:00:37. > :00:38.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:39. > :00:41.Theresa May embarks on a diplomatic offensive in European capitals
:00:42. > :00:45.to make the case for a fair deal for Britain outside the EU.
:00:46. > :00:50.But should Parliament be consulted before negotiations begin?
:00:51. > :00:53.Sparks fly in the second presidential debate
:00:54. > :00:55.between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.
:00:56. > :00:57.Did the scandal-hit Republican candidate do enough
:00:58. > :01:04.Ukip's Steven Woolfe leaves hospital following that dust-up
:01:05. > :01:09.Despite the incident, he's still the favourite to become leader.
:01:10. > :01:15.And should parts of the countryside be turned back into wilderness?
:01:16. > :01:19.Environmentalist George Monbiot has climbed on to his soapbox.
:01:20. > :01:31.What I perceive when I see places like this is a barren wasteland.
:01:32. > :01:34.All that in the next hour and with us for the whole
:01:35. > :01:36.of the programme today is the Conservative
:01:37. > :01:39.MP Oliver Dowden, and Dawn Butler, who has been promoted
:01:40. > :01:42.to Jeremy Corbyn's shadow cabinet in the brand new role
:01:43. > :01:44.of Shadow Minister for Diverse Communities.
:01:45. > :01:50.First today, the Prime Minister is shortly to arrive in Copenhagen
:01:51. > :01:52.for talks with her Danish counterpart over Britain's exit
:01:53. > :01:59.After that, she'll head to the Hague to meet the Dutch Prime Minister.
:02:00. > :02:03.Meanwhile here, David Davis, the Secretary of State for Leaving
:02:04. > :02:06.the EU will make a statement to the Commons later this
:02:07. > :02:09.afternoon on the Government's approach to Brexit.
:02:10. > :02:11.This comes after the former Labour leader Ed Miliband has said
:02:12. > :02:21.Parliament should have a say on the shape of any Brexit deal.
:02:22. > :02:26.Here is what he had to say earlier today.
:02:27. > :02:28.If they begin the negotiations without consulting Parliament,
:02:29. > :02:31.then after two years, or less than two years, they'll just
:02:32. > :02:33.come to Parliament and say, "Well, it's yes or no".
:02:34. > :02:36.I mean, I assume they'll try and get the final
:02:37. > :02:42.We need to be knowing now what the Government is going to be
:02:43. > :02:44.negotiating for and I believe they need to get the consent
:02:45. > :02:46.of MPs because there's no other mandate here.
:02:47. > :02:48.The Conservative manifesto said that the Conservative Party
:02:49. > :02:50.was determined to stay in the single market.
:02:51. > :02:52.Now, it sounded from what Theresa May and some
:02:53. > :02:55.of her ministers were saying that we were going to
:02:56. > :02:56.leave the single market, contrary to the manifesto.
:02:57. > :02:59.So there's no mandate for a hard Brexit, a huge separation
:03:00. > :03:02.from the single market, I don't believe, and that's why
:03:03. > :03:07.I think Parliament's got to be consulted.
:03:08. > :03:12.That was Ed Miliband. Is he right to say leaving the single market would
:03:13. > :03:17.break a commitment on your Tory manifesto? I looked at the wedding
:03:18. > :03:20.of the manifesto before I came on the programme and I don't think he
:03:21. > :03:24.is correct on that. The clear manifesto commitment was to hold
:03:25. > :03:27.that in our referendum. I remember there was scepticism on the doorstep
:03:28. > :03:33.about whether we would deliver on it but we did deliver on it. The
:03:34. > :03:37.manifesto says, we will safeguard British interests in the single
:03:38. > :03:43.market. That was setting out the negotiating asks as part of the then
:03:44. > :03:47.Prime Minister's renegotiation strategy but the clear commitment
:03:48. > :03:50.was on the referendum. All this sort of talk is still going back and
:03:51. > :03:54.trying to ask the question all over again. I was a reluctant remain but
:03:55. > :03:58.I accept what the British people said and I think we should deliver
:03:59. > :04:03.on it. Was actually says more clearly, "We are clear what we want
:04:04. > :04:06.for Europe, we say yes to the single market". There was no way of
:04:07. > :04:12.equivocating about that. You said yes to the single market. If we get
:04:13. > :04:18.into technicalities of that, that is the paragraph that sets out what the
:04:19. > :04:23.primates in -- premise to's negotiation asks were. Are you
:04:24. > :04:27.saying that is not a clear commitment? That is not what you
:04:28. > :04:30.meant, saying we will safeguard British interests in the single
:04:31. > :04:34.market, we are clear about saying yes to the single market. I didn't
:04:35. > :04:41.personally write the manifesto. You are in the party that did. I stand
:04:42. > :04:45.by that manifesto. You stood on a manifesto. And that paragraph was
:04:46. > :04:50.asking what the asks were for that renegotiation. What the Prime
:04:51. > :04:53.Minister set out to get he didn't get fully at negotiation and the
:04:54. > :05:00.British people chose to leave Europe. The battle now as to what
:05:01. > :05:04.that Brexit looks like. Did the British people vote referendum for
:05:05. > :05:08.the UK to come out of the single market? For me, during that
:05:09. > :05:11.referendum campaign, there were two very big themes. People wanted to
:05:12. > :05:15.have control of migration and they wanted control of their own laws.
:05:16. > :05:20.The problem with the single market is that it has four fundamental
:05:21. > :05:24.principles, freedom of movement, goods, services, capital and labour
:05:25. > :05:27.and if you look back to why we got into this whole referendum on the
:05:28. > :05:30.first place, one of the big issues was that we wanted to be able to
:05:31. > :05:35.control migration, including from Europe, and it is quite difficult to
:05:36. > :05:40.do that within the single market. So do you agree, then, that the two are
:05:41. > :05:43.mutually exclusive. If Theresa May says we are no longer under the
:05:44. > :05:54.jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and we want to control
:05:55. > :05:56.borders, she wants the UK out of the single market? The strategy the
:05:57. > :05:59.Prime Minister has set out, as I understand it, is to try and get a
:06:00. > :06:02.deal suitable for Britain. We're not going to be constrained by existing
:06:03. > :06:04.constructs. What do you say to the idea that the referendum has given
:06:05. > :06:08.some sort of mandate to the government to decide how Brexit
:06:09. > :06:12.negotiations are going to take shape? I think talking about the
:06:13. > :06:16.negotiations on the asks is very important to what people voted for.
:06:17. > :06:23.Yes, the question was a very simple in or out but what are the terms of
:06:24. > :06:28.the out? What are the terms of the exit strategy? Should there be a
:06:29. > :06:32.vote? Does Labour want to see a vote in parliament on the Government's
:06:33. > :06:37.initial negotiating position? Labour would like to see a vote on the
:06:38. > :06:41.terms so people, for instance, thought they were voting for an
:06:42. > :06:46.extra ?350 million in the NHS. That was very clearly set out as one of
:06:47. > :06:50.the negotiating terms in the campaign. What you say that you want
:06:51. > :06:54.to have a vote and that is what Kier Starmer, the shadow Brexit
:06:55. > :06:57.secretary, said yesterday but Diane Abbott, the Shadow Home Secretary,
:06:58. > :07:00.said, "We have to be careful not to look as if we are not listening to
:07:01. > :07:04.the result," and she wouldn't actually say that there should be a
:07:05. > :07:10.vote so is she right or is Kier Starmer? No, because we are not
:07:11. > :07:14.requesting or asking for people to rerun the election. What are you
:07:15. > :07:17.asking for? We are not saying yes or no again. People have said we want
:07:18. > :07:21.to leave the EU so we've accepted that people want to leave the EU.
:07:22. > :07:28.What are the terms of that exit? Is it a hard Brexit? Are you saying
:07:29. > :07:31.that we leave and we're out of the single market? Should there be a
:07:32. > :07:36.vote on that? Yes, the bubbly to know what they are voting for. So
:07:37. > :07:40.Diane Abbott, who wouldn't sign up to, was not speaking for the Labour
:07:41. > :07:44.Party, Kier Starmer is? They are essentially saying the same thing.
:07:45. > :07:49.What Diana saying is that we don't want to rerun the referendum, to ask
:07:50. > :07:54.people again, do you want to leave? Are you happy with your Prime
:07:55. > :07:58.Minister's negotiation is? When should that be? Before it is agreed
:07:59. > :08:05.in the EE you that this is the terms on which we will leave. Straight
:08:06. > :08:10.after article 50 of the vote -- is invoked? We're not saying that
:08:11. > :08:13.step-by-step Theresa May has to come back and say, this is what I've
:08:14. > :08:16.negotiated but an big things like single market, which is going to
:08:17. > :08:20.affect a lot of businesses, the public need to know what that means.
:08:21. > :08:24.There is growing pressure now for there to be a vote on whether the UK
:08:25. > :08:28.remains part of the single market and whether that should be part of
:08:29. > :08:31.the negotiations. I'm slightly confused as to Labour's stands
:08:32. > :08:35.because Ed Miliband seem to suggest that the vote would take place
:08:36. > :08:39.before invoking article 50, so it was a sort of negotiating mandate it
:08:40. > :08:44.a very different question if it is on the outcome of the negotiation
:08:45. > :08:47.process. I don't think there was confusion in terms of, what is it
:08:48. > :08:52.that is going to happen when we leave the EU? People need to know,
:08:53. > :08:56.what will it look like? What does it mean? Is this on the Government's
:08:57. > :09:00.negotiating stance or on the outcome? As I understood, it was on
:09:01. > :09:04.the negotiating stance. In that case, I have two problems with it.
:09:05. > :09:07.The first is the negotiating is clearly an executive power, an
:09:08. > :09:17.exercise of royal prerogative, and the reason for that is that the
:09:18. > :09:19.Prime Minister of the day, or whoever is undertaking the
:09:20. > :09:21.negotiation, needs to have the flexibility. That's why it's
:09:22. > :09:24.exercised as a royal brother to power. I have a wider political
:09:25. > :09:26.problem with it which is that I remember during the election
:09:27. > :09:28.campaign, we had very clear battle stood up on one side was pledged
:09:29. > :09:30.economic argument and on the other was the very compelling argument
:09:31. > :09:36.about controlling migration and controlling our laws... Do you
:09:37. > :09:41.accept many people didn't think that would mean coming out of the single
:09:42. > :09:43.market? Rupert Morgan, the Tory MP, has said that leaving the single
:09:44. > :09:47.market would break the commitment the Tories have made and that the
:09:48. > :09:53.negotiating stance should be something that is voted on by MPs. I
:09:54. > :09:58.think everyone is assuming we are going to get out of the single
:09:59. > :10:03.market it there was a negotiating process to go on. I hope the Prime
:10:04. > :10:07.Minister can get the very best deal possible. Let's not try and prejudge
:10:08. > :10:11.the exact nature that. If we are going to leave the single market, is
:10:12. > :10:16.it right that people understand that before the negotiations continue? As
:10:17. > :10:20.I said, it doesn't make sense to start binding the Government's hands
:10:21. > :10:24.before the negotiating process. Before we leave this, you were David
:10:25. > :10:28.Cameron's deputy chief of staff and are now a backbencher under Theresa
:10:29. > :10:32.May. It is a very different government now, obviously, post the
:10:33. > :10:37.referendum. Are you as comfortable with the government you had now as
:10:38. > :10:40.you were under David Cameron? I am completely comfortable. I thought
:10:41. > :10:43.the Primus's speech in the hall was a fantastic speech. There are two
:10:44. > :10:59.phases. What we had under David Cameron as our Prime Minister was
:11:00. > :11:01.somebody who got control of the economy, fixed Britain's broken
:11:02. > :11:03.finances, adopted a more inclusive stands for the Conservative Party.
:11:04. > :11:06.So why has Theresa May dumped everybody from that era? I think
:11:07. > :11:10.most of the government are the same as were under David Cameron but what
:11:11. > :11:14.Theresa May recognised in her speech was, first of all, we need to
:11:15. > :11:17.embrace Brexit and the consequences of that but, also, we need to
:11:18. > :11:21.embrace people that feel they've been left behind over the past two
:11:22. > :11:24.decades and for a Conservative government that believes in
:11:25. > :11:29.capitalism, as I do, it is very important that we must constantly
:11:30. > :11:35.review our mission. Of course, 48% didn't vote in favour of leaving the
:11:36. > :11:36.EU. That's how elections work. Indeed.
:11:37. > :11:40.According to newspaper reports, officials in the Foreign Office
:11:41. > :11:42.think they've found someone whom they've labelled their secret
:11:43. > :11:45.weapon to help them with Brexit negotiations, so our question
:11:46. > :11:55.At the end of the show, Dawn and Oliver will give us
:11:56. > :12:00.The Government says it will not force UK firms to list or name any
:12:01. > :12:03.Last week, a Conservative briefing suggested firms would have to be
:12:04. > :12:05."clear about the proportion of their workforce
:12:06. > :12:09.Labour says the Government is "in disarray" over the policy.
:12:10. > :12:12.The government says critics have misunderstood the plans.
:12:13. > :12:18.On Tuesday the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, told the Conservative
:12:19. > :12:20.Party Conference that the Government would be "examining
:12:21. > :12:23.whether we should tighten the test companies have to take before
:12:24. > :12:27.She added, "The test should ensure people coming here are filling gaps
:12:28. > :12:29.in the labour market, not taking jobs British
:12:30. > :12:36.She was referring to the Resident Labour Market Test,
:12:37. > :12:38.which businesses have to undertake when they want to recruit non-EU
:12:39. > :12:40.workers, to demonstrate they are filling genuine gaps
:12:41. > :12:46.This requires a company to advertise the role
:12:47. > :12:49.in the UK for 28 days and demonstrate no qualified
:12:50. > :12:55.In a briefing after the speech, the Government said it would consult
:12:56. > :13:00.to "set out the impact on the local labour force of their foreign
:13:01. > :13:03.recruitment and be clear about the proportion of their workforce
:13:04. > :13:09.The next day, The Times newspaper led with the following headline:
:13:10. > :13:15.The sub-heading read, "Plan to shame companies that turn
:13:16. > :13:20.In an interview on the Today programme, Ms Rudd said she wanted
:13:21. > :13:24.to "flush out" firms that were abusing the current rules.
:13:25. > :13:32.who campaigned for Britain to remain in the EU,
:13:33. > :13:35.said, "Those of us who find the denigration of non-British
:13:36. > :13:39.workers appalling have a duty to speak out."
:13:40. > :13:44.Michael Fallon, insisted, "We will not be asking companies to list
:13:45. > :13:47.or publish or name or identify in any way the number of foreign
:13:48. > :13:53.He said, "We're going to consult with business
:13:54. > :13:55.on how we can do more to encourage companies,
:13:56. > :14:05.to look first at the British labour market."
:14:06. > :14:11.Has there been a U-turn on this? There most certainly hasn't done if
:14:12. > :14:15.you look at the quotes, Amber Rudd never actually said there was going
:14:16. > :14:19.to be some sort of naming or shaming or public register. But she did say
:14:20. > :14:25.they would have to list to the numbers of none British workers. I
:14:26. > :14:27.think it is sensible in terms of managing immigration policy.
:14:28. > :14:32.Remember, we need to get immigration under control, to actually have a
:14:33. > :14:36.sense of how many foreign workers a company employs. I don't think this
:14:37. > :14:39.is terribly radical. They do it in the United States... I didn't ask
:14:40. > :14:45.whether it was radical. What I'm saying is, has there been a U-turn?
:14:46. > :14:49.Is the Government now going to require foreign workers to list how
:14:50. > :14:52.many none British people they have working for them? Goal but there is
:14:53. > :14:56.a consultation on going and I think that will be one of the proposals
:14:57. > :15:00.the consultation. So it is still there? What is being argued is that
:15:01. > :15:04.somehow the Home Secretary made the case that companies would be
:15:05. > :15:09.published and named unchanged. It is about managing migration. Let's take
:15:10. > :15:12.it one stage at a time. You said there is a consultation going on,
:15:13. > :15:23.whether companies will be required to publish the numbers none British
:15:24. > :15:26.workers they have. Not publish. Published suggest that it is put out
:15:27. > :15:29.into the public domain. That is the U-turn, because that was the
:15:30. > :15:33.implication. Can you show me where the Home Secretary said there would
:15:34. > :15:37.be published register? I am baffled by this. I can't see where the Home
:15:38. > :15:43.Secretary publicly said there would be a published register.
:15:44. > :15:50.Well they've had to deny its. It's hard to U-turn when it was not
:15:51. > :15:55.policy in the first place. So you can categorically say a list will
:15:56. > :15:59.not be made public. I don't think there was ever a proposal for its.
:16:00. > :16:04.But they will be required to come up with the data? It's one of the ideas
:16:05. > :16:09.under consideration as part of the consultation. What do you think?
:16:10. > :16:12.This has been clarified by Michael Farren and reiterated why Oliver
:16:13. > :16:19.Dowd and that these comments were misinterpreted? I think the whole
:16:20. > :16:24.premise of having a list worries me, whether it is published or secret.
:16:25. > :16:29.Identifying the government should have a secret list of foreign
:16:30. > :16:33.workers. -- I do not think the government should have a secret
:16:34. > :16:37.list. The tone of the debate around migration and immigration is
:16:38. > :16:41.worrying me, and the road this government is going down is deeply
:16:42. > :16:47.disturbing. Having a list per se is the wrong way to tackle it. Did you
:16:48. > :16:52.feel the same when Ed Miliband suggested this very idea in 2011?
:16:53. > :16:57.Yes, I do not believe there should be a list, secret or published. Did
:16:58. > :17:01.you make your voice public at the time when Ed Miliband floated this
:17:02. > :17:08.exact idea of telling job centres which firms had more than 25% of
:17:09. > :17:13.foreign staff? Ed Miliband did not make a public statement. He made a
:17:14. > :17:17.speech. He did not make a speech at a party conference calling for
:17:18. > :17:21.companies to publish a list of foreign workers and talked about
:17:22. > :17:27.jobs that are just people can take instead. What did Gordon Brown say?
:17:28. > :17:32.He said British jobs for British workers. And what happened when he
:17:33. > :17:35.said that? The whole thing you up and he retracted that. So he was
:17:36. > :17:41.wrong but you were a minister, did you say he was wrong at the time? I
:17:42. > :17:45.did and he apologised at the time. I have not seen any retraction, all I
:17:46. > :17:50.have seen is the government say, let's not nit-pick, let's look at
:17:51. > :17:53.the details. The details are what are important, you are in
:17:54. > :17:57.government, it is important what you say and the message you give out to
:17:58. > :18:00.the public. We have been through this discussion, it was not ever the
:18:01. > :18:08.intention that it would be published. Secondly I cannot
:18:09. > :18:13.understand your outrage over this. As Jo was saying, this is something
:18:14. > :18:17.Ed Miliband proposed in 2011, and for Labour to jump on the bandwagon
:18:18. > :18:26.and call it outrageous does not ring true. And the labour policy on
:18:27. > :18:30.immigration is slightly confused. Kir Starmer was saying you should
:18:31. > :18:35.reduce numbers, what is the actual policy? What Labour is talking about
:18:36. > :18:39.is putting systems in place to make sure people are properly paid, wages
:18:40. > :18:42.are not undercut, and by companies doing that it will naturally bring
:18:43. > :18:48.down immigration of people that are coming in and working. We are
:18:49. > :18:51.looking at structures and systems. What Labour is definitely not saying
:18:52. > :18:56.is going down the road of having a secret list of foreign workers. But
:18:57. > :19:00.should the numbers actually come down? That's the question. Does
:19:01. > :19:04.Labour believe that the number of migrants or the number of people
:19:05. > :19:09.migrating to the UK, should they come down? We've quite clearly said
:19:10. > :19:13.you cannot put a number on immigration because that is an
:19:14. > :19:23.arbitrary number and it has never worked. Keir
:19:24. > :19:29.Starmer has said that the numbers should come down. If people are
:19:30. > :19:36.properly paid, naturally that will bring numbers down. So what are we
:19:37. > :19:40.are doing to make sure people are getting paid the right amount. Is
:19:41. > :19:47.the next level of migration to high? I don't think that we should look at
:19:48. > :19:52.it in those terms. Keir Starmer says that number should come down. It is
:19:53. > :19:56.how we work towards a fair immigration policy in the UK. I
:19:57. > :20:00.understand that. Not how we denigrate people who are coming and
:20:01. > :20:06.working. Is Keir Starmer denigrating when he says he would like the net
:20:07. > :20:11.migration figure two come down? Said that is what Keir Starmer has said
:20:12. > :20:15.but then you have to look at what he is putting in place and that is the
:20:16. > :20:19.difference in terms of what the Labour Party is saying and what the
:20:20. > :20:24.Tory party is saying. Do you think this was handled well by Amber Rudd
:20:25. > :20:28.and the Home Office? The briefing by the Home Office said the government
:20:29. > :20:32.would consult on whether to require businesses to be clear about the
:20:33. > :20:36.proportion of their workforce which is international. Not as transparent
:20:37. > :20:41.as it could have been. It did lead to calls in the press condiment the
:20:42. > :20:45.government for what seemed to be, some even saying xenophobic remarks,
:20:46. > :20:49.was it handled well? I think the Home Office handled it perfectly
:20:50. > :20:54.well. What is actually going on is there is a group of people looking
:20:55. > :20:58.for any excuse to revisit the Brexit decision. Which group are you
:20:59. > :21:01.talking about? The media are constantly looking for splits and
:21:02. > :21:05.divisions where there are none. The policy has been clear all along. A
:21:06. > :21:09.lot of the people that have seized on this are trying to go back to the
:21:10. > :21:13.original Brexit argument itself. I think that argument has been settled
:21:14. > :21:17.by the British people. Part of that is certainly controlling migration,
:21:18. > :21:22.something the Prime Minister is committed to doing. Steve Hilton
:21:23. > :21:28.said the plan was divisive, Republic and insanely bureaucratic. Is it
:21:29. > :21:32.right to put more bureaucracy from a Tory government on businesses? I
:21:33. > :21:39.read his argument, he made some good points, but I do not agree. Why did
:21:40. > :21:42.he write it? He is perfectly capable of speaking for himself will stop
:21:43. > :21:46.lots of people have got carried away with something that is not a radical
:21:47. > :21:50.policy, it is something they do in the United States, something Ed
:21:51. > :21:53.Miliband proposed previously. This is about trying to control migration
:21:54. > :21:58.which was a central issue, and the Prime Minister is determined to
:21:59. > :22:01.deliver on its. Let's talk about business reaction, these are the
:22:02. > :22:05.people that would be involved in making lists or making clear how
:22:06. > :22:10.many non-British people they employ. The head of the CBI, not a
:22:11. > :22:13.hysterical person, has warned that the Prime Minister risks closing the
:22:14. > :22:17.door on an open economy, and not just talking about the issue we've
:22:18. > :22:20.been discussing, she is talking more broadly about the whole tone of the
:22:21. > :22:26.conference being anti-business and not welcoming, you accept that? I
:22:27. > :22:30.really do not recognise this. I sat through the Prime Minister's speech
:22:31. > :22:34.and that's not what I took from it, and not what I took from what the
:22:35. > :22:39.Chancellor said. Conservative Party has always been and will continue to
:22:40. > :22:43.be committed to an open economy, low taxes, deregulation. And as we even
:22:44. > :22:47.the European Union it is more important than ever that we face out
:22:48. > :22:50.to the world. That is not to deny that there were two very clear
:22:51. > :22:55.messages from the referendum campaign. Number one was, people
:22:56. > :22:59.wanted to control migration. Number two, people wanted control of their
:23:00. > :23:05.own laws. When you say people, you are talking about 52%, you make it
:23:06. > :23:09.sound like a vast majority. And what Carolyn Fairbairn is saying and
:23:10. > :23:13.warning the Prime Minister is that if you take the issue of immigration
:23:14. > :23:20.to fire then you will harm the economy. First of all you say it was
:23:21. > :23:24.52 versus 48, actually I think if you look at what that number means,
:23:25. > :23:29.more people voted for Brexit than voted for any political party in a
:23:30. > :23:34.generation. That's not what I'm saying. It was not a vast majority.
:23:35. > :23:38.Sane people is not quite the same as saying 80%, is it? I never said it
:23:39. > :23:43.was the vast majority of people. I was clear during the referendum
:23:44. > :23:48.campaign, these arguments were well aired. And for me this was where the
:23:49. > :23:52.balance life. It was between the economic argument and the very
:23:53. > :23:55.strong arguments for controlling migration and our own laws. On
:23:56. > :23:59.balance people decided for the latter rather than the former. For
:24:00. > :24:02.Now for some politics on the other side of the pond.
:24:03. > :24:05.It was billed as the showdown that could decide the US election,
:24:06. > :24:08.as Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump went head to head in a candidates'
:24:09. > :24:11.After a disastrous weekend for the Trump campaign,
:24:12. > :24:14.which saw the Republican candidate having to defend comments he'd made
:24:15. > :24:16.about groping women, the pressure was on Clinton to bury
:24:17. > :24:22.In the end, with Mr Trump deciding attack was the best form of defence,
:24:23. > :24:24.it was not so much sparks flying, as fireworks exploding.
:24:25. > :24:27.First of all, let's take a look at some of the highlights
:24:28. > :24:31.Ladies and gentlemen, the Republican nominee
:24:32. > :24:33.for president, Donald J Trump, and the Democratic nominee
:24:34. > :24:41.You described kissing women without their consent,
:24:42. > :24:45.You brag that you have sexually assaulted women.
:24:46. > :24:53.I don't think you understood what was said.
:24:54. > :25:01.I apologised to my family, I apologised to the American people.
:25:02. > :25:06.He has said that the video doesn't represent who he is,
:25:07. > :25:09.but I think it's clear to anyone who heard it that it represents
:25:10. > :25:14.If you look at Bill Clinton, far worse.
:25:15. > :25:21.There's never been anybody in the history of politics
:25:22. > :25:24.in this nation that's been so abusive to women.
:25:25. > :25:27.And I'll tell you what - I didn't think I'd say this
:25:28. > :25:30.but I'm going to say it, and I hate to say it,
:25:31. > :25:39.to instruct my Attorney General to get a special prosecutor
:25:40. > :25:42.to look into your situation because there has never been so many
:25:43. > :25:47.There has never been anything like it and we're
:25:48. > :25:53.When I speak, I go out and speak, the people of this
:25:54. > :25:58.It's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump
:25:59. > :26:00.is not in charge of the law in our country.
:26:01. > :26:08.I pay tax and I pay federal tax, too.
:26:09. > :26:12.A lot of it is depreciation, which is a wonderful charge.
:26:13. > :26:19.Hey, if she had a problem, for 30 years she's been
:26:20. > :26:24.Why didn't she do something about it?
:26:25. > :26:27.Why didn't she do something about it?
:26:28. > :26:29.She doesn't do anything about anything other than talk.
:26:30. > :26:32.With her, it's all talk and no action.
:26:33. > :26:35.Would either of you name one positive thing that
:26:36. > :26:53.His children are incredibly able and devoted and I think that says
:26:54. > :27:00.She does fight hard and she doesn't quit and she doesn't give up
:27:01. > :27:03.and I consider that to be a very good trait.
:27:04. > :27:13.I'm joined now by Jan Halper-Hayes, the chair of Republican Overseas,
:27:14. > :27:15.and the playwright and critic Bonnie Greer,
:27:16. > :27:30.welcome to both of you. Jan, to be clear, if it over for double charm
:27:31. > :27:36.following the revolution revelations of those audio tapes? No. If he had
:27:37. > :27:40.not handled himself as well as he handled himself last night it would
:27:41. > :27:45.have been over. But a lot of people are saying he really is back in the
:27:46. > :27:51.game. Plus, 96% of his supporters are still with him. Only 4%
:27:52. > :27:54.defected. Are you still with him after this? I will continue to
:27:55. > :27:59.defend him because we need a Republican in the White House. For
:28:00. > :28:03.tax reform, for the Supreme Court. It's vital. And what was your
:28:04. > :28:08.reaction to the tapes about him bragging about groping women? You
:28:09. > :28:13.know, asking me is a little unfair because I wrote a bestseller and
:28:14. > :28:16.interviewed over 4000 men and followed 43 men's lives. Men like
:28:17. > :28:21.Donald Trump have been my clients. Alpha males behave that way so it
:28:22. > :28:26.was not shocking to me. But should he be president? You know, it was 11
:28:27. > :28:31.years ago. And I know there is an enormous amount of anti-bias, an
:28:32. > :28:35.enormous amount of criticism, but is he the same and what has he learned
:28:36. > :28:42.from this? He's still in the game says Jan. Of course he is. Because
:28:43. > :28:46.he's an alpha male. It's interesting listening to Jan, I have Republicans
:28:47. > :28:52.in my family. And people don't deal with the fact that there is a strong
:28:53. > :28:57.African American conservatism that is very quiet, but it's there, OK?
:28:58. > :29:04.It's epitomised by people like on Rice,: Powell. They are gone from
:29:05. > :29:10.here. What is interesting listening to Jan, I totally respect her, it is
:29:11. > :29:14.interesting, many Republicans like her are putting their hands up.
:29:15. > :29:18.There are people saying we have two vote for this man because we do need
:29:19. > :29:21.a Republican. We are in a cycle, we need a Republican in the White
:29:22. > :29:26.House. But they don't want to present for him and the reason is
:29:27. > :29:30.because he is not a Republican. He has taken over the Republican party
:29:31. > :29:33.and that's the part that scary for a lot of people. He did a lot of dog
:29:34. > :29:38.whistling last night which is how he is advised. He did a lot of low
:29:39. > :29:42.information global waffling which talked to his supporters. And these
:29:43. > :29:46.are not necessarily the Republican Party. Did you read that we have the
:29:47. > :29:52.most unfavourable dislike candidates across the board. No question. You
:29:53. > :29:58.would agree with that with Hillary Clinton? Her unfavourable statistics
:29:59. > :30:01.are below his, but they are up there and they have been dug up for the
:30:02. > :30:05.last three years. One of the reasons that exists is because we are in a
:30:06. > :30:11.political environment now, not the kind I grew up in, where we are in a
:30:12. > :30:15.media driven, social media driven age, where people can actually
:30:16. > :30:21.intervene in a process that took a lot more thinking and new ones.
:30:22. > :30:25.Hillary Clinton was up there last night giving policies, you can like
:30:26. > :30:30.them or not, but she was doing policies. He was doing sound bites
:30:31. > :30:36.and talking to his base. And the media was egging this craziness on.
:30:37. > :30:39.And what do you say, Jan? It seemed too many people that the debate
:30:40. > :30:44.plumbed new lows in terms of political discourse, do you agree?
:30:45. > :30:51.I think the whole debate season through the primaries and now does.
:30:52. > :30:55.But this debate particularly, between the two of them, talking
:30:56. > :31:01.about sexual allegations on both sides, the personal ill servants --
:31:02. > :31:07.insults, the prowling round the studio, they wouldn't shake hands.
:31:08. > :31:09.Donald put his hand out and, actually, the life polls noticed
:31:10. > :31:19.that. She didn't want to shake hands with him. But I think there are some
:31:20. > :31:21.really important things to look at. Seven out of ten voters think the
:31:22. > :31:31.country is going in the wrong direction. Three think it is OK to
:31:32. > :31:36.write. What we need to understand and really what voters are
:31:37. > :31:41.deliberating, do we want someone status quo, conscious, security,
:31:42. > :31:46.values the institutions, do we want someone more like JFK or Ronald
:31:47. > :31:54.Reagan, here and now, takes action, doesn't spend a lot of time... I'm
:31:55. > :32:00.hearing you! Where is that comparison with JFK? I'm old enough
:32:01. > :32:02.to remember JFK, Reagan. The Republican party hasn't promised
:32:03. > :32:10.fast from their top candidate Watergate, OK? Could I explain why I
:32:11. > :32:19.said it? I haven't taken the presidential assessment used with 41
:32:20. > :32:23.presidents. He's losing white suburban women, he's losing women
:32:24. > :32:28.like Jan. She knows it's true and what is out there, people are
:32:29. > :32:31.talking about a silent 12. I put money on a silent Hillary. I think
:32:32. > :32:37.there are people on the right sitting at the back, like Barbara
:32:38. > :32:42.Bush, George HW Bush, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, who say, my
:32:43. > :32:46.country is first. You are quoted as saying that Donald Trump is
:32:47. > :32:50.psychologically balanced. When you say that people don't want Hillary
:32:51. > :32:53.Clinton as a continuation of the status quo and that she is a deeply
:32:54. > :32:57.unpopular candidate, is it worth voting for someone who is
:32:58. > :33:02.psychologically imbalanced, in your view? Lets be accurate about the
:33:03. > :33:06.quote. I raised the issue that since the convention, and so it was on
:33:07. > :33:10.August three, that there was an element of him that was concerning
:33:11. > :33:14.me in his behaviour that looked like psychologically imbalanced. And, you
:33:15. > :33:18.know, I have a very, very consciously been watching things,
:33:19. > :33:23.been in touch with the campaign people, the RNC, and, for me,
:33:24. > :33:30.changing his leadership, he's making progress. Where is he changing his
:33:31. > :33:36.leadership? If you are talking about bragging of sexual assault and
:33:37. > :33:40.locker room... How was he changing it? Taking that as sexual assault,
:33:41. > :33:46.as one who has counselled sexual assault victims, he even said last
:33:47. > :33:53.night it was more bragging and he hadn't done it. But I think... Why I
:33:54. > :33:58.am not so worried on either side of it is we've got Congress and we just
:33:59. > :34:02.might spend two years in gridlock. OK. That is one of the things put
:34:03. > :34:07.forward by Republicans, that there would be gridlocked. Why didn't
:34:08. > :34:16.Hillary Clinton, to coin a phrase, kill off his presidency nomination?
:34:17. > :34:20.She's not mud wrestling. She came out there with her policies. 85% of
:34:21. > :34:25.the people... Young kids were watching this in our country. We
:34:26. > :34:30.have civics and they go back to school and talk about the debates.
:34:31. > :34:33.Wasn't it an opportunity missed? She didn't have to be a mud sling at.
:34:34. > :34:38.She had everything in front of her and she still didn't manage it. She
:34:39. > :34:42.would have had to go in there on her husband and deal with what he was
:34:43. > :34:47.putting out. He was putting out garbage. Garbage in, garbage out.
:34:48. > :34:53.She made a decision. She won the debate in terms of the Poults. Some
:34:54. > :34:56.of them were very close. Women were sitting around, I promise you, and
:34:57. > :35:02.what Jan said was very good and very true. Women are sitting around
:35:03. > :35:07.thinking this one, who was prowling behind her like an orange column, is
:35:08. > :35:10.not somebody I want to be the president of the United States. I
:35:11. > :35:15.think we've got that loud and clear! He's not out of the game yet, is he?
:35:16. > :35:20.It doesn't seem so, which is quite shocking to me because I would've
:35:21. > :35:24.thought he would be out of the game. I think that we've just had all the
:35:25. > :35:29.around Jimmy Savile and, you know, a man who was... People are not
:35:30. > :35:32.surprised now because he was so gross on the outside, people
:35:33. > :35:36.couldn't believe he was so gross on the inside. And I just think Trump
:35:37. > :35:41.has told us what he's like. He doesn't respect women in any way.
:35:42. > :35:44.Avid supporter still support in. He's still got the support and
:35:45. > :35:48.you're going to give a man like that the keys to the White House, make
:35:49. > :35:52.him one of the most powerful men in the country? Somebody who doesn't
:35:53. > :35:56.respect women? He has said it is about having power and is about
:35:57. > :35:59.powerful people over the powerless and you're going to give somebody
:36:00. > :36:04.who already abuses power more power? I just don't understand it. What
:36:05. > :36:07.depresses me the most during this election year is that it has become
:36:08. > :36:11.personalities as opposed to policies.
:36:12. > :36:18.It is always personalities to some extent. He does talk about some
:36:19. > :36:21.policies. He talked a bit about Isis and supporting Bashar Al-Assad
:36:22. > :36:24.because he says, at least they are fighting Isis. What do you take away
:36:25. > :36:28.from this presidential campaign and last night's debate? It's
:36:29. > :36:33.interesting that you are talking about Ronald Reagan. I remember as a
:36:34. > :36:36.child growing up watching Ronald Reagan, we be living up to him
:36:37. > :36:41.admiring him as a leader of the free world. My real concern about the
:36:42. > :36:44.trump candidacy is not the specific comments, it is just the whole tone
:36:45. > :36:48.of the man. I have a seven-year-old daughter and I can't see her looking
:36:49. > :36:51.up to Donald Trump as being the leader of the free world, not just
:36:52. > :36:55.in terms of his dreadful comments but also in terms of his wider
:36:56. > :36:59.stance, playing footsie with the likes of Putin, being equivocal on
:37:00. > :37:05.the stands in Syria. I don't think he's got what it takes to lead the
:37:06. > :37:06.free world and that's where my problem lies. With your
:37:07. > :37:11.seven-year-old be upset about booting? She will in time! She's
:37:12. > :37:14.quite sophisticated. Thank you very much.
:37:15. > :37:17.Now, let's take a look at what else is happening in the Week Ahead.
:37:18. > :37:20.Jeremy Corbyn will this evening take part in the regular Monday night
:37:21. > :37:22.meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party.
:37:23. > :37:24.It's his first since being re-elected as leader last month.
:37:25. > :37:27.And with many MPs unhappy about last week's reshuffle, it
:37:28. > :37:31.The former Chancellor George Osborne is back in the spotlight tomorrow -
:37:32. > :37:33.he's appearing before the Business Committee to talk
:37:34. > :37:38.Lord Heseltine and Vince Cable will also be there.
:37:39. > :37:40.On Wednesday, Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn
:37:41. > :37:44.will take part in the first PMQs since the party conference season.
:37:45. > :37:50.On Thursday, the High Court will hear a challenge
:37:51. > :37:52.to the Government's plans to begin the process of leaving the EU
:37:53. > :37:56.Meanwhile, MPs like Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg are calling
:37:57. > :37:59.on the Government to give Parliament a say on issues like whether the UK
:38:00. > :38:05.And by Friday, we should hear the results of a European Parliament
:38:06. > :38:08.investigation into what happened in the so-called "altercation"
:38:09. > :38:13.We're joined now by Stephen Bush from the New Statesman
:38:14. > :38:29.Jeremy Corbyn addressing the PR people are the first time since
:38:30. > :38:35.being re-elected, I think. Is unity going to break out any time soon? It
:38:36. > :38:38.doesn't look likely. The reshuffle has not gone down well in some
:38:39. > :38:45.quarters so we are going to see a continuation of what he had the last
:38:46. > :38:48.year, disunity and infighting. What about Shadow Cabinet elections? Are
:38:49. > :38:54.they going to happen? Is there going to be a discussion about that, Lucy
:38:55. > :38:58.Fisher, and also the fact that both sides now, some of the people who
:38:59. > :39:00.quit before are back in the Shadow Cabinet? Is there a chance Jeremy
:39:01. > :39:05.Corbyn will be able to get on with policy? Well, Jeremy Corbyn's team
:39:06. > :39:08.are saying there will be a conversation further down the line
:39:09. > :39:11.about Shadow Cabinet elections but it's clear that that's not on the
:39:12. > :39:16.table for this particular reshuffle. I think it is difficult to see how
:39:17. > :39:20.there will be unity around policy-making, not least when there
:39:21. > :39:23.is a group of more moderate MPs talking about a shadow Shadow
:39:24. > :39:28.Cabinet. They are planning to meet and caucus on their own terms. In
:39:29. > :39:33.the meantime, some people, about ten or so MPs overnight, have returned
:39:34. > :39:38.to Jeremy Corbyn's front team but another knock to claims he is
:39:39. > :39:42.incompetent. He welcomed back a so-called rebel who never left! What
:39:43. > :39:46.about the leader of the MPs saying he wasn't consulted on the reshuffle
:39:47. > :39:50.and Rosie Winterton, he was seen very much as the glue in the Labour
:39:51. > :39:55.Party, the Parliamentary party, being sacked as Chief Whip? How has
:39:56. > :39:59.that gone down with her supporters? It has gone down pretty badly. Two
:40:00. > :40:03.of the whips have resigned, ostensibly to spend more time in
:40:04. > :40:07.their marginal seat with a young family, but it is a protest at what
:40:08. > :40:10.has happened in reality to it or bad is going to be a running sore. The
:40:11. > :40:13.problem with sacking the Chief Whip is that they keep acting like a
:40:14. > :40:19.Chief Whip but not for you on the backbenches and my instinct is that
:40:20. > :40:22.that will be the case in this case. What about a vote on the initial
:40:23. > :40:27.Brexit negotiating stance? Do you think it is likely to happen? I
:40:28. > :40:32.think it is certainly interesting to see that pro-EU MPs have finally got
:40:33. > :40:37.their Mojo back because it has been more to do with businesses, the CBI
:40:38. > :40:40.chief Carolyn Fairbairn saying today that businesses are concerned that
:40:41. > :40:45.Brexit means the UK is going to be seen as closed to business. It is
:40:46. > :40:48.interesting that people are now calling for the vote. A caucus is
:40:49. > :40:53.happening on Thursday about whether MPs should have a vote on triggering
:40:54. > :40:57.article 50. I think the bigger question is, Theresa May is setting
:40:58. > :41:02.out just how much parliament is going to be consulted over the
:41:03. > :41:05.terms, whether we are going to go for a soft Brexit, where we perhaps
:41:06. > :41:12.stay inside or have access to the single market, or else have a hard
:41:13. > :41:16.Brexit and leave the single market. Along those lines, the industrial
:41:17. > :41:19.strategy committee is going to be speaking to George Osborne, Michael
:41:20. > :41:23.Heseltine and Vince Cable. Sounds like a trio of Remainers who will be
:41:24. > :41:28.putting forward their views. How dangerous is this for Theresa May?
:41:29. > :41:32.Very dangerous. She has a majority of only 17, although the thing that
:41:33. > :41:36.was reported is that she's doing a great job of wooing the DUP so that
:41:37. > :41:39.is another eight votes. She is more stable than she was at the start of
:41:40. > :41:44.conference season but it could be tricky for her. Let's look at Priti
:41:45. > :41:47.Patel, the international developer and secretary. She's forced to
:41:48. > :41:52.confirm that she will stick to the spending commitment of 0.7% of GDP
:41:53. > :41:55.on international aid, after hinting that she might come in under budget
:41:56. > :42:00.deliberately to prove she was in wasting taxpayers' money. How long
:42:01. > :42:04.do you think that will last? We'll see. Last week, Stephen and I and
:42:05. > :42:08.many other journalists were in Birmingham for the Conservative
:42:09. > :42:11.conference, hobnobbing with lots of ministers. Several three different
:42:12. > :42:16.newspapers appeared saying that Priti Patel was going to underspend
:42:17. > :42:19.her budget, which is enshrined in law, this 0.7% of gross national
:42:20. > :42:24.income that she is mandated to on international aid. She rode back
:42:25. > :42:28.very harshly from those signals yesterday, setting out a statement
:42:29. > :42:32.that she is absolutely committed to that target. Number Ten wade in and
:42:33. > :42:36.said that that target is a manifesto commitment and will be in place
:42:37. > :42:40.until 2020 so it seems there is a lot less wiggle room than there was.
:42:41. > :42:45.We are also going to be seeing the results of the inquiry into the
:42:46. > :42:51.altercation between two MEPs in Ukip. What do you think is going to
:42:52. > :42:54.happen in the leadership contest? I think if Stephen Woolfe is
:42:55. > :42:58.exonerated, as it were, and isn't kicked out for bringing Ukip into
:42:59. > :43:02.disrepute, I think you start to the heavy favourite. He has the backing
:43:03. > :43:08.of the Nigel Farage tendency who have a lot of weight in Ukip. It is
:43:09. > :43:10.Stephen Woolfe or who knows? Thank you very much, both of you. Have a
:43:11. > :43:15.good week. Let's stick with Ukip,
:43:16. > :43:17.because their MEP Steven Woolfe has been discharged from hospital
:43:18. > :43:19.following the much publicised dust up with one of his
:43:20. > :43:21.colleagues last week. Mr Woolfe claims that his fellow MEP
:43:22. > :43:24.Mike Hookem "came at him" in a scuffle outside a meeting
:43:25. > :43:26.in the European Parliament Mr Hookem has denied
:43:27. > :43:30.punching Mr Woolfe and even posted a photograph of his
:43:31. > :43:32.hands on Twitter. Well, the party is holding
:43:33. > :43:34.an internal inquiry which should It all comes as the party
:43:35. > :43:41.is on the search for a new leader following the shock resignation
:43:42. > :43:48.of Diane James last week. I think she was in the post for
:43:49. > :43:52.about 18 days. Let's take a look at
:43:53. > :43:54.the runners and riders. Despite last week's incident
:43:55. > :43:56.Steven Woolfe, who's 49, He's been an MEP since
:43:57. > :44:00.2014 and is the party's He confirmed his candidacy before
:44:01. > :44:03.he ended up in hospital, William Hill put his
:44:04. > :44:10.odds at 8 to 11 to win. The next candidate is
:44:11. > :44:12.Raheem Kassam, 30 years old. He is the editor at Breitbart
:44:13. > :44:15.News and is a former He has also officially
:44:16. > :44:22.declared and his odds Next up is Bill Etheridge,
:44:23. > :44:26.who is 46 years of age. He's been an MEP since 2014
:44:27. > :44:29.and is also a Ukip councillor He confirmed his candidacy
:44:30. > :44:35.on the Sunday Politics yesterday, but at the moment, his odds
:44:36. > :44:39.are long, at 50 to 1. And finally, will Suzanne Evans
:44:40. > :44:42.throw her hat into the ring? She's the party's
:44:43. > :44:44.former Deputy Chairman She was suspended from
:44:45. > :44:49.the party but has now been readmitted and says
:44:50. > :44:51.she is "carefully considering" William Hill have her odds
:44:52. > :45:01.at 3 to 1. Joining me now to discuss
:45:02. > :45:03.this is Liz Jones - on the previous leadership election
:45:04. > :45:17.and she also sits on Ukip's We don't have your odds, it seems.
:45:18. > :45:22.Are you standing? I will decide by the end of this week. What will
:45:23. > :45:26.convince you? I want to see how the turbulence passes. I want to see how
:45:27. > :45:30.things fall in place. Do you just want to know whether Stephen Wolf
:45:31. > :45:35.will be allowed to stand in the leadership contest? If I have to
:45:36. > :45:39.play a significant role in that I will have to do it excuse myself
:45:40. > :45:45.from the leadership challenge, so it all depends what happens really with
:45:46. > :45:48.the report on Friday, how the investigations plan out, and what
:45:49. > :45:55.level of involvement we will have in that process. Who are you most is
:45:56. > :46:01.used about in the longest? I have not seen their policies yet. But you
:46:02. > :46:05.know them. I do know them, however things change. I do not know what
:46:06. > :46:09.the policies of Raheem Kassam or Suzanne Evans will be. Frankly I
:46:10. > :46:13.question whether all of those people would be able to stand in any event.
:46:14. > :46:19.Why? There are strict rules about standing as a leadership candidate.
:46:20. > :46:23.Number one you have to pay a ?5,000 deposit and if you do not recover
:46:24. > :46:28.more than 5% of the vote you will lose ?5,000. So that will preclude
:46:29. > :46:32.some standing? It may possibly, it is a financial risk. Format or is
:46:33. > :46:38.considering standing, what about him? I do not know if he is ending
:46:39. > :46:41.as yet. We have been in conversation with him. If he stands I should
:46:42. > :46:46.imagine he would probably be firm favourite. I spoke to Jonathan
:46:47. > :46:51.Arnott on Friday about the altercation between the two MEPs. He
:46:52. > :46:54.thinks neither should be... I don't think Mike Hookem will be but he
:46:55. > :46:59.thinks these should be allowed to stand. I say to that, until we know
:47:00. > :47:03.exactly what happened, we do not know if it was a physical
:47:04. > :47:07.altercation, it may have been a verbal altercation, we do not know,
:47:08. > :47:12.but we have witness statements, I cannot possibly comment. Of course
:47:13. > :47:16.if this were an employment situation, both would be suspended
:47:17. > :47:20.pending the resolution of an investigation. Is that what should
:47:21. > :47:25.happen? You are on the NEC. Do you agree the party has been brought
:47:26. > :47:29.into disrepute? The party has had a large amount of unfortunate
:47:30. > :47:33.publicity. I would not necessarily say it's been brought into disrepute
:47:34. > :47:39.because on the 7th of October last week in Hartlepool we won a local
:47:40. > :47:44.election seat, we got 49%. We are now the opposition I think in
:47:45. > :47:48.Hartlepool. It's having no impact on our membership and support base. It
:47:49. > :47:52.might be a bit too soon but do you instinctively think it has brought
:47:53. > :47:57.the party into disrepute, having two of your elected representatives,
:47:58. > :48:02.either, we don't know for sure, but certainly involved in some sort of
:48:03. > :48:05.confrontation? I would say it was a disappointment. I was very
:48:06. > :48:08.disappointed when Diane stood down and this behaviour is disappointing
:48:09. > :48:14.but I would not say it brings the party into disrepute. Let us not
:48:15. > :48:17.forget that there are six Labour MPs that had criminal convictions for
:48:18. > :48:23.expenses fraud. Four Labour life peers were involved in selling
:48:24. > :48:27.interference with legislation. I'm asking whether it has brought into
:48:28. > :48:31.disrepute, not how it compares to other parties, I do not deny other
:48:32. > :48:37.parties have had problems. I would say by comparison, no. This is a
:48:38. > :48:43.minor little tittle tattle incident. Your MEP in London has said that
:48:44. > :48:49.regardless of the cuff for confrontation, he says the fact that
:48:50. > :48:55.Stephen Woolfe was in talk with the Conservatives about defecting to
:48:56. > :48:59.their party, it is enough of a bar from him standing, do you agree?
:49:00. > :49:03.Until we have the facts we need to be 100% sure that it has happened
:49:04. > :49:07.and that it is not tittle tattle. Quite if proven that he had talks,
:49:08. > :49:12.and certainly was discussing the idea of defecting, he did say he
:49:13. > :49:16.considered it himself, would that be enough to bar him, or should it? It
:49:17. > :49:21.could be enough to suspend him so that he would be able to contest the
:49:22. > :49:24.leadership candidacy. It may not be enough to necessarily bar him from
:49:25. > :49:30.the party. We do not know until we have all the facts. From standing
:49:31. > :49:34.for leadership? If it can be proven 100% that it was the case and not
:49:35. > :49:40.just tittle tattle or idle rumour, potentially it could bar him from
:49:41. > :49:43.standing. He got his papers in 17 minutes late for the first
:49:44. > :49:48.leadership election, do you think that was a bit harsh by the NEC to
:49:49. > :49:52.say he could not stand? Not at all, because it shows that the rules
:49:53. > :49:57.apply to everyone, senior member or junior member, the rules apply to
:49:58. > :50:02.all. Who does Labour fear most in terms of the next leader of Ukip,
:50:03. > :50:08.bearing in mind the games they made in northern Labour heartlands? I
:50:09. > :50:13.don't think it is a matter of fear in who leads Ukip. I think we have
:50:14. > :50:18.to tackle Ukip at its source, and tackle the rhetoric that comes out
:50:19. > :50:23.of Ukip head office, and tackle their policies, and tackle them
:50:24. > :50:28.rather than who we fear as the leader. You don't particularly fear
:50:29. > :50:36.Stephen Woolfe. In the referendum and in the election in 2015, many
:50:37. > :50:39.Labour voters gave their vote to Ukip. Many voters have been
:50:40. > :50:44.dissatisfied with politics as a whole and some may have voted Ukip.
:50:45. > :50:48.We have to ensure that we win their vote bank, and that's the most
:50:49. > :50:56.important thing. And as I say, just tackling the underlying threat of
:50:57. > :50:59.parties such as Ukip. Do you now regret, in terms of the reasons for
:51:00. > :51:04.calling the referendum in the first place, as you know, the accusation
:51:05. > :51:09.was it was fears of Ukip, fears of the right of your party, now looking
:51:10. > :51:15.at the way Ukip is at the moment, two leadership contests, Diane Jane
:51:16. > :51:20.standing down, do you think you overreacted? I think it was right to
:51:21. > :51:24.hold the referendum, there was a clear demand in the country. During
:51:25. > :51:29.the 2015 election campaign people were saying they had not had their
:51:30. > :51:31.say 40 years, they wanted their say, but they did not believe a
:51:32. > :51:36.Conservative government would deliver on it. I think it was the
:51:37. > :51:40.right thing to do. I know you said you were a reluctant remainder,
:51:41. > :51:43.because you lost that vote? If the British people don't support your
:51:44. > :51:47.position you cannot say it was invalid to hold it in the first
:51:48. > :51:51.place. I did not say it was invalid, I said you lost your argument. Of
:51:52. > :51:54.course, I accept the will of the British people. Thank you.
:51:55. > :51:56.Should we let the British countryside grow wild?
:51:57. > :51:59.Should we bring back wild animals such as beavers and lynxes?
:52:00. > :52:01.There's a growing campaign for the "rewilding" of' rural areas,
:52:02. > :52:03.away from intensive farming and land management.
:52:04. > :52:05.Here's environmental campaigner George Monbiot, who first thought
:52:06. > :52:32.Some people find scenes like this beautiful.
:52:33. > :52:38.But what I perceive when I see places like this
:52:39. > :52:43.Hardly any birds, hardly any insects, hardly any flowers,
:52:44. > :52:55.But I believe that if we get the policy right, this could be
:52:56. > :53:04.You get a small hint of what could happen right
:53:05. > :53:09.What's taken place is that the sheep have been fenced out,
:53:10. > :53:12.and what we see as a result is that the trees are coming back,
:53:13. > :53:15.the flowers are coming back, the insects are coming back,
:53:16. > :53:24.When you consider the only reason the sheep are here
:53:25. > :53:29.is because we are paying for them through farm subsidies,
:53:30. > :53:32.you can see how easy it should be to change this system.
:53:33. > :53:34.Maybe we can start bringing back some of our missing
:53:35. > :53:36.species, the beavers, the boar, the lynx.
:53:37. > :53:44.Let's use the money to allow nature to come back,
:53:45. > :53:47.to allow people to have much richer places to explore,
:53:48. > :53:54.and to allow some wonderful oases to develop in our wet deserts.
:53:55. > :54:08.Where were you? Cambrian Mountains, right in the middle of Wales.
:54:09. > :54:13.Beautiful. Topographically, yes. Ecological EIB. Let's talk about
:54:14. > :54:16.that. You want to get rid of land management in the countryside? I'd
:54:17. > :54:21.certainly like to relax it significantly. I no means
:54:22. > :54:25.universally but in certain places where the productivity of the land
:54:26. > :54:29.is really, really low, as it is in most of the uplands, we are still
:54:30. > :54:34.continuing to graze them down to the nub in order to scrape a few lamb
:54:35. > :54:42.chops out of the land. I think the land could be much better used when
:54:43. > :54:46.it is rewilded, and we allow nature to come back and we stop floods
:54:47. > :54:53.downstream and all sorts of things. Who would benefit from rewilding?
:54:54. > :54:57.There's quite a lot of evidence to suggest it can be more lucrative
:54:58. > :55:00.than farming in terms of generating implement and income because
:55:01. > :55:05.associated with it is a lot of eco-tourism and a lot of potential
:55:06. > :55:09.for rebuilding economies where the traditional economic activity just
:55:10. > :55:12.aren't working any more. You want to get rid of subsidies, basically, to
:55:13. > :55:18.farmers, you do not think it is economic to productive? I do not
:55:19. > :55:21.want to get rid of the subsidies but I want to redeploy them
:55:22. > :55:25.significantly. At the moment we are spending ?3 billion per year, same
:55:26. > :55:29.as the NHS deficit, in basically keeping the land ruined in places
:55:30. > :55:32.where we are not producing any significant amount of food. Isn't it
:55:33. > :55:36.better to spend at least some of that money on ecological
:55:37. > :55:40.restoration. Why should there be subsidies for farming in this
:55:41. > :55:44.country, Oliver? I have hiked in that area of Wales and I think it is
:55:45. > :55:48.quite beautiful as it stands at the moment. Clearly sheep farmers play
:55:49. > :55:56.an important role in conserving the land. I'm not actually opposed to.
:55:57. > :56:01.George disagrees that it is conserving the land. I am not
:56:02. > :56:03.opposed to rewilding in principle, and as agricultural necessarily
:56:04. > :56:08.intensifies with a growing global population, we have to accept that
:56:09. > :56:12.land will become less bio diverse, and we should look at areas for
:56:13. > :56:17.rewilding. But it has to be done with the consent of the farmers. My
:56:18. > :56:20.question was about subsidies. Should farmers be given the level of
:56:21. > :56:24.subsidies they currently are? Yes, and I think the government has
:56:25. > :56:28.committed to it until 2020. We cannot pull away people's way of
:56:29. > :56:32.life without their consent. It may be that if over time you can work in
:56:33. > :56:36.partnership with the farmers there may be a way to use that subsidy in
:56:37. > :56:47.a way that encourages rewilding. It is being considered in Scotland. You
:56:48. > :56:51.were a rewildingremainer, and subsidies will reduce if we are
:56:52. > :56:56.known on the part of the EU, do you welcome that? It has opened up part
:56:57. > :57:00.of the countryside, although there are threats as well, we might rip up
:57:01. > :57:03.the birds directive and Habitat directive. But we can ask the
:57:04. > :57:06.questions about what we are doing in the countryside and why, and we have
:57:07. > :57:16.not done that being part of the European Union. You are the MP for
:57:17. > :57:23.Brent Central, not many links, there -- lynx. You haven't seen the beast
:57:24. > :57:26.of Brent, have you? You describe yourself as a champion for the
:57:27. > :57:31.environment, would you like to see rewilding? Not in Brent. But I think
:57:32. > :57:36.it's an interesting concept. I thought about it from the fact of
:57:37. > :57:39.the bees. And there's a little bit of rewilding going on in terms of
:57:40. > :57:44.trying to bring back the population of the bees and all of that. I think
:57:45. > :57:48.on a larger scale you really do have to work in conjunction with the
:57:49. > :57:51.farmers and their livelihood, I think that's the most important
:57:52. > :57:56.thing. I don't know how it would work in reality or if it is kind of
:57:57. > :57:59.just a dream. Have you got any parliamentary support for this? Yes,
:58:00. > :58:05.actually, quite surprisingly quite a lot. In fact there is now an enquiry
:58:06. > :58:10.by the environmental audit committee into the future of the countryside,
:58:11. > :58:13.including rewilding. It's in their terms of reference. And are they
:58:14. > :58:17.going to talk to you? I've sent them a written submission. You can come
:58:18. > :58:19.back and tell us if you do give evidence.
:58:20. > :58:22.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
:58:23. > :58:24.The question was, according to newspaper reports,
:58:25. > :58:26.who is the government hoping will be their secret weapon
:58:27. > :58:40.Shamefully I have no idea. It's the Duchess of Cambridge. Yes! Well
:58:41. > :58:42.done. The one o'clock news is starting
:58:43. > :58:47.over on BBC One now. I'll be here at noon tomorrow
:58:48. > :58:51.with all the big political stories