:00:00. > :00:38.weather for eastern parts of England.
:00:39. > :00:40.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics and Westminster,
:00:41. > :00:43.where many are asking if the Labour MP, Keith Vaz,
:00:44. > :00:50.He's under growing pressure to consider his position as head
:00:51. > :00:54.of a Commons' committee after a Sunday newspaper claimed
:00:55. > :00:57.he paid for the services of two male prostitutes.
:00:58. > :01:01.He's expected to be urged by colleagues to stand down today.
:01:02. > :01:03.Brexit means leaving the EU, according to the new Brexit
:01:04. > :01:09.He gave a confident first statement to MPs, but what if anything
:01:10. > :01:16.For most of its history the Green Party refused
:01:17. > :01:23.We'll be talking to the power couple taking part in the first job share
:01:24. > :01:28.And Paddy Ashdown's the latest politician to get into hot
:01:29. > :01:30.water after comparing his opponents with the Nazis.
:01:31. > :01:39.Just why has it become such a common feature in political debate?
:01:40. > :01:47.And I'm joined today by the Green Party MP, Caroline Lucas.
:01:48. > :01:51.She's just been elected joint leader of her party in the first ever
:01:52. > :01:52.British political job share, alongside her co-leader
:01:53. > :02:01.And as they're sharing the job, we'll be letting them
:02:02. > :02:04.too, so he'll be along for the second half
:02:05. > :02:08.Let's start by talking about a protest that's been causing
:02:09. > :02:17.Protestors from a group called Black Lives Matter chained
:02:18. > :02:19.themselves together on the the runway early this
:02:20. > :02:21.morning, forcing flights in and out of the airport,
:02:22. > :02:23.which is used by many business travellers, to be
:02:24. > :02:26.Black Lives Matter, which was originally formed
:02:27. > :02:31.in the US in response to police shootings of black people,
:02:32. > :02:34.was launched in the UK earlier this year and has previously
:02:35. > :02:38.blocked traffic to Heathrow and Birmingham airports.
:02:39. > :02:40.The group claimed today's protest was to highlight what they said
:02:41. > :02:43.was the "UK's environmental impact on the lives of black people".
:02:44. > :02:46.The Metropolitan Police said that all nine of the protestors have
:02:47. > :02:59.Caroline Lucas, in their sort of information about the group, they
:03:00. > :03:04.say, "We believe the time is now for a Black Lives Matter movement in the
:03:05. > :03:10.UK to shut down a nationwide crisis of racism and to fight for all black
:03:11. > :03:14.lives? Do you think there is a nationwide crisis of racism in the
:03:15. > :03:20.UK? I do. I think the figures would enforce that. The point they have
:03:21. > :03:24.taken today is top point out that environmental effects affect people
:03:25. > :03:27.the most. Air pollution are more likely to be affecting people of
:03:28. > :03:32.colour, black people more am in the case of City Airport w he know that
:03:33. > :03:35.the surrounding area, Newham is disproportion abilitily populated by
:03:36. > :03:40.people of colour, it is a poorer area and they are 28% more likely to
:03:41. > :03:42.be exposed to air pollution. There is links between environmental
:03:43. > :03:46.problems and people of colour and Poff Tyne it is one that has to be
:03:47. > :03:50.made. Is there evidence to show that? I live under the flight path
:03:51. > :03:53.of Heathrow, for example, and there is a pretty mixed community all
:03:54. > :03:58.along through Hounslow and into London. Are there figures to
:03:59. > :04:00.substantiated what you say that black and ethnic minority
:04:01. > :04:06.communities suffer more from air pollution? I think because they tend
:04:07. > :04:09.to be living in more urban areas. So there are no figures and everyone
:04:10. > :04:13.suffers from air pollution. Everybody certainly does and it is a
:04:14. > :04:15.good way of making the point. But I think there is a particular issue,
:04:16. > :04:20.for example, around City Airport where, as I say, black people in
:04:21. > :04:23.that area are 28% more likely to be suffering from air pollution and
:04:24. > :04:30.mother likely to be living in poverty and more likely to be unable
:04:31. > :04:35.to move away, run away from areas of high pollution. But there will be
:04:36. > :04:39.other people using the airport and by blocking the airport is that the
:04:40. > :04:46.most effective way to highlight racism? No it is not the first way
:04:47. > :04:51.to do it and it is not the only method Black Lives Matter are doing.
:04:52. > :04:55.There have been the usual issues, writing letters to parliamentarians,
:04:56. > :04:59.lobbying. But there is a report today about the air pollution and we
:05:00. > :05:02.have had one, about the links to neurological diseases and when it
:05:03. > :05:06.comes to climate change we know this country is behind in taking the
:05:07. > :05:10.comences rate action we need to see which will be disrupting people
:05:11. > :05:14.lives more than the disruption of this airport has. If we look at the
:05:15. > :05:19.pictures we have of the protest. This is the picture we can see, we
:05:20. > :05:26.are not see all nine of them. They are all white which is interesting
:05:27. > :05:29.when you say this is a were test to highlight racism and Black Lives
:05:30. > :05:33.Matter. I have looked a the their website and on that there is far
:05:34. > :05:39.more people from Black and ethnic minority backgrounds talking. I
:05:40. > :05:44.wasn't part of the demonstration. It is interesting, there are not more
:05:45. > :05:50.black people there that we can see, that was the runway where the
:05:51. > :05:53.picture was taken. Is air pollution the biggest problem facing that
:05:54. > :05:57.community? Air pollution in London is at critical levels. Sure but, is
:05:58. > :06:02.it specific, is it really about racism? Well, I feel awkward as a
:06:03. > :06:07.white person here, judging whether or not black people believe that air
:06:08. > :06:10.pollution is a racist issue, I can understand why they say, that I
:06:11. > :06:13.don't think Black Lives Matter is only working on the environment.
:06:14. > :06:18.They work on a range of eye us but to the extent they are raising an
:06:19. > :06:20.issue I think needs to be higher on the political agenda, in other
:06:21. > :06:23.words, the links between environmentalp problems and exposure
:06:24. > :06:25.of black people, I think it is a legitimate thing to do.
:06:26. > :06:29.And today we want to know which celebrities are backing
:06:30. > :06:32.Jeremy Corbyn in his bid to be re-elected as Labour leader
:06:33. > :06:43.At the end of the show Caroline's co-leader will give us the Green
:06:44. > :06:54.The Home Affairs Select Committee will meet this afternoon to discuss
:06:55. > :06:57.the future of its Chairman, Keith Vaz, after the Sunday Mirror
:06:58. > :06:58.published claims he had paid for the services
:06:59. > :07:03.At the weekend, the newspaper printed pictures it said showed
:07:04. > :07:07.Mr Vaz with the men in a flat he owns in north London.
:07:08. > :07:11.It also claimed that money was paid into an account used by one
:07:12. > :07:16.of the prostitutes by a man linked to a charity set up by the MP.
:07:17. > :07:20.The newspaper also said there was a discussion about using
:07:21. > :07:24.the party drug, poppers - a substance which Keith Vaz helped
:07:25. > :07:27.persuade the Government not to criminalise as part of its ban
:07:28. > :07:36.Mr Vaz released a statement on Sunday afternoon criticising
:07:37. > :07:39.the paper for paying the individuals involved and saying he had referred
:07:40. > :07:44.The conservative MP for North West Leicestershire,
:07:45. > :07:47.Andrew Bridgen, said Mr Vaz should consider his position as an MP
:07:48. > :07:49.and that there "should be a full police investigation
:07:50. > :07:54.and a Parliamentary standards inquiry" into the allegations.
:07:55. > :07:57.Keith Vaz was carrying on with business as usual
:07:58. > :08:00.in the Commons yesterday, where he was putting
:08:01. > :08:06.The Home Affairs Select Committee is expected to urge Mr Vaz to stand
:08:07. > :08:11.They will give him 24 hours "to reflect on his position"
:08:12. > :08:18.before he faces a possible no confidence vote.
:08:19. > :08:21.Well, to talk about this further, we're joined now from Leicester
:08:22. > :08:23.by Conservative councillor, Ross Grant.
:08:24. > :08:28.Welcome to the daily mrivenlingts you have heard there that Keith Vaz
:08:29. > :08:31.is going to be urged to stand down from the committee. - Daily
:08:32. > :08:37.Politics. That may well happen. Will that be enough in your mind? .
:08:38. > :08:41.Unfortunately I don't think so, Jo. I think that, you know, there is an
:08:42. > :08:46.important principle here about lawmakers not being law breakers and
:08:47. > :08:50.I think there is enough in these allegations and where they seem to
:08:51. > :08:54.be going, that this could go a lot further. I think Keith should really
:08:55. > :08:58.be immediately resigning from that committee but should actually be
:08:59. > :09:03.considering his position as an MP and probably, if he thought it
:09:04. > :09:08.through, to actually stand down as an MP. Right. But as you have said,
:09:09. > :09:13.these are allegations. Nothing has been proven as such and no laws have
:09:14. > :09:18.yet been broken. These are allegations that have been made in a
:09:19. > :09:23.paper and Keith Vaz is going to consider what he will do. Isn't this
:09:24. > :09:30.essentially a private matter? Well, I don't think so. I mean I'm
:09:31. > :09:35.surprised if, as part of a business transaction, paying for somebody
:09:36. > :09:38.else to have illegal drugs, isn't illegal. That is something I think
:09:39. > :09:43.that the police should actually be looking at. I think there is a
:09:44. > :09:48.number of things here which could well be, you know, on the illegal
:09:49. > :09:52.side. But as you say "they could well be" but as it stands at the
:09:53. > :09:56.moment these will be no doubt looked at. But as it stands at the moment,
:09:57. > :10:02.it is a private matter, something that Keith Vaz has done in his
:10:03. > :10:05.private life T may be wrong morally in people's minds and in your mind
:10:06. > :10:08.but you think as a result of that, he should not only stand downing
:10:09. > :10:14.from the Home Affairs Select Committee but he should also stand
:10:15. > :10:18.down as an MP? Well, I do. But I think that, you know, is it a
:10:19. > :10:26.private matter when you have actually got a law maker who's
:10:27. > :10:28.influenced our laws and is acting on approximate behalf of his
:10:29. > :10:31.constituency in all of this, but isn't transparent about it. --
:10:32. > :10:36.acting on behalf of his constituency. And I think you are
:10:37. > :10:40.talking that there probably will be police investigations into some of
:10:41. > :10:43.this and the details that we know shift daily. Keith needs to consider
:10:44. > :10:47.where does he think this could eventually end up and it actually
:10:48. > :10:51.would he be doing the public and Parliament a service by actually -
:10:52. > :10:57.and his family - by standing down now. Well bear with us, Ross Grant.
:10:58. > :11:01.What do you say on that point that Ross has made, that is important, he
:11:02. > :11:06.is a law maker here and he has been at the head of a committee has
:11:07. > :11:12.looked into the issues of prostitution and has looked into the
:11:13. > :11:18.issue of whether poppers, the party drug should be criminalised. He on
:11:19. > :11:22.that issue he should stand aside. There is no evidence he is a law
:11:23. > :11:26.breaker. 'S law maker. There is a conflict of interest. It would be a
:11:27. > :11:31.greater problem if there had been hypocrisy. That would be far greater
:11:32. > :11:36.reason to stand down. If on the one hand he was advocating something
:11:37. > :11:40.publicly and privately was taking a different course of action. Should
:11:41. > :11:44.he stand down from the Home Affairs committee, there might be something
:11:45. > :11:48.on standing aside on the inquiry into prostitution, not least the
:11:49. > :11:52.controversy surrounding him is a massive distraction. If it were me I
:11:53. > :11:56.would want to do that but we have to ask ourselves to what extent is this
:11:57. > :12:01.whole issue in the public interest. I haven't been persuaded, until I
:12:02. > :12:04.can be shown that there is ill legality and gross hypocrisy that it
:12:05. > :12:10.is not public interest. Even though Keith Vaz and his lawyers have put
:12:11. > :12:14.out a statement to say that they think it is about a sting, and you
:12:15. > :12:18.do, you agree with him totally on that. I don't see yet it is in the
:12:19. > :12:22.public interest because no I will legality has been shown to be the
:12:23. > :12:27.case and no gross hypocrisy. - no ill legality. What do you say about
:12:28. > :12:34.this, it was entrapment. Deliberately set up to entrap Keith
:12:35. > :12:39.Vaz and his private life and things he does in his life life that people
:12:40. > :12:44.may not like but it is a matter for him. It might have been set up to do
:12:45. > :12:47.that but it is going into things that Keith does which are of public
:12:48. > :12:50.interest. I'm really surprised that Caroline Lucas doesn't think it is
:12:51. > :12:54.hypocrisy when Keith has stood up in Parliament and made speeches where
:12:55. > :12:58.he has implied that he has no nobbling or no kind of knowledge
:12:59. > :13:02.about how poppers work and he is -- no knowledging about how poppers
:13:03. > :13:05.work and he is surprised another MP talked about that. And what is
:13:06. > :13:08.coming out is that's well aware of poppers and he has not been
:13:09. > :13:13.transparent with Parliament or the public about that. And that is
:13:14. > :13:17.hypocrisy. So there is a public interest in, I think, how this story
:13:18. > :13:22.has come about. Except, he has been an MP for 27 years, not without
:13:23. > :13:25.controversy, it is true, but his constituents have clearly felt he
:13:26. > :13:29.has done a good job, because they keep reelecting him. Should one
:13:30. > :13:38.mistake, if that's what we can agree to call t actually end his political
:13:39. > :13:42.career? -- to call it I'm sure if you ask Caroline she would tell you
:13:43. > :13:45.she would think Keith has been re-elected many times because of our
:13:46. > :13:48.parmentdry voting system and certainly Keith does well --
:13:49. > :13:53.parliamentary voting system. Keith does well but is no different to
:13:54. > :13:58.other MPs that are re-elected in various seats. I don't think it is
:13:59. > :14:02.just down to Keith's popularity. But, on this one, his constituents
:14:03. > :14:06.weren't aware of the position he was going to hold on these things or
:14:07. > :14:09.perhaps the details about it. And, you know, I think he needs to
:14:10. > :14:16.reconsider. OK, thank you. Now, yesterday the Secretary
:14:17. > :14:18.of State for Exiting that's one David Davis,
:14:19. > :14:21.took to the Commons for the first time to tell MPs
:14:22. > :14:23.about the Government's He said it was something
:14:24. > :14:27.he was determined to deliver as soon as possible,
:14:28. > :14:29.but many Remain supporting MPs accused him of giving
:14:30. > :14:33.next to no detail. Our instructions from the British
:14:34. > :14:38.people are clear - Britain There'll be no attempt to stay
:14:39. > :14:45.in the EU by the back door. No attempt to delay,
:14:46. > :14:48.frustrate or thwart the will No attempt to engineer a second
:14:49. > :14:53.referendum because some people didn't
:14:54. > :14:58.like the first answer. Now, naturally, people
:14:59. > :15:00.will want to know what Brexit Simply, it means leaving
:15:01. > :15:10.the European Union. The spin before today's statement
:15:11. > :15:16.with so much promise. We heard we were going to hear
:15:17. > :15:20.what the Government's But what we've heard, instead,
:15:21. > :15:26.hasn't been a strategy, hasn't It's just been more
:15:27. > :15:32.empty platitudes. Can I ask him, when he gets
:15:33. > :15:34.to the Despatch Box, to confirm to us that in leaving
:15:35. > :15:37.the European Union, the number one thing
:15:38. > :15:40.that is absolutely not negotiable, is that this United Kingdom
:15:41. > :15:47.will take control of its control of its borders and the laws relevant
:15:48. > :15:50.to that and that's not No-one expects him to have worked
:15:51. > :15:56.out all of the answers yet but we do expect him to be able to set out
:15:57. > :16:01.the outline of some kind of plan. And today we have
:16:02. > :16:06.heard nothing on that. Ah, yes, a most exotic delicacy
:16:07. > :16:13.in the House, Mr Michael Gove. We have seen a record increase
:16:14. > :16:17.in service industries growth. A record increase in
:16:18. > :16:20.manufacturing industry growth. A 3.3% increase in motor car sales
:16:21. > :16:25.and we have also seen - we have also seen the Speaker
:16:26. > :16:30.of the US Congress, the Prime Minister of Australia
:16:31. > :16:32.and the Prime Minister of New Zealand, all pressing
:16:33. > :16:35.for free trade deal was this country, while the deputy
:16:36. > :16:37.Chancellor of Germany has acknowledged that the EU-US trade
:16:38. > :16:51.deal is dead in the water. We're joined now by Peter Lilley,
:16:52. > :16:54.who spoke in yesterday's Commons debate, and of course Caroline Lucas
:16:55. > :17:04.is still with us. Welcome. He didn't say anything at
:17:05. > :17:08.all, we're number wise after that debate. At the beginning of the
:17:09. > :17:12.process you cannot outline how it will develop. This call for some
:17:13. > :17:16.plan is a bit like people saying to George Washington, what is your plan
:17:17. > :17:20.for independence? He would have replied, to be independent. What is
:17:21. > :17:26.the constitution going to be? We will have a constitutional
:17:27. > :17:32.conference. What would Gandhi's answer have been? The plan to Brexit
:17:33. > :17:38.is that we take control of our laws, money and borders. But nobody knows
:17:39. > :17:42.how. We do, by an act of Parliament. But nobody knows exactly how it is
:17:43. > :17:44.going to happen, even David Davis himself said he is going to have
:17:45. > :17:50.some sort of nationwide consultation. And what? He will
:17:51. > :17:54.consult industry, business and environmental sectors, and so on,
:17:55. > :17:58.and what their priorities will be in there are elements that require
:17:59. > :18:01.negotiation. I was disappointed slightly that he didn't make a
:18:02. > :18:05.distinction between issues which are matters for decision by the British
:18:06. > :18:10.government and issues which are a matter for negotiation between
:18:11. > :18:13.ourselves and the EU 27. Which issues are up for negotiation in
:18:14. > :18:19.your mind with the EU member states? Once we've left, or in preparation
:18:20. > :18:21.to leave, we want to discuss what the trading relationship will be
:18:22. > :18:26.between Britain and the EU subsequently. He hasn't got a plan
:18:27. > :18:35.for that yet. There are only two conceivable options. One, we trade
:18:36. > :18:41.on the basis of the three trading partners. The alternative is that we
:18:42. > :18:45.continue without tariffs. If they want to go to WTO tariffs, that is
:18:46. > :18:50.fine by us, but it'll be bad for them. But we knew that. We've known
:18:51. > :18:53.that for several months. No work has been done, has it, in terms of
:18:54. > :18:59.developing either of those two scenarios? They are both simple. Why
:19:00. > :19:04.haven't they decided which one they are going for? It is not for us, it
:19:05. > :19:09.is what the US decides. And no presentation has been made yet? The
:19:10. > :19:13.process hasn't started yet. It feels as if no work has been done over the
:19:14. > :19:16.summer. It feels we are no further forward in the minds of many of your
:19:17. > :19:22.colleagues as to where we are going to go with this exiting from the EU.
:19:23. > :19:26.And people are impatient. And business will feel uncertainty will
:19:27. > :19:28.grow. It is not at the moment, clearly the figures are there and
:19:29. > :19:32.there's been some sort of economic bounce, but uncertainty will grow to
:19:33. > :19:38.stop that was my worry. We don't want this process to go on longer
:19:39. > :19:42.than necessary. -- will grow. There is a two year period. Why not one
:19:43. > :19:47.year, three years, whatever, no explanation. As a danger we
:19:48. > :19:54.automatically think it has to take two years. My ask is that we had an
:19:55. > :19:58.assurance that we would go for the minimum with appropriate
:19:59. > :20:03.preparation. Do you agree, that it should be quicker, sooner rather
:20:04. > :20:08.than later? Should we be invoking article 50 as soon as possible? I
:20:09. > :20:11.don't. And we haven't been given any serious indication the government
:20:12. > :20:16.knows where it is going with Brexit. I believe Parliament really was
:20:17. > :20:19.quite shocked that after two hours, genuinely people were no more wise
:20:20. > :20:24.after that two our presentation than they were before it. You would have
:20:25. > :20:27.thought that in less time David Davis and his colleagues would have
:20:28. > :20:31.come up with some kind of set of options. I don't think Peter is
:20:32. > :20:38.quite right. It is the case that you can have WTO or nothing. You have
:20:39. > :20:41.the possibility of a Norway type arrangement where you can still have
:20:42. > :20:45.access to the single market. He ruled that out. That was a progress.
:20:46. > :20:49.Theresa May says that won't happen because there won't be freedom of
:20:50. > :20:58.movement. No points-based system, we have clarity on that, and that is
:20:59. > :21:02.what Theresa May said. She wanted a numerical total, as well. You may
:21:03. > :21:05.have points within that to decide within that total number who you are
:21:06. > :21:08.going to take. But she didn't want to have the Australian points-based
:21:09. > :21:13.system alone to control freedom of movement. We know that some things
:21:14. > :21:16.are going to happen now. And some things have been ruled out in terms
:21:17. > :21:21.of Brexit. So there has been some progress. I don't know that there
:21:22. > :21:25.really has. She says she wants to consult with the country. We know
:21:26. > :21:30.when people were voting Brexit they were not necessarily saying which
:21:31. > :21:33.are the options we wanted, what Brexit would look like. That is why
:21:34. > :21:37.we need some time. Not to do it as fast as Peter would like. So you
:21:38. > :21:40.have more time for consultation, more time to bring the country back
:21:41. > :21:43.together in some ways. This has been one of the most divisive elements
:21:44. > :21:48.that has happened in our country for decades. It seems to me that we
:21:49. > :21:51.should be using that time to see how much of a compromise we can get that
:21:52. > :21:54.will meet the different desires of the people who voted Remain, the
:21:55. > :22:00.people who voted to leave, to see how much of a deal going forward we
:22:01. > :22:03.could have. Which, for example, means we would keep the environment
:22:04. > :22:06.protection we need, which would keep workers' rights and human rights.
:22:07. > :22:10.People will want to see a lot of free movement, as well. And the
:22:11. > :22:12.element of Freedom of movement and keeping some of the protections
:22:13. > :22:17.Caroline Lucas is talking about, that is what will happen over time.
:22:18. > :22:22.There will be a compromise. I agree with Caroline, that we should try to
:22:23. > :22:26.adopt all existing EU laws and regulations into British law. That
:22:27. > :22:29.is what countries do when they become independent. When India
:22:30. > :22:33.became independent it adopted Imperial more to its own law.
:22:34. > :22:41.Likewise when Slovak Republic separated, they retained their
:22:42. > :22:46.existing laws. An awful lot of it is quite sensible. But it will take
:22:47. > :22:51.time. It cannot be done quickly. It can be done very quickly. How Wenger
:22:52. > :22:57.has not been much work done beforehand because they couldn't be?
:22:58. > :23:00.-- how when there has. They have drafted in people from other
:23:01. > :23:05.departments in the civil service. They are playing catch up. Now you
:23:06. > :23:08.are acknowledging there was a lot of work to do. They've probably been
:23:09. > :23:17.doing it in the summer. The most interesting question was actually
:23:18. > :23:22.the answer am sorry -- the answer, sorry, that we do do what other
:23:23. > :23:26.countries have done when going independent. He said there may be
:23:27. > :23:29.some difficulties and the civil service are working on it. I would
:23:30. > :23:34.like to know what those difficulties are. I understand that senior expert
:23:35. > :23:36.in constitutional law have disgusted with cabinet officials and they
:23:37. > :23:42.thought it was perfectly possible. If there are bits which will be more
:23:43. > :23:46.complicated, let's know about it in due course, but that is the sort of
:23:47. > :23:54.lines we will be working on. We will adopt the existing... He did say...
:23:55. > :23:59.Thousands of lines... There were in India. You adopt what you've already
:24:00. > :24:03.got. But it is the adoption which is difficult, it is deciding which
:24:04. > :24:08.one... You do not dump any on day one. Not on day one, but you said,
:24:09. > :24:14.then you have to decide... Their subsequently you do. But how long
:24:15. > :24:18.would that take... We had a review under Margaret Thatcher in the 80s.
:24:19. > :24:21.-- but subsequently you do. That is a different matter. That will be
:24:22. > :24:25.done as a sovereign independent parliament making its own decision.
:24:26. > :24:33.I see. Villa the misunderstanding which has been perpetrated by the
:24:34. > :24:38.BBC, is that you cannot go through it until you've gone to every bit of
:24:39. > :24:42.legislation. You don't do that. You adopt the process and change it when
:24:43. > :24:46.you need to. Then the ask something different. You said a rerun of the
:24:47. > :24:49.referendum would be an affront to democracy. So why are you calling
:24:50. > :24:55.for a second referendum on the terms of the deal? What I said would be an
:24:56. > :24:59.affront to democracy would be to do what the petition yesterday said,
:25:00. > :25:03.which would be to rerun, the 23rd of June, the same referendum but higher
:25:04. > :25:08.rules, have a -- but different roles, higher threshold, for
:25:09. > :25:12.example. That would be undemocratic. But what would be democratic would
:25:13. > :25:16.be to show people what things would look like after Brexit. Give people
:25:17. > :25:19.back control over what Brexit would look like. So after 18 months, or
:25:20. > :25:22.whatever this new package is going to look like I think that should
:25:23. > :25:28.come back to the country for people to have a say. Is that what you
:25:29. > :25:33.want. I'm not trying to rerun the 23rd of June. But you are calling
:25:34. > :25:36.for a second referendum. On the substance. And if that didn't pass
:25:37. > :25:40.we would have a different kind of Brexit, a different relationship
:25:41. > :25:47.with the EU, a closer one. Would that be fair? Allen it would be
:25:48. > :25:50.unnecessary -- it would be deeply insulting to the electorate and it
:25:51. > :25:56.would be unnecessary. Why would it be unnecessary and insulting? We
:25:57. > :26:01.told them what it would be. You can do it in different ways. Once you
:26:02. > :26:05.have control you can use it in a different way as an independent
:26:06. > :26:08.country. The shape of a Brexit deal could be different under different
:26:09. > :26:13.interpretations. The taking back control is... How are the
:26:14. > :26:17.environment or section is going to be? What about workers' rights?
:26:18. > :26:21.There will not be any. Can you tell me what the British government would
:26:22. > :26:23.do next year if we stay in. You would have a referendum every year
:26:24. > :26:26.because you don't know what the future holds. We will come back to
:26:27. > :26:28.this issue time and time again. Thank you very.
:26:29. > :26:30.Now the leadership of the Green Party -
:26:31. > :26:32.and I've got 50% of it here in the studio -
:26:33. > :26:36.has got a plan to try to reverse a situation which saw it win just
:26:37. > :26:38.one Commons' seat for more than 1 million votes
:26:39. > :26:42.It's been urging other parties on the left of politics to join
:26:43. > :26:44.a so-called "progressive alliance", including electoral pacts in some
:26:45. > :26:45.areas, to help defeat Conservative candidates.
:26:46. > :26:47.Let's have a listen to Caroline's other half,
:26:48. > :26:50.politically speaking, Jonathan Bartley.
:26:51. > :26:53.A progressive alliance can mean different things
:26:54. > :26:55.in different constituencies, but it will not be top-down.
:26:56. > :27:04.And our message to others who share a belief in a progressive,
:27:05. > :27:07.modern Britain is this, old tribal loyalties are dying.
:27:08. > :27:09.Voters can no longer be taken for granted.
:27:10. > :27:21.The era of two party politics is over.
:27:22. > :27:24.And we're joined now by the Labour MP, Peter Kyle,
:27:25. > :27:32.a neighbouring MP to Caroline Lucas in Brighton and Hove.
:27:33. > :27:38.Welcome to the programme. Caroline Lucas, how would an electoral pact
:27:39. > :27:42.work? I think it would be up to local people in local constituencies
:27:43. > :27:45.to make that decision. We are talking about a one off arrangement
:27:46. > :27:50.in a number of marginal seats whereby at the minute you might have
:27:51. > :27:53.Peter and myself fighting it out and a Tory comes through the middle. In
:27:54. > :27:58.Brighton and Hove this thing happens again and again. What we want to try
:27:59. > :28:03.to do is to get enough MPs who would have electoral reform as a number
:28:04. > :28:12.one issue in their manifesto. So the next election you could admit of
:28:13. > :28:19.this archaic system -- you could get rid of this archaic system. For
:28:20. > :28:24.marginal seats what is not to like? Every time I hear and speak to
:28:25. > :28:27.Caroline about this I can see the logic and the understanding of why
:28:28. > :28:31.this is an issue which a lot of people care about. But when I go
:28:32. > :28:34.away and think of it through the eyes of the electorate I cannot see
:28:35. > :28:40.how it would work through their eyes. I think what we are as a of
:28:41. > :28:44.establishment Labour Party, Green party, and other party officials,
:28:45. > :28:47.stitching up the election. I think from their side, through their eyes,
:28:48. > :28:53.they wouldn't understand why they are doing it. But otherwise you like
:28:54. > :28:56.it? What I like is the idea that parties come together and work when
:28:57. > :29:01.it is in our public and common interest between our two parties.
:29:02. > :29:05.Like we did during the European referendum. What I don't like is an
:29:06. > :29:08.electoral stitch up. I agree a stitch up, something that looks like
:29:09. > :29:12.it is top-down imposed wouldn't work and wouldn't be right. But in
:29:13. > :29:18.Brighton and Hove there is a Compass Group, another group called Sussex
:29:19. > :29:21.Progressives, who are local people coming together and saying, hang on,
:29:22. > :29:25.politicians, could you work it out in such a way that you don't have
:29:26. > :29:28.politicians who share more in common than they have apart, fighting it
:29:29. > :29:33.out between them, having observed its coming through again. Could you
:29:34. > :29:37.not be wiser. Would you stand out from your seat in order to allow the
:29:38. > :29:41.Labour candidate to win? If it was part of an overall deal I would do
:29:42. > :29:45.what is best in the Green party's interest. It has to be the case that
:29:46. > :29:48.ultimately one would have to be prepared to consider that. But the
:29:49. > :29:51.bottom one has to be that there is a fair outcomes are the Greens would
:29:52. > :29:57.get more seats than the one they have at the minute. Two issues I
:29:58. > :30:00.have. First, the voters, and even our own supporters, don't and they
:30:01. > :30:06.shouldn't do what we tell them to do. If you think there are 3000
:30:07. > :30:10.Green votes in Hove, I have a majority of 1236, so it would be
:30:11. > :30:14.great for me to have those, but when you look at my voting record their
:30:15. > :30:25.Ross and red lines that your voters wouldn't cross. Example, my vote on
:30:26. > :30:28.Trident. -- there are redlines. I think a lot of them would feel
:30:29. > :30:32.disenfranchised. That is what worries me about this idea. Except
:30:33. > :30:36.there are disagreements within Labour on Trident, of course, as we
:30:37. > :30:39.know. There are disagreements within parties. If it meant Labour would
:30:40. > :30:40.win more seats surely from a mercenary point of view that would
:30:41. > :30:48.be better. Brighton is a great example. In the
:30:49. > :30:50.last election, there were locals elections on the samedy as
:30:51. > :30:55.parliamentary. The Greens were running the council. The number one
:30:56. > :31:00.reason for voting intention, according to a BBC poll and own door
:31:01. > :31:04.stepping was - who is going to get rid of the Green Party? We thought
:31:05. > :31:07.of xaps, they were in third place and for the local council elections
:31:08. > :31:11.that we would be more compo at the time than the Greens locally. If we
:31:12. > :31:16.had said - don't vote for the Greens but vote for us locally but on the
:31:17. > :31:19.same day we were in a pact... You are trying to find all sorts of
:31:20. > :31:22.obstacles. He doesn't want to do it. I think voters would see it as an
:31:23. > :31:25.establishment stitch-up. I have already said that this is actually a
:31:26. > :31:29.demand coming up from the grassroots. Particularly in a place
:31:30. > :31:32.like Brighton and Hove. I have also said the big thing, the red line
:31:33. > :31:36.would be... Proporgssal representation. We want a system
:31:37. > :31:41.where there are fairer votes. It is not a system. Would you say yes to
:31:42. > :31:47.proportional representation. No. Therein lies the deal in tatters.
:31:48. > :31:51.But let's go further. Fortunately he doesn't speak for the whole of the
:31:52. > :31:57.Labour Party I speak for a party which has 230 MPs. Not a party that
:31:58. > :32:04.has more leaders than MPs. That's the difficulty of the alliance. That
:32:05. > :32:08.was a bit of a punch there. He is usually very courteous. The reality
:32:09. > :32:11.is surely to give people a voice. If you have an electoral system that
:32:12. > :32:15.means in so many seats there are safe seats, and it is not why people
:32:16. > :32:19.are voting because they can't get rid of them We need reform. I don't
:32:20. > :32:21.think PR answers all of the questions we need. Particularly with
:32:22. > :32:23.the strength of the political culture we have, with the
:32:24. > :32:28.establishment between constituency and MP. There is no reason to lose
:32:29. > :32:32.that. I need to ask Caroline something else. You were the one of
:32:33. > :32:37.them who said he doesn't speak for the whole of the #4r5i7. I'm not the
:32:38. > :32:41.leader. Jeremy Corbyn does. What conversations have you had about
:32:42. > :32:45.Jeremy Corbyn's office about this Before the summer, Natalie Bennett
:32:46. > :32:50.and myself wrote to Jeremy Corbyn to Leanne Woods and Tim far yob. We had
:32:51. > :32:53.had various responses back, more or less warm but saying there needs to
:32:54. > :32:57.be more debate from within the different parties. From Jeremy's
:32:58. > :33:00.office we had a message saying they are interested and what happened in
:33:01. > :33:03.the middle was a big leadership election and we have not heard back
:33:04. > :33:06.but we know there are plenty of people within Labour who are
:33:07. > :33:10.interested in this idea because they recognise our electoral system right
:33:11. > :33:13.now is consigning us, a grossive politicians, to silence. This
:33:14. > :33:18.includes Jeremy Corbyn. You think he is warm to the idea? He has no told
:33:19. > :33:22.me he is warm to the idea but the people around him suggest he is.
:33:23. > :33:24.Would they like to meet once the leadership contest... Depending, of
:33:25. > :33:29.course on the result. They have told me they would like to meet but what
:33:30. > :33:33.I am saying is that surely Labour is not - you must see that you are not
:33:34. > :33:36.going to win the next general election, whoever your next leader
:33:37. > :33:40.is. Look at Scotland and constituency boundary changes. You
:33:41. > :33:46.owe it to people who vote Labour to try to win. History tells us... Look
:33:47. > :33:50.at the pollsment That's the difference between the two of using.
:33:51. > :33:58.Agreement is not going so well so far. Thank you for your time.
:33:59. > :34:00.Now job-sharing is becoming more common in some British industries.
:34:01. > :34:03.For instance, Andrew and I share presenting duties -
:34:04. > :34:05.although I always insist that he does the weekends.
:34:06. > :34:07.But will it work at the top of a political party?
:34:08. > :34:11.It's been a long climb out of the political
:34:12. > :34:13.wilderness for the Green party and old habits die hard.
:34:14. > :34:16.Ah, the good old days when tree sit ins and beards were in vogue
:34:17. > :34:19.as the Green party's popularity rose in the late 80s.
:34:20. > :34:24.Over 2 million people voted Green in the 1989 European elections
:34:25. > :34:27.after this Crayola inspired campaign broadcast.
:34:28. > :34:34.Is this the picture you want for your children?
:34:35. > :34:36.Fuelling calls for the party to have a leader.
:34:37. > :34:39.Past moves to streamline the party have led invariably to the call
:34:40. > :34:42.Each year the motion reappears, rejected roundly by the members
:34:43. > :34:46.who sees no need for a single pop up face to fill the TV screens
:34:47. > :34:53.Almost 20 years later Caroline Lucas was elected as their first
:34:54. > :34:55.traditional party leader, and her breakthrough moment
:34:56. > :34:58.came when she entered the Commons shortly after that.
:34:59. > :35:00.Thank you so much for putting the politics of hope
:35:01. > :35:07.# We shall not, we shall not be moved #.
:35:08. > :35:09.Three years later she joined anti-fracking protesters and was
:35:10. > :35:18.Her successor as leader, Natalie Bennett, is credited
:35:19. > :35:22.with overseeing a rise in party membership.
:35:23. > :35:26.If not quite remembering what her policies were.
:35:27. > :35:29.How can you hope to raise 45 billion?
:35:30. > :35:32.People are very welcome to have a look at the Green party
:35:33. > :35:34.website and see how the figures are worked out.
:35:35. > :35:37.You would make it legal for people living here to be
:35:38. > :35:41.a member of Al-Qaeda, or Isis, or the IRA, you would make
:35:42. > :35:43.it legal to be a member of a terrorist organisation?
:35:44. > :35:50.She complained of brain fade in interviews.
:35:51. > :35:58.We stand here more united with two leaders than other
:35:59. > :36:06.Co-leader Jonathan Bartley was once a researcher
:36:07. > :36:09.for the Conservative Party before coming to prominence publicly
:36:10. > :36:11.challenging David Cameron about his policies on inclusive
:36:12. > :36:14.education with his disabled son by his side.
:36:15. > :36:21.You are not representing the needs of children.
:36:22. > :36:23.Most recently he was the Green party's spokesman
:36:24. > :36:26.Be careful, no, be very careful, you say...
:36:27. > :36:28.So, what pitfalls could Britain's first political party
:36:29. > :36:31.I asked the Guardian's part-time political editor.
:36:32. > :36:36.No one can get a slip of paper between you.
:36:37. > :36:38.If somebody comes talking to me, trying to lobby me, well,
:36:39. > :36:40.Heather knows exactly what they've been saying
:36:41. > :36:53.You're not just leader of the Green Party Monday to Friday,
:36:54. > :36:56.nine to five, you are leader of the Green Party all the time.
:36:57. > :36:58.You know, the world of news doesn't stop, the world
:36:59. > :37:02.In theory, one person can't be there 24 hours a day,
:37:03. > :37:04.seven days a week, so, actually, I think it's
:37:05. > :37:06.going to become much more sensible to have job shares
:37:07. > :37:09.Green Party members overwhelmingly back this job share
:37:10. > :37:13.Now the two leaders could well determine whether this first
:37:14. > :37:21.And we're joined now by the other half of the new Green Party
:37:22. > :37:24.leadership, Jonathan Bartley, so congratulations to you both.
:37:25. > :37:31.Thank you very much. Why a job share? Well, I approached Caroline
:37:32. > :37:33.about it because of my personal circumstances. I have a passion for
:37:34. > :37:39.politics, a long-standing interest in it but my son is disabled, I have
:37:40. > :37:41.responsibilities for him to look after him and care for him but I
:37:42. > :37:44.think that brings something important to politics. We need
:37:45. > :37:48.people with experience, like those, so they can be authentic in their
:37:49. > :37:51.politics but a lot of people are, you know, cut out of the system
:37:52. > :37:53.because they don't have the time to do it because they have those
:37:54. > :37:56.responsibilities, they have caring responsibilities or they are
:37:57. > :37:59.disabled themselves. It is a way of demonstrating a new way of politics.
:38:00. > :38:03.We would like to see this idea spread. How will it work on
:38:04. > :38:06.ady-to-day basis? How will you divide all the responsibilities
:38:07. > :38:10.Well, it is working very well already. We have had a long hustings
:38:11. > :38:14.campaign, 12 or is he around the country, we have done a lot of
:38:15. > :38:17.interviews like this and talked people we. Divide up
:38:18. > :38:21.responsibilities, play to our strengths, Caroline will be in her
:38:22. > :38:28.constituency a lot. The serious things, about a political point f
:38:29. > :38:31.you look at Westminster in in particular, anyone casting their
:38:32. > :38:35.eyes across the benches can't say it represent Britain. If we want a
:38:36. > :38:38.Parliament that is more representative, a job share is
:38:39. > :38:40.practical. More black people, job sharing responsibilities, more
:38:41. > :38:45.people with caring responsibilities. I think we need a greater diversity.
:38:46. > :38:49.Many people can't give 24-7 necessarily and therefore, anything
:38:50. > :38:53.we can do to make Parliament more representative and ensure MPs have
:38:54. > :38:56.one foot firmly placed back in their constituency I think will lead to
:38:57. > :39:02.better politics. It is Tuesday today, we are doing a store story on
:39:03. > :39:06.Mack 1. We are doing it with Caroline because she was first up,
:39:07. > :39:11.who would I call? The press office. They would decide. Would they call
:39:12. > :39:14.you? I can't believe you are asking this question. These are the
:39:15. > :39:18.practical issues. You know that job sharing is a common thing across the
:39:19. > :39:22.country and thank goodness politics are catching up Not in politics. It
:39:23. > :39:26.is the same issue. How would it work. Who is going to run, or lead
:39:27. > :39:30.on a particular story on your programme. You know as well as I do,
:39:31. > :39:33.it is not rocket science to work that out. What is great about this
:39:34. > :39:37.is when one is doing something we would have had to turn the interview
:39:38. > :39:41.down because we would be elsewhere. Another one is available. The media
:39:42. > :39:47.are getting two for the price of one. A supermarket deal. But You say
:39:48. > :39:51.why am I asking about practical details. Noernt. If you are working
:39:52. > :39:54.on a big story on fracking or a big campaign and you can't make it and
:39:55. > :39:58.that's your strength, does it get hand over to Jonathan, do you have
:39:59. > :40:03.to tell each other - I can't do these days this week, can you cover
:40:04. > :40:06.for me? The reason I was saying, why are you asking me those those
:40:07. > :40:09.questions, of course they are the conversation that is would happen
:40:10. > :40:13.just as they would in any other organisation where job sharing is
:40:14. > :40:16.common. The leader of a party has been a one-person role where you are
:40:17. > :40:20.asking for an opinion and you are asking for... Maybe in Westminster
:40:21. > :40:26.it is the case but around the world it clearly isn't. CEOs. The 20 CEOs
:40:27. > :40:30.of Fortune 500 companies are sharing. In Germany and Sweden, and
:40:31. > :40:34.Green Parties around the world have done this. Maybe it is because we
:40:35. > :40:37.have a different vision of leadership. What is the difference
:40:38. > :40:41.between the two of you? I would simply say in the Green Party,
:40:42. > :40:45.leadership is more of a collegiate cooperative thing, it is not a
:40:46. > :40:49.topdown, we had a view in the night we will do X and impose it and
:40:50. > :40:53.therefore you need to know what is on in the brain of that person, it
:40:54. > :40:56.is much more delib radiotive and discussed with our Green Party exec
:40:57. > :40:59.taven maybe that's a delifrn kind of leadership which is more attractive.
:41:00. > :41:04.What did you have a disagreement on a key policy area? The great thing
:41:05. > :41:15.about the green Party is all our policies are decided democratically
:41:16. > :41:23.by our members. We go out and... - what do you do when you have a fight
:41:24. > :41:29.with Andrew. We fight it out and. But you have tried this and it was
:41:30. > :41:32.abandoned, you didn't like T The problem with principal speakers, we
:41:33. > :41:37.got it down to two in the end, but there were eight, ten. We spent most
:41:38. > :41:40.interviews trying to explain what it was. Using the language of leaders
:41:41. > :41:44.and co-leaders, at least we think it means something more to you, the
:41:45. > :41:46.public and so forth and we can get on and talk about our policies,
:41:47. > :41:50.rather than our structures. All right, thank you very much. We can
:41:51. > :41:52.agree on all of that. Caroline we say goodbye to you, but Jonathan you
:41:53. > :41:54.are staying. Scotland's First Minister,
:41:55. > :41:56.Nicola Sturgeon, is outlining her legislative priorities for the next
:41:57. > :41:58.five years today with education, healthcare and new welfare powers
:41:59. > :42:01.said to be high on the SNP's agenda. She'll be making a statement
:42:02. > :42:03.at Holyrood a little later, but let's get more from BBC
:42:04. > :42:14.Scotland's Political Brian. Tell us more. What can we
:42:15. > :42:18.expect? Well, first of all, much to the relief of viewsers there is only
:42:19. > :42:21.one of me. I will bring you up-to-date with what the First
:42:22. > :42:24.Minister is going for. I think encation and the economy, perhaps
:42:25. > :42:28.joint number one. Indeed Nicola Sturegon was out this morning Ned
:42:29. > :42:33.enborough opening a new school, a new high school, a new building for
:42:34. > :42:38.that, stressing that on the one hand it is educational aproe. , opened it
:42:39. > :42:41.is jobs to grow the economy. I think there will be an announcement of a
:42:42. > :42:45.welfare system for Scotland. Not detail of the benefits but new
:42:46. > :42:49.welfare powers this week have been transferred to Holyrood and they
:42:50. > :42:54.need a Social Security system up and running to go with as well as a tax
:42:55. > :42:57.system. The new tax powers are there. In terms of other things,
:42:58. > :43:01.health reforms, perhaps trying to bring health and social care more
:43:02. > :43:04.together. In that field of education, the big controversy could
:43:05. > :43:07.be an attempt to channel money directly to schools, directedly to
:43:08. > :43:11.headteachers and involving parents. And perhaps, to some extent cutting
:43:12. > :43:15.out the local authority. It is likely to be very contentious.
:43:16. > :43:18.Right, and despite how much effort will be put into the other areas,
:43:19. > :43:24.particularly into education and health as you have outlined, won't
:43:25. > :43:28.the focus still be on the talk of a second independence referendum? I
:43:29. > :43:32.think the second independence referendum will be mentioned in the
:43:33. > :43:38.First Minister's statement. I think she will confirm that there is early
:43:39. > :43:41.planning under way. Planning for the necessary legislation to set out
:43:42. > :43:46.that referendum, but it will be a reference, a passing reference. I
:43:47. > :43:49.think, you know, that she is, is perhaps slightly sensitive about the
:43:50. > :43:52.idea, the attack that comes from Opposition parties who say - Nicola
:43:53. > :43:56.Sturegon, you are ignoring the day job, you are obsess being
:43:57. > :44:01.independence. Now she has dismissed that accusation. She puts it to one
:44:02. > :44:05.side but she knows if it is repeated endlessly, and it is being repeated
:44:06. > :44:11.endlessly -- understandably from the point of view of her opponents, if
:44:12. > :44:14.it is going repeated, it forms seeds in the voters' minds so #20ed she's
:44:15. > :44:20.going to counter that about saying it is about the nuts and bolts of
:44:21. > :44:24.deliver ri, the hard task of delivering the SNP manifesto, about
:44:25. > :44:31.the economy, education, health, welfare.
:44:32. > :44:37.While we were talking Keith Vaz has announced his regular igs nation
:44:38. > :44:40.from the Home Affairs committee. He says it is in the best interest of
:44:41. > :44:43.the Home Affairs Select Committee Thwaites important work can be
:44:44. > :44:52.conducted without any distractions whatsoever. "I'm enonlinely sorry
:44:53. > :44:56.recent he events make this possible while I'm Chair." Breaking news just
:44:57. > :45:00.appeared in front of me. -- I'm very sorry.
:45:01. > :45:03.Now yesterday the British Medical Association called off the junior
:45:04. > :45:05.doctors' strike that was due to take place in England next week.
:45:06. > :45:08.The BMA said it was not backing down in the dispute over
:45:09. > :45:12.a new contract for junior doctors, but said it wanted to give the NHS
:45:13. > :45:13.sufficient time to prepare for industrial action.
:45:14. > :45:16.A series of further all-out five day stoppages are still planned
:45:17. > :45:18.for later in the year, with the first due
:45:19. > :45:22.Let's have a listen to the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt,
:45:23. > :45:34.This afternoon's news of them delaying the first strike is,
:45:35. > :45:38.But we mustn't let it obscure the fact that the remaining planned
:45:39. > :45:40.industrial action is unprecedented in length and severity.
:45:41. > :45:46.Some of whom will have already had operations cancelled.
:45:47. > :45:48.Many NHS organisations, including NHS England,
:45:49. > :45:50.NHS providers, the NHS Confederation, and NHS improvement
:45:51. > :45:52.have expressed concern about the potential impact
:45:53. > :46:03.Indeed, this morning the General medical Council published its advice
:46:04. > :46:12.Whilst recognising a doctor's legal right to take industrial action,
:46:13. > :46:14.they urged all doctors in training to pause and consider
:46:15. > :46:18.We're joined now by the Conservative MP, David Morris, who spoke
:46:19. > :46:27.You are pleased I presume, the strike next week has been called
:46:28. > :46:32.off. I'm very pleased. And they shouldn't be any more striking. The
:46:33. > :46:37.contract has been agreed. I just didn't understand what the BMA Pope
:46:38. > :46:45.to get by this. Public support for the doctors strike is waning. --
:46:46. > :46:48.hoped. It has dropped nine points and a plentiful probably continue in
:46:49. > :46:55.that way, won't it? I don't know. But I know that my dad was a doctor.
:46:56. > :46:59.I just spent a month in hospital with my son. Doctors do not go into
:47:00. > :47:04.the industry to cause trouble, they go into it to help people and save
:47:05. > :47:08.lives. I think we need to take these concerns seriously. The fact that
:47:09. > :47:12.they would go so far as to strike, we need to listen to them. But they
:47:13. > :47:15.are putting patients' lives at some risk. You say you have a doctor in
:47:16. > :47:19.the family, and you are going to hospital with your disabled son,
:47:20. > :47:24.then you are relying on those doctors being there. I'm relying on
:47:25. > :47:28.a good service for years to come. We have less investment as a proportion
:47:29. > :47:31.of GDP at the moment in the last six years. We've had an entire history
:47:32. > :47:39.of the NHS as a proportion of the GDP. That is concerning and that
:47:40. > :47:42.will cause hurt in the long run. I have heard Doctor after doctor say
:47:43. > :47:46.how difficult this is for them and I believe them. I believe it is very
:47:47. > :47:52.difficult for them. Has Jeremy Hunt handled this well? He has handled it
:47:53. > :47:56.the best he possibly can do. What does that mean? It is politically
:47:57. > :48:02.motivated. There has been a shake-up at the top of the BMA. They have a
:48:03. > :48:06.deputy chairman, who I know and my local papers follow him. Are you
:48:07. > :48:11.accusing junior doctors of being politically motivated? I'm accusing
:48:12. > :48:17.the BMA of it. They have to have the support of junior doctors. Please
:48:18. > :48:22.don't talk over each other. The junior doctors have made these
:48:23. > :48:28.decisions. You are wrong. There has been no ballot on this. 4% of
:48:29. > :48:33.doctors actually want this strike to go ahead. 4%. There has been no
:48:34. > :48:37.ballot. There should be. There has been a shake-up at the top of the
:48:38. > :48:44.BMA. Who is it who are going on strike? 4% of junior doctors? The
:48:45. > :48:49.BMA are instructing their members to go on strike. 8% of junior doctors
:48:50. > :48:54.rejected the deal that was agreed by the BMA. Junior doctors are still
:48:55. > :48:58.not happy. Their claims, and I am paraphrasing, are back in order to
:48:59. > :49:02.put and satisfy a manifesto commitment to make a seven-day
:49:03. > :49:06.service they change the junior doctors' contract in order to make
:49:07. > :49:13.that happen with no more money will stop they do get paid more money at
:49:14. > :49:15.the weekends. -- more money. I mean resources in general. The resources
:49:16. > :49:21.is not the reason why they are striking. They are striking because
:49:22. > :49:25.they have agreed a contract... A contract has been imposed. It was
:49:26. > :49:30.agreed, there has been a shake-up at the top, it is politically motivated
:49:31. > :49:33.and that is why it is happening. Are you saying that no doctor is
:49:34. > :49:40.politically motivated? I'm sure you would get the same percentage in the
:49:41. > :49:43.medical industry. It has been used as... Somebody is going to have to
:49:44. > :49:48.stand up for the patients. The best people placed to see what is going
:49:49. > :49:51.on with the doctors are -- with the patient is the doctors. When you
:49:52. > :49:55.navigate your way through the mire of problems and disputes through
:49:56. > :49:59.this with the government and junior doctors, it has come on many
:50:00. > :50:04.occasions, come down to this narrow demand of increasing Saturday pay.
:50:05. > :50:09.Making it the same as overtime pay at times. Junior doctors are worried
:50:10. > :50:12.they will have to work these additional hours. That will put
:50:13. > :50:18.patient safety at risk. Doctors hours are coming down, down from 92
:50:19. > :50:22.to 70 hours. That is in the contract. When was the last time you
:50:23. > :50:26.spent a considerable amount of time in hospital? I see doctors working
:50:27. > :50:31.hour after hour. They look haggard, tired, they are coming in, doing
:50:32. > :50:36.emergency operations, they are struggling. Why are you not
:50:37. > :50:42.investing in them? We are. There is less than any time of proportional
:50:43. > :50:46.GDP. There isn't. Yes there is. There are 4000 more doctors being
:50:47. > :50:51.trained than in the last parliament. It is about keeping pace with
:50:52. > :50:55.demand. Demand, and the fact that many people are living longer means
:50:56. > :50:59.it isn't keeping pace with expectations of the voting public.
:51:00. > :51:04.That is what the doctors say needs to be addressed in the long term.
:51:05. > :51:07.That is what Jeremy Hunt is doing. He's placed to put money into the
:51:08. > :51:12.NHS over the course of this Parliament. Simon says there isn't
:51:13. > :51:18.enough. They have to find the money. You agree that have to find the
:51:19. > :51:21.money? I agree that after going through a turmoil of recession and a
:51:22. > :51:26.period of economic austerity we are at a position now where we have got
:51:27. > :51:31.politically motivated nonsense, quite frankly, from the BMA being
:51:32. > :51:35.peddled forward that I actually think it's probably transgressing
:51:36. > :51:40.the various acts we put in Parliament about lobbying and the
:51:41. > :51:43.effects of it. Because we have different people on the board of the
:51:44. > :51:50.BMA wearing different hats. We have a chairman of the Unite as the
:51:51. > :51:53.deputy of the BMA that has the history of peddling nonsense. Not
:51:54. > :51:59.just in my local paper, but nationally. You have got to find the
:52:00. > :52:03.money, you said. You have had your say, let me finish. We are at this
:52:04. > :52:07.position where the junior doctors and the BMA have agreed the contract
:52:08. > :52:11.and now they are going back on it. That cannot happen. The junior
:52:12. > :52:16.doctors said they didn't accept the contract in the first place but the
:52:17. > :52:19.BMA did. May I add, at the last election there was an overwhelming
:52:20. > :52:24.mandate to sort this problem out and that is what Jeremy Hunt is doing.
:52:25. > :52:28.Do you think a deal will be done? I hope it is a deal that satisfies the
:52:29. > :52:32.doctors. We needed that the doctors in control. It was about giving back
:52:33. > :52:35.control to the country, giving back control to the people who need to
:52:36. > :52:39.work long hours and squeezing every bit of the NHS they can. We need a
:52:40. > :52:41.decent NHS with doctors who can do the job properly. That is what we
:52:42. > :52:44.need to secure. Thanks very much. Now, you may not have
:52:45. > :52:46.heard of Godwin's Law, but it's an idea that was coined
:52:47. > :52:49.by an American in the early days of the internet and it says that
:52:50. > :52:53.if an online discussion goes on long enough, it will always end
:52:54. > :52:55.with someone comparing someone But these days this doesn't seem
:52:56. > :53:01.to be confined to the internet, but is becoming a regular feature
:53:02. > :53:03.in political debate. Yesterday after Theresa May appeared
:53:04. > :53:06.to rule out the idea of introducing an Australian-style points system,
:53:07. > :53:08.the former Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown sent a tweet
:53:09. > :53:11.which read 'the Tory Brexit brownshirts are stirring' -
:53:12. > :53:13.the brownshirts being a name used to describe the paramilitary
:53:14. > :53:20.wing of the Nazi Party. During the referendum campaign
:53:21. > :53:23.Boris Johnson, not exactly a stranger to controversy,
:53:24. > :53:26.said that the EU had the same aim as Hitler in trying to create
:53:27. > :53:30.a political superstate. His colleague Michael Gove said
:53:31. > :53:33.'we have to be careful about historical comparisons',
:53:34. > :53:35.before roundly ignoring his own advice and comparing economic
:53:36. > :53:37.experts supporting Remain And the former London mayor
:53:38. > :53:46.Ken Livingstone was at the centre of a media scrum and was suspended
:53:47. > :54:07.from the Labour Party after arguing We are joined by a journalist who is
:54:08. > :54:12.nodding away. What Boris Johnson correct to compare the European
:54:13. > :54:15.Union's aims to that of Nazi Germany during the referendum campaign? I
:54:16. > :54:18.can see why people are tempted to make Nazi references. It is the only
:54:19. > :54:24.bit of history people know these days. So it is lazy, isn't it? When
:54:25. > :54:29.I was at school it was all about the Middle Ages, but now all you get
:54:30. > :54:40.taught is about the rise of the Nazis. Paddy Ashdown comparing the
:54:41. > :54:46.70 when five people -- comparing the 17.5 million people who voted to
:54:47. > :54:50.leave, I don't think that works. There are occasions, I think, when
:54:51. > :54:53.the Nazi analogy is used, particularly by the left, to slack
:54:54. > :55:04.off people they don't like. Anybody mildly to the right they call Nazis.
:55:05. > :55:14.There is an interesting comparison to make. We encourage our children
:55:15. > :55:19.to study history to learn the lessons of the past. I do hear
:55:20. > :55:24.people coming to me, and I'm careful about saying it, because it is
:55:25. > :55:27.inflammatory, but I think there are parallels with the age of insecurity
:55:28. > :55:35.that we are experiencing at the moment. People feel unsure. The far
:55:36. > :55:39.right has in 70 in times like this. We saw it in the 1930s, we've seen
:55:40. > :55:46.the referendum today, and we have seen a rise in hate crime which is
:55:47. > :55:50.alarming. In many communities. In the end many people will justify how
:55:51. > :55:55.they have used their Nazi analogy, but isn't it just crass and lazy?
:55:56. > :55:59.No, I didn't agree with Jonathan on the detail, but on the broad issue
:56:00. > :56:02.of whether we should use Nazi analogies... I think, actually, the
:56:03. > :56:07.interesting thing about Nazi Germany is that it happened in a country
:56:08. > :56:10.which invented Beethoven and Schubert. Civilised people. Get over
:56:11. > :56:19.a period of five years they were effectively taken hostage by this
:56:20. > :56:24.party which was a joke. Do you worry history may be repeating itself? I
:56:25. > :56:28.do in terms of the left's war on free speech, the liberal left
:56:29. > :56:36.wall... You have used the term about Green party, or some of the Green
:56:37. > :56:40.party being eco-Nazis. Yes. How can that be when the Nazis were about
:56:41. > :56:47.dehumanising people, destroying the Jews... The Hitler era is rich in
:56:48. > :56:50.green analogies. Get the's Germany was the paradigms of green
:56:51. > :56:55.analogies. Himmler wanted to feed the S S and organic food only until
:56:56. > :57:00.somebody explained to him that it cannot be produced and such a scale.
:57:01. > :57:05.Goering wanted to put people who abused animals into concentration
:57:06. > :57:10.camps. I'm not sure whether to laugh or to say that is incredibly
:57:11. > :57:13.offensive. The truth hurts. I'm passionate about opposing fascism in
:57:14. > :57:19.this country. I'm probably one of the strongest opponents of Ukip. I
:57:20. > :57:23.would label Ukip in that fascist bracket. I don't think it is helpful
:57:24. > :57:26.to descend into the name-calling. Let's look at what people are
:57:27. > :57:29.standing for, the values, the policies of Ukip and the way they
:57:30. > :57:33.want to cut down on immigration. Let's look at the effect that has
:57:34. > :57:36.had on the divisions in our local communities. It is something we need
:57:37. > :57:42.to speak about and talk rationally about. Was Paddy Ashdown right to
:57:43. > :57:46.call Tory Brexiteers brownshirts? It wasn't helpful to the debate, but I
:57:47. > :57:49.see what he was trying to say. Was Michael Gove right to say that those
:57:50. > :57:59.economic experts supporting Remain when Nazi propagandists -- were. He
:58:00. > :58:03.was talking about the paper Hitler commissioned, the authors against
:58:04. > :58:05.Einstein, a specific analogy. Thank you.
:58:06. > :58:08.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
:58:09. > :58:11.Caroline was asked the question but I'm sure as they think as one
:58:12. > :58:13.on all things Jonathan will know the answer.
:58:14. > :58:15.The question was which celebrity is Jeremy Corybn appearing
:58:16. > :58:35.I know Billy Bragg supports him and UB40, I think it might be UB40.
:58:36. > :58:43.# Red red Wine # Goes to my head #.
:58:44. > :58:44.You are right. I didn't have a chance to say thank you for all of
:58:45. > :58:46.your history information today. The One O'Clock News is starting
:58:47. > :58:51.over on BBC One now. I'll be back at 11:30 tomorrow
:58:52. > :58:54.with Andrew for live coverage in a brand-new BBC Two quiz show,
:58:55. > :59:08.Debatable, where a team of celebrities put
:59:09. > :59:12.their debating skills to the test to try to win their contestants
:59:13. > :59:15.pots of cash. Will they help, or will they hinder?
:59:16. > :59:23.That's Debatable. The stars are out for
:59:24. > :59:27.a glittering night of awards,