26/09/2016: Labour Party Conference Daily Politics

26/09/2016: Labour Party Conference

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 26/09/2016: Labour Party Conference. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Welcome to Liverpool, where John McDonnell


is about to make his Shadow Chancellor's speech


Can he restore Labour's reputation for economic competence,


and steady his party's nerves, now the leadership contest is over?


Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell says he won't let key industries


like steel collapse, and that Labour will protect


EU funds to deprived communities after Brexit.


But we're promised another big announcement in his speech.


We're on for the next two hours, and will bring you that


live and uninterrupted, just after midday.


Back in Downing Street, the PM's folk have hit back


at claims Theresa May soft-peddled on curbs to immigration in the


So who's right and who's wrong in the Tory Brexit blame game?


A minister for peace, and talk of scrapping


Are the nation's defences safe with Labour?


I'll ask the Shadow Defence Secretary.


And Adam takes a look inside the other Labour


This whole thing is organised by Momentum, the group that grew out


of Jeremy Corbyn's first leadership campaign, so they


So all that, and more, in the next two hours of this


Daily Politics Conference Special, live from Liverpool.


Let's get right up to date with the latest developments here.


I'm joined by Heather Stewart of the Guardian, and Sam


Welcome to you both. Sam, is the strategy today, particularly with


John McDonald's speech, to get policy announcement out so that


people start talking about policy, not divisions, not the leadership?


The great problem with this conference has been, up till now,


what's the point of it? You had Jeremy Corbyn re-elected with a


bigger mandate on Saturday, but still the sense that the party is


deeply divided, and many Labour MPs thinking that their chances are very


minimal of winning the next election. So basically what John


McDonald, Jeremy Corbyn and his team wanted was just try and turn the


page, change the conversation with a pig, eye-catching announcement. We


just happen in the last few minutes, we are told that the energy and


climate change spokesman Barry Gardner is going to announce that


Labour will form the next election ban fracking. The party had


previously been slightly more open to it, they had a position of a


moratorium that they were not close to it. Now Labour, Jeremy Corbyn


thinks, will play to his base, the hundreds of thousands of people that


came in the leadership contest, but of course not everyone even in the


labour movement dislike fracking. But what is interesting about the


first big policy announcement is that it is Jeremy reaching to his


core, not Jeremy Chardy to reach out beyond the limited number of people


that got him back into power. So if this is an electro- strategy... Sam


Coates says what is the point of this conference, what is the answer?


I think you are right that the narrative today is to try to switch


to big ideas and talk about policy. But it's true it has created a very


odd atmosphere, having the leadership announcement at the


start, and Labour MPs who were sceptical about Jeremy Corbyn's


leadership stayed quiet for a proximate leak of ours a mentor to


the various stages around the conference centre yesterday to


express their sort of surprise, alarm and disdain. And it is very


clear that there are lots of quiet murmurings that will continue. They


are going to hope to turn to these sort of policy issues, but you know,


particularly Brexit, where an opposition is very potent. But I


don't get is going to be very easy. The Brexit of course is the issue


that sort of haunts the government. And you would think therefore it


would be a rich pasture for the opposition. But I'm not quite clear


what the opposition position is. No, and it is a rich pasture, not least


because Theresa May has effectively shut down debate on this issue. We


should be talking about what kind of migration settlement, the type of


economic settlement, what the consequences are, but she has


effectively banned ministers from doing that so far. There should be


an opportunity for the Labour Party, but guess what? The Labour Party


split and there are some people who want to maintain single party


membership, which means it looks quite to what it is today, in terms


of migration in particular, and then there is a group that have started


to come out, we saw it with Rachel Reeves, to a certain degree with


Chuka Umunna, Emma Reynolds in the last few days suggesting no, we have


to be more in June with the public on migration, and that might cost us


about access. Fascinatingly this morning John McDonnell came out on


the radio and said I want single market access, not membership. Now


single market access is a bit of a curious piece, it doesn't mean


anything specific but it means they will not try to get the full


off-the-shelf package of single market membership that contains the


free movement requirements. But what it does politically is give the


government enormous cover, because it means Labour doesn't really need


to spell out in any more detail what it does and doesn't think should


happen, and they can get on with any hard or soft Brexit planning,


knowing that Labour isn't really going to challenge them to hard in


the short-term. On the Tory side, given that there are so many


divisions here, you would think that one Tory tactic would be just a step


back and allow the media to cover all the divisions. So was it rise of


Theresa May's people in Downing Street to slap down all these


stories... ? There has been a lot of slapping down in the last couple of


weeks, as in there? We had these two books published at the weekend, one


by David Cameron's former director of communications Craig Oliver, and


another by the Sunday Times political editor, Tim Shipman,


making claims about Theresa May's role in the Brexit referendum and it


was quite hard. In particular on immigration, that she was


unenthusiastic about this idea of an emergency brake, it was suggested.


That it has given the story legs, as we say? It has, and has allowed us


to write slap down stories. She was Alan of these yester, to be fair,


because she thought Angela McIlroy not allow it. And she was right. --


Angela Merkel. We will speak to Tim Shipman later in the programme, I


think you both will be joining us. So it's a big day for


Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell. We're told he may have a surprise


for us in his speech in a short while, but we've got an idea of some


of what he's going to say. He's going to commit to spending


more than ?10 billion to make up any shortfall in funding for deprived


regions resulting from Britain's He'll also say Britain needs


an interventionist government working with companies,


and he'll promise to borrow more Here he is speaking


earlier to the BBC. The proposal is to set up a national


investment bank, to allocate ?100 billion towards that,


and that will lever of another ?150 billion


and that will be invested in our infrastructure


and in skills and it will be distributed


around the country as well so that We want to be like an


entrepreneurial state. That is the new concept of how


government could act. Borrowing is so cheap


at the moment, that would enable us, we think,


very quickly to actually ensure that we could cover the cost of that


by ways of increased tax revenues as a result


of more people employed. And remember, the Bank of England


only recently put ?75 billion into the economy


through quantitative easing. So it is not anything on a massive


scale but it will trigger other investment coming


in from the private sector. He was Shadow Chancellor


when Harriet Harman was acting Welcome back to the Daily Politics.


What do you make of this particular idea of a national investment bank?


I assume using state backed borrowed money. There's quite a lot to said


about the package John McDonnell is coming forward with. I think there


is a sensible critique of the Conservatives, in the Brexit


two-year negotiation we could well say deficit reduction should be


posed. The worry I have is this suggestion of ?500 billion. I mean,


that's an awful lot of either borrowing for extra taxes to be


raised. About 70% of all current government spending. To raise it you


would have to double income tax, you would have to double national


insurance, you would have to double council tax and you would have to


double the VAT as well. And is he planning to borrow it? I think


Vinnie the detail, and the body I have is that the Labour Party has to


come up with credible policies that don't send the taxpayers running off


into the hills. I suppose the argument would be that interest


rates are at an historic low at the moment, 10-year British gilts,


government bonds, are playing a yield of only about 0.8%. It is a


cheap time to borrow for the long-term, so why not do it for a


long-term investment? And I think you could legitimately say let's


Paul's deficit reduction for a couple of years will stop that


should be pressure on Philip Hammond and the Conservatives think I've


really been playing for the Autumn Statement. But we should be pushing


for that. That should be attacked on the Conservatives. The problem is if


John McDonnell overreaches by making out he's got this magic money tree


in his back garden that can be shaken, and everything can be sorted


out, the public will sort of say, it doesn't add up. That is I think an


important principle, which is one of the reasons I have disagreements


with John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn. I think you've got to be


straight and honest with the public about where the money comes from. If


you ever promise and then get into government and can't deliver, that


really is a bad state of affairs. Do you know what he means, used this


phrase this morning on the BBC, the entrepreneurial state. I think there


are some people who have been speaking to Professor Marianne to


Carter, one of the academics has been consulting with him, trying to


find ways of either voluntary sector, third sector, nonprofit way


helping to get new activities and entrepreneurialism going. But I


think it is over now have a feeling that something concrete. I want to


see precisely what the Labour Party will do in terms of hard impact


counteracting the worries people have about Brexit, showing people on


public spinning and on taxes. Together, that credibility has to be


brought back to the centre of their talking about. I know it sounds


boring and pragmatic but it really matters to a lot of taxpayers. Isn't


the Tory attack line on this quite obvious, you lost the last election


because voters think you are profligate, that you are a tax and


spend party, that you borrow too much, and now here you are going to


borrow another 500 billion? It is why I have not been able to be part


of the Shadow Cabinet. I will try to do my best from the backbenches, and


I will try my best to say let's be realistic about what is achievable.


We can still do radical things with that but if you fall into this


almost populist mode of promising everybody everything all the time,


the public can say this doesn't quite stack up and that is one of


the principal reasons I find my beliefs that Mariappa really with


what John is offering right now. So you are not going back into the


Shadow Cabinet? No, I don't think it would be honest of me. I could go


back in and sort of pretend and lighter people about it, but in all


conscience, I have to be honest with my constituents in the country think


that is realistic and best of the country at large, and that, to me,


I'm afraid has to come first. You heard Sam Coates mentioning earlier


from the Times about Labour's position on the single market, and


what its policy should be, holding the government to account, as the


government struggles to define what our relationship with a single


market will be. Is it clear what Labour's position is on this? I


think Labour generally, of course at the last conference we supported to


remain in the EU. We obviously lost the referendum. I don't think we


should be trying to replay this referendum we have to make the best


of what we can. I would like to keep the benefits we currently have on EU


membership for our businesses. So for example I had a debate in the


Commons last week about financial services access. Prior percent of


the economy. We need to have good regulation, robust, so we can still


have access to their markets. If we end up chasing the John Redwood


Nigel Lawson view of low regulation, offshore tax havens style Britain,


we will not only go down the runway which is unsafe for the taxpayer but


we will use access to those important markets. So there is a


Labour case to be made to the government but again I think front


bench have not quite grappled with their own feelings about


international engagement and doing business with Europe. There is a bit


of a strawman argument here, is there not? We cannot remain a member


of the single market because of the things that go with it, that people


voted against? Particularly free movement. Membership means free


movement of people and people did not vote on 23rd. We have access to


the single market, whatever our position. The thing we don't know it


is on what terms will that access be? Yes, and I think there is a deal


to be done somewhere about free movement of skills, because the


Germans and the Italians and the French are now also thinking free


movement of people without any of these constraints, that is also


causing them issues, and I think probably we are in the game of a new


bilateral treaty with the EU, where we cannot just take the rules that


the other 20 to decide, I think that would be very difficult. So we have


to have a say we have to be around the table, we have to be consulted.


That, I think, probably mean some new bilateral treaty. I think that's


where we need to be but also we shouldn't be triggering Article 50


until we can be certain we are allowed to talk about the new


relationships at the same time as the divorce process. If you have to


wait two years for Brexit divorce proceedings to be finished, as the


commission is saying, and then only talk about the new relationship,


that is five years potential limbo. So we have got to make sure that we


insist we do both those things simultaneously.


So do we end up with some kind of free trade agreement with the EU? It


may be that we don't necessarily stay in the customs union... The


single market. Because that would mean us taking the rules, people are


worried about Ttip and some of those things and that is when we are in


the club and can talk about them but if we are not in it, we have to take


the rules but we need to find a new way of staying in being consulted


and that to me is a new bilateral treaty. If it is now inevitable that


Jeremy Corbyn leads your party into the next election? Well, the members


as is have chosen for him to be at the helm. He did very well amongst


the new joiners, not all of them, but by and large. He got 85% of the


newcomers. But actually, the majority of long-standing members,


as exit polls show, were for change. We ended up with 59% of the


membership voting for Jeremy and 41% dissatisfied, wanting a change. That


41% is a big, serious group of mostly long-standing members who


want to hold Jeremy to account. Now he has to meet a series of


challenges. He's got to develop credible policies. He's got to look


like a Prime Minister in waiting. He has to go ahead in the opinion


polls. Those are hurdles he's got to get over. Are you confident that


will happen? I've been waiting to see if there is this mythical olive


branch... Is the mythical olive branch next to the magic money tree?


Are they in the same room? I hope not, I hope the olive branch is real


because if we can't reach accommodation, as I say, I think we


can be productive from the backbenches, some of us, but if we


don't have a front bench Shadow Cabinet chosen by the Parliamentary


Labour Party, then it is going to be very difficult for MPs in their


codgers, representing their constituents, to go along with some


of the things that they have not been part of formulating. On the


backbenches, we can continue with our own policy agenda and develop


that, sensible, hard-headed, you know, we have got to keep trying and


that is what I will try to do. Let me ask you one more specific


question, the Labour Party has said that if it forms the next


government, it will ban fracking. What is your position on that? I


can't say I have ever been a big fan of fracking. Have to be careful what


you say, they're! It came out right but I'm not sure how it squares with


reopening the coal mines which is something Jeremy was also keen to


do. You do have to have an energy policy that yes, focuses on reducing


carbon emissions but also provides energy security and build that the


consumer can afford. Unless you get all of those things right, I think


we are very good at saying what we are against but we have to now say


what we are for. Chris Leslie, good to see you. Have not seen you for a


while. Great to be back. Talk of splits and infighting


continue here in Liverpool, but the Conservatives,


who meet for their conference next week in Birmingham,


obviously don't want to be left out. Prime Minister Theresa May has this


morning had a rather pointed dig at her predecessor,


David Cameron, after claims that he called


her "lily-livered". The claim was made in a book


by the political editor of the Sunday Times,


one of a couple of new books about the referendum causing


a stir over the weekend. It claims that, in a 2014 speech,


Mr Cameron wanted to demand stronger controls on EU migration,


including an "emergency brake" Mrs May, along with the then


Foreign Secretary, Philip Hammond, put a dampener on that, arguing that


German Chancellor Angela Merkel After the meeting, Mr Cameron


told an advisor that his In response to the claims,


David Cameron's replacement at No 10 Mrs May has taken the unprecedented


step of releasing details of two letters Mrs May,


then Home Secretary, sent to David Cameron calling


for an emergency brake, one in November 2014,


and one in May 2015. They also point to previous


articles from 2013 and 2014 where Mrs May argued


for "a cap" on EU migration. In the end, Mr Cameron's final deal


with the EU secured curbs on benefits for migration,


not on overall numbers. And the terms of that deal


were rejected by the voting public, who opted to leave the EU


on the 23rd June referendum. Well, the man responsible


for the book that's caused this kerfuffle is Tim Shipman


from the Sunday Times. He joins me now, and from our


Westminster studio I'm joined by Mark Wallace from


the website Conservative Home. So, Tim Shipman, it turns out Mrs


May wanted an emergency brake. She appears to have wanted it a week


before the meeting and she appears to have put her thoughts in writing


to the Prime Minister six months after the meeting. But my sources


are adamant and Downing Street, it is important to say, are not denying


that in this key meeting just before David Cameron made the speech laying


out what he wanted on immigration, she did not back him up on the


grounds that it would not win the support of the Germans. But you


could be in favour of a brake and say it won't run with Angela Merkel


and that is also right. I'm not sure why there is a conflict. She wanted


a brake, she would have loved it and was all for it but she knew it would


not wash with the German Chancellor. The point the people around David


Cameron are making is that this is a pivotal moment in the referendum.


From this point onwards, the speech he makes on immigration committee is


demanding things on benefits, not numbers and they think that is


critical. -- on immigration, he is demanding. It set the policy,


despite it just being a conversation, from that point until


the referenda. From that point onwards, the benefits are people on


the speech was only watered down further so writing memos and letters


six months later, the scene was already set by then. This was the


moment where, if you were going to take a stand, you could have done


it. But she was right. Arguably, she was but people are looking back now


saying why and how what the referendum lost, and they think the


failure to go big, to ask for more, to try to transcend the tramlines of


European law, was where the mistake was made. Cameron himself at that


point appears to have thought, let's go for it because that 3am in a


summit, they might give us something. Don't forget, the


benefits stuff he did put in the speech, officials in Downing Street


and all the people around also said that was illegal and would not work


but in the end he got some of it. So some of this may have been


obtainable if he had gone for it. Let's go to Mark Wallace. What do


you think? Is it credible that Mrs May was against tougher curbs on


immigration? As you just said, Andrew, the really notable thing is


when you look at the details, the two accounts are not completely


incompatible. It is perfectly possible Theresa May was asking the


Prime Minister for a proper, tough brake on immigration but when she


looked at what David Cameron was actually talking about, which was


not really a brake in Britain's control but one that they would ask


for and the European Commission and every single other EU member state


would have to give us permission to pull the brake, she might have


looked at it and thought it was frankly pointless. Tim Shipman, it


is kind of counterintuitive that Theresa May, given the speech she


made at the Tory conference last year, would want to water down any


British position on immigration. I think that is probably why it is


news, why it is interesting because the debate now is about what lessons


can be learned from how the referendum campaign and the


renegotiation was conducted in terms of how we now go forward to


negotiate Brexit. Downing Street, I need to stress, are not disputing


that in this meeting, that is precisely what Mrs May did. They are


rightly saying there is contact stillness and she remained a firm


advocate of tough measures. -- context do this. But when it came to


putting the policy in the speech, she thought it would not wash. But


it is dancing on the head of a pin, it was not that she was against an


emergency brake, in fact, she was in favour of it. It is just that she


did not think, all the evidence suggests she was right, that you


could sell that to the Germans in general and Angela Merkel in


particular. I don't understand what it tells us beyond that. It tells us


she wanted to work with the grain of the system and David Cameron, who


ended up working with the grain of the system as well, at the one


moment where he felt, actually, shall we try to do something more


radical, she did not seem to want to do that. But he could still have


forced it through if he wanted. Of course and when you read the rest of


the book, you will see the David Cameron is not exactly escaping scot


free himself. Mark Wallace, we have also had Craig Oliver's account of


the referendum campaign. He talks of a submarine strategy by Theresa May,


that she was pretty much invisible during the referendum campaign. That


is quite accurate, isn't it? It is pretty accurate and you have to stay


in retrospect, that was something that turned out to be quite wise. --


you have disabled these are two different books, Tim's is a


journalistic account and Craig Oliver's is much more partisan for


obvious reasons but what shines through in both of them is that


there is a huge blame game going on, people who were running the country


three and a half months ago are now engaged, quite extraordinary, in


trying to take chunks out of the next Prime Minister which is not a


great look. Isn't this just the settling of old scores, Tim? These


are the losers and they want to blame somebody else. They lost the


campaign, their campaign, they called it, they ran it, the campaign


was run from Downing Street by people like Craig Oliver, Mr


Cameron, himself, they decided the positions are now they are just


trying to smear the new Prime Minister? There is certainly a case


that there's a difference of opinion but I think it is an attempt to


learn some lessons. There were divisions within Downing Street


about how far Cameron should go and a lot of the people around Cameron


felt he should do something much bolder. They looked at this moment


as the one moment where he might have done that. They think that it


is unfortunate that he was not backed up at that point. Finally, if


he had gone to Berlin, to the German Chancellor and said, "I need a brake


to be able to sell this referendum to the British people, to win it, I


need an emergency brake on numbers", and she had said, would almost


certainly she would have, "I understand that but I'm afraid, as a


woman from Eastern Europe who lived behind the Berlin Wall, that it is a


red line for me, there is no way we can agree to that", what would he


have done? He would have had to capitulate or campaign to leave and


that was never going to happen. That is one argument. But I return to


what I said earlier. The benefits stuff was also not beloved in


Europe. People in the British government, lawyers and people in


Berlin all said it contravened the principles of non-discrimination and


yet, at the end of the day, he ended up getting a version of it. There


are people who think if he had pushed harder on free movement,


there were areas where he might have achieved more. We will never know!


Tim Shipman, Mark Wallace, thank you very much.


Now, events held on the fringes of party conference are usually


They're a chance to meet policy enthusiasts in a warm room,


with even warmer glasses of wine, if you're lucky.


But not far from where we are in Liverpool,


the Jeremy Corbyn-supporting campaign group Momentum has been


holding an event on a much bigger scale, with the rather ambitious aim


Right, this festival is happening near Chinatown,


in an arts venue, called the Black E.


It is called "The World Transformed".


Let's find out how our world is going to be transformed.


This whole thing is organised by Momentum, the group that grew out


of Jeremy Corbyn's first leadership campaign.


Next door is the nation's largest ethical streetwear brand,


selling all sorts of Jeremy Corbyn T-shirts.


Apparently, this is the best seller, here, being modelled by Ash.


This is the bookshop called News From Nowhere which is run


You can pick up such brilliant tomes as The Jeremy Corbyn Colouring-In


Book, and a collection of poems in honour of the Labour leader.


Then, magically, Jeremy Corbyn dropped in, completely unannounced.


This corner is where people come to have a rant on any


subject they feel strongly about, like Michelle


If all that activism leaves you starving,


why not join the queue here for one of the famous pies


This is a Shankly Pie, a local delicacy made with steak,


The whole hall is dominated by these massive banners for causes ranging


from the Liverpool dockers to climate change to people who have


There's more art up here where you will find Phil


the sculptor hard at work on a bust of Sylvia Pankhurst,


the daughter of Emmeline, the suffragette leader.


And this is Edward Rushton, a poet, blind, born in Liverpool and helped


And that, ladies and gentlemen, is The World Transformed.


We're joined now by one of Momentum's national organisers,


Adam Klug, and by John McTernan, who has worked for the Labour Party


in various guises including as an adviser to Tony Blair.


Welcome to you both. Adam at the world transformed meeting, is this


the people who could not get into the Labour Party conference? No, it


is to try to enable the conference to be even more accessible than it


is already, so intending to attract visitors and delegates to


conference, but also groups like disabled people against cuts, black


lives matter, Hillsborough Justice campaign, groups that might not have


been able to have afforded a story that to be part of it and have their


own workshops and sessions. What is the fundamental purpose? To bring


the new politics into action, in the way of having their participatory


workshops, talks and discussions and music, club nights in the evening,


to try and return the Labour Party into the social movement so many


wish it to be. Dirk Kuyt to bring all bring that into the Labour


conference itself? I think so, in time. But I see it in harmony with


the comfort and amplifying the Labour Party rather than as some


people suggest somehow Anelka alternative conference, which is not


how it is intended at all. Red Mr Corbyn said we need to went people


have been tempted to vote Tory have voted Tory. How is your momentum


gathering on that? It is time to bring in people who are new to


politics who previously felt that mentioning politics has not been for


them. People who are affected in their lives will vote a different


party for a number of reasons and a lot of those people will come to The


World Transformed and have their voices heard. I am not sure how you


attract Tory inclined people by selling mugs that said Tories are


vermin, and T-shirts that said still hate Thatcher. I haven't seen either


of those things. But you have been to Momentum, haven't you? It is a


diverse range of people over 200 hours of workshops. How are you


going to attract anybody outside political geeks to want to be there


for that? It went on until 2am, 2:30am on Saturday, and there will


be another big music night on Tuesday. On Saturday night I was


talking to a number of disabled people who are from Liverpool, who


had come along and it is a fully accessible space and they were on


the dance floor, and I was having a chat with an outside. People are


saying to the first time in a very long time they felt this was a place


that was truly inclusive. There was a lot more overweight to go.


Momentum has brought a lot more people into the party, a lot younger


people into the party, people who have not previously been involved in


party politics into the party. What's wrong with that? Probably the


most serious thing is that they would define their politics around a


set of issues and ideas which are completely unpalatable to the


British public. I saw the energy at Momentum, I was there yesterday, and


I saw lots of the meetings but these are not mainstream political ideas,


they are the ideas of the fringe, and the reason they are on the


fringe politics is because they are popular. Such as what? They are


anti-capitalist, which in the end is antigrowth, which is anti-wealth.


That is not a policy, it is a frame of mind or a strategy,


anti-capitalism. But policies are Momentum espousing that are


unpopular, reaching out to disabled people, why would that be unpopular?


Those on policies, they are ways of working, they are very friendly and


a welcoming environment are go into, but the Momentum mindset is that if


more people talk more about John McDonnell's economic policies to


people, they will convince them that printing money is the way to save


the economy, and it's not. It's not a strategy because it's not a


message to sell. What is the meaning of the Momentum mindset? It is a


very large Jeremy Corbyn Fanclub, and good on him. But a political


party needs activists, and one of the complaint I have heard from MPs


who are here is that Momentum members join the party and go to


Momentum that are never active on doorsteps, they never leaflet and


never campaign. Is that right? Not at all, let's think about it, Labour


have lost two general elections, and we now have so many more new


activists who are out campaigning. The momentum of for Labour hashtag


has proved really effective in the May elections. By-elections. I get


lots of tweets from Momentum. Sometimes they don't want to be


obviously branded as Momentum, so they are just out campaigning. We


love Twitter, but Twitter is not the world, it is an echo chamber, it is


just an exchange of views with people who normally agree with, not


political suasion. Isn't the problem though that many people will regard


Momentum and the people at this Momentum gathering as the future for


Labour, and the Parliamentary party will have to start being more


representative of the future, rather than dinosaurs such as yourself?


What we actually see is, as members join the party, there is an


enthusiasm. The members who joined last year lost their enthusiasm for


him after the Brexit vote, because they blamed him for Labour's per


performance in mobilising voters. I say good on Momentum for organising


their events, good on them for bringing people into politics, but


the thing is politics is about persuasion, and persuasion is based


on conversation, and that is an exchange of views, not the


transmission of a set of use to which there can be no variants that


is my problem. Firstly, it is great that you came yesterday and so what


The World Transformed is about but the talking about Momentum mindset


is a fundamental misunderstanding of a pluralist range of views, people


coming in to discuss. It is not a place with a fixed mindset of


indoctrination. I'm sure that's not how you experienced it yesterday,


and I would incur Vergeer, Andrew, to come along as well. Is that an


invite? Yes. Can I get one of these pies? Indeed! By New Road about some


of the merchandise, some letters join the British Army and get free


prosthetic limbs. I believe you are referring to Darren Cullen, an


artist, who in collaboration with veterans UK was putting on an art


exhibition about the horrors of war but it was absolutely not a way of


demonising soldiers or anything, it was just amplifying the issues which


were often creates both civilians and people in services. Right, but


there were some mugs that if you are in the army you would take offence


to, would you not? I don't think they were intended in any way to be


demonising soldiers, that wasn't the intention at all. If anyone did take


offence to that, that is a shame. I apologise. On the Jewish labour


movement, one of the leaflet says that you are using the charge of


anti-Semitism to attack the new movement. By New Road about being


thought of in parts as anti-Semitic. I can't hear you so well because it


is quite nosy, J say? There have been some complaints about charges


of anti-Semitism of the new movement. Are you worried about


that? There was a session about the Chakravarty enquiry yesterday as a


way of having a range of diverse voices, Jewish voices, and


discussing anti-Semitism both within the party and more broadly within


society, and a way of breaking down misconceptions, and hearing


different viewpoints from a range of perspectives, so as to learn from


one another and to stamp out anti-Semitism. Are you the Momentum


guy in the Channel 4 documentary that says Momentum has taken over


Bristol? We had somebody who came in who worked with us for five months


as a volunteer, who was really seen as a friend by many, who was with us


for a long period of time. He did secretly for me in the corridor and


said something taken out of context. What I was saying is that there were


loads of new activists who got involved in the party, both


campaigning in a range of issues but they had also got active in the


Labour Party and been elected to positions, but it is not in some


orchestra to plan to take over and infiltrate from a small group. That


is not what Momentum is, it is not infiltrating the Labour Party, it is


the Labour Party. We will leave it there, thanks to both of you.


Now, yesterday we reported that the Labour peer Parry Mitchell


had resigned from the party in protest at Jeremy


This morning, the Leader of the Labour Group


on Portsmouth City Council, John Ferrett, has resigned, and he


Why have you resigned? I have come to the conclusion I can no longer


stay in a Labour Party that is not only led by Jeremy Corbyn, but is


effectively being shipped in his image. I spent the last year


struggling with that, but Jeremy clearly has a clear mandate. Now he


has won a second election but it is not something I want to be part of.


And was because he was re-elected for a second time did you conclude


that that settles the matter, and that the kind of Labour Party you


want is now really not possible for the foreseeable future? Yes,


certainly, and I feel that the 172 Labour MPs crossed the Rubicon when


they decided to have a vote of no-confidence in Jeremy, because I


cannot see, and I ask this question over the weekend directly to some


members of the PLP, but didn't get an answer. The question is how can


you go out at election time cap advocated Jeremy Corbyn to be prime


ministers of a country and at the same time so you have absolutely no


confidence in him? Electors are not stupid and they will just throw that


straight back at those member is of the PLP. What has been the reaction


on your Labour colleagues in Portsmouth? I'm sorry, Andrew, can


you repeat that? Yes, what has been the reaction of your Labour


colleagues in the city? No, I think he's struggling to hear. I can hear


you now, Andrew. I just wondered what the reaction was of your Labour


colleagues in the city had been? I have had some expressions of support


from long-standing members, clearly the Labour Party in Portsmouth


reflects what is happening in the country. That the Labour Party in


Portsmouth has gone from 400 member is to over 1700 members in the last


year. Those people I campaigned with and worked with prior to 2015


appeared to be very supportive, but I suspect those that have come in


subsequently, particularly those organised by momentum will be glad


to see the back of May. And is Momentum now a force in your local


Labour Party? Yes, Portsmouth was one of the first CLPs I think to be


taken over by Momentum. Taken over? Yes, Momentum took over of the


office within the CLP. I would argue that Portsmouth is right in the


vanguard of Momentum, it is a Momentum stronghold. Over the last


year I have faced a lot of hostility from them because I have a


completely different political perspective. Mr ferret, we will


leave it there. Struggling through the sound problems and the wind, and


lots of noise all over, I am very grateful to you. Always windy here,


Andrew! That is the news from Portsmouth.


I'm joined now by the Labour mayor of Bristol, Marvin Rees.


What is your reaction to his resignation? To be honest, it is the


first I have heard of it right now so it is a bit of a surprise, but we


need to keep people on board. I think the critical thing to the


party's future is that we have a genuine diversity of thought and


argument to make sure the propositions we take to the country


are as rich as they should be. But he was saying that Momentum had


taken over the local party in Portsmouth. Has it taken over the


Labour Party in Bristol too? No, and we worked very hard to the election


campaign to make sure that we are protecting this space in the party


to have rich debate. Clearly, sometimes that went over the top,


and we are dealing with some of the consequences of that now. But as the


leader of my party investor I am really keen to make sure that our


local debate, not just within the Labour Party, but across the


political parties is as rich and dynamic as it should be. So when


Adam Klug from Momentum said in the Channel 4 document tree, the battle


for the Labour Party, referring to Momentum after a visit to the city


of Bristol, they are taking over, they are taking over of the


constituency Labour parties in the area, they are completely like


running the Labour Party. Look at what I am doing in my city, I have


delivered a cross-party cabinet, six women, Faye men, I have a Liberal


Democrat, a green party member and a conservative in my cabinet. We are


building a big support base across business, the voluntary sector and


the political parties. We have taken city government outside of the city


and it is a party not looking in on itself, we are determined. Have they


taken over the constituency Labour parties in the area?


No, they haven't, and the important message we want to bring to


conference is that the domination of local politics and city politics by


the Westminster conversation is one that needs... We need to move beyond


it. I am the leader of one of the ten core cities. Between us, we


oversee 90 million people. We need the Westminster debate to begin to


wrap itself around how it supports city leaders to deliver not asking


city leaders to keep commenting and wrapping itself around the


Westminster debate. How important is the devolution of powers to cities


like yours and high profile mayors like you, like London and Manchester


are about to have and so on, how does that help rebuild the Labour


Party? It is essential. Devolution is not just imported in rebuilding


the Labour Party. It is important to rebuilding cities. It is essential


and one of the challenges that we as their core cities will be bringing


to the party today is that they need to be much more proactive in


supporting devolution's agenda. We want to take responsibility but we


don't want a hospital pass. We want to take responsibility for


populations and to deliver for them but we need the power to make sure


we get the homes built and the transport systems in place. What is


the one big power you would like to have if you could have it tomorrow?


Transport. We are making good headway on building houses. We have


a fantastic political lead on that but we need to be able to get hold


of transport. You can't have great cities without great transport


network and Bristol faces major challenges. If you had the transport


power, what would you do with it? Begin to shape the bus routes in the


first instance, who gets served so we don't end up with isolated


communities. And that comes from local knowledge and demand?


Absolutely, not just in local government but with the brass


providers and the voluntary sectors and community and business. You have


said you oppose austerity. Everybody seems to these days. Is it not true


that he faced 1000 job losses at City Hall? We have offered voluntary


severance with the aim of balancing the budget, we set a legal budget


for this year which we must do. Unfortunately, we have had to go to


the workforce. What we have said is I think many aspects of austerity


are a full sick on. They may save money in the short-term but because


they cut back on our ability as local government to invest in


preventative around public health and the size of the workforce, it


will cost us in the years to come. Is there an appetite for more


power... Let me do this in two ways. The people of Bristol, do they want


more power devolved to their city? I think there was, and often, in the


Brexit result as well, there was a bit of a spoof but I think it was


indicative of our city, about people declaring an independent state. With


a distinctive political culture? Yet and I think we need to respect that,


looking towards the American model where city governments have genuine


power. And tax-raising powers? Would you like that, too? I would but


don't attach the tax-raising to me, tax management! This Conservative


government has kind of started this process of empowering local


government, cities, around cities, as it go nearly far enough for you


-- it hasn't gone nearly far enough for you but do you detect an


appetite in Whitehall to devolve more power to cities? It is


difficult to know right now with the change of government. We are seeing


where they stand but my understanding was the deals we


struck around the devolution deal one for the West of England what the


deal that was on the table so we can continue with that. We are entering


into conversations now with the government about looking for


devolution deals two, three and four. I will say from my sense, what


we are not talking about is not just deluge as with powers. There's an


element at which local government has to be able to grow into that


because there could be a bunch of responsibility without the skill set


and culture to be able to manage it. So walk before you can run? Exactly,


we have to grow into it. In Bristol on Thursday, for example, we are


pulling together 70-75 city leaders to say that shaping a place is not


just about local government, it is about the way businesses interact


the voluntary sector will -- voluntary sector, faith groups and


local universities so we have do have a bigger solution. If the


Labour leadership on site for city devolution? The core city leaders


are and we are a major part of the party. I work that bit out but what


about the party? We are getting a sympathetic ear. This is part of


being here today and one of the things I will talk about on the


floor tomorrow is that they need to support us to deliver. That is where


you will see evidence of what Labour leadership candy but when I say not,


I want to be clear that the fault lines of national politics don't


always easily translate to the local level where we have to be very


pragmatic and deliver. As I said, we are a cross-party cabinet. We work


with the challenges of that but we know it is good that the city and it


creates a difficult did -- different kind of political culture. What is


the composition? Beside me, I have nine cabinet members, six Labour and


a Liberal Democrat, a Green and a conservative. Does that broadly


reflect the political balance of the city? It reflects all the elected


parties apart from Ukip. You have to be more pragmatic, is what you are


saying? You have executive power so rather than posturing, you have to


deliver? Like I said, we have do deliver for the whole city. It is


saying that the local government challenge is not simply about having


political knock-about in the council chamber. We have to work with the


chamber of commerce, the voluntary sector and some of those people are


not interested in the knock-about. It is important we have meaningful


political debate, I'm not undermining its importance but we


are not just in the contest about who can get a headline in the local


paper. We're working out how to deliver. At some point, local


councillors have to deliver for people. That is the culture and the


structure we are trying to build. When are you before re-election?


2020. It is a four-year term like the London mayor? Are you up for


another term? I'm enjoying it. It is a challenge and one of the aspects


of politics that people don't always take on, I'm a human being, a father


with children and adjusting is a challenge. It will never catch on!


But it is an enjoyable, meaningful job and it means something for me to


give back and for the city. What happens? I understand devolution to


cities and you could see how that is working in a relatively coherent


political entity but what about devolution for those folks who don't


live in cities? We are, that is the devolution deal in the west of


England. We are worked up with North East Somerset and South


Gloucestershire, with heavy rural populations. But again, I meet the


leaders of my neighbours and that is where we have to be very pragmatic


and say, how do we work together? There is some baseline where we are


delivering for local populations and they need good quality transport,


education and public health and stable homes and employment


opportunities. If you want to bring transport together and organise on a


strategic level, do you need a Greater Bristol? Our devolution deal


was signed up around a Metro mayor so it is not a Greater Bristol, I


have to respect the sovereignty of my neighbours. Very diplomatic. It


is not colonial expansion by Bristol but we need to work across


boundaries which is the only way the economy is going to get the maximum


benefit from having that kind of joined up leadership. Transport will


only work cross boundary and to be honest, most people's lives


transcend those boundaries anyway. People move for work, retail,


education also. I know that you maintain there is a different


dynamic to local government or city government. Not totally. De Vrij to


Westminster and I understand that, and the concerns of Westminster are


not always the concerns of Bristol or Manchester and so on. --


different to Westminster. What is the take -- your take on the state


of the Westminster party at the moment? It is challenging, to be


perfectly frank. It was a very challenging leadership contest and


it was challenging for me as a city leader and how I navigated it. I was


clear with journalists that I would not comment and I don't think it


would have helped me as a mayor or more effectiveness in Bristol so I


put the city first. -- my effectiveness. We have to be serious


about healing and reconciliation. The city needs it and if we are to


be a party that is going to speak to a world which is full of fractures,


whether it is in the Middle East or increasing in our own country in


inequality, we have do show ability to hold ourselves together across


difference, if we want to lead a country that bases its own


fractures. Thank you for joining us. I must come down and see you. You


would be welcome. Jeremy Corbyn has talked


about offering an olive branch to Labour MPs opposed


to his leadership of the party. The MPs want that olive branch


to come in the form of elections that would allow MPs to choose


at least some of the Shadow Cabinet. But what do activists


here in Liverpool think? It is an issue here behind closed


doors but let's bring Who should have the power


to select the Shadow Cabinet? Jeremy Corbyn or MPs,


like under the old system? Who should select the Shadow


Cabinet, Jeremy Corbyn... Good leaders have to


select their own Cabinet. What is this all actually really


about? It is about having Chukka Umunna


or Liz Kendall in the Shadow Cabinet which would be a symbol


that the Labour Party is not simply John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn,


it is bigger and wider than that. You should have had a third section


which is being put forward in that you have the MPs,


Jeremy Corbyn and the members having an equal say,


then it is democratic and it is not him or him,


it is all of us. Does it matter if they are


elected or not? Just one per person,


one member, one vote, There's Hilary Benn, who got sacked


from the Shadow Cabinet by Jeremy Who should select the Shadow


Cabinet, Jeremy Corbyn or MPs? Is that Angela Rayner trying to


run away? Who is the biggest dud that has been


the Shadow Cabinet? Do you want to split it in half,


crack it like an egg? Would you rather be put


in the Shadow Cabinet by the leader You wouldn't expect Theresa May


to ring up Peter Bone and ask who should be


at International Development? What they have to do


is to stop sabotaging. Oh, well, let's start with Alan


Johnson. This is a stunt by


ill-informed people. There you go, the results


are in and the party is split evenly down the middle, 50-50, in fact,


just like the ruling That may be the first time that


Adam's unscientific balls have probably reflected what the opinion


is. We are joined by John Pienaar. Not long until the Shadow


Chancellor's speech. But on the Shadow Cabinet, why would Mr Corbyn,


having just won the leadership for a second time in a year, and over as


much power to the PRB deduces Shadow Cabinet? I think he is keen to hand


over as little power as he has do. The idea of a fully elected Shadow


Cabinet, elected by fellow MPs, has been a way back for some of those


who marched away from the Shadow Cabinet, giving a rude sign to


Jeremy Corbyn on the way and since then so much has been said about


Jeremy Corbyn's lack of basic competence, his inability to unite


the party N alone appeal to the country, that you can't say those


things. The idea from some of those quite senior show -- Shadow Cabinet


figures is you can get back in if you have a mandate, not from Jeremy


Corbyn but from other MPs would still leaves the question


unanswered, how do you unsay what has been said. And when the


questions will be asked by you and me every Sunday, do you now endorsed


Jeremy Corbyn at the best possible Prime Minister, what do you say?


I've had a lot of hesitation so far, and I'm sure you have as well. The


number of the centrist MPs here say that what they hope will happen is


Mr Corbyn and John McDonnell will strengthen their grip on the party.


-- is that what will happen. Now they have the membership, and the


membership in time could change the nature of the PLP, the Parliamentary


party, they want to get a grip on national executive committee and the


regional organisers and so on. Is this a long march through the


institutions? I think that has been part of the plan, not said out loud


but that has been part of the plans and stay one, pretty much, since


Jeremy Corbyn came in, knowing perfectly well he was surrounded by


mostly most members of Parliament so how do you consolidate your position


in the party? You do it through the mass membership who have come


swinging in, in enormous numbers, mobilising them, hard and in that


way, you can, not bypass your MPs, but sort of bypass them and get the


policies you want from the people who support you.


On policy, tramadol about make probably the second most important


speech of this week, the most important being by Jeremy Corbyn,


will the flesh out what he means quick and not previous Labour


governments have been interventionist, I remember Harold


Wilson's government was. Michael has a times and I will get up early in


the morning to intervene. Do we really know -- Michael Heseltine. To


know what it means in terms of trying to bailout the steel


industry? The short answer is no. Intervention is a good thing it is


also specifically a good thing when you look at what happened to tapas


deal, that is the example given. But I were talking about picking winners


up and down the country, getting involved in firms in the north of


England, the South West of England? We are not given that kind of detail


and we can't get into the nitty-gritty unless you have that


kind of detail to work with. Unless you know the strategy itself. What


about Labour's position on the terms of Brexit? There seems now to be an


acceptance by John McDonnell that we don't remain a member of the single


market, but we will have unspecified, as yet, access to the


single market. There is room for further clarification, put it that


way. With the government and the opposition. A lot of clarification.


In the case of the Labour leadership vision, John McDonnell, I was


talking to him yesterday morning and he was saying look, you have got to


respect the will of the referendum. Not going the Owen Smith root of


let's have a second referendum but he left open rejecting the terms of


Brexit, and then maybe putting opposition in the manifesto, which


begs the enormous question if you oppose the deal and you put it in


the manifesto and you win, then what do you do? Wouldn't that mean you


would have to apply for membership again, and if you have to reapply


for membership, would that not mean you accept the euro, the Schengen


free movement, and I don't think they will give us the rebate back.


We know about this process is once the deal is done, when the terms are


agreed, and remember the Article 50 process is not about coming to a


deal, you have two years to come to a position whether you like it or


not at the end of you take it and it. But there is only one crack at


this. It is either trying to get back in stay where you are without a


deal, with no deal at all. Is their concern among some in the party that


this emphasis on borrowing to invest, and quite eye watering sums


of money being talked about, ?500 billion, though it is split up in


various ways. There was meant to be a private sector involvement in


there as well, all a little bit vague. But if over polling shows


that the party isn't quite trusted to manage the books, is coming out


as a binge borrower, which is the phrase the Tories will probably use


colour something like that, is that sensible? Quite, Andrew. When Labour


likes of 30 points also behind the government, in terms of trust in


economic competence, there is an enormous mountain to climb. This


morning I was telling listening to John McDonnell, and it sounds like


rather a lot of money to me. However many notes you put on, it looks to


the man in the street like ?100 billion of their money being


borrowed up front in the expectation of the economy taking off and paying


it back later on. We will be joined later on by Paul Mason. He might be


in the flesh some of it out in advance of the speech. Let's take


you into the conference will now and have a look inside. There is Len


McCluskey, the head of the biggest union in the country, a big


supporter of Jeremy Corbyn. We have heard that the party's energy


policy, we have have the announcement that the party would


put a stop to fracking, and as we have been hearing there have been


speeches from the Shadow Defence Secretary, Clive Lewis. We wanted to


speak to him but we have lost and somehow, and if he is watching, come


and talk to us. Emily Thornberry has been speaking as well at that and


ethical foreign policy. Of course we are waiting for the big speech of


the day, John McDonnell's second autumn conference speech as Shadow


Chancellor. While we wait, better to tell is what might be in store than


journalist of Channel 4 provenance, now Labour activist, Paul Mason.


Welcome. Threw I'm not sure about Labour activist, it sounds like I am


going to leap over the desk at you. . Flesh out for us this investment


plan, where will the money come from? The idea is he's going to


borrow 250 billion, and that leveraging European investment bank


money, 100 billion plus, and they are going to use it... He is not


going to leveraged any European investment bank money, he's going to


try to get private money in the same way as the EAB. They will use a


variety of sources, but they are using the VIP as a model. They are


going to bellow. -- -- EIB. What businesses want is a stable,


predictable environment for long-term investment. Labour whether


it is in opposition or power has to start spelling out a framework for


that is. But as you alluded to earlier, once the answer to


everything is not the market, the answer is very difficult to come up


with any can come up with wrong answers. The challenge for John


McDonnell is to start spelling out what at the micro level they want to


concentrate on when the start spending the money. Does the


National investment bank, the government borrows 100 billion on


its balance sheet, and the national investment bank gets that hundred


billion? That is my understanding, that they will create regional


investment balance. I am not privy to the full details of the speech


but I think the move from simply saying we are against austerity, we


will end the austerity. Ending austerity is now mainstream, Vergini


20 wants to do it, the Chinese, the IMF is saying that. Saying this is


not insignificant, it moves a further piece of the global


decision-making architecture, albeit they are not in power, in favour of


that renewed physical activity. But Steve NIB, where I come from, that


is news in brief, but as it comes with that version at Labour's


understanding of what exit is starting to change. Before we were


thinking spent on things like HS2, HS three, bridges, tunnels, the rest


of it. I think Labour has come to understand that you don't


necessarily do all of that. And you have to start thinking about


community level investment. That is why there will be a big thing in


McDonnell's speech about developing responsible at it. It will be quite


easy to build a HS3 somewhere, and whether the communities that are


pretty dire at the memo just watched the trains go by. There will be a


renewed emphasis on fostering a more vibrant co-operative sector in


Britain. We have got quite a week cooperative sector, and the


countries like Spain have some giant corpse that only successful. We're


being told the reason Clive Lewis, the shadow defence spokesman, could


not join as is that in the words of somebody, he is in the leader 's


office currently arguing about the speech! Apparently the unit is over


Trident. He would have thought Labour would argue about Trident at


a conference. Of course Lewis is on record of being pro-maintenance of


it in a different firm, not Trident but cruise missiles. It was


something to do with what is in his speech. Earle the curb and


leadership is not a monolithic leadership, you could Clive Lewis,


Emily Thornberry, both have a threw more nuanced position on defence


than him. National investment bank will it be expected to make a


return? I have no idea. One would expect that the return is measured


by economic growth, increased tax receipts over ten or 20 years. I


think it is a policy decision. In the design of it you would see it in


the next phase. It is an idea that has been around the sometime in


Labour thinking, and he announced the basic idea over the summer when


they were fighting the leadership thing. I think he will emphasise now


we need to move to the implementation process. Of course in


a democracy we would say let's have the Treasury model, let's see the


Office for Budget Responsibility model it and hope Labour develop


policy. They haven't got any of those resources, because the


government won't give them, and of course Gordon Brown didn't give it


to the Tories when he was in power it. But there are big university


departments we can get on board, think tanks that I think Fleming and


ready do that. So I think the next phase is the detail, but the idea is


it is not a very difficult idea in modern thinking that states have a


national fund that they use to shape the national income. Where does it


work? Scandinavia, it works in places where countries just


basically take an activist approach to investment. Sometimes they don't


actually need the National Investment Bank because they have


such good banking sectors. Look at the German banking sector, at the


land level, the regional level and the local level, they are able to


mobilise capital and fund it. The German regional banks, they are down


to seven now, they don't do infrastructure investments. They did


at one point. They ended up almost going bust because they put so much


money into American sub-prime, and these were state-owned banks.


McIlroy absolutely, apropos of that we will see McDonnell emphasise


again today that in supporting the city, the pass putting arrangement


with the Unitt, they will not give them a free pass to go precisely the


route that the German banks ended up with in 2008. To come back to your


question, the idea of regional investment banks funded by the banks


is not Marxism. The private money would only come in as a return.


Private money is not getting any return on anything, as you know


Andrew, right now. Long-term bonds style investment is producing in


some senses negative returns. As we do the unorthodox monetary policy we


can expect more and more of the world's assets to be yielding less.


I think we are in a low interest rate environment, let's see what


environment it is a photo when Labour came into power. I think the


return for the long-term investor will not be the problem. The problem


is the execution, not ending up like Harold Wilson, backing a bunch of


bad projects and doing this in a smart way and learning from the


best. Would you pick winners? You have two. That is what the national


enterprise board tried to do as well as mail out losers. What Labour has


been learning from and being scored by, the work of people like Marianna


Mazzucato. I know her work. You create an environment where you try


to shape investment towards specific technologies and outcomes. One of


those would-be green technology. It is a big thing waiting to happen in


Britain, along the German lines. President Obama tried that. He put


in a substantial amount of federal funding into green energy projects.


Sa Lynda Bellingham the most famous one. It was $520 million, where is


that money today? It proves the point. It is all gone. It proves the


point that public investment strategies can go wrong. We are not


going round a primrose path here, it is a difficult thing to do that we


have to do it because we just don't want to leave the community after


community setting with close ties streets, no transport links, no


schools, under skilled. Firms within 20 miles of here missing thousands


of Ph.D. Is because they cannot turn people with education into the right


skills. The government has to do is to bridge the gaps. The example of


Scandinavia, where you have long-term infrastructure investment,


in those Scandinavian funds, they are backed by sovereign wealth. We


haven't got any in this country. We are talking about a sovereign great


hole in the ground. You are not talking about a sovereign fund. With


Scandinavia that is where the structure comes from. If you have


1.6 trillion debt, that has to be paid down first. The Norwegian is


the big sovereign fund. They invest for people's pensions for the


long-term payment of Norwegians pensions. It is a different concept.


What you're hearing is a very borrow to invest strategy. He knows, they


know, they need the expertise to turn it into reality, and that the


design stage is just one stage of it. What happens if you lose all the


money? How are you going to lose the money? Of course you could build dad


projects coming could back hover crafts, we didn't need hovercraft in


the end. Concorde? I quite liked Concord, I never went on it, I think


he probably did. Yes, courtesy of the taxpayer. Yes, when we educate


people from GCSE standard to Ph.D. Standard and they go into the


workforce, the taxpayers invest in their skills, and we, the people,


get tax back from their wages, and we get the fact that we have more


innovative businesses. That is an investment, isn't it? The old BBC


isn't against investing in skills and infrastructure? Of course not,


but you can see a stroke return from investing in skills. Particularly


the stems goes we are short of commerce science, technology,


engineering, maths, there is a straight return, long-term return at


a straight return to the country. That is different from investing in


a supersonic plane by the state, that allows rich people to travel at


high speeds, courtesy of working class taxpayers.


I don't think we will be building Concorde either. But when Labour


tried to outline this earlier, they put skills and human capital --


human capital into the category of long-term investment. That was


something at the time the old Cameron Osborne people trying to


defend austerity were quite worried about because they were saying, "You


are trying to get current spending, education spending, into an


infrastructure fund", and they are manifestly going to try to do that


if they are going to -- if they get power. We have just lead the


surprise announcement from John McDonnell is that Labour would


increase the National Living Wage to ?10. It is a kind of, why not ?11?


By 2020. It will be close to ?10 by 2020 so it is not radical. It is


closing the gap between the official government specified minimum wage


and the living wage that is left over from the previous


administration. My understanding is, what we now call... Let's just call


it the minimum wage because that it would it is, that the new minimum


wage will be about ?9.50 by 2019 anyway so the Tories could do that


if they got back in in 2020. If you add to that rigid enforcement


because the problem that working people who may be on their lunch


break, short and though it may be, watching this will know is that all


kinds of employers are chipping away at the base level with all kinds of


fines, you know, charges, uniform costs. A Labour Inspectorate plus an


active trade union movement that goes to employers and says they are


not going to get away with it, the baseline is a ?10 per hour minimum


wage by John McDonnell will signal that we want a high wage economy.


Conservatives and Labour before them have built a low and stagnant wage


economy to revive demand. This is pure Keynesianism, we need wage


share of the economy to rise. One way of that is to raise the minimum


wage and the other way to create more high skilled, high-paying jobs,


hard to do but having the government behind it, not saying the market


does it, is the essential difference now between radical social democracy


which is what we have seen reborn in this hall, and stagnant, stale, old


conservatism. It is the way you tell them! Of course, the more you put


the minimum wage up, the more enforcement becomes important,


doesn't it? Some employers, unscrupulous employers, will have an


incentive to get round the minimum wage. You need to be seen to be


enforcing it. That is so and the argument goes that it has been in


force to anything like the kind of degree it might have been so far,


there are still people working under the feeling all over the country. It


is a fairly incremental increase. The TUC have been calling for a ?10


minimum wage for a couple of years and Labour were nearly there at the


time of the last election. As a big announcement goes, it is not exactly


an earthquake. You might have been briefed by the wrong brief, who


knows? You think it might be more than that? I think in terms of the


biggest announcement he is going to make the man who knows? I don't see


this as a massive, game changing thing, it is splashing out


investment fund. I think there will be words about Co-op 's and some


intent to do it. You might see some personnel changes announced. Who


knows? Where? We are not getting a Shadow Cabinet reshuffle but I think


over conference, we have begun to see people say... Let's go to the


hall now. John McDonnell is going to the stage. A number of the delegates


already getting on their feet to welcome him. So we will now hear


from the Shadow Chancellor and we are expecting a number of policy


announcements. John McDonnell. Wait until you hear what I have got


to say! LAUGHTER Now the leadership election is over,


I tell you, we have to become a government in waiting. APPLAUSE


And election could come at any time. Theresa May has said that she will


not be calling an early election. But when could anyone trust the word


of a Tory leader? We have to prepare ourselves are not just to fight an


election, but also for moving into government. So to do that


successfully, we have to have the policies and the plans for


implementation on the shelf in place for when we enter government,


whenever that election comes. So everybody in the party, at every


level, and in every role, needs to appreciate the sense of urgency of


this task. In this speech, I want to address some of the key issues we


will face and how we will face them. First, though, we need to appreciate


the mess that the Tories are leaving behind when we go into government.


Six years ago, six years on from when they promised to eliminate the


government deficit in five years, they are nowhere near that goal. The


national debt burden was supposed to be falling by last year and it is


still rising. In monetary terms, it now stands at ?1.6 trillion. Our


productivity has fallen far behind each hour worked in the US or


Germany or France. It is one third more productive that each hour


worked here. Our economy is failing on productivity because the Tories


are failing to deliver the investment it needs. Government


investment is still plans to fall in every year remaining of this


Parliament. -- plans to fall. In the real world economy that our people


live in, wages are still lower than they were before the global


financial crisis in 2008. They are now at least -- there are now at


least 800,000 people on zero hours contracts, unable to plan from one


week to the next and the number continues to rise. There's Nellie


500,000 in bogus self-employment. 86% of austerity cuts have fallen on


women. Tragically, there are nearly 4 million children living in


poverty. This isn't right, is it? In the fifth richest economy in the


world, poverty on that scale. So let's talk about the immediate


issues facing us. On Brexit, we campaigned to Remain and we


campaigned hard. But we have to respect the decision of the


referendum. But that doesn't mean we have two acts that what the Tories


serve up for our future relationship with Europe. -- have two except


what. Since Brexit, the Tories have come up with no plan whatsoever.


They have no clue. Half of them want a hard Brexit, to walk away from 30


years of investment in our relationship with Europe. Some are


just paralysed by the scale of the mess they created. So what we will


do is we will be working with our socialist and social Democrat


colleagues across Europe and our aim is to create a new Europe which


builds upon the benefits of the EU but tackles the perceived this


benefits. I set out in Labour's red lines on the Brexit negotiations a


few days after the vote, so let's get it straight. We have to protect


jobs. We will seek to preserve access to the single market for


goods and services. APPLAUSE Today, access to the single market


requires free movement of labour. But we will address the concerns


that people have raised in the undercutting of wages and conditions


and the pressure on local public services. I tell you this, we will


not let the Tories bargain away our workers' writes, either. APPLAUSE


We will defend the rights of EU National that live and work here,


and UK citizens currently living and working in Europe. APPLAUSE


We'd were all appalled at the attacks that took place on the


Polish community in our country following the Brexit wrote. Let's be


clear, as a party, we will always stand up against racism and


xenophobia in any form. APPLAUSE In the negotiations, we also want


Britain to keep its stake in the European investment bank. At the


centre of the negotiations is Britain's financial services


industry. Our financial services have been placed under threat as a


result of the votes to leave. Labour has said clearly we will support


access to European markets for the financial sector. But our financial


services must understand that 2008 must never happen again. We must


never... APPLAUSE The message is clear to them, we


will not tolerate a return to the casino economy that contributed to


that crash, ever again. We will support financial services where


they deliver a clear benefit for the whole community, not just enriching


a lucky few. We will work with the finance sector to develop its new


deal with finance for the British people. We will fight for the best


possible Brexit deal for the British people. And there will be no more


support for TTip or any other trade deal that promotes deregulation or


privatisation here or across Europe. APPLAUSE


And we will make sure that any future Labour government has the


power to intervene in our economy in interests of the whole country. For


Britain to prosper in that new Europe and of the world stage, our


next major challenge is to call a halt to this government's austerity


programme. The Conservatives... APPLAUSE


The Conservative Party built upon the disaster of the 2008 financial


crisis by introducing an austerity programme that has made the impact


of the economic crisis more prolonged, protected the


corporations and the rich, and made the rest of society pay for the


mistakes and greed of the speculators that caused the crash.


Last year, this conference determined that this party would


oppose austerity and that is exactly what we have done. We have had some


successes. We forced the reversal of tax credit cuts. We also thought and


won to have the personal independence payments cut scrapped.


APPLAUSE -- fought and won. Sometimes in this


movement, we don't thank people enough so I want to thank Owen Smith


for the work he has done working with Jeremy to defeat the Tories on


this issue. APPLAUSE And I want to thank Angela Smith and


her team in the Lords for the terrific work the Lords team has


done to defeat the Tories. APPLAUSE I say that as someone who has


campaigned to abolish them for 30 years! I am having a rethink! These


are tangible victories that are making a real difference to people's


lives. I tell you, this is what we can achieve, when we are united.


APPLAUSE So when we go into government


United, be clear, be absolutely clear, we will end this government's


austerity programme that has damaged so many lives and so many


communities. But the first step, yes, is opposing austerity, the


second is creating the alternative. So exactly as our economic adviser,


Nobel Prize winner Joe Stiglitz said, we have to rewrite the rules


of the economy. We will rewrite the rules for the benefit of working


people on taxes, on investment and how our economic institutions work.


On tax, we know we can't run the best public services in the world on


a flagging economy with a tax system that does not tax fairly or


effectively. I want to congratulate a group of people as well, and


Jonathan Reynolds in particular, because the criticisms on the left


that he is a representative of came up with their slogan, the hashtag,


Patriots pay their taxes. It is a great slogan. Patriots to pay their


taxes. -- do pay. APPLAUSE Labour has already set the pace on


tackling tax avoidance and tax evasion. We launched our tax


transparency and enforcement programme to force the government


into action. Again, I would like to thank Rebecca Lauren Baillie for


leading the Labour charge in Parliament to hold the tax dodgers


to account. APPLAUSE She has been ably backed up by any


member of our team, petered out, who has again stepped into the breach


and fought in Parliament for every principle we have put forward. --


Peter Dowd. And I want to congratulate Caroline Flint, who


forced an amendment to the Finance Bill, to ensure country by country


reporting is now back on the agenda. APPLAUSE


The publication of the Panama Papers through sunlight on the scale of tax


evasion and avoidance. Some of the largest firms in the City of London


are up to it -- up to their necks in it. HSBC alone accounted for more


than 2300 shell companies established to help the super-rich


duck their taxes. In government, we will end the scourge of tax


avoidance. We will end it. APPLAUSE We will create a new tax enforcement


unit at HMRC, doubling the number of staff investigating wealthy tax


avoidance. We will... APPLAUSE We will ban tax dodging companies


from winning public sector contracts. APPLAUSE


And we will... APPLAUSE And we will ensure that all British


Crown dependencies and overseas territories introduce a full, public


register of company owners and beneficiaries. We will throw light


on where the tax dodgers are hiding their money. APPLAUSE


A review of HMRC has also revealed the corporate capture of the tax


system, and how staff cuts are undermining our ability to create


the taxes we need. I would like to thank the team for the expertise


they have provided us in drawing up this review. The next stage will be


to develop the legislation and international agreements needed to


close tax havens and end tax abuse. And I would believe this assurance,


when we go back into government will make sure HMRC has the staffing, the


resources and the legal powers to close down the tax avoidance


industry that has grown up so in this country. APPLAUSE


But we have to do more than stop tax avoidance. The burden of taxation as


a whole now fails to heavily on those least able to pay full stop so


let me make it clear, in this coming period we will be developing the


policies that will shift the tax burden fairly away from those who


earn wages and salaries and onto those who hold wealth. APPLAUSE


Turning to investment, as I have said before, labour as a party of


government needs to think not just about how we spend money, but how we


earn it. I have announced a ?250 billion investment programme that


will ensure no community is left behind. This is the scale of


investment that independent experts say will start to bring Britain's


infrastructure into the 21st century. It means putting the


investment in place that will transform our energy system,


providing cheap, low carbon electricity. It means ensuring that


every plant in the country has access to superfast broadband that


during the best in the world. It means delivering the transport


deliveries, including HS3 in the north-west of England, to unlock the


potential of the whole country. But for too long now, major decisions


about what and where to invest have been taken by Whitehall and the


city. The result? And investment and decline across the country, so it's


time for our regions and localities to take control, take back control.


So we will create new institutions not run by the old elite circles,


are National Investment Bank well sustain a new, more productive


economy. It will be backed up by a network of regional development


banks, with a clear-cut mandate to supply finance to regional and local


economies. It is also a disgrace that Arsenal businesses can't get


the finances they need to grow. Our financial system is letting them


down badly at the moment. The new regional develop and banks will have


a mandate to provide the long-term investment they need, but we will go


further than this. We will shake up our major corporations work and


change how our economy is owned and managed. We will clamp down on the


abuses of power at the very top. Under Labour, there will be Nemeth


Philip Greens at all. APPLAUSE We will legislate to write company


law to prevent it. We will introduce legislation to ban company is taking


on excessive debt to pay out dividends to shareholders. And we


will rewrite the tax takeover code to make sure every takeover proposal


has a clear plan in place to pay workers and pensioners. We will


protect their pensions. APPLAUSE But we can do more to transform our


economy for working people. Theresa May has spoken about worker


representation on boards. It is good to see her following our lead. But


we know that meant workers own and manage their companies, those


businesses last longer and are more productive. If we want patient,


long-term investment and high-quality firms, what better way


to do it than to give employees themselves a clear stake in both. So


Corporation and collaboration is how the emerging economy of the future


functions. So we will look to at least double our co-operative sector


in this country, so it matches those in Germany and the US. APPLAUSE


We will build on the good example of Labour councils like Preston here in


the north-west, using public procurement to support cooperative


is whether they can. Yes, we will help to create 200 local energy


companies and 1000 energy cooperatives, breaking the monopoly


of the big six producers. APPLAUSE We will introduce a right to own,


giving workers first refusal on a proposal for a worker ownership when


a company faces change of ownership foreclosure. A right to own for


workers. So the next Labour government will promote a menace


once in cooperative and worker ownership. The new leadership


develop and banks will be tasked with supplying the capital that a


new generation of business owners will need to succeed. We will


support business hubs around the country. I visited Make Liverpool


yesterday, the next Labour government will provide support to


established business hubs in every town and city, every town and city.


APPLAUSE We know the economy is changing,


with more people self employed than ever before. We need to think


creatively about how to respond, so we'll be taking a serious look about


how to make the welfare system better support the self-employed.


I'm also interested in the potential of a universal Basic income. I want


to learn from the experiments that are taking place across Europe. But


you know, until working people have proper protections at work, the


labour market will always work against them. So to achieve fair


wages, the next Labour government will look to implement the


recommendations of the report. We will reintroduce sectoral collective


bargaining across the economy, ending the race to the bottom.


APPLAUSE And I give you this commitment: in


the first 100 days of our Labour government, we will repeal of the


trade union act. CHEERING Because what happens when trade


unions are weakened? I'll tell you what happens, over 200,000 workers


in the UK are receiving less than the minimum wage set down in love.


This is totally unacceptable. Under Labour, we will properly resource


HMRC and the gang masters and labour abuse authority to make sure they


are no more national scandals like Mike Ashley Sports Direct. APPLAUSE


And our vision for a higher wage economy with everyone receiving


their Sergi 's doesn't end there. I have spoken before about building on


the great achievements of previous Labour governments will stop yes,


and one of the greatest achievement of the government elected in 1997


was the establishment of a national minimum wage, lifting millions out


of poverty. And I pay tribute to that government for doing it.


APPLAUSE But, remember, remember, the Tories


opposed it, claiming it would cost millions of jobs. But, united


purpose, we won the argument. Under the next Labour government, everyone


will earn enough to live on. When we win the next election, we will write


into law a real living wage. APPLAUSE


We'll charge a new living wage bloody, and independent forecasts


suggest this will be over ?10 an hour. This will be part of our new


bargain in the workplace. But we know that small businesses need to


be part of that bargain, and that's why we'll also be publishing


proposals to help businesses implement the living wage,


particularly small and medium-sized companies. We will be examining a


number of ideas, including the expansion and reform of employment


allowance, to make sure this historic step forward, improving the


living standards of the poorest paid, does not impact upon hours of


employment. Backed up by our commitment to investment, this means


we will end the scourge of poverty pay in this country, once and for.


APPLAUSE -- once and for all. Decent pay is


not just fundamentally a right, it is good for business, it is good for


employees and it is good for Britain. But we need a new deal


across the whole of our economy, because whatever we do in Britain,


the old rules of the global economy are being rewritten for us. The wins


of globalisation are blowing in a different direction now, they are


playing against the belief in the free market, and in favour of


intervention. Look at the steel crisis, with the world market


flooded by cheap steel, major governments moved to particular


their domestic steel injuries forced up ours did not until we pushed them


into it, as a result of a community and trade union and Labour campaign.


But they are so blinkered by the eulogy that they can't see how the


world is changing. Good business doesn't need no government. Good


business needs good government. APPLAUSE


And the best governments today, right the way across the world,


recognise that they need to support their economies, because the way the


world works is changing. For decades, manufacturing jobs


disappeared, as producers look for the cheapest labour they could find.


Today, one in six manufacturers in the UK are bringing jobs back to


Britain. That's because production today is about locating cluster


markets and drawing upon the highly skilled labour and high-quality


investment. Digital technology means production can be smaller scale, in


smaller, faster firms, dependent on cooperation and collaboration. Not


to eat dog competition. The economies that are making best use


of this shift are those with governments that understand it is


taking place, and support new industries and small businesses. So


we could be part of that change here. There is huge potential in


this country, and in every part of the country. We have an immense


heritage of scientific research, and engineering expertise with that


today, our science system is a world leader. We have natural resources


that could make us world leaders in renewables. We have talent and


ambition in every part of the country, yet at every stage, we have


a government that fails to reach that potential. It has cut


scientific research spending, slashed subsidies to renewables,


threatening tens of thousands of jobs, and it plans to cut essential


investment in transport, energy and housing across the country. Be


certain, the next Labour government will be an interventionist


government, we will not stand by like this one and the Ahki


industries flounder and our future prosperity but at risk. When we


return to government, we will implement a comprehensive industrial


strategy, developed in partnership with trade unions and employers and


the wider community. After Brexit, we want to see a red assaults in


British manufacturing, and as we have committed ourselves, our


government will create an entrepreneurial state that works


with wealth creators, the workers and the entrepreneurs, to create the


products and the markets that will secure our long-term prosperity. Let


me just say this in conclusion, on a personal note. I'm so pleased that


this conference is being held in Liverpool. I was born in this city,


not far from here. My dad was a Liverpool blocker and my mum was a


cleaner, and they worked for 30 years behind a BHS store counter. I


was part of that 1960s generation -- Liverpool dock. We lived in not so


sure logical studies have described as some of the worst slum conditions


that have existed in this country. We just called it home. As the


result of a Labour government, I remember the day when we celebrated


moving into our council house. My brother and I had a bedroom of our


own for the first time, a garden front and rear. Both of us were born


in NHS hospitals, both of us had a great free education. There was an


atmosphere of eternal optimism. Our generation always thought that from


here on there would always be a steady improvement in people's


living standards. We expected the lives that each generation would


improve upon the last. But successive Tory governments put an


end to that. Under Jeremy's leadership, I believe that we can


restore that optimism, people's faith in the future. So I say this,


in the birthplace of John Lennon, it falls to us to inspire people to


imagine again. APPLAUSE Imagined the society... APPLAUSE


Imagine... Imagine the society we can create. It is a society that is


radically transformed, radically fairer, more equal, more democratic,


yes, based upon a prosperous economy that is economically and


environmentally sustainable but where that prosperity is shared by


all. That is our vision to rebuild and transform Britain. In this


party, you no longer have to whisper its name, it is called socialism.


APPLAUSE STUDIO: And John McDonnell finishes


his speech to the Labour Party conference with the word solidarity,


as he did last year but before that, saying socialism was no longer a


word that you had to apologise for in the Labour Party. He finished by


quoting John Lennon and Imagine in the city of Liverpool, which was a


natural thing to do. He said there would be no more support for


transatlantic trade deals of the sort that is currently being


negotiated, under a Labour government, HMRC would be much


tougher in enforcing those who were trying to dodge or evade tax, no


public contracts for tax evading companies, he said. He announced


again the ?250 billion investment programme for a national investment


bank, backed up by he says, regional investment banks throughout the


country. He said there would be no more Philip greens under Labour. He


wanted to double the size of the co-op sector. There would be a right


to own for workers when companies came up for sale. Interesting to see


how that would work but what was really popular was that he said he


would repeal the trade union act in the first 100 days of a Labour


government. Most of the reforms that were put in the Thatcher years and


were left largely untouched in the Blair and Brown years. And he


announced that he would want is the new minimum wage, well, he called it


a new National Living Wage, from 2020 onwards, over ?10 per hour.


Many other things in it too but that gives you a flavour of the kind of


things he was proposing. John Pienaar?


One of the benefits for John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn of


winning the Civil War is they now have space to develop their ideas


and set up what a future Labour government under Jeremy Corbyn would


look like. The challenge for them is that we are listening and we would


like to note what a Labour government under Jeremy Corbyn would


look like. This is still obviously a very early stage of the process.


There are any number of questions being stacked up here. And a


requirement for some clarification. We spoke a moment ago about his


comprehensive industrial strategy but what is that going to look like


beyond being far more locally based? We know that is part of the pan and


it is broadly socialist. The question of Europe and Brexit, he


talked about access to the single market. What does that mean? The


very web access implies some kind of compromise from full membership and


all that goes with it. Now they will presumably have to be some kind of


trade-off with freedom of movement. That was a big question with no real


answers beyond what we have heard before about the need to take on the


threat of wages being undercut and all of that kind of thing, the ideas


we have heard in the past. A of emphasis on tax avoidance to the


point of uttering threats to companies who engage in tax


avoidance, that they could lose government contracts. But tax


avoidance is what happens when you have a tax code. We are not talking


about tax evasion, which is a legal, tax avoidance is what every company


tries to do one way or the other. The thicker the tax code gets, and


what is it now? 2000 pages, the more loopholes. It is 15,000 pages. That


is just in the last week! George Osborne added another third to what


had already been doubled. Wealth taxes on the agenda. He hinted at


that. Some way of dealing with wealth rather than earnings so the


mansion tax but what else? Many questions. It is good to be able to


start talking about policy and drill down to see what they think and how


far the thinking has gone. Paul Mason, your reaction? The keyword


was intervention. Some of this came Xeon macroeconomic policy like ?250


billion spending, raising wages through the living wage, is classic


canes, but the next phase for Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell is the


interventionist idea. -- some of this Keynesian macroeconomic policy.


It is reaching inside companies and saying you can't do this commie


can't not pay the minimum wage, you can't... He was very clear, and


let's be clear, we are not talking about evasion, illegality, we are


talking about the legitimate tax avoidance that means companies like


Apple and Google allegedly pay less tax than they should, is now going


to be subjected to contract compliance rules in the public


sector. Does that mean the government will not buy iPhones? It


may do and let's think about this, before Brexit, this contract


compliance was not possible. That is an interesting thing, John McDonnell


now says we have Brexit and there are no EU rules to worry about, if


we want to intervene in the private sector and change it, we will do it.


That, plus the trade union act, massive applause and I saw some


people stand up at the end which I think John McDonnell and Jeremy


Corbyn are quite happy with at this conference! We are all obsessed with


Momentum and entry is. I read that as a very trade union influenced


speech and not just by Unite that supports them, there were big throw


out to people like the GMB who has been wavering in their support for


the new government. I'm sure it will be popular with the trade unions.


John, picking up anything on Clive Lewis and this argument he is having


with Mr Corbyn about Trident? We seem to have gathered there was a


meeting ahead of the speech and the line in the speech was in dispute as


we understand it and as we have been discussing, nuances of difference


between the two of them, mainly focused on all of that but the


outcome we don't yet know and precisely how it will lead onto


policy, which is still a work in progress, very much. We have the


rest of the day and week to find. Thank you for joining us.


So Mr McDonnell told the conference that he wanted to end


the "scourge of poverty pay", and one way he says he'll do this


He said it would be set by an independent body.


Let's just remind you what he had to say.


When we win the next election, we will write into law a real living


wage. APPLAUSE We will charge a new living wage


review body with the task of setting it at the level needed for a decent


life, independent forecasts suggest this will be over ?10 per hour. John


McDonnell on the announcement that he had managed to hold back and not


leaked in advance and we would like to know what that is.


Now, we asked for an interview with John McDonnell or one


of his colleagues on Labour's economic team so we could scrutinise


the party's developing economic policy.


But none of them were apparently available.


But the Shadow Foreign Affairs Minister Catherine West has agreed


Good to see you. He is going to invest ?250 billion investment


banks, national and regional. Where will the money come from? Partly


through the investment bank arrangement in the European Union,


which of course... We did not want to leave the European Union for this


very reason that those facilities are available to us. Excuse me, the


European investment bank will give us this money? It will assist as one


of the tools which will bring together the funding but in terms of


the money that actually exists, the quantitative easing programme which


the government has been using since 2008, there are financial mechanisms


and ways of investment. We know that in the Autumn Statement, Phillip


Hammond will be looking at investment. I guess it is the same


question. Let me try to an picked this a bit. Have you talked to the


European investment bank to find out if they will contribute to this ?250


billion? We will approach them. But you haven't? We can use the same


mechanisms that Mr Hammond will be using. But the European investment


bank mechanism is to put public money in and then leveraged it by


getting more private money in. It does not give money to national


investment banks. So you have not discussed this yet? We will be using


the same tools which Mr Hammond is going to use when he announces it in


the Autumn Statement. Forgive me, we will deal with Mr Hammond when we


deal with him -- get him and I get a chance to interview him. Let's stick


with what John McDonnell announced today. You mentioned the Bank of


England's quantitative easing which is essentially the electronic


printing of money. Will you just print money to finance this ?250


billion? No, I think the point is this, what we had all hoped after


2008 was that QE would have an effect on the real economy but


instead, it has led to the driving down of wages. Yes, growth is around


1% which is a good thing. No, it's not commit an average of 2.5%. Not


1%. -- it's not, it is on average. In terms of wages and people's


pockets... Bayard growing by 2.3%. Not in the public sector. But they


are growing by an average of 2.3%. In certain sectors, wages are


flatter than they have ever been. RUC began to print money, going to


monetise... We are going to use the same mechanisms that Mr Hammond will


when he announces his infrastructure spend on the 23rd of November. What


will you do with that money? The number one priority is building more


homes, we have a desperate shortage of affordable homes. The second one


is transport priorities. Many regions are crying out for real


basics like a bus to go to work in the morning. Things which are


desperately needed. So this money would not be expected to earn a


return? The thing about investing in the economy, which we know and I


know because I have been a bar leader before, if you invest in the


local area, like the regions, in a place like Liverpool, and you can


see the European investment where we are having conference at the moment,


it leads to jobs. It can over time if the investment is right, that is


correct. What do you accept in the short term, perhaps even the medium


term, it will lead to quite a substantial rise in the deficit? The


thing at the moment is that borrowing is quite low. As we know,


the borrowing just came down after the Brexit Road. But will it add to


the deficit? It is a good time to borrow which is why the government


is about to announce it. But it will add substantially to the deficit.


Lets see how to the government is going to add the deficit. But I'm


asking about you, these plans in total come to about ?500 billion,


and you will take our national debt over ?2 trillion, won't you? It


depends on the rate at which we borrow and we have to examine that


when we come to make the decision. We want to borrow so that rather


than borrowing to keep a few businesses afloat to press down


wages, we want to borrow to invest in the country. John McDonnell


praised the entrepreneurial state and said the Obama administration


had been a good example of that. Can you give me an example of where the


Obama administration has been entrepreneurial? I think


increasingly across globalised economies, we are seeing people


working from home, creating their own businesses. But what has been


entrepreneurial about Mr Obama? You can see there has been a growth in


the economy and the -- unemployment rate has dropped... The same as


Britain's. I'm proudly and implement rate is lower but we are talking


about the quality of those jobs, what the wages are and how we can


make the workforce and people's lives work much better. My working


life will be better when we get it time!


John McDonnell has given his second speech as Shadow Chancellor.


I'll be back at 11:15pm on BBC2, straight after Newsnight,


to bring you all the main events from Liverpool in


How could you miss that? And we will be back at the usual time of midday,


live from Liverpool, tomorrow. Goodbye.


As we think of the places we've called home.


Download Subtitles