would be a "red line"
:13:09. > :13:14.And Leave campaigners such as Michael Gove,
:13:15. > :13:17.Andrea Leadsom and Liam Fox have argued during the referendum
:13:18. > :13:19.campaign that the UK should introduce a points-based system
:13:20. > :13:29.for managing migrant applications, similar to that used by Australia.
:13:30. > :13:31.Joining us now is the Conservative MP, Jacob Rees-Mogg,
:13:32. > :13:37.who is backing Michael Gove to be the next leader.
:13:38. > :13:44.Welcome to the programme. I'll come to the moment. Is Theresa May the
:13:45. > :13:48.right person to negotiate immigration figures on her watch, it
:13:49. > :13:51.soared and her record is not inspire confidence. Absolutely because
:13:52. > :13:55.immigration, as we have seen in the past 15 years, going back through
:13:56. > :14:00.three governments, is a hugely difficult issue. You have to balance
:14:01. > :14:04.the needs of this country economic league with getting the brightest
:14:05. > :14:09.and the best here with the desire for control and actually bringing
:14:10. > :14:12.down the numbers. Many successful measures have been taken, the
:14:13. > :14:16.closure of 800 bogus colleges in Taiwan but even so the numbers have
:14:17. > :14:19.gone up. But they're not successful at the numbers go up and you work
:14:20. > :14:24.with Theresa May in the office of immigration and under your watch it
:14:25. > :14:29.has gone up. It's gone down and back up again, showing the difficulties
:14:30. > :14:33.but what I think is key is to make sure you strike that right balance
:14:34. > :14:36.and, in the new disposition we find ourselves, where we can have an
:14:37. > :14:41.immigration policy that applies to all countries, then the end of the
:14:42. > :14:47.old system of free movement and the movement to a new system of control
:14:48. > :14:52.am combining that with the capacity to keep our economy as strong as
:14:53. > :14:55.possible, is hugely detailed and Teresa has a much better
:14:56. > :15:00.qualification that anybody else. You say that but of course, on that
:15:01. > :15:04.issue of actually a trade-off, which is what Philip Hammond was talking
:15:05. > :15:07.about today between the economy and immigration, which is still pledged
:15:08. > :15:11.to bring net migration down to tens of thousands?
:15:12. > :15:22.We clearly need to bring it down lower. Theresa May has not set it
:15:23. > :15:28.out yet. We all wanted to come down. This idea that you should announce
:15:29. > :15:33.it is all fine, every British expat in Europe is fine, every European
:15:34. > :15:38.expat here is fine, to saying now that there is going to be no change
:15:39. > :15:41.is just a sign of an experience, frankly. Clearly that is a big
:15:42. > :15:50.negotiating card that we do not want to give away at this point. Many
:15:51. > :15:56.people will be worried by the implication that this will be part
:15:57. > :16:04.of the negotiation, EU nationals here now, but Michael Gove is clear
:16:05. > :16:07.it shouldn't be. Yellow -- I disagree with Damien. I think it is
:16:08. > :16:15.a question of what is the right thing to do about these individuals.
:16:16. > :16:18.I thought the free movement of people wouldn't -- within the
:16:19. > :16:22.European Union was a mistake. But when these people have done nothing
:16:23. > :16:27.wrong, and to throw their lives into the air as part of a negotiation, it
:16:28. > :16:30.is the wrong thing to do, a bad way to treat people. But in terms of
:16:31. > :16:35.reducing the numbers, it would have to be? From the day we leave, we
:16:36. > :16:44.should ensure that people come here on the same basis from India is from
:16:45. > :16:48.Italy. E4 wheelie, we should make sure the people who arrived here
:16:49. > :16:56.before June 23 does not inherit these rights. It would be wrong to
:16:57. > :17:00.say to polish people, to French people, that they should leave. It
:17:01. > :17:06.would be wrong. The problem is I want to give the same guarantees to
:17:07. > :17:11.British ex-patriots. In an ideal world, absolutely, we would get to a
:17:12. > :17:16.point where nobody is inconvenienced. First of all, we
:17:17. > :17:22.cannot control what other governments do to British expats.
:17:23. > :17:31.That is why saying whatever happens, nothing will change now, is a lack
:17:32. > :17:35.of experience. What you have just said, from the moment we exit,
:17:36. > :17:40.everybody will be able to stay, that is fine. What will happen between
:17:41. > :17:48.now and then? That is why we must not extend rights to people from now
:17:49. > :17:54.on. We have to set a date. When would be a sensible date? I think it
:17:55. > :17:57.should be announced by the leadership contenders so people
:17:58. > :18:02.would know. We have to say and it has to be soon. If you say anyone
:18:03. > :18:07.who comes in the next couple of years can stay forever, that would
:18:08. > :18:11.encourage a rush of people. But I do disagree with Damien about using
:18:12. > :18:15.this as a bargaining chip. I think sometimes you have to do the right
:18:16. > :18:19.thing. You have to remember you are dealing with individual lives. That
:18:20. > :18:24.is more important than using it as a bargaining chip in the negotiations.
:18:25. > :18:32.How do you protect the lives of it is expats? Politics without some
:18:33. > :18:36.moral backbone is without value. I would be very surprised. We heard
:18:37. > :18:41.the Maltese Prime Minister, which has the highest percentage of
:18:42. > :18:46.British expats to their population, you would not dream of asking them
:18:47. > :18:50.to leave. Are you sure you would get that agreement from Spain, from
:18:51. > :18:55.France, where there are hundreds of thousands of British people, in a
:18:56. > :18:59.negotiation? I think it would be extraordinary if we behave
:19:00. > :19:06.generously, that they would behave meanly in return. Let's talk about
:19:07. > :19:10.an Australian points-based system, which is being advocated by Michael
:19:11. > :19:15.Gove. Will that bring migration down to tens of thousands? It depends how
:19:16. > :19:18.you set the system. You determine the points for the skills you need
:19:19. > :19:22.and work out how many people you need for jobs that are available. It
:19:23. > :19:28.would have to be awfully narrow to bring it down by hundreds of
:19:29. > :19:33.thousands? It would have to be more narrow vanities. It is possible to
:19:34. > :19:37.do. Immigration was in the tens of thousands until the 1990s. It has
:19:38. > :19:42.got out of control in the last 20 years. It would be impossible to go
:19:43. > :19:49.back to a level of control. It is silly to pretend it is easy. Do you
:19:50. > :19:55.support a points-based system? The problem for the Australian system is
:19:56. > :20:03.that it does not achieve what it set out to achieve. You could let nobody
:20:04. > :20:08.in but I hope that is not a theory that will ever be put into practice.
:20:09. > :20:11.That could be hugely damaging. You said during the referendum campaign
:20:12. > :20:18.that such a system would wreck the economy. The more complexities you
:20:19. > :20:24.put into it, the more difficult it is for firms and for individuals...
:20:25. > :20:29.If someone doesn't know whether the rules are going to be changed next
:20:30. > :20:34.year, saw their qualifications may not apply, you do actually get a lot
:20:35. > :20:40.of friction in the system. You have to create a huge bureaucracy to make
:20:41. > :20:44.it work. What is your view? John McDonnell agrees with Jacob
:20:45. > :20:50.Rees-Mogg, that people already here, EU nationals, should be safe in the
:20:51. > :20:53.knowledge they should stay. Do you agree to absolutely. My constituency
:20:54. > :20:56.of Brent North is the first constituency in the country that had
:20:57. > :21:02.more people in the last election voting were born outside of the UK
:21:03. > :21:07.than were born in it. How much should immigration come down? Much
:21:08. > :21:14.of that has been through the eastern migration in Europe -- migration --
:21:15. > :21:22.Eastern European migration. There were transitional controls. Not for
:21:23. > :21:27.Poland. That is absolutely right. What we have got is one of the most
:21:28. > :21:32.vibrant economies in north-west London. So you don't think
:21:33. > :21:36.immigration should come down? No, I didn't say that. What has happened
:21:37. > :21:41.with the migration, and perhaps Jacob should take it on board,
:21:42. > :21:45.although I agree with his moral point, he needs to consider that
:21:46. > :21:50.when we widen immigration from India to Italy, we then see the widening
:21:51. > :21:54.of the commodification of labour. That presents its own problems, the
:21:55. > :21:58.very problems that he is talking about, where people in this country
:21:59. > :22:02.feel alienate it by the migration flows that have taken place, the
:22:03. > :22:11.undermining of the old politics of place. That will accentuate. Very
:22:12. > :22:16.briefly, this legal challenge on Parliament having to actually
:22:17. > :22:21.trigger or agree that only the Prime Minister can invoke article 50, will
:22:22. > :22:26.that get anywhere? I don't think it well. I have spoken to a legal
:22:27. > :22:30.expert who said the purpose of the communities act -- European
:22:31. > :22:35.Communities Act, was to bring EU law into British law, not to determine
:22:36. > :22:37.our membership. And that the referendum act made it clear there
:22:38. > :22:42.would be an advisory board that the government could then act on. I
:22:43. > :22:47.think you might be arguing that exercising Article 50 by the
:22:48. > :22:51.prerogative power would have an implication for one act, it would be
:22:52. > :22:52.fully in accordance with the second and later act. The liver act would
:22:53. > :22:59.be deemed superior. All the king's horses
:23:00. > :23:02.and all the king's men couldn't put But Len McCluskey thinks
:23:03. > :23:05.he can put he can put the Labour Party back together,
:23:06. > :23:07.and keep Jeremy Corbyn as its leader, as he told
:23:08. > :23:09.Andrew Marr yesterday. Trade unions have always been
:23:10. > :23:11.the rock, the anchor, that has kept the Labour ship steady
:23:12. > :23:15.in stormy seas and what I'm saying is that, because this
:23:16. > :23:17.coup has now failed, the trade unions can broker a peace,
:23:18. > :23:21.with Jeremy as our leader and the genuine concerns of the PLP,
:23:22. > :23:25.we can bring people together, and I'm calling upon Angela Eagle
:23:26. > :23:32.and Owen Smith and anybody else What kind of deal
:23:33. > :23:35.could you offer them? You would bring in a
:23:36. > :23:40.different shadow cabinet? We would bring both parties together
:23:41. > :23:53.and resolve this issue. Len McCluskey is going to stage the
:23:54. > :23:59.Labour Party back together and keep Jeremy Corbyn as leader. If he does
:24:00. > :24:04.do -- do that, you might be up for a Nobel Peace Prize? I don't think
:24:05. > :24:10.Glenn would want a peace prize. It is important that we are clear that
:24:11. > :24:16.negotiations have to happen. Should it be united by Len McCluskey? It
:24:17. > :24:19.should be somebody trusted within the trade union. I think Frances
:24:20. > :24:25.O'Grady would be an excellent choice. There are other potential
:24:26. > :24:30.choices. I put John Prescott's name in the frame yesterday. He is
:24:31. > :24:36.somebody who has a tradition of negotiating between Labour leaders.
:24:37. > :24:42.He certainly does. It wasn't as bad then as it is now. I don't know.
:24:43. > :24:47.More than that, he is somebody who is the rank and file of the party
:24:48. > :24:58.and people trust. Party members know he has party members interests at
:24:59. > :25:04.heart. More so than Len McCluskey? ECM more honest broker? I didn't
:25:05. > :25:08.hear Len McCluskey ask for the job. I think he simply said that the
:25:09. > :25:12.trade union movement could do it. And I agree with that. I think
:25:13. > :25:16.Frances O'Grady would be an excellent choice. How long will you
:25:17. > :25:23.stay in the shadow cabinet if this impasse continues? I am there at the
:25:24. > :25:28.invitation of the leader and I will stay there until the invitation is
:25:29. > :25:33.no longer extended. Angela Eagle has said she will stand if the impasse
:25:34. > :25:39.continues. What do you say to her? That is the party rules. The party
:25:40. > :25:43.rules are very clear. Should she stand? The only way of having an
:25:44. > :25:48.election, the only way of triggering a change in leader is to challenge.
:25:49. > :25:52.Do you think that should happen? Would it be better now for someone
:25:53. > :26:03.to challenge for the leadership and just have it out? What we need to do
:26:04. > :26:06.is get all sides together and have them talk to each other. At the
:26:07. > :26:08.moment it is being talked through proxy and I don't think that helps.
:26:09. > :26:12.Even without those talks, could Jeremy Corbyn continue as leader?
:26:13. > :26:18.Absolutely. He has not had the support of the vast majority of MPs
:26:19. > :26:21.since becoming leader. He had 36 nominations, that was all, in the
:26:22. > :26:28.ballot the other day he actually got 40. In effect, his approval rating
:26:29. > :26:33.has gone. The key point here is that for the past nine months the Labour
:26:34. > :26:36.Party has been functioning on that basis, that the vast majority of the
:26:37. > :26:42.Parliamentary party do not like the leader, they would have somebody
:26:43. > :26:46.else. The difference here is that people within the PLP have decided
:26:47. > :26:51.that they want to, in effect, conducted through to get rid of him
:26:52. > :26:56.instead of challenging through the party process. You are saying it
:26:57. > :27:02.would be better to challenge than to wait for him to stand down? The only
:27:03. > :27:09.way constitutionally to depose a sitting leader of the Labour
:27:10. > :27:14.Party... Unless he stands down. I said to depose. If Corbyn stays, the
:27:15. > :27:19.pressure will be on to replace Labour MPs, to deselect the 176 MPs
:27:20. > :27:23.who failed to vote for Jeremy Corbyn and replace them with people who are
:27:24. > :27:28.sympathetic at grassroots level. Is that what he would like to see to
:27:29. > :27:33.the first thing I said at shadow cabinet last week was that we had to
:27:34. > :27:38.have absolute clarity, that anybody who was harassing, intimidating or
:27:39. > :27:42.threatening sitting MPs, if they were party members, should be very
:27:43. > :27:46.clear, that if they were found guilty, they would be thrown out of
:27:47. > :27:52.the party. We are not going to have a witch hunt within the Labour
:27:53. > :27:57.Party. That would be a disaster. Are you sure? I am telling you my view.
:27:58. > :28:01.It would be a disaster to do that. Members of Parliament do a difficult
:28:02. > :28:06.job, they are elected by constituents and they should not be
:28:07. > :28:11.levered out by people who do not have the best interest of the party
:28:12. > :28:14.and the wider public at heart. Do you sometimes wake up in the morning
:28:15. > :28:17.and wonder how the Labour Party got into this mess? I think politics is
:28:18. > :28:21.a very strange profession. Now, before we go, if you want
:28:22. > :28:25.to hear more on all these stories, I will be joining Adam
:28:26. > :28:27.online in one minute, for another 20 minutes,
:28:28. > :28:29.to take your questions and show you our programme from behind
:28:30. > :28:32.the scenes in our newsroom. Just follow the link
:28:33. > :28:42.to the BBC News Facebook page. Can you believe how politics has
:28:43. > :28:47.turned out in the last couple of weeks? It is on fast forward at the
:28:48. > :28:49.moment. A very strange period. Could you have predicted Anier but? Not
:28:50. > :28:53.really. It is politics. My guest will be former Labour
:28:54. > :28:57.minister Tessa Jowell.