:00:36. > :00:38.Hello and welcome to The Daily Politics.
:00:39. > :00:41.The Government should cut the numbers of EU workers allowed
:00:42. > :00:44.in to Britain to 30,000, once we leave the bloc.
:00:45. > :00:46.So says the campaign group Migration Watch.
:00:47. > :00:51.But opponents say the plan will damage the economy.
:00:52. > :00:54.Voting in the Labour leadership contest has ended -
:00:55. > :00:56.the result will be announced on Saturday.
:00:57. > :00:58.But the stalemate between the party's warring factions
:00:59. > :01:07.The fragile ceasefire in Syria looks all but dead after the US accuses
:01:08. > :01:10.Russia of involvement in an attack on an aid convoy.
:01:11. > :01:13.Meanwhile, a group of MPs criticises the Government's
:01:14. > :01:19.AS MARGARET THATCHER: Betrayed by my one-time
:01:20. > :01:22.friend and colleague, Sir Geoffrey Howe.
:01:23. > :01:25.We speak to the characters of a play focusing on the man
:01:26. > :01:38.All that in the next hour, and with us for the whole
:01:39. > :01:40.of the programme today, the former Labour MP
:01:41. > :01:47.First today, Theresa May delivered her big speech at the United Nations
:01:48. > :01:53.It was her debut set-piece appearance on the world stage.
:01:54. > :01:56.She used the opportunity to send a message that Britain was very much
:01:57. > :02:00.open for business in the wake of the EU referendum.
:02:01. > :02:03.British people voted to leave the EU.
:02:04. > :02:05.They did not vote to turn inwards or walk away from any
:02:06. > :02:11.Faced with challenges like migration, a desire for greater
:02:12. > :02:14.control of their country and a mounting sense that
:02:15. > :02:18.globalisation is leaving working people behind,
:02:19. > :02:21.they demanded a politics that is more in touch
:02:22. > :02:25.with their concerns and bold action to address them.
:02:26. > :02:30.But that action must be more global, not less, because the biggest
:02:31. > :02:33.threats to our prosperity and security do not recognise
:02:34. > :02:38.or respect international borders and, if we only focus on what we do
:02:39. > :02:48.at home, the job is barely half done.
:02:49. > :02:55.Theresa May. Chris Mullin, isn't there a contradiction at the heart
:02:56. > :03:00.of what she says, that, while she recognises many people in the UK
:03:01. > :03:04.felt left behind by globalisation, she said our response needs to be
:03:05. > :03:07.more global, because current problems don't recognise
:03:08. > :03:12.international borders. That's what people voted against. Whether they
:03:13. > :03:17.voted against it or not, and there are many reasons why people voted as
:03:18. > :03:21.they did, she is right. If you take climate change or global migration,
:03:22. > :03:26.these things don't stop at borders. One of the ironies is that those who
:03:27. > :03:32.are most against admitting more refugees or migrants are also the
:03:33. > :03:36.very same people who don't want us to spend anything on overseas aid
:03:37. > :03:39.but actually, one of the things we do with international development
:03:40. > :03:45.aid, is help people stabilise their countries to make them habitable
:03:46. > :03:49.again or, indeed, contribute to maintaining the camps in Jordan
:03:50. > :03:57.Lebanon to stop people coming here. She wants to do more of that. Yes, I
:03:58. > :04:01.agree. As you say, people voted for all sorts of reasons, of course, but
:04:02. > :04:06.there was a theme running through the Brexit vote according to
:04:07. > :04:10.politicians like her, which is that people felt left behind by
:04:11. > :04:16.globalisation, ignored. How is she going to address that? That brings
:04:17. > :04:20.us to the discussion we are going to have later about controlling the
:04:21. > :04:23.number of migrants. That is what I think people did vote for, whether
:04:24. > :04:28.it is good or bad. We can have an argument about the extent to which
:04:29. > :04:31.our economy needs qualified or unqualified people in the years to
:04:32. > :04:34.come and what the numbers should be but I think people did vote for
:04:35. > :04:42.having some limit on it, for better or worse. Perhaps frivolously, she
:04:43. > :04:47.was compared to Gordon Brown. That was for dithering on issues like
:04:48. > :04:52.Hinckley and airport expansion, couldn't make a decision and nor
:04:53. > :04:56.could he, according to the journalist John Redwood. Do you
:04:57. > :05:00.think that is fair? I don't think so because, let's face it, she got
:05:01. > :05:05.elected rather sooner than she thought she would. There were a
:05:06. > :05:09.number of big decisions in the intro and she asked for a few months to
:05:10. > :05:13.give it further thought was given the size of the decision and the
:05:14. > :05:16.implications for the future, I thought it was perfectly rational to
:05:17. > :05:17.have a look at it before she settled in.
:05:18. > :05:20.Now it's time for our daily quiz. The question for today is...
:05:21. > :05:22.In his speech yesterday, Lib Dem leader Tim Farron
:05:23. > :05:24.voiced his admiration for Tony Blair, but which music
:05:25. > :05:26.band did he compare the former Prime Minister to?
:05:27. > :05:40.At the end of the show, Chris will give us the correct answer.
:05:41. > :05:43.A tough permit scheme is being recommended to Theresa May
:05:44. > :05:46.to limit the number of EU workers coming to Britain after Brexit.
:05:47. > :05:50.Migration Watch UK want to cap the number of skilled workers
:05:51. > :05:54.which they say would support UK economic growth by ensuring British
:05:55. > :05:57.employers get the staff they need while putting the brakes on years
:05:58. > :06:03.Just 30,000 skilled EU workers a year
:06:04. > :06:06.should be allowed into Britain, according to the group
:06:07. > :06:09.which campaigns for tighter immigration controls.
:06:10. > :06:14.Migration Watch UK said a tough permit-based plan would keep
:06:15. > :06:18.out unskilled workers, who make up up to 80%
:06:19. > :06:22.of all new arrivals from the European Union.
:06:23. > :06:24.Net migration - those arriving minus those leaving -
:06:25. > :06:29.from the EU is estimated to stand at around 180,000 a year.
:06:30. > :06:35.And Migration Watch said a cap on unskilled workers would cut it
:06:36. > :06:38.The campaign group said there should be no restrictions
:06:39. > :06:42.on tourists, business visitors, students or retired people coming
:06:43. > :06:48.To discuss this are Alp Mehmet from Migration Watch UK
:06:49. > :06:55.and James McCrory, the Executive Director of Open Britain.
:06:56. > :07:03.Welcome to both of you. Let's look at the figures first of all. The
:07:04. > :07:08.current annual net EU immigration figure, those arriving minus those
:07:09. > :07:17.leaving, is 180,000. Your proposal would take 100,000 from that net
:07:18. > :07:21.figure, leaving 80,000. 30,000 of the 80,000 are skilled workers. Who
:07:22. > :07:29.is making up the other 50,000? What we've got at the moment, when we've
:07:30. > :07:33.looked at those who come in over the last ten years, 1.25 million have
:07:34. > :07:37.come in to work. If you compare them to those who come in from outside
:07:38. > :07:42.the EU and how they have had to qualify, then you've got the
:07:43. > :07:49.percentages you've described. 20% come in to the sort of jobs that
:07:50. > :07:53.require a degree level sort of qualification and 80% don't. We've
:07:54. > :07:58.got to get numbers down. That's what the government is mandated to do.
:07:59. > :08:03.Saying it and being able to achieve it requires a forensic look at the
:08:04. > :08:09.figures as to who is coming to do what sort of work. If you are saying
:08:10. > :08:12.there should be no restrictions on tourists, business visitors,
:08:13. > :08:20.students or retired people coming to the UK from the union, do they make
:08:21. > :08:23.up the remaining 50,000? No, no. There are no restrictions on
:08:24. > :08:31.tourists, business people, students, the retired, unlike the Times, who
:08:32. > :08:36.got it wrong today. We are saying there shouldn't be restrictions on
:08:37. > :08:40.those people. That will continue. We want the minimum of disruption. We
:08:41. > :08:44.are not coming out of Europe, we're coming out of the EU. What we are
:08:45. > :08:50.proposing will bring numbers down significantly. We reckon, in the
:08:51. > :08:57.medium term, by about 100,000. Do you agree? No, not surprisingly. I
:08:58. > :09:01.think it would be damaging for our economy, because it would guarantee
:09:02. > :09:05.that we leave the single market and it would also restrict UK businesses
:09:06. > :09:09.from employing the skilled and semiskilled Labour they need. This
:09:10. > :09:14.report suggests that people who come over who are not highly skilled, not
:09:15. > :09:19.engineers, people taking graduate roles, are not making an important
:09:20. > :09:23.contribution to our society, care workers, hospital porters, bus
:09:24. > :09:28.drivers. They are not degree qualified but there are lots of them
:09:29. > :09:33.in this country making a huge contribution, paying taxes, working
:09:34. > :09:36.hard, keeping the economy going and benefiting society. We have had a
:09:37. > :09:42.big report today on the crisis in the care industry. Even ministers
:09:43. > :09:47.who have worked in the area say, if we lost the EU workers in those
:09:48. > :09:51.industries, it would collapse. We've got to get numbers down. That has to
:09:52. > :09:55.happen. This is a sensible and reasonable way of doing it. With
:09:56. > :09:59.regard to care workers in that report, that was saying there was
:10:00. > :10:05.going to be a shortage in years to come. Whatever immigration we have.
:10:06. > :10:09.What I would suggest is, having been involved with parents and in-laws
:10:10. > :10:14.having care over the last ten years, what they could do is pay people a
:10:15. > :10:16.bit more, change their conditions of service so it's more attractive
:10:17. > :10:21.rather than look for the cheap option, the option they can push
:10:22. > :10:28.around and go for overseas workers. Do you accept this is about getting
:10:29. > :10:31.numbers down? If you take the main point, that there has to be a
:10:32. > :10:35.reduction in the number of people coming here from the EU and even
:10:36. > :10:40.from outside it, as a result of the Brexit vote. I accept that people
:10:41. > :10:46.want to see free movement reformed, but just having a crude number, just
:10:47. > :10:50.saying, 30,000, that'll do, isn't the way forward. You get to a Dutch
:10:51. > :10:55.auction on numbers which I do think it's healthy for an open and honest
:10:56. > :10:59.debate. We have looked at the numbers over the last ten years and
:11:00. > :11:03.those who have come in with the sort of skills that industry says it
:11:04. > :11:13.needs only consisted of about 20% of the 1.25 million. Do you accept that
:11:14. > :11:17.figure? Last year alone, the qualifications required to meet
:11:18. > :11:21.Migration Watch's target were larger than the 30,000 they have put the
:11:22. > :11:30.cap on, it was 33,000 even by your estimate. 25,000, and we've added
:11:31. > :11:35.5000 to allow for growth. It's still a small number, when you take
:11:36. > :11:39.180,000. There will be an argument to say, why would you plan to cap
:11:40. > :11:44.the number of migrants Britain needs, in terms of skills, whether
:11:45. > :11:48.it is high skills for engineering or slightly lower skilled in other
:11:49. > :11:55.areas, but you want to have limitless numbers of students?
:11:56. > :12:00.Students from the EU go. We don't know that, we don't know how many
:12:01. > :12:04.people leave the country. Our analysis shows that EU students
:12:05. > :12:09.leave. Non-EU students tend to come and stay. That's a separate issue.
:12:10. > :12:13.In terms of getting the numbers down, there has to be an attempt at
:12:14. > :12:18.taking radical action so people will see the evidence of fewer people
:12:19. > :12:23.coming. I think you can look at reform of free movement as a whole,
:12:24. > :12:28.set specific emergency brakes, tying it to the free movement of Labour,
:12:29. > :12:32.for example. But not a crude thing, 30,000, and if we get one more
:12:33. > :12:37.engineer in November he can't come in. What I think is damaging is that
:12:38. > :12:44.this suggests that, unless you are very highly skilled, you have no
:12:45. > :12:48.role to play in our economy. People who work in our agricultural
:12:49. > :12:52.industry, people in the hospitality industry, people driving buses and
:12:53. > :12:56.working in hospitals and care homes, this report says these people
:12:57. > :12:59.shouldn't be allowed to come to this country and make a contribution and
:13:00. > :13:06.pay their taxes. I can't agree with that. You are talking about manpower
:13:07. > :13:12.and planning. Do you have businesses to set these figures for? Why don't
:13:13. > :13:18.we hear from them? From non-EU, for the last six years, we've had a
:13:19. > :13:23.limit of 20,700 visas, work permits per year. At no point has that
:13:24. > :13:29.figure been reached on an annual basis. Never. Occasionally, one
:13:30. > :13:36.month to another, there have to be carry-over numbers. We know that we
:13:37. > :13:41.are able to bring in the sort of skills that businesses say they
:13:42. > :13:44.want. We have had businesses on here who say they would have liked to
:13:45. > :13:48.bring more people over from outside the EU and they were stopped from
:13:49. > :13:52.doing so, which has meant certain industries have suffered. Why will
:13:53. > :13:59.you not have industries setting the figures? What are you afraid of? I
:14:00. > :14:03.don't think... Turkey being given the opportunity to say whether or
:14:04. > :14:10.not we have Christmas or not is the right way to do it. It's not the
:14:11. > :14:13.approach. What we are saying is they will be up to choose whoever they
:14:14. > :14:18.want so long as it is within certain limits, and we believe those limits
:14:19. > :14:23.are perfectly reasonable. Even Stephen Kinnock, writing in the
:14:24. > :14:28.Guardian yesterday, said we've got to manage migration from the EU in
:14:29. > :14:32.some way. This is a reasonable and generous way of doing it. Both of
:14:33. > :14:35.you agree it's got to be managed, it's about the numbers and how many
:14:36. > :14:41.people we are talking about. If you're not keen for business,
:14:42. > :14:44.turkeys voting for Christmas, to set the limits, at least open to
:14:45. > :14:50.businesses in agriculture about the number of farm workers they need to
:14:51. > :14:54.pick the fruit, for instance, in seasonal weather? All of those who
:14:55. > :14:58.are here doing those jobs now are not going to suddenly disappear
:14:59. > :15:03.overnight. That isn't going to happen. But it's about guarantees.
:15:04. > :15:08.We know it isn't going to happen. Going back to what I said earlier,
:15:09. > :15:13.we need to pay people a bit more and look after them a bit better, then
:15:14. > :15:16.perhaps we will attract from within our own labour force market rather
:15:17. > :15:24.than going overseas. What do you say about the limit on skilled EU
:15:25. > :15:29.workers? It an arbitrary figure but nobody knows how it work out. I
:15:30. > :15:32.assume that Migration Watch isn't wedded to it and if it doesn't look
:15:33. > :15:38.like it is working out, perhaps, let's wait and see, they will agree
:15:39. > :15:42.to adjust it. The interesting thing is what the impact will be an
:15:43. > :15:48.unskilled and low skilled areas. I do actually agree that's one thing
:15:49. > :15:54.that should happen is we should start enforcing the minimum wage and
:15:55. > :15:57.protecting British citizens already doing those jobs and making those
:15:58. > :16:06.jobs more attractive to British citizens.
:16:07. > :16:12.You asked about business a moment ago. One of the things business has
:16:13. > :16:19.been doing at the lower end of the trade is recruiting in the far east
:16:20. > :16:22.or in Eastern Europe. Without even making the jobs available, here.
:16:23. > :16:30.They aren't even on the market here. Then you've got people living, ten
:16:31. > :16:35.people into rooms, and they'll be able to undercut British bus
:16:36. > :16:38.drivers. And that's where the undercutting happens. It's the fact
:16:39. > :16:42.the living costs are so much blubber, they can afford to charge
:16:43. > :16:45.less than those jobs whether they are builders or plumbers and that is
:16:46. > :16:51.where the low skilled end of the jobs market suffers for Brits. I do
:16:52. > :16:54.think anyone is against raising wages in any sector particularly
:16:55. > :17:02.amongst the low paid. It's enforcing it, though. I completely agree that
:17:03. > :17:06.adverts that only advertise in foreign countries before in Britain
:17:07. > :17:10.first, that should be banned. Look at how the relatively low rates of
:17:11. > :17:14.unemployment. The idea we are not benefiting from EU workers in low
:17:15. > :17:18.skilled jobs in agriculture, hospitality and public services is
:17:19. > :17:21.just not true. These people are making a very valuable contribution
:17:22. > :17:27.and to suggest we aren't going to need any of them in the future is
:17:28. > :17:32.ridiculous. If the government listening to you on this? I hope so,
:17:33. > :17:37.yes. Do you have confidence Theresa May will deliver Brexit? She said
:17:38. > :17:42.that in China not so long ago. I believe she will deliver Brexit,
:17:43. > :17:47.yes, absolutely. In a way here we are arguing about the referendum
:17:48. > :17:51.debate, really. What was going on. What we're talking about now is a
:17:52. > :17:55.situation but we are going to leave the EU. What we are proposing is a
:17:56. > :17:57.sensible and measured way of controlling numbers coming in work.
:17:58. > :17:59.Thank you. Let's turn now to the situation
:18:00. > :18:02.in Syria, because the United States has said it holds Russia responsible
:18:03. > :18:05.for a deadly attack on an aid convoy in the Syrian city
:18:06. > :18:08.of Aleppo on Monday. The attack left around 20 civilians
:18:09. > :18:10.dead and has further complicated efforts to maintain a ceasefire
:18:11. > :18:14.in the ongoing civil war. Meanwhile, here, the House
:18:15. > :18:17.of Commons Defence Select Committee has criticised the Government's
:18:18. > :18:20.strategy for combating the so-called The UK has been taking part in air
:18:21. > :18:26.strikes against Islamist militants in Iraq since 2014 and Parliament
:18:27. > :18:30.authorised their extension But one of the main points
:18:31. > :18:36.in the Committee's report is the disparity between the number
:18:37. > :18:38.of UK air strikes between The report says that,
:18:39. > :18:46.since December 2015, UK air strikes have been
:18:47. > :18:50.predominately in Iraq, with 550 attacks, yet just 65 UK
:18:51. > :18:53.airstrikes have happened in Syria In the first two weeks of September,
:18:54. > :19:01.there have been nine UK air strikes in Iraq,
:19:02. > :19:03.mostly near the Iraqi town of Qayyarah, with attacks also
:19:04. > :19:07.in the Iraqi regions There have been two UK
:19:08. > :19:14.air strikes in Syria, at a Daesh strong point in the east
:19:15. > :19:18.of the country and also over In a statement, the Ministry
:19:19. > :19:25.of Defence said: "We have conducted over 1,000
:19:26. > :19:27.airstrikes, which is second only to the US in both countries,
:19:28. > :19:30.and have helped train more As a result, Daesh is losing
:19:31. > :19:39.territory in Iraq and Syria." Let's speak now to our defence
:19:40. > :19:51.correspondent, Jonathan Marcus. What are the main criticisms in the
:19:52. > :19:57.report? Essentially the main criticism is that they point out
:19:58. > :20:02.that this can't be won by military means alone. The fear is that whilst
:20:03. > :20:07.Di Esch, so-called Islamic State, is being pushed back particularly in
:20:08. > :20:11.Iraq but also to an extent in Syria, the fear is that if there isn't a
:20:12. > :20:15.proper political transition in place in both countries then of course,
:20:16. > :20:19.the victory if you want to call it that could be squandered and there
:20:20. > :20:23.will be a vacuum and other, maybe more extreme groups, could take
:20:24. > :20:27.over. There is a clear difference between a rock and Syria and it
:20:28. > :20:31.actually underlies why the overwhelming predominance of air
:20:32. > :20:36.strikes have been in Iraq. In Iraqi have a functioning government, for
:20:37. > :20:40.all of its faults. You have Armed Forces and so on. There it is very
:20:41. > :20:45.much a question of bolstering but the Iraqis are doing, trying to
:20:46. > :20:48.persuade them to be less corrupt and more inclusive, to pursue the sorts
:20:49. > :20:53.of policies their Western allies would like. In Syria it's completely
:20:54. > :21:01.different, not only are you trying to push back Islamic State but you
:21:02. > :21:05.are also trying to remove the Assad regime and back the formation of a
:21:06. > :21:08.new so-called democratic, Western leaning government in the country.
:21:09. > :21:13.But as we've seen through the past few days, the failures of the
:21:14. > :21:17.putative ceasefire and so on, is a hugely tall order. That's what the
:21:18. > :21:21.committee is particularly concerned about. There are difficulties in
:21:22. > :21:27.Iraq but the situation in Syria seems to lack an overall clear
:21:28. > :21:30.political strategy altogether. Does the report then have any suggestions
:21:31. > :21:35.in terms of what the endgame should be as far as Syria is concerned with
:21:36. > :21:39.the civil war raging there? It doesn't have any clear answers and I
:21:40. > :21:43.suppose to be fed to the British government, Britain although it's
:21:44. > :21:46.the second largest contributor of air strikes is clearly a small
:21:47. > :21:51.player compared to the United States. I do think anybody has any
:21:52. > :21:56.clear idea what can be done in Syria. The move at the moment has
:21:57. > :22:00.been to try and get a ceasefire, to stabilise the situation, to relieve
:22:01. > :22:05.some of the besieged areas. And then perhaps in the wake of that to try
:22:06. > :22:09.and get some political and diplomatic dialogue going. The
:22:10. > :22:13.difficulty of course is that the underlying Western aim has all along
:22:14. > :22:18.been essentially the hope that the Assad regime would be pushed aside.
:22:19. > :22:22.Almost a year ago now, the Russian intervention with its airpower and
:22:23. > :22:26.also to some extent operations on the ground, has really altered the
:22:27. > :22:30.dynamics and made sure that the Syrian regime is very much in place
:22:31. > :22:32.for the foreseeable future. Thank you very much.
:22:33. > :22:34.We did ask the Ministry of Defence if a minister
:22:35. > :22:37.was able to talk about this, but no-one was available.
:22:38. > :22:40.Joining us now in the studio is the chair of the Defence
:22:41. > :22:52.Welcome. Just listening to Jonathan there, having a sort of double aim
:22:53. > :23:01.of trying to get rid of Assad and tried to deal with Daesh, which
:23:02. > :23:05.should we be prioritising? There are differences of view. My personal
:23:06. > :23:10.view all along has been that there is no third way in Syria. That is
:23:11. > :23:17.not the view it must be said of the committee as a whole. I believe that
:23:18. > :23:21.the reason why we find so few air strikes, and it's right that there
:23:22. > :23:23.should be few air strikes if we are not sure of the target and who we
:23:24. > :23:31.are supporting, the reason why there are so many in Iraq and so few in
:23:32. > :23:35.Syria, nine to one is the ratio, is that in Iraq we know what we're
:23:36. > :23:38.doing, there is a government we are content to see victorious, there are
:23:39. > :23:46.forces fighting on the ground that can benefit from our air strikes. In
:23:47. > :23:50.Syria we not only want Daesh to lose, we also want Assad to lose as
:23:51. > :23:57.well, and the great dispute about the time when we voted to extend the
:23:58. > :24:02.air strikes from Iraq, which was uncontentious and voted through with
:24:03. > :24:07.a huge majority, into Syria which was much more contentious, was
:24:08. > :24:09.whether there was a third force of 70,000 moderate fighters who would
:24:10. > :24:13.benefit from the air strikes. If there are tens of thousands of
:24:14. > :24:18.moderates, why aren't we doing more air strikes? Do you have a list of
:24:19. > :24:22.who these people could be? Or the government say they are trying to
:24:23. > :24:28.connect with? We repeatedly asked the government to let us have a list
:24:29. > :24:32.of these groups. The government took the view, and a majority of
:24:33. > :24:36.committee members agreed with it, which is that if the government were
:24:37. > :24:48.to confirm which groups we are helping, that would somehow endanger
:24:49. > :24:57.them and assist Assad or I. -- assist Assad or Isil. The report as
:24:58. > :25:01.a whole did conclude that by not naming the groups it casts a degree
:25:02. > :25:06.of doubt as to how real this third force of tens of thousands... You
:25:07. > :25:11.don't believe they exist, do you? I don't. I believe we are in an
:25:12. > :25:16.analogous situation in Syria to what we were in Libya. I voted for the
:25:17. > :25:22.Libyan one because I was told it was air cover to protect the citizens of
:25:23. > :25:27.Benghazi. Had I been told it was to remove the dictator, atrocious
:25:28. > :25:30.though he was, I'd have voted against it just as I did in Syria.
:25:31. > :25:34.The committee of the whole takes the view it would be helpful if we could
:25:35. > :25:37.have more information about this because that would add credibility
:25:38. > :25:42.to the government's position. You take away from this report that we
:25:43. > :25:46.are not actually doing anything in Syria, it really is a fig leaf to
:25:47. > :25:50.the Americans. We are doing this because we are in a rock, it's not
:25:51. > :25:58.actually achieving anything. That has been my view all along. I agree
:25:59. > :26:02.with Julian's analysis. I don't see there are three ways, I think there
:26:03. > :26:07.are two. We surely have learned by now but when you take the lid of one
:26:08. > :26:13.of these regimes, be it a rock, Libya Syria, you take the lid of the
:26:14. > :26:15.fires of hell. Here we are yet again trying to remove an admittedly
:26:16. > :26:23.dreadful regime and perhaps really... There may eventually have
:26:24. > :26:28.to be some sort of division of the country and safe zones for those who
:26:29. > :26:32.are of a different persuasion to the regime. We don't want to see more
:26:33. > :26:35.massacres. The Turks are doing something like that along the
:26:36. > :26:39.border. Do you think the latest fallout from the attack on the aid
:26:40. > :26:47.convoy near Aleppo which the Russians say was not down to the --
:26:48. > :26:54.not done to them, the US said it was. How does that relate to that
:26:55. > :26:59.situation? In relation to that disastrous attack and the other
:27:00. > :27:03.disastrous attack which killed 62 Syrian army forces, which apparently
:27:04. > :27:07.the West was responsible for, those sort of attacks are precisely the
:27:08. > :27:12.result of the fact we haven't basically faced up to the fact that
:27:13. > :27:16.it's hard enough to intervene in a civil war to get one side to win and
:27:17. > :27:20.one side to lose. When you want both sides to lose, you've got to be in
:27:21. > :27:25.dead trouble. Until we can get an agreement with Russia over exactly
:27:26. > :27:30.what we are going to do in Syria, incidence of this sort on both sides
:27:31. > :27:34.are likely to be repeated. Unless you were to send in ground troops?
:27:35. > :27:37.There's no support for that but is that the only way you could deal
:27:38. > :27:41.with the situation which of course we didn't do in Libya? No, that
:27:42. > :27:49.would be entirely the wrong thing to do. The wrong thing that unites all
:27:50. > :27:55.of these Muslim factions against us is to have infidel boots on Muslim
:27:56. > :28:00.territory. The answer is, you can intervene, you can do support, in
:28:01. > :28:07.support of indigenous local forces. That's why it's working in Iraqi but
:28:08. > :28:13.in Syria. Because of course apart from the magical 70,000, who we
:28:14. > :28:18.can't seem to find anywhere, the moderate forces we can't seem to
:28:19. > :28:23.find, apart from that either Assad's side or someone like him is going to
:28:24. > :28:28.win, or the Islamist is going to win. One thing the report does say
:28:29. > :28:36.is the fact that we say we mustn't get too hung up just over this
:28:37. > :28:41.group. Because the al-Nusra Front is if anything a more dangerous threat.
:28:42. > :28:45.We hadn't heard of Isil a few years ago. Once they are disposed of don't
:28:46. > :28:46.think that's the end of the process, there's plenty more out there. Thank
:28:47. > :28:49.you. Now the polls have just closed
:28:50. > :28:52.in the Labour leadership race. But with Jeremy Corbyn the clear
:28:53. > :28:54.favourite to defeat Owen Smith and be re-elected on Saturday,
:28:55. > :28:56.many are focusing instead on the ongoing power struggle
:28:57. > :28:59.between the Labour leader Rule changes proposed
:29:00. > :29:02.by Mr Watson were discussed at a marathon meeting
:29:03. > :29:04.of Labour's National Executive The proposals included a possible
:29:05. > :29:07.return to Shadow Cabinet elections. But, after almost eight-and-a-half
:29:08. > :29:12.hours of talks, the meeting ended So which side holds
:29:13. > :29:16.the upper hand today? Our reporter Mark Lobel has been
:29:17. > :29:30.finding out and joins us now. You spent much of the day outside
:29:31. > :29:36.that meeting. Has any side won it? Tom Watson's attempt to put the band
:29:37. > :29:42.back together it a bum note. The main offer on the table, elected
:29:43. > :29:46.shadow cabinets, seen as a way of bringing dismayed MPs back into the
:29:47. > :29:50.party, a more respectable way for them to return if they were elected,
:29:51. > :29:55.has been kicked into the long grass. There will be another attempt on
:29:56. > :29:58.Saturday night at the NEC meeting at the Labour conference to vote on
:29:59. > :30:04.this, but an attempt to make that the final vote, the knife edge vote
:30:05. > :30:08.was lost by the anti-Corbyn wing of the NEC rather than the pro-Corbyn
:30:09. > :30:13.wing. It looks like that could go on for some time. Many were looking for
:30:14. > :30:17.this measure for party unity, and it goes to show you how important the
:30:18. > :30:22.balance of pro-and anti-Corbyn MP 's are. There was some good news for
:30:23. > :30:26.the anti-Corbyn members, because representatives from the Scottish
:30:27. > :30:30.and Welsh Labour parties are likely to be given two new places on the
:30:31. > :30:35.committee, which will be seen as anti-Corbyn members, which would add
:30:36. > :30:41.to the vote for that site. But we recently had elections at the NEC,
:30:42. > :30:46.so two new pro Corbyn members are about to come in. We are left with a
:30:47. > :30:51.divided ruling body. So do you think that peace will ever break out in
:30:52. > :30:56.Labour? The ballot has just closed in the election and we have just
:30:57. > :31:04.learned that 630,000 people voted in the election, an electorate of
:31:05. > :31:07.640,000, so that turnout is enormous. It's widely expected that
:31:08. > :31:13.Jeremy Corbyn will win. I was talking to the anti-Corbyn wing of
:31:14. > :31:16.the party, so-called centrists, and they were saying the leadership
:31:17. > :31:21.contest should never have been held this early in Jeremy's tenure. They
:31:22. > :31:25.were saying that many of the members have seen this as the Parliamentary
:31:26. > :31:29.Labour Party stabbing Jeremy Corbyn in the back, so it's self-defeating
:31:30. > :31:35.for them. They say they are hearing on the doorsteps that many Labour
:31:36. > :31:40.members now want to see Labour MPs making party unity is a priority, so
:31:41. > :31:44.there will be a lot of pressure on who work counter Corbyn in the party
:31:45. > :31:48.to come into his tent. I am told by the Corbyn camp that we should
:31:49. > :31:52.expect an olive branch to be held out at the conference if he wins
:31:53. > :31:56.next week, and we will be very surprised, I'm told, by the type of
:31:57. > :31:58.people they are asking to come back into his tent. I am waiting with
:31:59. > :31:59.bated breath. Well, we can hear now from someone
:32:00. > :32:02.who was at that marathon meeting. Darren Williams is a member
:32:03. > :32:04.of Labour's NEC and Also here with me in the studio
:32:05. > :32:08.is Luke Akehurst, a former member of the NEC and now secretary
:32:09. > :32:19.of the Labour centrist Luke Akehurst, Jeremy Corbyn has
:32:20. > :32:23.won, presuming he is going to win the leadership. That would be my
:32:24. > :32:29.assumption, that he is going to win on Saturday. And he has won for
:32:30. > :32:33.control of the party as well. I don't think so. I think the decision
:32:34. > :32:40.yesterday that the rule change to give seats on the NEC that are
:32:41. > :32:44.specifically for Wales and Scotland is unlikely to produce people that
:32:45. > :32:47.are his supporters, which throws a spanner in the works of the quite
:32:48. > :32:53.outrageous plan that seems to have been patched to try and sack the
:32:54. > :32:59.general secretary and key staff members. That won't happen. In terms
:33:00. > :33:04.of conference, we already know that, for instance, there won't be a
:33:05. > :33:07.debate on Trident, so none of the big overseas that Corbyn supporters
:33:08. > :33:14.would like to change are going to change for another year, and the
:33:15. > :33:20.delegation -- the conference make-up is quite good for the anti-Corbyn
:33:21. > :33:24.members. You voted against this change, to give the NEC votes to
:33:25. > :33:30.representatives from the devolved administrations in Scotland and
:33:31. > :33:35.Wales. Why? I voted against it because, as far as Wales is
:33:36. > :33:38.concerned, it's an workable. The idea that a front bench Assembly
:33:39. > :33:42.Member or any Assembly Member would be able to go to an NEC meeting in
:33:43. > :33:49.London on a Tuesday when the assembly is sitting and we only have
:33:50. > :33:54.29 AMs is an workable. There is a practical problem. I'm in favour of
:33:55. > :33:59.the principle of Scotland and Wales having ring-fenced representation,
:34:00. > :34:02.but those people should be elected by the ordinary members. You wanted
:34:03. > :34:07.them to be elected by ordinary members. Does that tip the balance
:34:08. > :34:14.of power away from Corbyn and his supporters, that it isn't going to
:34:15. > :34:19.happen? Other proposals are under discussion is -- discussion that
:34:20. > :34:21.were too contentious to be agreed yesterday, but they will be
:34:22. > :34:27.discussed after conference, which will potentially change we made up
:34:28. > :34:32.of the NEC. So I don't think we should see it is just adding two
:34:33. > :34:37.more people for Scotland and Wales. There is more to be done. So it
:34:38. > :34:42.isn't going to throw a spanner in the works in terms of getting rid of
:34:43. > :34:46.the general secretary of the Labour Party, Ian McNicol. Nobody is
:34:47. > :34:49.talking about getting rid of the general secretary. Yesterday, there
:34:50. > :34:55.was a general message that there should be no threat to sack or
:34:56. > :34:59.anything of that nature. Well, there you go. It's been widely reported
:35:00. > :35:06.that there was a meeting at Unite's offices in Esher to plot the removal
:35:07. > :35:10.of key members of staff, and even when an assurance was made at the
:35:11. > :35:15.NEC, Jeremy Corbyn needs to make that very publicly that he has
:35:16. > :35:19.confidence in the general secretary, whose behaviour, I think, has been
:35:20. > :35:23.impeccable during the leadership campaign, trying to uphold the rule
:35:24. > :35:28.book in difficult circumstances. That is what discussed at that
:35:29. > :35:32.meeting in Esher, wasn't it, that there were discussions about getting
:35:33. > :35:38.rid of people who hadn't been legal -- and been loyal to Jeremy Corbyn,
:35:39. > :35:41.including Ian McNicol. I wasn't at that meeting, Jeremy was. He told
:35:42. > :35:45.the meeting clearly yesterday that that wasn't part of the discussion.
:35:46. > :35:53.Do you think that Ian McNicol should stay? Luke Akehurst presented that
:35:54. > :35:56.there is no question about decisions made by officials during the
:35:57. > :36:01.election. A lot of the decisions were controversial, such as the
:36:02. > :36:03.decision to challenge the High Court judgment about members
:36:04. > :36:07.disenfranchised by the six-month freeze date. I don't think you can
:36:08. > :36:14.simply say that every decision made by party officers, with the
:36:15. > :36:21.involvement of... Should he stay or should he go? It's not for me to
:36:22. > :36:25.say. But you have a view? That decision has to be made in the round
:36:26. > :36:30.by the NEC if there are concerns about actions made by party
:36:31. > :36:34.officers. I would not get into talking about individuals. Last week
:36:35. > :36:39.you said the changes to constituency boundaries presented an opportunity
:36:40. > :36:42.to replace Labour MPs with other candidates more in tune with the
:36:43. > :36:45.views of ordinary party members. Can the party come together when senior
:36:46. > :36:53.members like you are effectively calling for a selection? I was
:36:54. > :36:56.saying that, in my view, we should be in a position where elections
:36:57. > :37:02.should be as open as possible and members have a genuine choice. --
:37:03. > :37:06.selections. I was not suggesting a purge of anybody who differs with
:37:07. > :37:11.Jeremy Corbyn. It's a decision for members in every constituency to
:37:12. > :37:15.make. Members in each constituency, when a selection contest comes up,
:37:16. > :37:19.should be able to change from the widest range of candidates. Given
:37:20. > :37:22.the evident disconnect between the views of many of our MPs and
:37:23. > :37:26.ordinary members that we have seen emerging, it would be a positive
:37:27. > :37:31.thing for that choice to be made available. It's not that a purge or
:37:32. > :37:34.a witchhunt, it's about wider democracy. Actually, what he is
:37:35. > :37:39.described is a purge or a witchhunt. It's to frighten MPs into not voting
:37:40. > :37:45.or speaking according to their conscience. And saying, you could
:37:46. > :37:48.sacked by activists, and he can dress it up in whatever technical
:37:49. > :37:55.language he wants, but this is effectively a call for mandatory
:37:56. > :37:59.reselection for every MP. It's a recipe for chaos. How can Jeremy
:38:00. > :38:03.Corbyn be expected to lead the party when there are groups like Labour
:38:04. > :38:10.First actively organising to get rid of him? It's the right of people in
:38:11. > :38:14.a democratic party to want to change the direction of the party it is
:38:15. > :38:17.exactly what left-wing groups like the Labour representation committee
:38:18. > :38:22.did all the time when they disagreed with the direction that Blair or
:38:23. > :38:27.Brown was going in. People cannot put their conscience on ice and not
:38:28. > :38:32.speak up about the fact that they think that Jeremy is leading the
:38:33. > :38:37.party in a disastrous direction. We have a duty, if we believe it is
:38:38. > :38:43.going in the wrong direction, to say so, and he should have listened when
:38:44. > :38:47.MPs no-confidenceed him. We are in this situation because he didn't do
:38:48. > :38:53.the right thing and step down after that vote. What do you say to that?
:38:54. > :38:56.I think that's a very arrogant position. Jeremy Corbyn has the
:38:57. > :39:01.biggest mandated in any leader's history. I am confident he will get
:39:02. > :39:09.a similar mandate as a result of this vote. 172 Labour MPs tried to
:39:10. > :39:13.overturn that mandate. I think we are going to see that their views
:39:14. > :39:16.have been rejected. To return to what Luke Akehurst was saying,
:39:17. > :39:21.nobody including myself is suggesting that anyone who differs
:39:22. > :39:25.from Jeremy Corbyn on matters of policy should be regarded as... But
:39:26. > :39:29.that is what is said publicly, but privately when you speak to people
:39:30. > :39:33.these things have been set in meetings. Of course it isn't the
:39:34. > :39:38.public statement of Jeremy Corbyn or any of those around him, but you
:39:39. > :39:42.have to accept these things have been set in individual constituency
:39:43. > :39:46.meetings. There is an important difference between disagreeing with
:39:47. > :39:49.the leader of the party on policy, nobody is suggesting, as Luke
:39:50. > :39:52.Akehurst was saying, that people shouldn't be true to their
:39:53. > :39:56.consciences. Those disagreements have to be aired. Jeremy Helan did
:39:57. > :40:04.clear that he feels there is room for a wide spectrum. -- Jeremy has
:40:05. > :40:09.certainly made it clear. Where MPs have been consistently and publicly
:40:10. > :40:13.disloyal and hostile, briefing against him in the media and openly
:40:14. > :40:19.plotting against him, I think if I were a party member in those MPs'
:40:20. > :40:25.constituencies, I would be interested in alternative
:40:26. > :40:28.representation. The party membership at the moment is completely
:40:29. > :40:32.unrepresentative of Labour voters, let alone the voters we need to win
:40:33. > :40:36.over to win a general election, so we have people that demographically
:40:37. > :40:40.and politically are not a representative sample of the public,
:40:41. > :40:44.that have lumbered us with a leader who frankly is unelectable and it
:40:45. > :40:50.looks like they want lumber us with unelectable MPs as well. Chris
:40:51. > :40:54.Mullin, we have just had a report which says that Owen Smith, the
:40:55. > :40:59.challenger to Jeremy Corbyn, as appeared to concede repeat. Asked in
:41:00. > :41:03.an interview whether he would serve in a Jeremy Corbyn Shadow Cabinet,
:41:04. > :41:07.Mr Smith at -- Mr Smith said he would not be serving but he would do
:41:08. > :41:13.what he had always done, he would vote Labour lawyerly and served from
:41:14. > :41:19.the backbenches. Should people like Owen Smith, if Jeremy Corbyn has won
:41:20. > :41:22.it, which we expect, go back and served in a Shadow Cabinet? Should
:41:23. > :41:27.those MPs who said they had no confidence serve him? That up to
:41:28. > :41:33.them but they shouldn't spend the next year or two trying to undermine
:41:34. > :41:37.him. -- backed up to them. I respect Jeremy but I am not a Corbyn
:41:38. > :41:40.supporter. I think it's unwise to elect a leader who has the support
:41:41. > :41:47.of perhaps only 10% of the party. But we have now had two elections.
:41:48. > :41:52.If he wins twice, that result has to be respected for the duration. Last
:41:53. > :41:55.time, when he won it by a considerable margin, the plotting
:41:56. > :42:00.and scheming against him started within 24 hours. I just despair if
:42:01. > :42:04.that is going to start all over again. We can't go on like this. The
:42:05. > :42:11.party needs to get its guns facing outwards. There are all sorts of
:42:12. > :42:17.open goal is to be kicked out -- at that require a functioning
:42:18. > :42:22.opposition. Do you believe these claims of entryism, that the people
:42:23. > :42:26.supporting Jeremy Corbyn are not true Labour Party supporters? There
:42:27. > :42:29.might be a bit of it but it doesn't account for the huge numbers that
:42:30. > :42:31.have joined. There has always been a bit of it but it is not a decisive
:42:32. > :42:33.factor. When it comes to internal strife
:42:34. > :42:35.in the Labour Party, Chris Mullin has been there,
:42:36. > :42:37.done that and probably got Ellie Price has been
:42:38. > :42:42.delving into the archives. 22-year-old Chris Mullin stood
:42:43. > :42:47.against the Liberal leader I wouldn't ever want to fight
:42:48. > :42:53.an amorphous slab like perhaps Hull where I lived before,
:42:54. > :42:56.and this strikes me as a very lovely way of beginning
:42:57. > :42:58.a career in politics, But he had to wait another 17 years
:42:59. > :43:03.to start that career as a Labour MP. So in the meantime he set
:43:04. > :43:08.about becoming a journalist, It took him to conflicts in places
:43:09. > :43:12.like Vietnam and Cambodia, and to war zones closer
:43:13. > :43:16.to home like the one waging in the Labour Party
:43:17. > :43:19.in the early 1980s. Chris Mullin was a leading Bennite,
:43:20. > :43:22.and edited Tony Benn's speeches when he stood against Denis Healey
:43:23. > :43:26.to become deputy leader. He also wrote a pamphlet entitled
:43:27. > :43:31.How To Select Or Reselect Your MP. It was fundamentally
:43:32. > :43:32.about democracy, no doubt we were a bit over the top at times,
:43:33. > :43:36.but it was about making leaders When the deputy leadership bid
:43:37. > :43:41.failed he became editor of Tribune, Shifting its direction
:43:42. > :43:46.further to the left, falling out with senior party
:43:47. > :43:49.members along the way. The tradition of Tribune's
:43:50. > :43:53.rebelliousness, which is correct and must be maintained,
:43:54. > :43:57.has moved to the point where it has simply become a vehicle
:43:58. > :44:01.for opposition to another I think what has happened
:44:02. > :44:08.in the last two or three years is it began to enjoy rather a too cosy
:44:09. > :44:11.relationship with the establishment. We suddenly found ourselves
:44:12. > :44:13.in danger of becoming part And I certainly am not keen that
:44:14. > :44:18.that should be the case. It's not good for a campaigning
:44:19. > :44:25.paper, I don't think. But in 1987, Chris Mullin did become
:44:26. > :44:28.part of the establishment, elected as an MP
:44:29. > :44:32.for Sunderland South. It might be a good idea
:44:33. > :44:34.if the United States called By the time Labour got
:44:35. > :44:39.into government in 1997, Chris Mullin was signed up
:44:40. > :44:41.to the New Labour project. He even served as a minister
:44:42. > :44:45.in three departments. His journey from the Bennites
:44:46. > :44:49.to the Blairites is a different approach to that of one
:44:50. > :44:51.of his contemporaries. This picture of the newly-elected MP
:44:52. > :44:54.Jeremy Corbyn was taken in Chris Mullin's garden three days
:44:55. > :45:00.after the 1983 election. Jeremy is a saintly figure
:45:01. > :45:04.of enormous personal integrity, and a man who lives his life
:45:05. > :45:09.in accordance with his beliefs. So for example, if you run into him
:45:10. > :45:13.on a train, as I have done on one occasion,
:45:14. > :45:16.he'll immediately get out his box of sandwiches, which are vegetarian
:45:17. > :45:19.of course, and cut them in half Do you see him as electable
:45:20. > :45:44.as a Prime Minister? You hesitated there but you do feel
:45:45. > :45:51.he is not the right man to lead the party? I do, yes. As I said a moment
:45:52. > :45:56.ago, it's a high-risk strategy in a system that is a parliamentary
:45:57. > :46:00.system to elect a leader who has the support, for good reasons of bad, of
:46:01. > :46:10.only 10% or so of the Parliamentary party. It is a recipe for problems.
:46:11. > :46:14.But actually, isn't this what you've always wanted? A leader who wants
:46:15. > :46:19.party members to be more involved, to have more democracy in the party,
:46:20. > :46:23.that they would make the decisions about who is appointed, who is
:46:24. > :46:29.sitting on the National ruling executive? Why aren't you supporting
:46:30. > :46:33.Jeremy Corbyn? I still support reselection. I'm still a member of
:46:34. > :46:38.the campaign for Labour Party democracy. I've consistently voted
:46:39. > :46:44.to get rid of nuclear weapons. I haven't changed as much as you think
:46:45. > :46:47.I have. But I do think we ought to be in a position to form a
:46:48. > :46:55.government and I am in favour of that. One of the reasons I supported
:46:56. > :46:59.Tony Blair in 94 is, having lost four general elections in a row, my
:47:00. > :47:03.feeling was that we couldn't even take a little punt on the outcome of
:47:04. > :47:08.a fifth general election if we wish to remain relevant. So why is Jeremy
:47:09. > :47:17.Corbyn doing so well? If you cite that he can't win an election and
:47:18. > :47:21.somebody like Tony Blair, but he won elections? He's one internal
:47:22. > :47:25.elections in the party. One thing we have learned is to be popular in the
:47:26. > :47:29.party doesn't necessarily translate into votes in the country. And
:47:30. > :47:32.actually what ordinary punters complain about is not whether
:47:33. > :47:37.somebody is left or right, on the whole they're not that bothered
:47:38. > :47:41.about that. But if you are disunited, they say you are fighting
:47:42. > :47:46.each other, how can you function as a government? That's a reasonable
:47:47. > :47:50.point. You read this pamphlet about the reselection of MPs and you stand
:47:51. > :47:56.by that but isn't the truth now that that is used as a weapon and it's a
:47:57. > :48:02.weapon to oust centrists, in this case, rightly or wrongly, who are
:48:03. > :48:06.deemed disloyal to Jeremy Corbyn. As Len McCluskey has clearly said, that
:48:07. > :48:11.it's not for making the party more democratic, it is a weapon. Both
:48:12. > :48:15.sides have always tried to occasionally undermined their
:48:16. > :48:20.opponents. But actually I was new Labour ahead of my time. Safe seats
:48:21. > :48:26.for life is old label and a contract renewable every five years is new
:48:27. > :48:30.Labour. This situation has not been brought about by people in the
:48:31. > :48:38.Labour Party, it's been brought about by the government's
:48:39. > :48:42.determination to have a boundary is reorganised. That is what has given
:48:43. > :48:49.the opportunity and inevitably some Labour MPs will lose out. But it
:48:50. > :48:53.could be used as a weapon, to take this opportunity... If you look back
:48:54. > :48:58.all of these points were made in the 1980s. Very few people were
:48:59. > :49:04.deselected for ideological reasons. I can think of two in the 1980s.
:49:05. > :49:09.Despite the hysteria in the media, two is all I can think of. Is this
:49:10. > :49:20.situation now worse in your mind than the 1980s or the same? Slightly
:49:21. > :49:23.worse. Nobody ever doubted that Benn was capable of governing. Aren't we
:49:24. > :49:30.supposed to be talking about my memoirs? Go on then, tell us about
:49:31. > :49:33.it. The Hinterland. It's all a thread through, your political
:49:34. > :49:37.journey. You made a political journey, are you saying Jeremy
:49:38. > :49:42.Corbyn hasn't made that political journey? There's no doubt about
:49:43. > :49:47.that. It's about my life, for better or for worse. I believe that the
:49:48. > :49:52.most useful MPs are the ones who have done something before they get
:49:53. > :49:57.elected. Young people come up to be sometimes and say, I'm interested in
:49:58. > :50:02.Parliament, what's your advice? My advice is go away and do something
:50:03. > :50:10.first, and then you might be useful if you get elected. I was 39 when I
:50:11. > :50:13.got elected. I'd been a reporter in Vietnam and travelled all over.
:50:14. > :50:22.Taken part in a major battle against the establishment it about
:50:23. > :50:25.correcting miscarriages of justice. The trouble is there the cult of
:50:26. > :50:31.youth in politics although it has come to a rather grinding halt with
:50:32. > :50:35.the election of Jeremy, hasn't it? Theresa May isn't in her 30s either.
:50:36. > :50:40.Not to say that she's old, of course. Yes you could say leaders
:50:41. > :50:47.are a bit older rather than younger. I'm not against that. The route that
:50:48. > :50:52.happened lot under New Labour, you went to Oxford, studied PPE, got a
:50:53. > :50:56.job working for a minister. You then used your contacts to be levered
:50:57. > :51:01.with patronage into a safe seat and jewel on the front bench or indeed
:51:02. > :51:06.in government by the age of 30. By the time you were in your late 30s
:51:07. > :51:11.very often you burned out. Whereas you are an example of how a career
:51:12. > :51:18.can span the decades! Things are not yet so desperate that they are
:51:19. > :51:23.saying, send for Chris Mullin! As we get used to political life under our
:51:24. > :51:29.second female Prime Minister, memories of our first abound.
:51:30. > :51:32.Not least how she too had Europe to blame for many
:51:33. > :51:35.Her divisions with former Chancellor and Foreign Secretary Geoffrey Howe
:51:36. > :51:37.are revisited in a play currently touring the country.
:51:38. > :51:40.In a moment we'll talk to the playwright Jonathan Maitland.
:51:41. > :51:42.But first Mark Lobel got the hot ticket to
:51:43. > :51:46.Sir Geoffrey Howe, Mrs Thatcher's longest serving colleague
:51:47. > :51:48.throughout her years in power, turned on her in the Commons today.
:51:49. > :51:51.It's rather like sending your opening batsman to the crease only
:51:52. > :51:54.for them to find the moment the first balls are bowled
:51:55. > :51:57.that their bats have been broken before the game by the team captain.
:51:58. > :52:02.I never expected him to say what he said in the way that he did.
:52:03. > :52:05.The surprising events that brought Margaret Thatcher down are closely
:52:06. > :52:06.examined in writer Jonathan Maitland's play.
:52:07. > :52:09.It depicts how the man Denis Healey once compared debating with to being
:52:10. > :52:12.savaged by a dead sheep - the title of this political drama -
:52:13. > :52:15.went on to deliver one of the most effectively brutal Commons
:52:16. > :52:18.Or, as Thatcher, played by Steve Nallon, who provided her
:52:19. > :52:21.voice for Spitting Image, might have put it...
:52:22. > :52:24.AS THATCHER: It was about how I was betrayed, betrayed,
:52:25. > :52:29.by my one-time friend and colleague, Sir Geoffrey Howe, aided and abetted
:52:30. > :52:39.I was stabbed, stabbed in the back and the front.
:52:40. > :52:41.AS SELF: The physicality helps to create the voice,
:52:42. > :52:44.so it's actually much better to be wearing the frock.
:52:45. > :52:47.I'm dressed like this now for rehearsal, but it is good to get
:52:48. > :52:51.What's unique about this play is that it puts Geoffrey Howe
:52:52. > :52:53.centrestage after he finds an increasingly Eurosceptic Thatcher
:52:54. > :53:00.AS THATCHER: Monsieur Delors said that he wanted
:53:01. > :53:01.the European Parliament to be the democratic
:53:02. > :53:04.body of the community, that he wanted the Commission to be
:53:05. > :53:08.the executive and the Council of Ministers to be the Senate.
:53:09. > :53:15.AS SELF: Those three words a story tell.
:53:16. > :53:17.Dead Sheep depicts the moment Geoffrey Howe delivered his
:53:18. > :53:18.resignation note to Thatcher, highlighting their
:53:19. > :53:30.AS SELF: He is divided between loyalty to the values
:53:31. > :53:33.that his wife holds and also to his country and party
:53:34. > :53:40.The production's three-month UK tour will arrive in Birmingham
:53:41. > :53:41.next month, coinciding with the Conservative
:53:42. > :53:45.When you heard Theresa May's first Prime Minister's
:53:46. > :53:47.Questions, did you hear the voice of Thatcher?
:53:48. > :53:51.Mrs Thatcher, towards the end, used to use her glasses to lean
:53:52. > :53:58.She didn't like wearing glasses, so she used take them off and lean
:53:59. > :54:05.Theresa May didn't exactly do that, but she put a hand on the dispatch
:54:06. > :54:16.But, with Europe dominating the agenda once again,
:54:17. > :54:20.this drama reminds us that a Prime Minister should take care.
:54:21. > :54:23.It even brought the Iron Lady down in the end, with a little
:54:24. > :54:37.And the man who wrote the play, Jonathan Maitland, joins me now.
:54:38. > :54:44.Fantastic mimicry going on of Margaret Thatcher. Why a man for the
:54:45. > :54:49.role? He was the best person for the role, actually. It was famously said
:54:50. > :54:58.she was the best man in the Cabinet. He is unbelievable, it's pure
:54:59. > :55:04.Stanislavsky. He's got the 1981 voice, the 1984 voice... He changes
:55:05. > :55:07.with her! One might say, surely we know all of this drama in terms of
:55:08. > :55:12.Margaret Thatcher and Geoffrey Howe, and how she was brought down,
:55:13. > :55:16.there's nothing left to say. You might know it, Jo, but I'm not sure
:55:17. > :55:20.everyone else does. There's been lots of plays and films about her.
:55:21. > :55:24.When I had a chat with John Sergeant he said, you are wasting your time,
:55:25. > :55:29.everyone knows it. But actually I think the Geoffrey Howe 's story is
:55:30. > :55:37.the best bit of the tale. He was the mouse that roared and he ended up
:55:38. > :55:39.stabbing her in the back. He went from being the world's worst speaker
:55:40. > :55:42.to making one of the greatest speeches of all time. Also, his wife
:55:43. > :55:47.couldn't stand Mrs Thatcher and she couldn't stand her. You've got this
:55:48. > :55:52.podgy bloke in between two powerful women. The Iron Lady films treated
:55:53. > :55:57.Geoffrey as a walk one pompous buffoon, he was much more than that.
:55:58. > :56:01.It was devastating in the House at the time. You are saying it makes
:56:02. > :56:05.for great drama. These political events do make for fantastic stage
:56:06. > :56:10.plays? Judging by the reaction of the audiences it makes for great
:56:11. > :56:15.drama and break comedy as well. You've got Margaret telling Geoffrey
:56:16. > :56:21.to shut up in front of Cabinet and he keeps on humiliating her. It's
:56:22. > :56:26.interesting because there were tragedies along the way. The glue
:56:27. > :56:30.that bound them together was the late Ian Gow MP for Eastbourne. In
:56:31. > :56:36.the play he dies which is what happened. He was assassinated by the
:56:37. > :56:40.IRA. You've gone from a seen before whether they are laughing about
:56:41. > :56:46.being at school together, to this terrible tragedy. You had a front
:56:47. > :56:51.row seat to this. Not quite on the front row but I was there, yes. It
:56:52. > :56:57.was a dramatic moment. If you read Jonathan Aitken's biography of
:56:58. > :57:01.Thatcher, it documents how she treated... Actually it's true of
:57:02. > :57:06.Charles Moore as well, it documents how she treated Geoffrey Howe. It
:57:07. > :57:10.was her who humiliated him and this was the payback. She said in front
:57:11. > :57:14.of civil servants, that paper you submitted is twaddle! And the
:57:15. > :57:19.private conversations are interesting. That's the point. I
:57:20. > :57:23.like to think the play personalises politics because politics is all
:57:24. > :57:32.about personalities. I am trying to make the political personal.
:57:33. > :57:35.Geoffrey was quite every man, he was like a plump country solicitor with
:57:36. > :57:39.a really good brain. It's the quiet once you've got to watch! Thank you.
:57:40. > :57:42.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
:57:43. > :57:45.The question was which music band did the Lib Dem leader
:57:46. > :57:47.Tim Farron compare former Prime Minister Tony Blair
:57:48. > :57:48.to in his conference speech yesterday?
:57:49. > :58:08.I am going to go for the Stone Roses. That was a good and educated
:58:09. > :58:12.guess. It is right. I'm not just a pretty face! What do you think about
:58:13. > :58:21.Tony Blair deciding he's going to give up the money, or give up making
:58:22. > :58:24.any more money? To be honest, he runs four charitable trusts, that's
:58:25. > :58:29.where quite a lot of the money has gone. I never see that point made.
:58:30. > :58:39.Yes, he's earned himself a lot of money... Grudging, here! I'm saying
:58:40. > :58:41.he employs something like 180 people and that's where the money has gone,
:58:42. > :58:52.it hasn't all gone into his pocket. Andrew and I will be back at midday
:58:53. > :58:56.tomorrow. From all of us here, goodbye.