22/09/2016 Daily Politics


22/09/2016

Andrew Neil, Jo Coburn and SNP politician John Nicolson discuss English votes for English laws, British troops facing allegations of abuse in Iraq, and Scottish independence.


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 22/09/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

It's been one year since the Government passed a law

:00:40.:00:44.

to ensure "English votes for English laws" at Westminster.

:00:45.:00:46.

But will it make any difference when it comes to big issues

:00:47.:00:49.

There's anger at the treatment of British troops accused of war

:00:50.:00:56.

crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan - but are investigators coming under

:00:57.:00:59.

Following the Brexit vote, there were reports of a rush

:01:00.:01:04.

to a second referendum on Scottish independence.

:01:05.:01:08.

We'll be asking when and if it might happen.

:01:09.:01:12.

It's not the hard left, more the soft left ? yes,

:01:13.:01:15.

you can even bring your teddy to Momentum's new activity

:01:16.:01:17.

We'll be getting the view of children's author Michael Rosen.

:01:18.:01:31.

You could bring your teddy bear, couldn't you? You have more than I

:01:32.:01:35.

have! And with us for the whole

:01:36.:01:36.

of the programme today, He used to be a TV presenter,

:01:37.:01:40.

you know, although he was never as famous as me and JoCo,

:01:41.:01:44.

and that might be why he gave up this life of unstinting

:01:45.:01:47.

sacrifice and public service for all the glamour,

:01:48.:01:49.

fame and riches that I think I've got that

:01:50.:01:51.

the right way round. Welcome to the show,

:01:52.:01:55.

John. First today, the Government has said

:01:56.:01:58.

it is committed to introducing a new law to pardon gay men

:01:59.:02:05.

convicted under historical The legislation has been referred

:02:06.:02:07.

to as the Alan Turing Law, after the World War II code breaker

:02:08.:02:11.

who was pardoned in 2013, decades after he was convicted

:02:12.:02:14.

of gross indecency in 1952. Relatives of Mr Turing,

:02:15.:02:18.

whose work was critical in Allied efforts to read

:02:19.:02:20.

German naval messages, have led a high-profile

:02:21.:02:24.

campaign to secure pardons for the 49,000 other men convicted

:02:25.:02:27.

under those laws. The Government promised to act

:02:28.:02:33.

in last year's election manifesto, and our guest of the day has already

:02:34.:02:35.

introduced a private member's bill to get the Turing Law

:02:36.:02:38.

onto the statute books. Are the proposal from the Government

:02:39.:02:48.

actually going to do what you would like to see in terms of pardoning

:02:49.:02:54.

these 49,000 men? I don't quite know yet. I won the Private members draw,

:02:55.:03:00.

and I decided with Government support that I would introduce the

:03:01.:03:07.

Turing law. The idea is that pardons would be given to all the people

:03:08.:03:12.

found guilty of a crime which is no longer a crime. It was interesting

:03:13.:03:17.

in terms of the politics, because you and Andrew know, I am a new MP,

:03:18.:03:22.

and when I won this, I was invited in to see the Tory whips. You walk

:03:23.:03:27.

down this corridor with posters of great Tory victories on either side,

:03:28.:03:32.

and you are taken into see the deputy Chief Whip. She said, I am

:03:33.:03:36.

keen for this to reach the statute book, if you run with it, there will

:03:37.:03:40.

be no tricks or games from the conservative side. That's

:03:41.:03:47.

reassuring! I felt like a lack -- I was in a scene from House Of Cards.

:03:48.:03:54.

One of the other whips said, you are delightfully naive, Mr Nicolson.

:03:55.:04:01.

Will it get the statute books? I don't know any more than you do

:04:02.:04:04.

about what the Government has said. My bill will be introduced on the

:04:05.:04:10.

21st as a Private members Bill. It is great to forgive all the people

:04:11.:04:15.

who are now dead, but it is kind of sentimental. I am interested in the

:04:16.:04:19.

people who asked alive and who have lived with this for decades. Would

:04:20.:04:26.

that include those people too? Yes, so my bill says that there will be

:04:27.:04:31.

pardons for anyone found guilty, alive or dead, of any crime that is

:04:32.:04:37.

no longer on the statute book. Typically, for example, if you were

:04:38.:04:41.

21 and you had a boyfriend who was 20, you could have been found guilty

:04:42.:04:47.

of having underage sex. We think that is absurd now, but these guys

:04:48.:04:51.

have criminal convictions will stop they lived with that, and it was a

:04:52.:04:57.

great shame for their families. That's right. So I think it is good

:04:58.:05:01.

to pardon those who have died, for the sake of their families, but it

:05:02.:05:05.

is important to pardon those who are still alive. I wonder why it is

:05:06.:05:10.

taking so long. I remember the apology from Gordon Brown in 2009

:05:11.:05:15.

for what happened to Alan Turing and others, and yet here we are in 2016

:05:16.:05:20.

and it is not there get. I made a film in 1992 for the BBC called A

:05:21.:05:26.

Question Of Consent, and I took Edwina Currie to Amsterdam to look

:05:27.:05:31.

at a quality in action. It was the first time she became interested.

:05:32.:05:40.

She had James Anderson -- James Anderton, God's copper. I remember

:05:41.:05:49.

him. His job was to come on to gay men in and if they responded, they

:05:50.:05:56.

would be arrested. It would be called entrapment now. I said it was

:05:57.:06:01.

a prurience thing to want to do with police time. He defended it and said

:06:02.:06:06.

it was the right thing to do. People caught by him still have criminal

:06:07.:06:09.

convictions, and I want to give them some peace. Keypads in touch with

:06:10.:06:18.

what happens with the bill. -- keep us. It is time for our daily quiz.

:06:19.:06:29.

The question for today is about an hour-long documentary

:06:30.:06:31.

It was released online yesterday and it was made

:06:32.:06:34.

At the end of the show, John will give us the correct

:06:35.:06:48.

You hope! I think we know who it wasn't!

:06:49.:07:00.

"English votes for English laws" was the mechanism introduced

:07:01.:07:02.

by David Cameron's government to answer concerns about the ability

:07:03.:07:04.

of Scottish MPs to veto legislation that applied only

:07:05.:07:06.

It's known at Westminster by the menacing-sounding acronym

:07:07.:07:10.

Evel, and it's been in place for a year.

:07:11.:07:13.

Theresa May's government says it is going to review the

:07:14.:07:17.

So, what exactly is it, and is it working?

:07:18.:07:23.

Think back two years ago to the morning after the Scottish

:07:24.:07:26.

David Cameron stood on the steps of Downing Street and said

:07:27.:07:31.

new powers for Scotland should be balanced by "English

:07:32.:07:37.

It was an attempt to answer the so-called "West Lothian

:07:38.:07:41.

Question", which concerns Scottish MPs voting on matters that

:07:42.:07:43.

Under rules introduced last October, the Speaker, John Bercow,

:07:44.:07:48.

now decides if each new law applies only to England,

:07:49.:07:54.

A new stage in the law-making process was also created,

:07:55.:08:00.

the Legislative Grand Committee, where only MPs from

:08:01.:08:04.

The changes came into effect in January.

:08:05.:08:08.

So far, the Speaker has certified 11 bills under what is known as Evel,

:08:09.:08:13.

including on housing and policing and crime.

:08:14.:08:18.

And there have been 14 divisions on other pieces of legislation

:08:19.:08:21.

in which only English or English and Welsh

:08:22.:08:23.

But the controversy hasn't gone away.

:08:24.:08:29.

The Government was forced to shelve a vote last summer on relaxing

:08:30.:08:31.

the fox-hunting ban in England and Wales,

:08:32.:08:33.

after the Scottish National Party pledged to vote

:08:34.:08:35.

Now, there are suggestions the SNP could attempt to block

:08:36.:08:41.

Theresa May's plans for grammar schools in England.

:08:42.:08:45.

And the Government is now carrying out a review of the process.

:08:46.:08:49.

Leader of the Commons David Lidington told MPs the details

:08:50.:08:51.

Well, to discuss this, we're joined by the Conservative MP

:08:52.:08:59.

Chris Philp, and of course, John Nicolson is still here.

:09:00.:09:06.

Chris, is it working? It is a good start in the sense that it means

:09:07.:09:13.

that for the first time English MPs have effectively a veto over

:09:14.:09:16.

measures that only affect England, which did not exist before, and it

:09:17.:09:24.

is a small step to stop the unfairness whereby Scottish MPs can

:09:25.:09:27.

vote on matters that affect only England but England's's MPs don't

:09:28.:09:33.

have the reciprocal right. When you say a beta, what do you mean? I

:09:34.:09:36.

thought the purpose was not a veto but -- veto. It is still subject to

:09:37.:09:49.

a vote by the whole house. Even if English members vote for something,

:09:50.:09:52.

it could still be voted down by the house as a health. It has not

:09:53.:09:56.

happened so far, but it is a power of veto, not to positively

:09:57.:10:02.

legislate. The ban on fox hunting, which was only for England and

:10:03.:10:06.

Wales, the Government withdrew that when the SNP said they would vote

:10:07.:10:11.

against it. Is that not a huge hole in the middle of what you're trying

:10:12.:10:16.

to do? In that situation, if the whole house could vote against it,

:10:17.:10:19.

it would not progress. Nicola Sturgeon said clearly in February 20

:10:20.:10:26.

oh that's right 2015, the SNP members would not be voting on

:10:27.:10:33.

England only matters. Come July 2015, just a few months later, she

:10:34.:10:38.

did a U-turn and decided that fox hunting in England was of such

:10:39.:10:41.

critical importance in Scotland that they would vote on it after all,

:10:42.:10:45.

which I thought was shamelessly opportunistic. What was the logic of

:10:46.:10:51.

the SNP voting on it? Did you worry that you would be inundated with

:10:52.:10:54.

leaking Fox's? PHONE RINGS

:10:55.:10:57.

I was inundated with Tory MPs asking us to vote on that, actually. A lot

:10:58.:11:06.

of people don't realise how many Conservative -- I was inundated with

:11:07.:11:13.

Tory MPs. People don't realise how many Conservative MPs were against

:11:14.:11:16.

it. She did change her mind, Nicola Sturgeon, which I think politicians

:11:17.:11:22.

are allowed to do. My view was, I am strongly against blood sports, and I

:11:23.:11:26.

thought we were right to vote on it. Although you mention Fox's crossing

:11:27.:11:33.

the border in jest, the hunt do not respect the border. There used to be

:11:34.:11:42.

a rule which was broadly adhered to by the Scottish Nationalists that

:11:43.:11:47.

you didn't vote on what you would regard as England only matters. That

:11:48.:11:51.

seems to have gone by the wayside. What is the rule now? Since I have

:11:52.:11:59.

been in the House of Commons, the issue as always been whether or not

:12:00.:12:05.

it has a knock-on financial effect, with the exception of the fox

:12:06.:12:09.

hunting one which you raise. I say to you why we said we would vote on

:12:10.:12:13.

that. You could not have carried the Tory backbenches on it anyway, in

:12:14.:12:19.

errant irony. A Barnett consequential would be the thing we

:12:20.:12:24.

would vote on. If it comes to the House, will you vote on Theresa

:12:25.:12:27.

May's plans on grammar schools for England? We don't know yet. It will

:12:28.:12:33.

depend on whether there are financial implications or not.

:12:34.:12:38.

Whether it is done on the existing education budget or a bit more is

:12:39.:12:41.

added to the budget to greatly schools, which of course you would

:12:42.:12:45.

get benefit from, even though you want be introducing grammar schools?

:12:46.:12:52.

Where would the negative consequential be? I will have to see

:12:53.:12:57.

the detail, which I don't yet know. You are kind of making it up as you

:12:58.:13:04.

go along. No, really. The financial implications are key. Can you point

:13:05.:13:08.

me to other examples where the SNP has intervened? It is not in our

:13:09.:13:16.

voting record in the last year. Sunday trading was something you

:13:17.:13:20.

were accused of turning into an opportunistic example of voting on

:13:21.:13:23.

something that would not affect you directly. It did not go beyond

:13:24.:13:28.

preliminary discussions. There was a vote on it, and the SNP voted

:13:29.:13:34.

against the Government's motion. As a result, Sunday trading laws in

:13:35.:13:37.

Croydon had been affected by your vote. I can't vote on Sunday trading

:13:38.:13:44.

in your constituency, so it is not fair. Barnett consequential are made

:13:45.:13:48.

up as a tiny figleaf to excuse basically troublemaking. I like it

:13:49.:13:55.

that if we don't help you get your legislation through we are

:13:56.:13:58.

troublemakers. You can't carry your backbenches. They are hostile. That

:13:59.:14:06.

is his problem. It is his problem. You are not there to help the Tory

:14:07.:14:10.

party, so why are you making the point? Because he is talking as if

:14:11.:14:15.

the Tory party is united on these issues and it is only a bunch of

:14:16.:14:18.

troublemakers in the air sent P Hu... There could be an issue. -- in

:14:19.:14:29.

the SNP who... Do you agree that if a vote on grammar schools comes

:14:30.:14:35.

before the Commons and it is clearly an English only matter, if the

:14:36.:14:38.

Scottish Nationalists are able to vote under the EVEL rules, there is

:14:39.:14:45.

a coach and horses through EVEL that makes it relevant? It was only ever

:14:46.:14:52.

a veto, but it would expose the weakness you are talking about. It

:14:53.:14:56.

would mean that English MPs alone cannot get something through. It

:14:57.:14:59.

would be good to strengthen the reform not to make it just a power

:15:00.:15:03.

of veto but a power of legislation as well, where the Scots did not

:15:04.:15:08.

have a veto. On fox hunting, I may well have voted against it, as you

:15:09.:15:12.

did or would have done. That is not the point. The point is that it is

:15:13.:15:18.

not fair for Scottish MPs to vote on matters that do not affect them at

:15:19.:15:20.

all. Can I just clarify - is it your

:15:21.:15:30.

desire to toughen this up? Well, I think there is a case for looking at

:15:31.:15:38.

that. If the SNP show... Governments are always tinkering. But I think if

:15:39.:15:43.

the SNP respect the spirit of what is intended and leave the grammar

:15:44.:15:47.

school legislation and similar things alone, then I think we could

:15:48.:15:51.

say the system is working. If on the other hand they abuse the current

:15:52.:15:55.

arrangements, and I would put it as strongly as abuse, then we need to

:15:56.:16:03.

look at it. I'm not sure what that means you should do! Because this is

:16:04.:16:07.

very complicated, this business. I think it was William Hague, of

:16:08.:16:12.

course, he's not there any more, but he put it together. If this is the

:16:13.:16:16.

way you want to go roster whether that's right is another matter - but

:16:17.:16:21.

if it was the way you wanted to go, what would be wrong with the Speaker

:16:22.:16:26.

designating a bill as England only, and you simply say, Scottish MPs

:16:27.:16:30.

cannot vote on that matter? That's effectively what I'm suggesting we

:16:31.:16:34.

would need to look at if they, as it were, misbehave and abuse the

:16:35.:16:40.

current system. The danger is that you start creating an English

:16:41.:16:45.

Parliament by the back door. You need to think carefully before you

:16:46.:16:49.

tinker with the constitution. Scotland has got a parliament, Wales

:16:50.:16:52.

has got a parliament. We're all being moved out of the crumbling

:16:53.:16:56.

House of Commons. It's the perfect time for you to set up an endless

:16:57.:16:59.

Parliament and resolve this issue. And place it in the north of

:17:00.:17:03.

England? Which would be even more fabulous. Some would say we have got

:17:04.:17:10.

enough Parliaments already. You're creating more lords, you will have

:17:11.:17:15.

more lords than MPs. Cut them. Whether Scotland ends up independent

:17:16.:17:20.

or not, the whole trend of British constitutional policy is for further

:17:21.:17:24.

devolution - devolution to Scotland, more powers for Wales and Northern

:17:25.:17:28.

Ireland and devolution to some extent, although more

:17:29.:17:31.

administrative, within England itself, in Manchester and all the

:17:32.:17:36.

rest of it. If that's the direction of travel, which it seems clear it

:17:37.:17:40.

has been since before Mr Blair, would it not make sense to look at

:17:41.:17:46.

an English Parliament? As I say, I think you mess around with the

:17:47.:17:51.

constitution with caution. These are complicated, long-standing

:17:52.:17:53.

traditions. We have enough politicians already, local councils,

:17:54.:17:56.

county councils, a huge number already. The reason the SNP are keen

:17:57.:18:01.

to see an English parliament is because they think it will pick the

:18:02.:18:05.

ties... I don't think you're giving me friendly advice, I think you're

:18:06.:18:08.

trying to unpick the ties. Anyway, we've run out of time! I'm just

:18:09.:18:17.

saying it's a good idea. We will come back to Evel, however you

:18:18.:18:20.

pronounce it. Evel sounds less sinister! And anyway, you don't

:18:21.:18:25.

spell evil like that! Theresa May has been under pressure! You might

:18:26.:18:33.

pronounce it like that! She has been to a grammar school, hasn't she? No,

:18:34.:18:38.

actually! Theresa May has been under

:18:39.:18:41.

pressure this week to scrap the Iraq Historic Allegations Team,

:18:42.:18:43.

which is handling some 1,500 allegations of murder,

:18:44.:18:46.

abuse and torture carried out by British soldiers

:18:47.:18:48.

during the conflict in Iraq. This morning's Daily Telegraph

:18:49.:18:50.

reports that a further 550 historic allegations of crimes committed

:18:51.:18:52.

by British troops in Afghanistan are also under investigation,

:18:53.:18:54.

leading to claims from senior political and military figures that

:18:55.:18:56.

many of the allegations The prime minister was asked

:18:57.:18:58.

about the claims on her trip to the United Nations this

:18:59.:19:02.

week, and she said... "We should all be proud

:19:03.:19:06.

of our armed forces." We can be proud of the disciplined

:19:07.:19:08.

way in which our armed Ihat, the Iraq Historic Allegations

:19:09.:19:27.

Team, will be able to focus on cases where there may be

:19:28.:19:31.

questions of allegations." Well, we're joined

:19:32.:19:34.

now by Tim Collins. He led the 1st Batallion Irish

:19:35.:19:37.

Regiment in Iraq, and he has said that many of the allegations are

:19:38.:19:43.

being made by "parasitic lawyers". Welcome to the programme - how do

:19:44.:19:53.

you distinguish between a legitimate and vexatious claim? Well, I think

:19:54.:19:56.

that throughout the conflict, not just in Iraq but in Afghanistan as

:19:57.:20:01.

well, and remember we also have large caseload of investigations

:20:02.:20:04.

from Northern Ireland, is Russian forces operations there. And I think

:20:05.:20:09.

certainly looking at Iraq, the military police on the ground have

:20:10.:20:15.

already investigated these things. But if someone saw an opportunity to

:20:16.:20:20.

make a fast buck, and that was facilitated by government, and now

:20:21.:20:23.

it has become a runaway train. When you look at the depth and the

:20:24.:20:26.

complicity of the lies that we are told in these enquiries, you have to

:20:27.:20:31.

say, enough. At it is difficult to distinguish between the two - you

:20:32.:20:37.

don't I presume want to shop down the jet claims of abuse and torture

:20:38.:20:41.

as per international treaties wanted it is a bit like, do you keep

:20:42.:20:44.

looking at these things until you get the answer you want, like the

:20:45.:20:48.

referendum? You have described it as an industry. It is an industry. And

:20:49.:20:54.

in terms of the numbers cases reported today, 550 - is that what

:20:55.:20:58.

makes it an industry as well as the money that's involved? Well, I think

:20:59.:21:04.

again, it's a runaway train. There is 550 cases, 157 complaints, ?7.5

:21:05.:21:10.

million has been put into its. There's 124 MPs investigating it. So

:21:11.:21:15.

far they have dismissed 16 cases and there has not been a single case of

:21:16.:21:19.

wrongdoing found. But would it be right not to look at them at all? If

:21:20.:21:24.

you're saying this is an industry... They're look that at a certain

:21:25.:21:29.

level. The bottom line is, and I think it reaches a wider spectrum,

:21:30.:21:36.

that this industry depends on applying the rule which applies on

:21:37.:21:38.

the street here in London to the battlefield elsewhere. If that's

:21:39.:21:43.

what we want, then we should not be deploying troops. And furthermore, I

:21:44.:21:47.

think it is now got to a point where we are about to see the worm

:21:48.:21:51.

turning. Think there is going to be military people bringing cases

:21:52.:21:54.

against the Government for harassment, and then it is going to

:21:55.:21:58.

turn into an awful dogfight. The problem is, the leadership of the

:21:59.:22:02.

military have so lost confidence of the rank and file, it might even be

:22:03.:22:06.

time that we need a union in the military to start dealing with this,

:22:07.:22:09.

because that's what would happen in industry. If we're going to apply

:22:10.:22:13.

industry standards, then we've got to apply unions. If you don't want,

:22:14.:22:17.

as you say, the laws of the street, what levels of law being applied to

:22:18.:22:21.

troops should be there? Well, what we've done for the last couple of

:22:22.:22:25.

hundred years, we have military law. It's what we did in the Second World

:22:26.:22:29.

War, it's what we did in Korea. We've moved the goalposts and

:22:30.:22:33.

discovered why we shouldn't have moved the goalposts - it's time to

:22:34.:22:37.

move them back. What would your response be? The law society has

:22:38.:22:39.

responded, saying that everybody needs protection. And some of these

:22:40.:22:44.

cases are being put forward by the most vulnerable. And there have been

:22:45.:22:49.

cases of alleged torture and abuse by British troops which need to be

:22:50.:22:53.

investigated, and they've got a point? They do have a point, because

:22:54.:22:58.

Tim also has a point - we have a duty of care to these soldiers,

:22:59.:23:01.

these very young soldiers. Many of them are going from the UK, they

:23:02.:23:06.

have never been abroad, and suddenly they are expected to switch roles,

:23:07.:23:10.

aren't they, from being warriors to be in police, in very different

:23:11.:23:14.

circumstances? Tim knows better than anybody else how difficult it is to

:23:15.:23:18.

tell these young soldiers that although they've been fighting an

:23:19.:23:25.

enemy, under all circumstances they've got to treat the enemy with

:23:26.:23:30.

respect. I think it's very important for us to remain there that we have

:23:31.:23:34.

a duty of care to these soldiers. Of course we must absolutely respect

:23:35.:23:39.

the law. Equally, we must run with a terrible strain the soldiers have

:23:40.:23:43.

been under. But that is the onus on the military, to train the armed

:23:44.:23:47.

forces so that they understand that, as well as to protect them from any

:23:48.:23:51.

miscarriage of justice which might be thrown their way? There not being

:23:52.:23:54.

protected from miscarriage of justice. Is that because the

:23:55.:23:58.

military isn't doing it? The military commanders are so

:23:59.:24:00.

frightened of the lawyers. Of course the lawyers are the ones who will

:24:01.:24:04.

gain from this. Of course the law society want that in their pocket.

:24:05.:24:08.

The bottom line is, it's easier for a commander now to take a risk with

:24:09.:24:15.

a soldier called life, and lose a soldier dead, that can be explained.

:24:16.:24:18.

But if you take the opportunity to protect your men and you do the

:24:19.:24:20.

wrong thing, you will go to court. That can't be right. The balance has

:24:21.:24:25.

tipped, according to Tim Collins, so how do you redress it? There have

:24:26.:24:30.

been much publicised cases people dying in military custody, one of

:24:31.:24:34.

them many years ago, back in 2003, and a public inquiry said it was an

:24:35.:24:38.

episode of serious, gratuitous violence. It's important to

:24:39.:24:43.

remember, it's not the law versus the army. I've interviewed many,

:24:44.:24:46.

many soldiers, and decent, honourable soldiers are not

:24:47.:24:50.

supporting the bad apples. Where there have been cases of abuse or

:24:51.:24:54.

illegality, soldiers want these to be rooted out. Soldiers want these

:24:55.:24:58.

people to be prosecuted. Or accusations of cover-ups? Soldiers

:24:59.:25:03.

do not want there to be a cover-up. When they behave honourably, they

:25:04.:25:06.

want to be defended by their commander, and where there are bad

:25:07.:25:09.

apples, they want them to be uncovered. You make a very valid

:25:10.:25:14.

point. These people are not turning up at a police station in Iraq or

:25:15.:25:17.

Afghanistan to complain. These allegations are all being made by

:25:18.:25:21.

someone from within the military, to say they saw something, and that's

:25:22.:25:24.

when the vultures come in to start picking at the corpse. I take your

:25:25.:25:29.

point that people in the military are more frightened of the lawyers

:25:30.:25:35.

than they would be, perhaps. Whistle-blowers, reporting these

:25:36.:25:40.

things. But the point is, the chap we were talking about was a

:25:41.:25:44.

notorious bomb maker. He is looking for compensation from our courts, a

:25:45.:25:47.

reward for killing soldiers. Are we going to give him that? Yes, we

:25:48.:25:52.

probably are. In terms of the amount of money that's been spent, six will

:25:53.:25:55.

say, it's costing millions in the context of a war which is costing

:25:56.:25:59.

billions is that not a small price to pay to make sure human rights and

:26:00.:26:04.

international law is upheld. In my house, I tell my children to turn

:26:05.:26:07.

the lights off to stop wasting money. I don't care if it's one like

:26:08.:26:12.

or every light in the house. You don't leave the tap running, this is

:26:13.:26:15.

public money, it can't be wasted. What do you think should happen,

:26:16.:26:19.

then? How do you stop this industry spreading? It's a very difficult

:26:20.:26:25.

question. We've seen a huge rise in ambulance chasers in the last 25 in

:26:26.:26:29.

30 years, it was not something that I remember from years before. I

:26:30.:26:34.

think Tim is fundamentally right. I think soldiers have got to feel with

:26:35.:26:37.

certainty that when they go to their commanding officer, they will be

:26:38.:26:42.

taken seriously. If they whistle-blower, they will be

:26:43.:26:44.

defended, it will not be considered dishonourable. The military has got

:26:45.:26:49.

to protect its own, and the legal system also has got to protect

:26:50.:26:55.

soldiers and also, where necessary, victims. Thank you.

:26:56.:26:57.

Now, leaked documents published today show that

:26:58.:27:01.

new Home Secretary Amber Rudd used to be a director of two offshore

:27:02.:27:04.

There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by Mrs Rudd, but her critics say

:27:05.:27:09.

the revelations are embarrassing for the Government, which has

:27:10.:27:11.

prioritised cracking down on tax havens.

:27:12.:27:16.

A spokesperson for the home secretary told the Guardian that it

:27:17.:27:21.

is a matter of public record that Amber had a career in this area

:27:22.:27:23.

before joining politics. Joining us now is Molly Scott Cato

:27:24.:27:25.

MEP for South-West England, and a member of the European

:27:26.:27:28.

Parliament's inquiry committee Molly Scott Cato, what has Amber

:27:29.:27:44.

Rudd Dunne? We have heard that she was a director of two of these

:27:45.:27:48.

companies, notorious tax havens. So what we're calling for a day is for

:27:49.:27:52.

Amber Rudd to come and make a much fuller statement, probably a

:27:53.:27:55.

statement which include details of what the directorships was about and

:27:56.:27:59.

how much money she made from them. The suspicion is, when people set up

:28:00.:28:02.

a company in the Bahamas, they're not doing it because... They are

:28:03.:28:06.

doing it because it is at the heart of a nexus of tax avoidance and it

:28:07.:28:10.

is totally inappropriate for a government minister to be involved

:28:11.:28:13.

in something like that. Do you have evidence that Amber Road was

:28:14.:28:17.

involved in tax avoidance or tax evasion through these directorships?

:28:18.:28:19.

These are the questions that need to be answered. Do you have evidence?

:28:20.:28:24.

We have evidence that she was eye rector of two asset management

:28:25.:28:27.

companies. That in itself is not illegal but it does not smell right,

:28:28.:28:31.

when Theresa May came into power, she said you wanted to work for the

:28:32.:28:35.

many, not the few. She was going to clean up capitalism and so on. I

:28:36.:28:38.

think she needs to be asking Amber Rudd questions and we need more

:28:39.:28:42.

information in the public domain. You have said that it is difficult

:28:43.:28:46.

to see how the Prime Minister can continue to have confidence in Amber

:28:47.:28:49.

Rudd, but you can give us no examples this morning of any

:28:50.:28:52.

illegality or any dodgy tax work by Amber Rudd, so why? What evidence do

:28:53.:29:00.

you have? Is this just an attempt to get some publicity? What evidence to

:29:01.:29:05.

you have that she has done anything wrong? An awful lot of this is about

:29:06.:29:10.

appearance, and the appearance here is all wrong. The companies were

:29:11.:29:13.

based in the Bahamas. There's reasons for that... It was 1998!

:29:14.:29:19.

That's right. It is historic evidence. And the law on tax

:29:20.:29:24.

avoidance was totally different from what it is now! It comes together to

:29:25.:29:29.

bring a picture of a government which is not living up to the

:29:30.:29:32.

standards it set itself. If Amber Rudd can come forward and defend

:29:33.:29:36.

these allegations, let her do that. This government says it is focused

:29:37.:29:41.

on tax transparency, and ending tax avoidance, but we have someone who

:29:42.:29:46.

came forward to doom defend David Cameron where his name cropped up in

:29:47.:29:50.

these allegations, but she did not say anything about herself at that

:29:51.:29:54.

time. So because somebody was a director of a company for two years

:29:55.:29:58.

over 16 years ago, that makes them unfit to be a government minister,

:29:59.:30:02.

even though you can bring no sense of illegality or wrongdoing to this

:30:03.:30:07.

argument? You may think that's fine, Theresa May may think it's fine, but

:30:08.:30:11.

I can tell you, the people I represent are scandalised that this

:30:12.:30:15.

sort of behaviour goes on, whether it's rich companies all rich

:30:16.:30:21.

individuals avoiding tax. But do you have any evidence that she actually

:30:22.:30:24.

earned any money from these two offshore funds for two years?

:30:25.:30:31.

That is what protects people, secrecy. She was encouraging

:30:32.:30:39.

transparency. Should you not have encouraged her to come forward

:30:40.:30:41.

before you deigned to call for the Prime Minister to get rid of her?

:30:42.:30:45.

The fact she has been the director of two companies in the Bahamas is

:30:46.:30:50.

bad enough, because it has the wrong type of tone. That this qualifies

:30:51.:30:55.

even though it was 16 years ago and there was no issue of illegality? It

:30:56.:31:01.

is a question for Theresa May to answer. I am asking you because you

:31:02.:31:07.

brought it up. It is important to be critical of Government and allow

:31:08.:31:10.

them to account their past behaviour as well as their present behaviour.

:31:11.:31:14.

I am not impressed by a senior member of the Government profiting

:31:15.:31:20.

from activity in a tax haven. So if we find that any Green party member

:31:21.:31:25.

has had an ass -- an historic connection with offshore tax havens,

:31:26.:31:35.

going back 15, 20 years, they would have to leave the Government or the

:31:36.:31:43.

party? Surely the attitude is the same. If it is wrong to do it if

:31:44.:31:47.

you're a Government minister, it must be wrong if you are Ray Green

:31:48.:31:51.

activist campaigning against tax avoidance. Of course it is wrong.

:31:52.:31:59.

Amber Rudd is supposed to be upholding high standards of this

:32:00.:32:02.

new, clean form of capitalism that works for us all, and her past

:32:03.:32:06.

business record does not live up to it. She has called for reforms on

:32:07.:32:10.

the offshore system now. She says it is important and as you will know,

:32:11.:32:16.

since 2000, there have been huge changes to make tax havens more

:32:17.:32:21.

transparent. There are OECD agreements, EU agreements. You are

:32:22.:32:25.

on the committee, so you must know. She herself has said it is time that

:32:26.:32:31.

we put 25 new measures in place by 2021 to get transparency on tax

:32:32.:32:36.

matters. What is your problem? The words sound good, but current and

:32:37.:32:41.

past actions don't live up to them. Can you let me get to the end of

:32:42.:32:50.

one... The Government has taken the lead on OECD recommendations. That

:32:51.:32:55.

is action. The recommendations don't go far enough. We need full

:32:56.:32:58.

information to come out, and we still have tax havens where the

:32:59.:33:03.

information is being concealed, and there are still close relationships

:33:04.:33:07.

between those havens and the City of London. That is what does not smell

:33:08.:33:11.

right from a Government that says it will set itself higher standards. If

:33:12.:33:15.

you discover that a Green party donor has had legitimate and legal

:33:16.:33:22.

directorship of an offshore company an attack saving, will you hand the

:33:23.:33:27.

money back? If it were down to me, I would. It is not legitimate to

:33:28.:33:34.

accept money who it -- money from people who have been involved in tax

:33:35.:33:39.

havens. Even if it were 20 years ago? We all, in public life, need to

:33:40.:33:48.

live up to the higher standards and we need to expect the highest

:33:49.:33:52.

standards from donors. This is the Home Secretary, someone who sets the

:33:53.:33:57.

tone. She has nothing to do with tax policy. She is one of the key

:33:58.:34:01.

ministers in Government. I do think it is good enough. Let's hear from

:34:02.:34:05.

her and let the public decide. You have already made up your mind. The

:34:06.:34:11.

public are not happy with people with that level of responsibility

:34:12.:34:16.

acting in any way that smacks of tax avoidance. There is a great deal of

:34:17.:34:20.

unhappiness out there on this issue. Thank you for joining us.

:34:21.:34:23.

Now, there's still plenty of speculation in Scotland

:34:24.:34:25.

if and when Nicola Sturgeon might call for a second

:34:26.:34:28.

Immediately after the Brexit vote, the First Minister said a second

:34:29.:34:31.

referendum was "highly likely", but with the polls not showing

:34:32.:34:34.

clear public support, in recent days it's been suggested

:34:35.:34:36.

that the SNP has put another vote on the back burner.

:34:37.:34:38.

Well, we're joined now by our Scotland Editor, Sarah Smith.

:34:39.:34:41.

Nice to see you again. What do the polls say at the moment on Scottish

:34:42.:34:57.

independence? If Nicola Sturgeon was relying on a Brexit bounce to in

:34:58.:35:04.

increase support for independence, she will be disappointed. There was

:35:05.:35:10.

a poll showing support independence over 50% just after the Brexit vote.

:35:11.:35:15.

The most recent poll was published on Sunday, to coincide with the

:35:16.:35:19.

second anniversary of the independence referendum, and it

:35:20.:35:23.

showed support at 48% of top it is not easy for the First Minister to

:35:24.:35:25.

make a decision because she has previously said she would not want

:35:26.:35:30.

to call another referendum unless there was sustained support at

:35:31.:35:33.

around the 60% mark. We know that polls are not always entirely

:35:34.:35:37.

accurate, but if it is polling below 50%, it is hard to see how she could

:35:38.:35:43.

call another vote. What is the policy at the moment? Is it to have

:35:44.:35:47.

another referendum as soon as possible, or to wait until the

:35:48.:35:52.

Brexit deal is done, and we all then know the terms of the divorce, and

:35:53.:35:59.

then have the referendum? Is there any clarity on the timetable for the

:36:00.:36:03.

principles that could govern a second referendum? There is a debate

:36:04.:36:07.

going on within the party about that. Senior SNP figures are keen to

:36:08.:36:12.

go for a vote soon, some of them. They are talking about 2018. The

:36:13.:36:16.

reasoning would be that if Scotland votes were independence before the

:36:17.:36:22.

UK exits the EU, Benny Howell that maybe Scotland could be a continuing

:36:23.:36:25.

member and never leave the EU. There are others who think that would be

:36:26.:36:33.

too soon. -- then they hope that maybe Scotland. There are people who

:36:34.:36:39.

think that maybe if the Conservatives were to win another

:36:40.:36:44.

general election in 2020, and the Tories still have only one MP in

:36:45.:36:48.

Scotland at the moment, that that would look like more of a democratic

:36:49.:36:56.

deficit and would show that the rest of the UK and Scotland are going in

:36:57.:37:00.

different political directions, and that might be a better Rodman for

:37:01.:37:05.

independence. Sarah Smith, in a sunny and beautiful looking Glass

:37:06.:37:11.

School. It was always thus! You and I know that is not true!

:37:12.:37:14.

We are now joined by former Scottish Secretary Michael Forsyth,

:37:15.:37:17.

and the SNP's John Nicolson is still here.

:37:18.:37:19.

John Nicolson, what is your view? When do you think there should be,

:37:20.:37:25.

if you think there should be a second referendum? I believe in

:37:26.:37:33.

independence so I think there should be. Sarah's analysis is spot on.

:37:34.:37:37.

There are a lot of new members who have joined the party, over 100,000

:37:38.:37:41.

members, and a lot of these people have come across from the Labour

:37:42.:37:46.

Party in particular and they are desperate to see a referendum as

:37:47.:37:50.

soon as possible. When would you like to see it? We are in a bit of a

:37:51.:37:55.

phoney war at the moment, because we voted for Brexit but we don't know

:37:56.:37:59.

the deal that is on the table. Sarah is right - the polls still show less

:38:00.:38:04.

than 50% of people supporting independence. So you don't want one

:38:05.:38:09.

now? You don't want to hold a referendum until you think you're

:38:10.:38:14.

going to win it. People. To focus on what Brexit actually means, and I

:38:15.:38:17.

don't think the Prime Minister can keep up this line she uses, which

:38:18.:38:22.

is, we are not prepared to give a running commentary on the

:38:23.:38:25.

negotiations. People south and north of the border are going to want to

:38:26.:38:29.

know what the deal is. I understand that, but I know that your party has

:38:30.:38:35.

several views on this. I'm trying to determine yours. OK. Should you have

:38:36.:38:41.

a referendum during the Brexit negotiations, or should you wait

:38:42.:38:44.

until you know the shape of the deal and then call a referendum? On

:38:45.:38:49.

balance, I think we should know the shape of the deal so that people

:38:50.:38:52.

know of what they are broadly conform. -- voting for. That would

:38:53.:39:01.

be the fairest thing, so that the question they are being asked is put

:39:02.:39:05.

with the most information possible on the table. So not before another

:39:06.:39:12.

two years at least? That is my view. Michael Forsyth, is it not

:39:13.:39:22.

inevitable, since Scotland voted to remain in the EU, that this Scottish

:39:23.:39:26.

independence business is back on the agenda? I don't think so at all. If

:39:27.:39:31.

the SNP want to hold another referendum, they should fight an

:39:32.:39:34.

election with a manifesto that makes that clear. Their manifesto actually

:39:35.:39:38.

said, we believe that the Scottish parliament should have the right to

:39:39.:39:41.

hold another referendum if it's clear that more than half the people

:39:42.:39:46.

in Scotland want independence. We have Alex Salmond saying something

:39:47.:39:49.

different from Nicola Sturgeon. And the most striking thing is the

:39:50.:39:55.

contempt that the SNP show for the clear decision, 55% of the Scottish

:39:56.:40:01.

people voted to remain part of the UK. In their manifesto, they said,

:40:02.:40:07.

in 2014, we held a referendum that got people across the country

:40:08.:40:10.

talking about what kind of nation we want to be and how we want to be

:40:11.:40:15.

governed. No, we didn't. We took a clear decision which Alex Salmond

:40:16.:40:20.

holders was a once in a generation chance. They are damaging Scotland,

:40:21.:40:24.

creating uncertainty and reinforcing the view that you can't believe

:40:25.:40:30.

anything politicians tell you. What politicians, Unionist politicians,

:40:31.:40:34.

told the Scottish people was that the only sure way of remaining

:40:35.:40:39.

inside the EU, which was the settled will of Scotland, was to vote for

:40:40.:40:46.

the union. An independent Scotland could not be guaranteed to be inside

:40:47.:40:51.

the EU, and now that sure way has turned out to be a sure way to the

:40:52.:40:58.

door. Because of a decision made by the British people. I have to say,

:40:59.:41:03.

the only argument I can think of in favour of independence that would

:41:04.:41:06.

have been the vote for it was as a way of getting out of the EU. As

:41:07.:41:13.

with many of your views, that is a minority view in Scotland. Indeed,

:41:14.:41:21.

it is. When you say it is a minority view in Scotland, it is a properly

:41:22.:41:24.

held view among Scottish Nationalist. If you look at Dundee,

:41:25.:41:29.

the most nationalist town in Scotland, 40% of the people there

:41:30.:41:32.

voted to leave the EU, because there are a lot of people who believe that

:41:33.:41:36.

Scotland should have more control of their own affairs and realise that

:41:37.:41:41.

staying part of the EU is a contradiction. John Nicolson, if you

:41:42.:41:47.

were to have this referendum, so the Brexit deal is done, and Britain is

:41:48.:41:51.

on the way out, and we know the terms that we are out on, I've guess

:41:52.:42:00.

we're talking about 2019 -- I guess. Could you go to the Scottish people

:42:01.:42:04.

and guarantee that if Scotland voted to leave the UK, it would

:42:05.:42:09.

automatically be a member of the EU? We don't know that yet.

:42:10.:42:16.

Certainly,... You could end up being out of both? Michael Forsyth is

:42:17.:42:22.

laughing. It takes some hot spot for a Tory politician -- it takes some

:42:23.:42:31.

nerve for a Tory politician to laugh when they promised it was how to

:42:32.:42:38.

stay in the EU. But you could be -- you could be out of the UK and out

:42:39.:42:46.

of the EU. People know that the UK as a whole is leaving. There is a

:42:47.:42:51.

lot to be said for rewarding Scotland for being good Europeans

:42:52.:42:56.

and for allowing Scotland to continue to be Europeans. The

:42:57.:43:03.

European Union is then -- is in the business of expanding, as Euro

:43:04.:43:09.

sceptics point out. And the expansion for new members includes

:43:10.:43:13.

taking the euro, and it includes becoming part of the Schengen area.

:43:14.:43:18.

In an independent Scotland, if it were to be part of Schengen, there

:43:19.:43:22.

would have to be border controls at Carlisle and Berwick. It is

:43:23.:43:25.

uncharted territory. INAUDIBLE

:43:26.:43:32.

It is. In Northern Ireland, -- it is. In Northern Ireland, they are

:43:33.:43:36.

having a debate about open borders. The Government has made it clear to

:43:37.:43:39.

Irish politicians that there would not be a hard border. Because we're

:43:40.:43:46.

not a member of Schengen, but you might have to accept Schengen

:43:47.:43:49.

membership in order to be part of the EU. You rightly say that a lot

:43:50.:44:02.

of these issues are upper negotiation. It is early days. It

:44:03.:44:08.

would be a huge gamble, would it not, for Scotland to vote to leave

:44:09.:44:13.

the United Kingdom, particularly given the economic sub oil these

:44:14.:44:17.

days, without being sure that you would be able to join the European

:44:18.:44:22.

Union, and again, to tell the Scottish people, because this was

:44:23.:44:25.

one of the reasons you've lost last time - what will be the currency?

:44:26.:44:31.

You're right, we have to be rock-solid on the economy this time.

:44:32.:44:35.

We have to build a case. I'm glad Michael is having a good time. Some

:44:36.:44:42.

snorting down the line! I remember he said when we sent the Stone of

:44:43.:44:47.

destiny back to Scotland we would settle all this. He made a film for

:44:48.:44:57.

Newsnight. I'm trying to tell an amusing anecdote! You are right that

:44:58.:45:02.

the case on the economy has to be rock-solid, which is why Andrew

:45:03.:45:06.

Wilson is heading up a commission to answer these questions. Michael

:45:07.:45:11.

Forsyth, to some extent, as a staunch Unionist, have you not

:45:12.:45:18.

already lost the argument in that there is no question that Scotland

:45:19.:45:22.

and England are going their separate ways? They may stay within the

:45:23.:45:26.

United Kingdom, which is a different matter, but they are becoming very

:45:27.:45:29.

different countries, very different in many ways from the time when you

:45:30.:45:34.

were Secretary of State for Scotland. And even your own party,

:45:35.:45:41.

Ruth Davidson is styling herself as an independently minded, Scottish

:45:42.:45:47.

Conservative. Michael Forsyth, that was to you.

:45:48.:45:54.

Yes, of course, that is an inevitable consequence of

:45:55.:45:58.

devolution, which was one of the reasons why I opposed it back in

:45:59.:46:05.

1996. You actually said there was no demand for it, I remember. I

:46:06.:46:09.

interviewed you and you told me there was no demand for it from the

:46:10.:46:14.

Scottish people. And unlike you guys, we had a referendum and I

:46:15.:46:18.

accept the results of democratically held referenda. And so we have got a

:46:19.:46:23.

Scottish Carmont, which has got more powers. And that has changed the

:46:24.:46:27.

position. And of course, we're going to have to look at how that affects

:46:28.:46:31.

other parts of the United Kingdom. And people are looking at having a

:46:32.:46:36.

more federal kind of structure, which will maintain stability. But

:46:37.:46:39.

what worries me is that all this chatter about having independence in

:46:40.:46:47.

Scotland, when there is a deficit of some ?15 billion, is hugely damaging

:46:48.:46:54.

to Scotland's investment, in an area where business is not going to

:46:55.:47:02.

invest. We need to end it there. But I'm sure the argument is clearly not

:47:03.:47:06.

going away, so we will be able to come back to it in the weeks and

:47:07.:47:10.

months and probably years ahead. Your loving it! Carry on! When a

:47:11.:47:23.

political party is not exactly doing brilliantly nationally, it is not

:47:24.:47:27.

unusual for them to say, look how we are doing in the regional elections.

:47:28.:47:30.

The Liberal Democrats made the claim at their conference this week. So we

:47:31.:47:34.

thought we would see if there is any truth to it.

:47:35.:47:48.

It sounds like the football scores I'm doing here! To work out what all

:47:49.:48:18.

of that means, we're joined by the man who is lucky enough to follow

:48:19.:48:22.

this sort of thing for a living - and thank goodness somebody is, it's

:48:23.:48:26.

Tony Travers! Is it correct, then, to say that Liberal Democrats are

:48:27.:48:29.

doing well, albeit at local council by-election level? Well, they're not

:48:30.:48:34.

doing that well in the opinion polls, but they are, as you have

:48:35.:48:39.

just shown, doing surprisingly well, certainly surprisingly compared with

:48:40.:48:43.

the 2015 general election debacle, at the local level. Not in every

:48:44.:48:47.

seat but in a number of seats and particularly against Labour, it must

:48:48.:48:52.

be said, they are getting swings of 10%, 20%, even 30% from one party to

:48:53.:48:57.

the other. So I think they can realistically say, although these

:48:58.:49:00.

are straws in the wind, but there are some straws. So is that the

:49:01.:49:04.

basis for any sort of Liberal Democrat fightback? Well, it's the

:49:05.:49:08.

basis of the basis. If we remember the history of the Liberal Democrats

:49:09.:49:12.

- after the decline of the old Liberal Party and the period in the

:49:13.:49:17.

1950s and 1960s when they're used to be jokes about the Liberals' party

:49:18.:49:21.

conference, being able to fit in a phone box, then we moved onto the

:49:22.:49:26.

building of the Liberals, then the social and Liberal Democrats, and

:49:27.:49:35.

then the current party, as a new force in the middle of politics.

:49:36.:49:39.

They did that by building up local areas first, so-called pavement

:49:40.:49:43.

politics, getting new members, going out and knocking on doors, getting

:49:44.:49:47.

people interested, building up in local areas, winning councils and

:49:48.:49:50.

then hoping to win an MP in Parliament. It took 30 or 40 years,

:49:51.:49:55.

that was the trouble. As you say, it could be a long journey back for the

:49:56.:49:59.

Liberal Democrats locally, never mind nationally. But should Labour

:50:00.:50:04.

particularly be worried? Some of the examples which we have been talking

:50:05.:50:08.

about say it is Labour that they are taking some of these by-elections

:50:09.:50:12.

from, and in safe Labour areas? Indeed. The result is that you just

:50:13.:50:16.

put up for Labour are frankly abysmal for the main opposition

:50:17.:50:21.

party at this point of Parliament. The Conservatives in one way or

:50:22.:50:25.

another have now been in power for six years - their results are not

:50:26.:50:30.

that bad. The Lib Dems as we have said are making some progress,

:50:31.:50:33.

significant in some by-elections. But for the main opposition party in

:50:34.:50:37.

England to be losing seats net is pretty bad. Will that give the

:50:38.:50:43.

Liberal Democrats a rich seam than looking towards the Conservatives

:50:44.:50:47.

eats or areas that they lost in the south-west, for example, where Tim

:50:48.:50:51.

Farron seems to be looking, but there is no enthusiasm the

:50:52.:50:54.

pro-European stance of the Liberal Democrats, there? Don't know yet

:50:55.:50:58.

whether, when we get to the next general election, whenever that is,

:50:59.:51:02.

it could be next year, it could be 2020, it could be in between,

:51:03.:51:07.

whether the EU will play a major dominating role or not. It may just

:51:08.:51:10.

be back to the economy and the normal stuff with the EU as a bit

:51:11.:51:15.

player - we will have to wait and see. But I think going back to the

:51:16.:51:19.

progress the Lib Dems are making, we now know, because we live in

:51:20.:51:22.

multiparty politics, increasingly, all over Britain, that if the Lib

:51:23.:51:28.

Dems are doing better, even against Labour, it could harm the

:51:29.:51:30.

Conservatives in some parts of the country. And so as the Lib Dems

:51:31.:51:35.

start to pick up, it will be very interesting to see for example in

:51:36.:51:38.

the county elections next year and the local elections in Scotland and

:51:39.:51:43.

Wales, whether as it were, a beginning of a Lib Dem fightback

:51:44.:51:47.

damages only Labour or Labour and the Conservatives. It could do

:51:48.:51:50.

different things in different parts of the country. Whether that feeds

:51:51.:51:53.

to a general election, we would have to wait and see. Thank you very much

:51:54.:51:58.

for giving us that detail. I will not ask you about why the SNP lost

:51:59.:52:02.

that one local by-election. How did that happen? I was going to ask. The

:52:03.:52:11.

Lib Dems had to close the count because it was so empty, the hall.

:52:12.:52:13.

That's quite sad, isn't it? There was a mixture of approval

:52:14.:52:18.

and mockery this week when the Corbyn-supporting campaign

:52:19.:52:20.

group Momentum announced that it was setting up

:52:21.:52:22.

an activity group for children. Called Momentum Kids,

:52:23.:52:25.

it's intended to provide childcare for parents who want to get involved

:52:26.:52:27.

in political activism. Some thought this was an entirely

:52:28.:52:33.

sensible idea, but others weren't exactly keen on the idea that it

:52:34.:52:36.

might involve politicising children. Lib Dem leader Tim Farron dubbed

:52:37.:52:39.

the group Tiny Trots, and the idea may not have been

:52:40.:52:41.

helped by an advert for an event at this weekend's Labour conference

:52:42.:52:46.

featuring a "Teddy Bear Children were invited

:52:47.:52:48.

to bring their favourite toy, imagine what party it might join,

:52:49.:52:53.

think about what their teddy stands for, its values and how it might

:52:54.:52:56.

make positive changes. So, is this revolutionary

:52:57.:53:02.

brainwashing or an entirely harmless way to get more people

:53:03.:53:04.

involved in politics? Well, I'm joined now

:53:05.:53:06.

by the childrens' author Michael Rosen, and by Laura Perrins

:53:07.:53:08.

from the website Conservative Women. Welcome to both of you. Michael

:53:09.:53:15.

Rosen, is it ideological brainwashing? No, it's exactly what

:53:16.:53:21.

the Government recommends. If you look closely at the government's

:53:22.:53:25.

British values site, it says that schools should encourage children to

:53:26.:53:28.

demonstrate how democracy works. It's is those exact words -

:53:29.:53:32.

demonstrate how democracy works. That's what all schools should be

:53:33.:53:35.

doing. And what's wrong with that? Well, I think this is another great

:53:36.:53:39.

example of how the left, it's a rather sinister example of sort of

:53:40.:53:43.

grooming and for treating a very young child's mind onto a very

:53:44.:53:49.

leftist agenda. And we've always, there are plenty of examples of

:53:50.:53:53.

that. If it was just avoiding childcare, there's nothing wrong

:53:54.:53:57.

with that, but the idea that we are empowering children, very young

:53:58.:54:01.

toddlers and children to hold up placards, it's going little bit too

:54:02.:54:05.

far, I think. Didn't have the bit you read out say that they get to

:54:06.:54:11.

choose which party? Yes, if it was a right-wing grassroots organisation,

:54:12.:54:13.

perhaps like your own, what would be wrong with providing childcare and

:54:14.:54:17.

perhaps talking about politics? I think you have to be careful in

:54:18.:54:20.

terms of not trying to go behind the backs of parents and as I said,

:54:21.:54:27.

influencing the minds of very, very young children. Other parents not

:54:28.:54:32.

going along? Look, the parents will be politicking with the children

:54:33.:54:38.

separated in the crash. While they are out protesting. Michael Rosen,

:54:39.:54:43.

why is it necessary to have it with a political backdrop? If families

:54:44.:54:46.

want to talk politics at home or take their kids out on protests,

:54:47.:54:50.

they can do that, why does there have to be a political thing? There

:54:51.:54:58.

does not have to be at all. Why say, we will in some ways in Dockrell

:54:59.:55:02.

eight your children? There does not have to be at all. I belonged to

:55:03.:55:06.

left-wing groups when I was a child. I might have been indoctrinated!

:55:07.:55:11.

When you were very young children and I was no good at making

:55:12.:55:17.

placards! But the carrot is the free childcare. So it's quite clever, you

:55:18.:55:22.

could argue that it is never for a political party to offer free

:55:23.:55:24.

childcare and recruit new people, not people who are already

:55:25.:55:29.

indoctrinated like yourself! I feel very indoctrinated, thank you. But

:55:30.:55:32.

you could say, as people do, you cant things to children and show

:55:33.:55:37.

them things and demonstrate how democracy works, which is what the

:55:38.:55:41.

government recommends, and some children will walk away because

:55:42.:55:44.

they're bored stiff. Whatever they do it will have to be fun, because

:55:45.:55:49.

they are not at school, it is not punishment. It's always fun,

:55:50.:55:53.

indoctrination! What's the difference between sitting at the

:55:54.:55:57.

dinner papal with your family, putting the same newspapers in front

:55:58.:56:01.

of you all day basis, you're being indoctrinated from a fairly early

:56:02.:56:05.

age by your parents, so what would be wrong with extending that

:56:06.:56:09.

slightly? That's if you think parents and politicians are exactly

:56:10.:56:16.

the same ridge of course they're not. Let me finish, other people

:56:17.:56:21.

have a view. Of course political discussion around the dinner table

:56:22.:56:24.

should be encouraged, and I do it at home a lot. But that's very

:56:25.:56:29.

different to separating children, very young children, five and six,

:56:30.:56:32.

from their parents, hooding them in a room and setting about this, as I

:56:33.:56:37.

said, what is essentially indoctrination. It shows how extreme

:56:38.:56:44.

Momentum are. Would the SNP do it? I'm sitting here listening to this

:56:45.:56:48.

teddy business and it's a bit like Chairman Mao goads to Brideshead,

:56:49.:57:01.

isn't it? Jeremy Corbyn joins the Pooh Sticks society. I read the

:57:02.:57:05.

website, it wasn't exactly full with fun. What about children's books,

:57:06.:57:12.

lots of children's books have moral messaging in them? And I have one

:57:13.:57:22.

here, let's celebrate 25 years since the great Dr Zeuss died. What is the

:57:23.:57:29.

message? The message is that if you are poor and downtrodden, you should

:57:30.:57:34.

fight back. Have you read it? I've read a lot of yours, Michael Rosen,

:57:35.:57:39.

and I'm disturbed about this book being used to indoctrinate children.

:57:40.:57:43.

I read it to my kids all the time. All the family are underneath the

:57:44.:57:48.

duvet, and this is what the ordinary Labour Party members will be on

:57:49.:57:53.

Saturday. Are you reading some of this into everything here?! That's

:57:54.:57:57.

where middle Britain is, hiding under the covers! And sharing a bed

:57:58.:58:07.

as well, with an animal. I feel like this is a sort of Jackanory session.

:58:08.:58:11.

Andrew has fallen asleep. I was just reading the Harvard business review!

:58:12.:58:16.

Meanwhile, the answer to our quiz question...

:58:17.:58:18.

There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.

:58:19.:58:22.

The question was which award-winning director has made a documentary

:58:23.:58:24.

I would love to see the Quentin Tarantino version, myself. You might

:58:25.:58:39.

see that this weekend! But I suspect it might be Ken Loach. And you're

:58:40.:58:42.

right! The One O'clock News is starting

:58:43.:58:46.

over on BBC One now. I'll be here on BBC One tonight

:58:47.:58:50.

after Question Time for the return of This Week, with Ed Vaizey,

:58:51.:58:53.

Lisa Nandy, Ken Livingstone, Miranda Green, Quentin Letts

:58:54.:58:56.

and Katie Price. If there is nothing new,

:58:57.:58:57.

then the Court of Appeal aren't going to change

:58:58.:59:07.

their decision.

:59:08.:59:11.

Andrew Neil and Jo Coburn are joined by SNP politician John Nicolson to discuss English votes for English laws, British troops facing criminal investigations into alleged abuse in Iraq, and whether there is any chance of a second Scottish independence referendum.


Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS