:00:37. > :00:41.As the Labour leadership contest enters its final 24 hours,
:00:42. > :00:47.it's high noon in the battle to take control of the party.
:00:48. > :00:50.As we come on air, the party's governing body, the NEC,
:00:51. > :00:53.is settling in for a marathon meeting that could prove
:00:54. > :00:55.crucial in the ongoing struggle between Mr Corbyn
:00:56. > :01:03.Theresa May's in New York at the UN, where she'll warn about mass
:01:04. > :01:08.She's also telling world leaders the UK isn't turning inwards
:01:09. > :01:14.The Liberal Democrats are meeting in Brighton ahead of leader
:01:15. > :01:17.Tim Farron's big speech, and we'll be talking
:01:18. > :01:24.about their plan for a new tax to pay for the NHS.
:01:25. > :01:26.And as Jeremy Corbyn reveals his preferred teatime snack,
:01:27. > :01:29.we'll be asking why politicians find it so hard to pick
:01:30. > :01:46.Why do they find it so hard? We're going to find out.
:01:47. > :01:51.of the programme today, it's the Guardian's Polly Toynbee.
:01:52. > :01:53.She's resisted the lure of Liberal Democrat conference
:01:54. > :01:55.in Brighton to be with us here in Westminster -
:01:56. > :02:00.probably because we told her there would be free biscuits.
:02:01. > :02:04.That's just something we tell all our guests to get them
:02:05. > :02:07.So we'll be talking about the Liberal Democrat
:02:08. > :02:10.conference, and we'll be back on air at two o'clock to bring you live
:02:11. > :02:16.coverage of leader Tim Farron's speech to his party.
:02:17. > :02:21.How could you miss that? Best get the popcorn in now!
:02:22. > :02:24.But first today, let's talk about Theresa May's trip
:02:25. > :02:26.to New York, where she's due to give her first speech
:02:27. > :02:30.She's already been talking about migration, and today she and
:02:31. > :02:33.Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson are meeting with big US investors
:02:34. > :02:35.to spread the word about trade opportunities with post-Brexit
:02:36. > :02:39.She's also responded to Eastern European leaders
:02:40. > :02:43.for suggesting they would make life difficult for the UK on the way
:02:44. > :02:50.We're going to be in a negotiation with the other members of the
:02:51. > :02:53.European Union as we negotiate the way we are exiting and the
:02:54. > :02:56.relationship we're going to have with them afterwards.
:02:57. > :02:58.I'm very clear, we're going to go in there to
:02:59. > :03:01.get the right deal for the United Kingdom.
:03:02. > :03:04.I'm going to be ambitious for Britain in the negotiations, and
:03:05. > :03:08.I want to see the deal that's going to be right for the UK.
:03:09. > :03:13.We're joined now by the Conservative MP Kwasi Kwarteng.
:03:14. > :03:23.Welcome back. Are we not at the moment, because we all look at what
:03:24. > :03:29.the Prime Minister says, but even the Slovakian prime minister, what
:03:30. > :03:34.he says, are we not in a phoney war where what anybody says does not
:03:35. > :03:37.matter? You make a good point. At the beginning, people are setting
:03:38. > :03:42.out their stall in the negotiation, saying they will be tough and will
:03:43. > :03:46.drive difficult deals, but I think what the Prime Minister said is
:03:47. > :03:51.right. There will be a deal, at the end of the day, because it is in our
:03:52. > :03:55.mutual interest as Britain and the EU to come to a deal. That is the
:03:56. > :03:59.line from your side of the argument, but you said we are at the beginning
:04:00. > :04:07.of a negotiation. I'm not even sure we are. Preparatory stage. The
:04:08. > :04:12.understanding is that article 50 will be invoked sometime next year.
:04:13. > :04:17.That is 12 months, maybe you could be more specific. Before Easter?
:04:18. > :04:21.What do you think? We have been in the EU for over 40 years, so whether
:04:22. > :04:26.it is at some point next year in the long run is neither here nor there.
:04:27. > :04:38.It has to be done and dusted if we're going to an election in 2020
:04:39. > :04:44.is at least before then. If you add two years to 2017, that's 2019.
:04:45. > :04:49.There isn't a problem. I can understand that you can't rush to
:04:50. > :04:54.trigger article 50, you want to do preparatory work beforehand. But the
:04:55. > :04:59.longer you leave it, I would suggest, the more you create a
:05:00. > :05:03.vacuum and the more others will fill that vacuum, not necessarily to your
:05:04. > :05:06.advantage. There will be a long vacuum anyway because the process of
:05:07. > :05:13.negotiation will take longer than two years, I suspect. Irene the FT
:05:14. > :05:16.day after day and one industry after another, the sheer complexity of
:05:17. > :05:24.what has to be agreed on each kind of sector that we are involved with
:05:25. > :05:32.I think... It will leak from both sides. Under article 50, they cannot
:05:33. > :05:38.take more than two years unless all 27 members plus ourselves I agree.
:05:39. > :05:43.Indeed. The great problem is there will be no agreement on anything
:05:44. > :05:47.unless all 27, plus the European Parliament, agree on everything. The
:05:48. > :05:52.idea that we can get there in two years seems to be whistled thinking.
:05:53. > :05:56.Perhaps we can, but during that time, there will be huge gaps, highs
:05:57. > :06:01.and lows in expectations. It will leak from the European side, from
:06:02. > :06:07.the 27 countries, leak from Parliament and from our site, too.
:06:08. > :06:11.The party is riven. There is the Chancellor on one side saying soft
:06:12. > :06:17.Brexit, and then there is Boris, the man David Davis, the terrible three.
:06:18. > :06:20.They are on the hard Brexit site. You can exaggerate the complexities.
:06:21. > :06:27.There is access to the single market and there is freedom of movement.
:06:28. > :06:32.They are linked. And a lot of discussion will be about those
:06:33. > :06:36.issues. I read the FT, as Polly does, I even read her column. There
:06:37. > :06:40.is endless hand-wringing and saying how difficult it will be, and how
:06:41. > :06:44.complicated and all the rest of it, but actually, I think the principles
:06:45. > :06:49.are simple. There is no doubt that Brexit means Brexit. What that means
:06:50. > :06:54.is that we will not stay in the U. We know exactly what it doesn't
:06:55. > :06:58.mean. Hasn't the narrative been set because Theresa May doesn't have
:06:59. > :07:02.anything to say at the moment? If she doesn't have a message to sell,
:07:03. > :07:08.because it will take time, that vacuum could create problems. You
:07:09. > :07:16.said it will take time, so the narrative will be filled. We are in
:07:17. > :07:19.a stage before preparation. The negotiations haven't started. There
:07:20. > :07:22.is no point in trying to second-guess our position before we
:07:23. > :07:31.start. I know there is endless hand-wringing. Brexit means Brexit
:07:32. > :07:36.is a tautology. They want us to leave as well. We all know that. It
:07:37. > :07:41.is a clear mandate, a clear proposition, and I think we will be
:07:42. > :07:45.able to deliver this into under half years. Simplicity has been the big
:07:46. > :07:49.lie on the Brexit side of the argument. There is nothing simple
:07:50. > :07:56.about it. Every industry has their own quite complex needs in terms of
:07:57. > :08:04.staying in the single market. That and the free movement of people. At
:08:05. > :08:09.the end of the two-year period, if there is still a tonne of tough to
:08:10. > :08:15.do, what happens? You describe article 50 very well. We leave
:08:16. > :08:19.anyway. Sir James Dyson has a clear view and says we start with a blank
:08:20. > :08:24.sheet of paper and we can carry on negotiating. I don't think this
:08:25. > :08:28.hotel California idea that we are always going to stay in is tenable
:08:29. > :08:33.and that it is going to happen. Is it your view that we cannot sign
:08:34. > :08:41.trade deals with other countries while these talks are going on, but
:08:42. > :08:46.could we begin negotiations, scope out deals with Canada or America or
:08:47. > :08:50.Australia? That think that's why the Prime Minister set up the Department
:08:51. > :08:54.of International trade. We know we can't sign deals, so what is the
:08:55. > :08:58.point of having a Department if they are not doing preparatory work for
:08:59. > :09:04.deals that will be signed after we leave the EU? Is that possible? You
:09:05. > :09:08.can scope it out. Liam Fox is in the Gulf states making deals with people
:09:09. > :09:13.that a lot of people would regard as quite unsavoury. If that is the
:09:14. > :09:16.alternative to the EU, making deals with dictators and people bombing
:09:17. > :09:22.other countries, I'm not sure that will go down awfully well. The EU
:09:23. > :09:28.makes deals with these people. It may do, but not the sort of deals we
:09:29. > :09:32.will be proposing. We will be pretty desperate. We have 44% of our trade
:09:33. > :09:35.with Europe, so if we are replacing some of that, we will be on our
:09:36. > :09:44.knees in these negotiations and will take any deal. I think the prophecy
:09:45. > :09:50.of doom, people have had enough of. In my constituency, people are very
:09:51. > :09:54.optimistic and upbeat about the prospects for Brexit. I have lots of
:09:55. > :10:00.exporters who export all around the world, selling fridges to Libya, if
:10:01. > :10:03.you can believe. These companies are buoyant and optimistic about the
:10:04. > :10:10.future. Nothing has happened yet. One thing that may be going the way
:10:11. > :10:15.of the Brexiteer 's, which is not of their making, but it is quite clear
:10:16. > :10:21.when you look at the lack of future for TTIP with North America, or the
:10:22. > :10:26.inability of Congress to agree the specific trade deal which has been
:10:27. > :10:30.agreed but not ratified by the US Congress, that maybe these big
:10:31. > :10:34.regional trade deals have come to an end and we are moving back into an
:10:35. > :10:40.age of bilateral trade deals between Japan and America, Britain and
:10:41. > :10:43.Canada and whatever. You need to look at the reasons why TTIP is
:10:44. > :10:48.falling apart. It is because the Americans won't agree to regulations
:10:49. > :10:51.that we have, and we won't agree to let them trade on more relaxed
:10:52. > :10:56.regulations. Do we want beef from America that has been injected with
:10:57. > :11:00.chemicals or antibiotics that we wouldn't allow? We want the same
:11:01. > :11:06.standards. And that was the problem. Are you saying that Britain would
:11:07. > :11:12.accept lower standards than the EU in a TTIP deal? I have no idea, I am
:11:13. > :11:17.simply saying that it would seem axiomatic, let's take Canada, that
:11:18. > :11:23.it would be easy to do for one country to do a deal than Canada
:11:24. > :11:27.doing a deal with the whole of the EU. I'm not sure why, unless there
:11:28. > :11:34.are regulations the EU insists on that we will drop. If you have 27
:11:35. > :11:38.individual states performing -- forming part of the EU, it is much
:11:39. > :11:43.harder, all things being equal, to do a deal with 27 when they had to
:11:44. > :11:49.agree on everything than it is with one country. It is just arithmetic.
:11:50. > :11:53.This kind of speculation, this kind of discussion, based on a minimum of
:11:54. > :11:58.fact, because we don't know, this will continue all the way through
:11:59. > :12:01.Christmas, won't it? In the negotiation, we don't know what the
:12:02. > :12:06.other people are thinking. It is like any kind of game theory. You
:12:07. > :12:12.don't know what all 27 are thinking, so we have to stop the discussions.
:12:13. > :12:15.I don't believe we will have these endless .my John Major said it will
:12:16. > :12:22.take ten years, someone else says it won't. The big question that will be
:12:23. > :12:26.asked is, what was all this for? We are going to go through this hell
:12:27. > :12:29.for at least two years, and at the end it might be OK, it might be
:12:30. > :12:35.disastrous, but what was it all for? That's what people will ask. I think
:12:36. > :12:39.it was good to reclaim sovereign rights over a sovereign country.
:12:40. > :12:44.Let's not refight the referendum campaign. Oh, we will!
:12:45. > :12:49.The question for today is all about biscuits.
:12:50. > :12:52.You can't say we shy away from the big issues of the day.
:12:53. > :12:55.Yes, Jeremy Corbyn was interviewed by users of the website Mumsnet
:12:56. > :12:57.yesterday, and as is now traditional, he was asked
:12:58. > :13:02.Was it, A: Garibaldi, B: Jammy dodgers, C:
:13:03. > :13:07.A bit later on in the show, Polly, who bows to no-one
:13:08. > :13:17.in her biscuit knowledge, will give us the correct answer.
:13:18. > :13:20.In just 24 hours' time the ballot will close in the contest to choose
:13:21. > :13:25.We won't know until this coming Saturday if it will be
:13:26. > :13:28.Jeremy Corbyn or Owen Smith, although if you were to head
:13:29. > :13:32.to your local bookmakers, you'd need to spend ?66 in order
:13:33. > :13:35.to win ?1 back on a bet for Mr Corbyn to see
:13:36. > :13:53.Let's just explain that - put down ?66 can, get ?1 back if he wins.
:13:54. > :13:55.Not that we endorse gambling, particularly at those odds.
:13:56. > :13:58.But Mr Smith's campaign insists he is still in with a chance,
:13:59. > :14:01.and both men are still working hard to hoover up those final votes.
:14:02. > :14:08.Let's have a reminder of how the campaign has unfolded.
:14:09. > :14:15.Launching my bid to be the next leader of the Labour Party, and more
:14:16. > :14:16.importantly than that, the next Labour Prime
:14:17. > :14:19.This party is strong, this party is capable
:14:20. > :14:25.And that I am leader of the party, I will be that Prime
:14:26. > :14:35.It doesn't mean trading our principles.
:14:36. > :14:42.How you can complain about disunity in the
:14:43. > :14:52.party when you and others are the ones who resigned from the party?
:14:53. > :14:54.Most people in the undecided section have moved
:14:55. > :14:55.and swelled the ranks of the
:14:56. > :15:06.I think we should stay within the European
:15:07. > :15:10.Union, and I've always believed that.
:15:11. > :15:12.Jeremy wants to leave the European Union.
:15:13. > :15:14.We have to realise that regrettable as they are, the
:15:15. > :15:17.results of the referendum, we have to ensure we have access to
:15:18. > :15:24.European markets for manufactured goods.
:15:25. > :15:47.I've absolutely no desire whatsoever to go on Strictly Come Dancing.
:15:48. > :15:50.If Jeremy Corbyn wins, as the polls seem to suggest,
:15:51. > :15:54.attention will turn to the other battle within Labour, over
:15:55. > :15:57.who controls the party machinery - supporters of Mr Corbyn or those MPs
:15:58. > :16:04.And today sees something of a show-down at a meeting
:16:05. > :16:08.of Labour's National Executive Committee.
:16:09. > :16:11.It's just got under way, and it could pave the way for rule
:16:12. > :16:13.changes that could change the balance of power within Labour.
:16:14. > :16:19.The National Executive Committee is the ruling body of the Labour Party.
:16:20. > :16:21.It is composed of 33 members from various branches
:16:22. > :16:24.of the Labour movement, including MPs, trade unions
:16:25. > :16:30.The NEC is finely balanced between allies and opponents
:16:31. > :16:37.of Jeremy Corbyn, making it a key battleground in the ongoing power
:16:38. > :16:42.In August, six new NEC members were elected in a clean sweep
:16:43. > :16:50.Today is the final meeting before they take up their posts.
:16:51. > :17:01.Items up for discussion include possible changes to the rules
:17:02. > :17:18.Labour MPs voted overwhelming for a return to a Shadow Cabinet
:17:19. > :17:23.Jeremy Corbyn, however, is understood to favour a counter
:17:24. > :17:25.proposal for "partial" elections that would see the Leader,
:17:26. > :17:28.MPs and party members each decide a third of the Shadow Cabinet.
:17:29. > :17:31.But whatever is agreed today won't be the end of the story.
:17:32. > :17:34.It will also need to be ratified by the party conference
:17:35. > :17:40.Well, Labour's deputy Tom Watson has been speaking ahead of the meeting.
:17:41. > :17:48.We've been airing our dirty linen in public.
:17:49. > :17:51.We've got a leadership election, we'll get a new leader on Saturday
:17:52. > :17:54.and we've got to put the band back together because Jeremy,
:17:55. > :17:57.Owen, myself, John McDonnell, most of our front bench,
:17:58. > :18:00.think we're heading for an early General Election.
:18:01. > :18:06.So, there are a series of proposals today to try and help do that.
:18:07. > :18:09.Well, let's find out more now from our correspondent Mark Lobel.
:18:10. > :18:11.He's outside the meeting which we're told could last for as
:18:12. > :18:23.Here you are again outside an NEC meeting, the Labour ruling
:18:24. > :18:30.executive, is this the showdown we have been talking about? You are
:18:31. > :18:34.right, it's a little bit like Groundhog Day. Two months ago they
:18:35. > :18:38.were here Jeremy Corbyn trying to get on to the leadership ballot.
:18:39. > :18:42.Since then over the last two months while they've tried really hard in
:18:43. > :18:45.public, Jeremy Corbyn and the deputy leader, to really get on and show
:18:46. > :18:48.they're best of friends, behind the scenes they've been fighting very
:18:49. > :18:52.hard. When the parliamentary Labour Party came up with this proposal for
:18:53. > :18:56.elected Shadow Cabinet members, rather than appointed ones, it was
:18:57. > :19:00.met with scepticism by Jeremy Corbyn's camp. One member told me it
:19:01. > :19:05.was transparent manoeuvring to undermine Jeremy Corbyn. He at first
:19:06. > :19:07.suggested he would bring members on as part of the election but I
:19:08. > :19:11.understand he is going to kick the idea into the long grass today so
:19:12. > :19:14.that it can get proper consideration as part of a wider review of party
:19:15. > :19:20.democracy so that might not be resolved today. But this other issue
:19:21. > :19:23.of registered supporters, the constituency that traditionally
:19:24. > :19:28.favours left-wing leaders, might be scrapped, that's another thing put
:19:29. > :19:33.up today, people who pay ?25 to vote for the leadership, to get a vote in
:19:34. > :19:40.the leadership, that facility might go as a result of today's meeting.
:19:41. > :19:44.In terms of the party itself, inward looking, infighting, the critics
:19:45. > :19:48.say. But this is a battle for the heart and soul of the Labour Party.
:19:49. > :19:52.What is or isn't decided today or at any subsequent meeting will decide
:19:53. > :19:56.the future direction of the party, won't it? Absolutely. This is a
:19:57. > :20:02.crunch meeting and if it's not resolved today, the Shadow Cabinet
:20:03. > :20:05.issue is still a crunch issue, as one former Shadow Cabinet who left
:20:06. > :20:09.upset with Jeremy Corbyn's handling of the party said to me we might by
:20:10. > :20:14.the end of this week and on Saturday if he is re-elected as is widely
:20:15. > :20:18.rekicked, have Jeremy Corbyn strong within the party, the party itself
:20:19. > :20:21.will remaven divided and this Shadow Cabinet Minister is looking to see
:20:22. > :20:24.who is in the Shadow Cabinet and what it looks like as an example of
:20:25. > :20:28.how the party will continue and whether they'll be a strong
:20:29. > :20:31.opposition. Jeremy Corbyn's camp, however, says that there is at least
:20:32. > :20:34.a dozen former Shadow Cabinet members that will come in, even if
:20:35. > :20:38.he is still appoints a Shadow Cabinet and they'll focus on two
:20:39. > :20:41.things. Electoral strategy straightaway, they almost want an
:20:42. > :20:46.early election and they would encourage Theresa May to have one.
:20:47. > :20:51.They also need to prepare for the local and mayoral elections in May.
:20:52. > :20:56.Second, they're going to try to change the party into a
:20:57. > :20:59.union-backed, take it away from the momentum groups, some upset, some
:21:00. > :21:05.members of the parliamentary party and want to take away something that
:21:06. > :21:09.turns their stomach and make it into a more inclusive party. Only eight
:21:10. > :21:13.hours to go, to see you this evening.
:21:14. > :21:16.He has nothing else to do, no harm, keeps him out of harm's way!
:21:17. > :21:20.She's a newly elected member of the NEC who'll be taking up
:21:21. > :21:24.So, she too can look forward to sitting in these meetings
:21:25. > :21:34.So you are not at the NEC today because you are not yet on but you
:21:35. > :21:39.will be for the next meeting? Absolutely. I will be joining
:21:40. > :21:42.straight after conference. What is your view on whether or not the
:21:43. > :21:47.Shadow Cabinet should be elected? Well, you know, I think it's
:21:48. > :21:54.important that sort of debate happens really. I am on the NEC to
:21:55. > :21:58.represent members. I was elected to represent members and members will
:21:59. > :22:05.unite behind and make their decision on Saturday clear. I understand
:22:06. > :22:10.that. What I am asking is when that debate takes place, it seems like it
:22:11. > :22:13.may take place today, but may not be decided today, so it will still be
:22:14. > :22:20.an issue by the time you are on the NEC. What is your position? I like
:22:21. > :22:23.the idea of opening up the notion of greater party democracy and
:22:24. > :22:27.decision-making to members and widening that debate and looking at
:22:28. > :22:30.that. It's great that the parliamentary Labour Party has put
:22:31. > :22:35.forward this concept and this idea because I think it's something we
:22:36. > :22:38.ought to discuss and look at. Who do you think should elect the Shadow
:22:39. > :22:42.Cabinet? I think the notion of having a debate that involves the
:22:43. > :22:47.membership in being able to select some is a good idea. The opportunity
:22:48. > :22:52.also for the membership having decided their leader, the
:22:53. > :22:54.opportunity for the leader to actually also appoint who he would
:22:55. > :22:59.like to serve the leadership with him. Let me get this clear. You
:23:00. > :23:02.think the broad membership should choose some of the Shadow Cabinet,
:23:03. > :23:08.and the leader should also choose some? I like the idea of having that
:23:09. > :23:13.discussion about how can we enable the membership to have a greater say
:23:14. > :23:18.in party democracy in the running of the Labour Party and I think the
:23:19. > :23:20.notion of enabling the Shadow Cabinet to have that interaction
:23:21. > :23:26.with the membership is an important one. Equally important is the
:23:27. > :23:33.opportunity for the parliamentary Labour Party to have its say but
:23:34. > :23:37.crucially... The leader, the democratically elected leader to
:23:38. > :23:40.appoint. It seems are you in favour of this one-third one-third,
:23:41. > :23:45.one-third solution that the members elect a third, the leader chooses a
:23:46. > :23:49.third and the PLP chooses a third? It's an idea that is just emerging
:23:50. > :23:53.and I think I am open to hearing that discussion and engaging with
:23:54. > :23:57.others around that. It gives the opportunity, in my view, for the
:23:58. > :24:02.membership to have a real say in party democracy and I think that's
:24:03. > :24:05.important. Is this a good idea? It's a complete stitch-up between on the
:24:06. > :24:10.Corbynite side, because at the moment as things stand with a huge
:24:11. > :24:15.new membership, the old membership is on the whole less pro-Corbyn with
:24:16. > :24:22.a new membership, they will vote the Corbyn ticket. Claudia was elected,
:24:23. > :24:26.six members by the membership, all of them the straight Corbyn slate,
:24:27. > :24:31.so Corbyn would have a third, he would also control the slate of the
:24:32. > :24:34.other third. The PLP would effectively be outvoted. What's
:24:35. > :24:36.interesting about this is that there is no constitution for the Shadow
:24:37. > :24:40.Cabinet. Once they are sitting around the table decisions are not
:24:41. > :24:44.made there. The reason that so many people walked away from it was that
:24:45. > :24:47.they would have discussions around the table and Jeremy Corbyn would
:24:48. > :24:50.say thank you very much and go away and nothing would be decided and he
:24:51. > :24:52.would do whatever he wanted. There is nothing in the constitution that
:24:53. > :24:56.says the Shadow Cabinet actually matters. I guess if he gets a Shadow
:24:57. > :25:00.Cabinet more to his liking he may end up taking more decisions in it?
:25:01. > :25:06.Possibly. I think he makes his own decisions. In reality, what you saw
:25:07. > :25:10.was when Jeremies could elected this time last year, with an overwhelming
:25:11. > :25:16.mandate, Jeremy opened up the Shadow Cabinet to a wide range of people.
:25:17. > :25:24.People came on board. The idea... But then left. What we saw was a bit
:25:25. > :25:29.of an orchestrated... The big chunk of them left. Was that a vote
:25:30. > :25:32.against the leader or a vote against the democratic membership that
:25:33. > :25:38.elected the leader in the first place? What should they do around
:25:39. > :25:43.the table, if you had Heidi Alexander walking to talk about
:25:44. > :25:49.health policy, other people walk -- wanting to talk and they couldn't
:25:50. > :25:52.get a meeting, so there was no policy, a bit of time of time. But
:25:53. > :25:57.the Shadow Cabinet was clearly useless. These are things we heard.
:25:58. > :26:02.This is all being played out in the public domain, put to the membership
:26:03. > :26:05.again. They've heard all of this. They will make their decision on
:26:06. > :26:08.Saturday. I believe that they will continue to have faith in Jeremy as
:26:09. > :26:12.the leader, despite all that you say and despite all that the
:26:13. > :26:16.parliamentary Labour Party have said. We have got a tripling of the
:26:17. > :26:20.membership, this is all happening under Jeremy Corbyn. Jeremy's drawn
:26:21. > :26:24.a fine line between Labour's policies and where the Conservatives
:26:25. > :26:28.are at. The membership are listening to this and making a clear decision
:26:29. > :26:35.on Saturday and it's behind that sense of unity that I think the
:26:36. > :26:40.Labour Party needs to draw its energy and take that. The Labour
:26:41. > :26:45.Party is, in quote, near terminal meltdown. I think it is. It's really
:26:46. > :26:48.two parties. The old Labour Party and then this huge avalanche of new
:26:49. > :26:52.arrivals who are a completely different party. Of course if we had
:26:53. > :26:56.a sensible electoral system they would be two parties, just as the
:26:57. > :27:00.Tories would long ago have been a pro-Europe and anti-Europe party. We
:27:01. > :27:04.have an electoral system that forces people to say within the two big
:27:05. > :27:10.parties, which is very uncomfortable. At the moment for
:27:11. > :27:16.Labour it really is could habiting divorced couples. These are ordinary
:27:17. > :27:20.people from the stretch of of the country, nurses, these are
:27:21. > :27:24.administrators, these are people doing ordinary jobs from all ages,
:27:25. > :27:29.all diversities, all mixes, joining in for change, for something that
:27:30. > :27:32.reflects change in society. This is a powerful testimony of people
:27:33. > :27:35.coming together and saying that they are fed up with the current
:27:36. > :27:42.political system and they want to see change. They see that hope, that
:27:43. > :27:47.energy in Jeremy. What do you say to poly's point or claim that your
:27:48. > :27:52.party's in near terminal meltdown? I don't think that is the case. What
:27:53. > :27:55.we will see from Saturday is hopefully a sense of unity. The
:27:56. > :28:00.membership will be clear about its decision. Nearly 600,000 members
:28:01. > :28:08.making a very clear decision about who it wants to lead the party. That
:28:09. > :28:12.is a clear standing. What do MPs do? The parliamentary Labour Party will
:28:13. > :28:15.hopefully come behind that sense of unity and that sense of democracy.
:28:16. > :28:19.You know it's not going to. At the end of the day we are a Labour Party
:28:20. > :28:22.that believes in social justice. These are parliamentary Labour Party
:28:23. > :28:27.members that do not want to see a divided party, do not want to see a
:28:28. > :28:32.split. They actually believe in democracy and they will unite behind
:28:33. > :28:40.that. You don't know that. The fact is that a lot of these Labour MPs
:28:41. > :28:45.who are anti-Corbyn, the likelihood is will now face deselection
:28:46. > :28:50.problems. That's plain. Len McCluskey has made it plain. He has
:28:51. > :28:54.a lot of power. Even without being orchestrated, partly because of the
:28:55. > :28:56.happenstance of the boundary changes. Which gives them an
:28:57. > :29:01.opportunity. Gives them an opportunity. There is a lot of
:29:02. > :29:05.momentum going on in the back door of a lot of these MPs. I think they
:29:06. > :29:11.feel they are threatened with deselection. I think they have to
:29:12. > :29:16.between now and then make it quite clear what they actually stand for
:29:17. > :29:21.and I am advocating they should take a strong pro-European position
:29:22. > :29:27.because the Labour Party has simply and scent... Some are saying they
:29:28. > :29:29.will drift back to a Shadow Cabinet under Jeremy Corbyn which shows
:29:30. > :29:34.there could be moves to them supporting him as leader again. Yes,
:29:35. > :29:39.I think some will. Some found it so impossible last time they say they
:29:40. > :29:45.can't. Some will, certainly if the PLP gets to elect most of the - a
:29:46. > :29:50.majority of the members they'll put up enough people. That's not going
:29:51. > :29:55.to happen? You weent want that to happen. These eight-hour meetings,
:29:56. > :30:00.somebody You wouldn't want the PLP to choose a Shadow Cabinet? It would
:30:01. > :30:04.be unjust if it was just the PLP. I think you need to have the leader
:30:05. > :30:07.having a say and the membership having a say and at the end of the
:30:08. > :30:11.day you talk about deselection, there is nobody calling for
:30:12. > :30:15.deselection of hard-working parliamentary Labour Party members.
:30:16. > :30:20.Not Jeremy Corbyn, not any of the leadership of the Labour Party.
:30:21. > :30:29.What about Peter Keil in Brighton? I don't believe that is really what
:30:30. > :30:35.we're talking about? Did you see Channel 4 last night? Come on... You
:30:36. > :30:45.said no one is calling for his deselection, but people were.
:30:46. > :30:52.Channel 4 News is not a credible journalistic... It was hardly
:30:53. > :30:59.credible. A focus on a WL as being the basis of any entry is, this is
:31:00. > :31:05.not... But there was someone calling for Mr Keil to be deselected. The
:31:06. > :31:09.leadership of the party, and the structures that govern the Labour
:31:10. > :31:16.Party, there is no one calling for deselection of anybody. So you would
:31:17. > :31:20.back Mr Keil to stay as the MP for Brighton and Hove? He has the
:31:21. > :31:25.opportunity to put himself... I didn't ask you that. I'm not a
:31:26. > :31:31.member in Brighton and Hove. At the end of the day, I will sit on the
:31:32. > :31:37.Labour Party's NEC. While I am there, I won't advocate deselection
:31:38. > :31:42.and I don't expect anyone else to. We are talking about hard-working
:31:43. > :31:48.Labour MPs, Unity, working together and taking the fight to the Tories,
:31:49. > :31:50.to the Conservatives, and ensuring that we win over on the ardent of
:31:51. > :31:54.anti-austerities. Let's return now to the Liberal
:31:55. > :31:56.Democrat conference, where later today Tim Farron
:31:57. > :31:58.will use his closing speech to unveil a panel of senior doctors
:31:59. > :32:01.and other experts to examine the case for a dedicated
:32:02. > :32:03.NHS and care tax. Here's the party's health spokesman,
:32:04. > :32:05.Norman Lamb, telling conference that the health
:32:06. > :32:07.service needs more money. We live in a country with the 6th
:32:08. > :32:13.largest economy in the world. Yet we are letting
:32:14. > :32:18.people down so badly. Surely we can do better than this
:32:19. > :32:20.but the Government seems Again and again, they claim
:32:21. > :32:25.that they are giving money to the NHS, more
:32:26. > :32:28.so than ever in the past. Treat these claims
:32:29. > :32:36.with extreme caution. And Norman Lamb joins
:32:37. > :32:47.us now from Brighton. Norman Lamb, you want to raise taxes
:32:48. > :32:53.to pay for health and social care - which taxes will you raise and by
:32:54. > :32:59.how much? I am asking this expert panel to look, and I think it is a
:33:00. > :33:04.sensible way to develop policy, to get health economists, others with
:33:05. > :33:07.an expert knowledge of the NHS to work together to advise the party,
:33:08. > :33:13.but we are asking them to look at the case for a dedicated health care
:33:14. > :33:20.tax which would be shown on your pay packet, and my view is that health
:33:21. > :33:24.and care are, in a way, unique in terms of public services in that
:33:25. > :33:28.demand just keeps rising inexorably every year, by 4% across the
:33:29. > :33:32.developed world. There is a real case for carving it out. You end the
:33:33. > :33:36.distortion of spending in other areas of Government spending as well
:33:37. > :33:40.by carving it out and dealing with it separately. Then there is the
:33:41. > :33:45.case of whether you need to increase it. You would have a separate
:33:46. > :33:52.hypothecated tax that would go towards paying for health and social
:33:53. > :33:58.care. How much would it be? Would it be 1p on national insurance, on
:33:59. > :34:04.income tax or what? We know that 1p on income tax or national insurance
:34:05. > :34:08.will raise ?4 billion ?5 billion, something in that range. Certainly,
:34:09. > :34:13.that amount extra at the moment would make a massive difference to
:34:14. > :34:19.the sustainability of our health and care system. So that is what you
:34:20. > :34:24.would go for? Yes. The argument I am making is, let's look at the design
:34:25. > :34:29.of a dedicated tax. You could base it... Frank Field has argued this,
:34:30. > :34:33.that it should be based on national insurance. You would then need to
:34:34. > :34:38.look at whether you need to make it more progressive. You would need to
:34:39. > :34:41.make sure it is fair between generations but ultimately, it could
:34:42. > :34:45.form the basis of a hypothecated tax. The argument is that if people
:34:46. > :34:49.could see where their money is going on this, they may be prepared to pay
:34:50. > :34:53.a bit more, if it is clear that the system needs more money. Before,
:34:54. > :34:57.under Labour, there was more money for the health service, but it
:34:58. > :35:01.wasn't hypothecated in quite that way, which meant that some of the
:35:02. > :35:03.money did not go towards health. Exactly, and Frank Field makes that
:35:04. > :35:20.point. The NHS in England is facing a ?22
:35:21. > :35:22.billion gap in its finances by 2020, so if you're only talking about ?4
:35:23. > :35:25.billion being raised on national insurance, it won't go that far. Why
:35:26. > :35:30.not be bolder in opposition? That is why I have asked the expert panel to
:35:31. > :35:35.look at this. The public are crying out for politicians to be straight
:35:36. > :35:39.and to tell people what the scale of the problem is. There has been a
:35:40. > :35:44.conspiracy of silence about health and care funding. No party wants to
:35:45. > :35:49.admit how dire the situation is. No party at the last election came up
:35:50. > :35:54.with a solution to this problem. Including yours. Absolutely, I am
:35:55. > :36:03.saying that. And yet everyone within the system recognises that the
:36:04. > :36:05.situation now is dire and it will have real consequences for human
:36:06. > :36:07.beings. I put it to you that the reason is because it is not
:36:08. > :36:11.palatable politically. I don't know, but maybe people don't want to pay
:36:12. > :36:17.more than 1p extra on National Insurance to pay for extra money
:36:18. > :36:21.going into the health service. I think you're right. The consensus
:36:22. > :36:27.over many years has been, don't talk about extra tax, only talk about
:36:28. > :36:31.cutting tax. But there is also, we know, an enormous sort of affection
:36:32. > :36:39.for the NHS, but their results are a recognition that every family relies
:36:40. > :36:42.at moment of need on a very well organised and effectively
:36:43. > :36:47.functioning health system and care system. Is there any evidence that
:36:48. > :36:53.the public want to pay for this? That is the question. Beyond getting
:36:54. > :36:59.this panel to advise the party on our policy-making, I've also called,
:37:00. > :37:05.along with Liz Kendall and Dan Poulter yesterday, a form of -- a
:37:06. > :37:10.former Conservative minister, the three of us have come together to
:37:11. > :37:14.urge Theresa May to set up a cross-party commission to engage the
:37:15. > :37:17.public on these critical, once-in-a-lifetime questions. I have
:37:18. > :37:23.talked to the Institute for Government for this. It has been
:37:24. > :37:27.done in the last decade with pensions, and by establishing a
:37:28. > :37:30.process that binds in all the parties, a solution was developed
:37:31. > :37:35.which we legislated for. We need the same process for health. Your
:37:36. > :37:39.thoughts, Polly Toynbee, because it has been dismissed by the Government
:37:40. > :37:43.and even Labour voices like Margaret Hodge, who says there is a lot of
:37:44. > :37:46.waste and if we got rid of that, we would not have to raise this sort of
:37:47. > :37:52.money that Norman Lamb was talking about. She has been brilliant and
:37:53. > :37:55.incisive about picking up bits of waste, but I think everyone
:37:56. > :38:00.recognises that the health service is severely underfunded and there
:38:01. > :38:05.has to be some mechanism by which the public does, as Norman Lamb
:38:06. > :38:08.suggests, if they really care about the health service, which the polls
:38:09. > :38:12.show they do, there has to be a method for paying for it. I think a
:38:13. > :38:15.Royal commission would be an excellent idea. I think there is see
:38:16. > :38:20.Roe chance of the Tories doing it. They brought in the Lansley act,
:38:21. > :38:26.which the Lib Dems voted for, at last. They brought in a budget that
:38:27. > :38:31.cut the NHS spending as never before. And the Lib Dems were part
:38:32. > :38:36.of that. I know they regret it now, but it is a shame. Let's talk about
:38:37. > :38:39.the merging of health and social care, as Andy Burnham has talked
:38:40. > :38:44.about. How would that work? There is a central grant that goes to
:38:45. > :38:48.councils and they decide how much is spent on care. Are you saying that
:38:49. > :38:54.within the NHS budget more of that should go to social care? I am
:38:55. > :38:56.arguing that we have to have a unified health and care system. If
:38:57. > :39:01.you think about it from the patient's point of view, it is
:39:02. > :39:05.ridiculous that it is split down the middle. Too often, quite vulnerable
:39:06. > :39:11.people fall through the cracks in the system between organisations,
:39:12. > :39:15.and we have this crazy situation of two lots of people commissioning
:39:16. > :39:20.services in every locality. Let's just recognise that there is a
:39:21. > :39:24.continue here between health and care, and that the whole system
:39:25. > :39:28.ought to be focusing much more on preventing ill-health and preventing
:39:29. > :39:31.deterioration of health. Get all the incentives in the system aligned and
:39:32. > :39:36.have one pot of money. That would save money and it would make more
:39:37. > :39:40.efficient use of resources. But I think, you know, we need to organise
:39:41. > :39:46.things in localities. We shouldn't have a top-down service. But that
:39:47. > :39:49.does sound like what you are proposing. You are centralising
:39:50. > :39:55.something that has been decentralised. I think you were the
:39:56. > :39:59.party of local decisions. No, not at all. I think it is important to have
:40:00. > :40:03.very clear national standards about your right of access. One of the
:40:04. > :40:07.things I have campaigned for for many years and introduced as a
:40:08. > :40:12.minister is the first maximum waiting time standards in mental
:40:13. > :40:15.health. So, wherever you live in the country, you should know that the
:40:16. > :40:20.National Health Service will give you access to good, evidence -based
:40:21. > :40:24.treatment on a timely basis. You can then allow every area to design
:40:25. > :40:28.services to meet the needs of that locality, subject to those national
:40:29. > :40:31.standards which everyone should abide by. That seems perfectly
:40:32. > :40:35.consistent. Norman Lamb, thank you very much.
:40:36. > :40:37.What could Brexit mean for the airline industry?
:40:38. > :40:39.Well, there were warnings during the referendum that a vote
:40:40. > :40:42.to leave might affect the cost of cheap flights to Europe.
:40:43. > :40:45.But, as you'll have realised by now, along with most things to do
:40:46. > :40:47.with Brexit, the reality is a little more complicated.
:40:48. > :40:54.Take a look on the website flightradar and you
:40:55. > :40:56.will see some of the two million-plus take-offs and landings
:40:57. > :41:00.It is an industry regulated in a big way by
:41:01. > :41:05.A group of airlines and airport operators had a meeting with
:41:06. > :41:07.Chris Grayling the Transport Secretary here at the Department for
:41:08. > :41:10.Transport during the summer holidays.
:41:11. > :41:11.Top of their wish list is
:41:12. > :41:15.access to the EU's single market in aviation.
:41:16. > :41:18.I understand easyJet would
:41:19. > :41:21.like a deal where any UK-based airline could fly from any European
:41:22. > :41:25.city to any other European city, as they can do now.
:41:26. > :41:28.And they want a deal done as soon as possible.
:41:29. > :41:29.Maybe even separate from the main Brexit
:41:30. > :41:35.Transatlantic carriers like Virgin are also concerned about
:41:36. > :41:37.what happens to the EU's agreement with the US,
:41:38. > :41:41.which allows European airlines to fly to American cities.
:41:42. > :41:44.Will Brexit Britain have to negotiate its own treaty with
:41:45. > :41:51.Aviation lawyers say deals will have to be done
:41:52. > :41:54.position to fall back on, like the World Trade
:41:55. > :41:57.Organisation provides for