14/10/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 14/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Afternoon, folks, and welcome to the Daily Politics.


The Foreign Secretary has called for more "kinetic" action to stop


But do increasing tensions between Russia and the West mean


an end to the bloodshed is further away than ever?


The President of the European Council, Donald Tusk,


says the UK can't have its cake and eat it.


Is he right that the only alternative to hard


Theresa May would like to end the ban on new selective


But - even if she gets them through the Commons -


could her plans be scuppered in the Lords?


Nicola Sturgeon says that if she doesn't like the look


of Theresa May's Brexit deal, she'll call a second


So which union do delegates at the SNP conference prefer -


The fact I voted Brexit I would still vote the EU over the UK. You


voted to leave? You are in the SNP. I thought they did not exist!


All that in the next hour, and who better to react to those


stories than the editor of the website


And the journalist Rosa Prince, whose biography of Theresa May


And we'll start with Theresa May because she's meeting a gaggle,


or whatever the collective term is, of British Ambassadors


Britain in the other EU member states.


for strong relations with our European partners to pave


the way for smooth Brexit negotiations.


Theresa May herself has been on a tour of European capitals this


week where she emphasised that the decision to leave


the EU did not mean the UK retreating into isolationism.


Last night the President of the European Council,


that's the body that represents heads of government of the EU,


warned that Britain could not have its cake and eat it.


The brutal truth is that Brexit will be a loss for all of us.


There will be no cakes on the table for anyone.


If you ask me if there is any alternative to this bad scenario,


I would like to tell you that yes, there is.


And I think it is useless to speculate about soft Brexit,


because of all the reasons I've mentioned.


This would be purely theoretical speculation.


In my opinion, the only real alternative to a hard


That was Donald Tusk, the president of the European Council. Has he cuts


through a lot of nonsense spoken in this country? It is quite clear, if


we are not going to be in the single market as a member, which is the


implication of everything the government tells us, then it is what


we are calling a hard Brexit, we are out the single market? I so. I am


not sure where the idea came from it could be any other way. One thing


that came through loud and clear during the referendum was people


were unhappy about levels of immigration and migration from the


EU, which means no freedom of movement and no membership of the


single market. There were food metaphors flying around, and I think


that is the nub of the issue. What the government will have to try to


do is somehow forge, perhaps that is why ambassadors are there, forge


relationships separately with these countries. George Osborne, David


Cameron made it clear, saying during the referendum campaign that a vote


to leave is a vote to leave the single market. Why is this still an


issue? I disagree slightly on the Donald Tusk speech. To me it is


standard diplomacy and business negotiation. He is laying out a hard


position on behalf of the government 's who will decide, rather than the


commission and European Parliament. That is how negotiations work. I


think you are right, Andrew, but there are various ways to leave it


and there is the possibility of a soft -ish Brexit, a compromise on


quotas and immigration, some copper wires on the City of London, is


certainly feasible. We are focused on the British angle but the biggest


obstacle is European politics, the 27 are not speaking as one, despite


what Donald Tusk indicated. Europe is extremely fragile. You look at


how the Hungarians are attempting to bully the Germans. The French


elections coming up, Austria, the Italian banks, Deutsche Bank. Donald


Tusk is saying what he has to say, it is the beginning of a


negotiation, but I think hopefully there is at some point room for


compromise. When Mrs May trigger 's Article 50 to begin the Brexit


process sometime in the first quarter of next year, for all the


reasons he has given, German and French elections, the turmoil, not


much will happen until we see the new face of Europe. One asked how


they could do negotiations until they know who they are negotiating


with. Francois Hollande might not be there. Angela Merkel could be the


walking wounded after an election. This one, I think that is right. We


can have a clearer picture in March, I think that is a fallacy. It will


take a couple of years at the very least. There is a tendency in


debilitating to see every story through the prism of Brexit, or from


the agenda of the Remain and Leave people. The Marmite story would not


have been touched had it not been for Brexit. People decided to pursue


it for their own agenda. It is difficult and I speak as someone who


is a moderate lever. It applies on both sides, people leap on stories


that appear to confirm the position they were attached to four months


ago. The media is complicit, keeping on looking for a Brexit angle.


Unilever and Tesco constantly have negotiations which we never cover


but because there might be a Brexit angle, suddenly it is leading every


newscast and is on the front page of every paper. It took us a while to


catch up that Unilever had also asked, all told the Irish


supermarkets, it was putting up prices there and the last time I


looked island is not leaving and uses the euro. The head of PR for


Tesco deserves a bonus! It applies to the pound and the way the


fluctuations of the pound are reported. Of course there are


downsides but there are upsides with a tourist boom under way in the UK


and exports should flourish. Prices will rise, there is no doubt about


that, but we have a long way to go. I am glad we have you here today.


Let's have a quits. The question for today


is all about the United Nations, which yesterday appointed


Antonio Guterres as its At the end of the show we'll


see if Rosa and Iain Now, yesterday, Nicola Sturgeon


surprised the SNP conference in Glasgow by announcing right


from its start that she would next week publish a consultation


on a bill for a second independence She has said she wants Theresa May


to negotiate a Brexit deal that would enable Scotland to remain


in the single market after the UK leaves the EU,


and Scotland would have the right to hold a second independence


referendum if that isn't achieved. Here's what she had to say


on Breakfast this morning. I think the UK right now


is potentially about to take a step off the edge of a cliff by coming


out of the single market, and I don't want that


to happen to Scotland. I actually don't want that


to happen to the UK. I respect the fact that England


and Wales voted to leave the EU, but I don't think the Prime Minister


has a mandate to take the UK out I want to explore every option


to protect Scotland's vital economic interests,


and I set out very clearly yesterday how I will try to do that,


and try to do that in discussion But ultimately, if the Prime


Minister and the UK Government doesn't listen, if they are intent


on ignoring Scotland's voice, then I think Scotland should


have the option to consider again So that's what the first Minister


thinks - but what about her party? Our Adam's been out with his balls


in Glasgow to find out which Union Well, let's test the mood


of SNP activists here in Glasgow with this question -


which union do you prefer, Well, some of the rules I don't


like, some of the rules I Its openness and inclusiveness,


definitely compared to the UK we are


seeing at present. Has the UK got anything


good going for it? I just feel that the way the EU


is run, with everybody being equal. You know, different countries


all coming together. Do you think Malta has


as much power as Germany? No, I don't mean that,


I think it's the outlook. Despite the fact I voted Brexit,


I'd still pick the EU over the UK. Grab a ball, the Daily


Politics, grab a ball. I think it's time, sooner rather


than later, that we get When would you ideally


like to have the next referendum? Has Nicola Sturgeon got the power


to have another referendum? I think it's Westminster has


the power. Scotland's voice is being heard,


and will continue to do so. And the vessel at the moment


is Nicola Sturgeon. She is the vessel for


the people of Scotland. Which union do


Because I am a European citizen, and I don't want my human rights


"I'm with Nicola", well, you're with Nicola.


He did actually, and it was a surprise this morning.


"The Scottish lion has roared, Alex Salmond, 8th of May 2015."


Are you proud to have Alex Salmond on your chest?


What do you think about the five people that have put balls in there?


I don't know who they are, are they journalists?


No, they were people at the conference, apart from one


guy who was just walking through the conference venue.


It's interesting, and they are voices we should listen


to as we take discussions forward in the future.


You're not going to hunt them down and kick them out?


Absolutely not, we're not that kind of party.


Which union do you prefer, the UK or the EU?


Well, it doesn't get much more conclusive than that.


It would be even more so if it wasn't for the impostor just walking


through the conference centre, who put that one in.


We're joined now by the SNP's Mike Russell, who is


the Scottish Minister for UK Negotiations on Scotland's


If as Britain heads for the door it is clear that that will involve no


longer having membership of the single market, will that trigger an


independence referendum in Scotland? Well, I think Nicola was clear. We


are at the stage of looking at the options that we have. One of those


options is independence, is right to prepare for those options, and


that's what we are starting to do. My job is to discuss those options


with those who are formulating them, including a la cancelled advisers to


negotiate on those options. Independence is of course an option.


Just to be clear, is membership of the single market a red line? If it


is clear in coming out the United Kingdom will not be a member, it


will have access but not have membership of the single market, you


would want a second referendum? Membership of the single market is


extremely important to us. Free movement of labour is important. 9%


of our doctors, 12% of our care staff come from the EU. It is of


great importance. There are no negotiations yet with the UK


Government that had been slow in starting. There aren't red


would you want a referendum before Britain left the EQ or would you


wait until afterwards? We haven't even started those discussions yet.


It would be premature of me to talk about timing. There is opinion and


advice on both sides of that. You are always well read in these


matters. The important stage we are in is to consider the options to


negotiate with the UK Government. They've been slow on that and some


of the noises are not at all helpful. To have those negotiations


and to come to the conclusion. The Scottish Parliament asked the


Scottish Government to do that. We are fulfilling that mandate. We also


have a mandate from the Scottish people. 62% voted not to leave.


That's a very important issue in this nation. They did indeed but


there is no polling to suggest their demand for another referendum has


got any higher despite they didn't get their way in the Brexit


referendum. You only had a referendum a couple of years ago and


here you are talking about another one because you did that time round.


There has been a material change in the circumstances and that is a


phrase we used in our manifesto. There has been a material change. We


were promised in the referendum voting no would mean staying in the


EU. It did not turn out that way. We have an opportunity to look at our


national future and look at all the options. It may be a deal-breaker,


it may be a watershed event for you and those behind you in the SNP but


I struggle to find evidence it is a watershed event for people in


Scotland. The latest polling is 47% of people do not want a second


referendum as against 38% to do. Again, a clear majority. A clear


lead of people who don't want one. You do. You are not necessarily in


tune with the Scottish people on this. I would advise you to the cook


the detail of the poll more carefully. Look at the question


asked about hard Brexit. What we are seeing from the UK Government. In


those circumstances people want a second referendum. We are seeing the


hardest of Brexits and we are seeing the reaction from Brussels. Which is


if that is what the UK Government say they want to Donald Tusk is


saying you can have it. We are in difficult times and we need to apply


rationality which is looking we consider the options, decide on the


options and move forward. That is what we are going to do and is what


we are engaged on. It is the default position. You harp on about a


referendum until you win one. I don't harp on about anything. We


have known each other for years and we have a rational conversation. The


circumstances in Scotland require us to consider that question again as


part of a range of options. That is what Nicholas said, that is what I


said today, that is what the party is saying. We will look at the


options, come to a conclusion, and we should be ready for all options,


including independence. You will be familiar with the fact that the


Quebec generational obsession with independence cost the Quebec economy


dear. It was an advantage to Toronto and a loss to Montreal during these


years, because of the constitutional issue that created uncertainty. Do


you not fear the same for the Scottish economy?


The plunge in the pound to its lowest level, the way in which


businesses are looking at investing elsewhere, the warning from the


Japanese government, as a result of a Tory obsession with Europe that is


costing us dear. The options we consider will have to be the options


that get us out of that position and that includes independence. Your


country has a massive fiscal deficit and the oil industry a key part of


the economy is in decline and the financial services, the second part


of your economy are seriously depleted and your girth rate is


lacklustre. Should you concentrate on these -- growth rate. Should you


concentrate on these issues that matter to Scottish people rather


than the referendum. We should be concentrating on the way in which we


improve our economy, we improve our democracy and social cohesion. The


options we are looking at our options


we are considering under Brexit. The decline in Scotland would become


much worse, precipitous, would we to go along with what the Tories want


with Brexit. That is a disaster. You talk about the financial sector,


thousands of jobs would be lost with no single market. That is the


reality of where the union has taken Scotland and I think the people of


Scotland will want to look at options. My job is to consider the


options and negotiate on them. There is no decision about which option is


needed but the portrait you paint a Scotland is not only inaccurate now,


but it could become true if Brexit has its way. I am not sure anything


I said is factually inaccurate. John Swinney, a collie, said it would be


the intention, even in a second independence referendum, with


England out of the EU but Scotland in, that you would want to use the


pound sterling. By what stretch of the imagination would you think


Brussels would allow you to join the EU and use a currency of a country


not in the EU? It would be a kindness to use the pound given its


lack of strength at the moment. We might be doing the rest of the UK a


favour. Those negotiations for another time. The present situation


is looking for options we had and taking them forward. That is what we


are determined to do and that is what we are going to do. Thanks for


joining us. Iain Martin, to what extent is this talk of a second


referendum, and she came right onto the stage, at the start of the


conference, she even surprised her own delegates by bringing it up so


quickly, but to what extent is this positioning for a second referendum


or party management? It is a bit of both but I think it should be taken


seriously. I think she will take that option if the polls are aligned


and if Brexit goes badly and if for example the UK was in recession. The


biggest advantage the SNP have and it is shown by the scale of their


conference, is this incredible organisation and this amazing


membership. Activists on the ground, digital operation. The question for


Unionists, who just about got away with it last time, better together,


the old Labour generation that helped to win the referendum last


time are gone. Who will be the force is arguing for the union? Certainly


Ruth Davidson. Will it be Theresa May, is that a plus? I think they


are setting it up so that if circumstances align, she will go for


it. She says she is keeping her options open. In some ways the bar


for independence is higher than in 2014. It is possible Scotland could


vote for independence, or indeed it will probably have to vote for


independence without knowing if it is going to be allowed to join the


EU, and given the size of the deficit and the currency, I find it


inconceivable Brussels would allow a member country joining to use the


pound. It would almost certainly have to go for the euro. If Scotland


found itself out of the UK and then out of the EU. You spoke about


newspapers tying everything onto Brexit, I think the SNP is guilty of


that, trying to say now is the time for another referendum because of


Brexit. I can see the logic but it seems a stretch. The Scottish people


have referendum fatigue, it does not seem to be the time while everything


is in the air for it to happen. I kind of see the SNP leadership would


not want it, with the polls. The SNP has a powerful point when they say


in the last Scottish referendum, the Unionists, it was argued that


Scotland could seamlessly joined the EU. The union said the only sure way


of Scotland remaining a member of the EU was to stay in the UK. How


did that work out? It did not work out. A load of nonsense.


It is a question to which no one can know the answer. The lesson they


draw from the EU referendum is people are prepared to take an


economic gamble for self-government taking back control. They studied


the referendum carefully. Their gamble is Project Fear, or something


like it, or a warning about the size of the deficit, the oil industry,


all of that somehow will not apply if there is a second referendum. And


as the SNP point out they are starting from a higher base with the


activist network. And they are closer in the polls, although they


are behind, closer to when the first referendum started.


Now, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has called a meeting with US


Secretary of State John Kerry and other foreign ministers


this weekend to consider a new way forward to resolve


But with tensions rising between Russia and the United States


following an attack on a UN aid convoy in Aleppo last month,


Last night, the new UN Secretary-General called


on the international community to broker a solution to a conflict


that has already claimed hundreds of thousands of lives.


Antonio Guterres said ending the conflict in Syria


He was one of many world leaders who spoke out on the ongoing


On Monday, France's President Hollande suggested Russian officials


could face war crimes charges over the ongoing bombardment of Aleppo.


Russian leader Vladimir Putin dismissed the suggestions,


telling French media the accusations were rhetoric


that did not take into account the realities in Syria.


Meanwhile, Boris Johnson said Russia was in danger of becoming a pariah


nation, during an emergency debate held in Parliament on Tuesday.


The Foreign Secretary also called for demonstrations outside


Moscow hit back by accusing him of Russophobic hysteria,


while Russian officials in London criticised his comments on Twitter.


Some MPs have called for a no-fly zone over Aleppo,


which would involve Western powers being prepared to destroy Russian


and Syrian war planes and air defences.


Others have urged for so-called no-bombing zones to create safe


areas and protect civilians. Those military options seemed a step


closer yesterday when Boris Johnson told MPs it was time to consider


more "kinetic" action to stop Aleppo being "pulverised".


You might puzzle over what kinetic means. Do not do that too much.


Because within hours, his comments were played


spokesman, who said, "There are no plans


As mentioned, that statement from the Prime Minister's


office was in response to Boris Johnson's comments


to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.


Let's hear more of what he had to say.


Most people, I think, are now changing their minds


about this and thinking, we can't let this go on for ever,


we can't just see Aleppo pulverised in this way, we have


And I thought the mood of the House of Commons the other


Whether that means we can get a coalition together for more


kinetic action now, I cannot prophesy, but certainly


what most people want to see is a new set of options.


Here with me to discuss this further are Dr Karin von


Hippel, Director-General of the Royal United


Doctor, there is a lot of hand-wringing, a lot of something


must be done. Are we any clearer what could be done? At this stage it


is difficult. The only real option I think to get the Russians to change


behaviour is using force in some capacity, whether it is a no-fly


zone, no bombing zone, but both would require shooting down Russian


jets and I'm not sure the Obama administration is ready to do that.


At this stage in the American election cycle, looking at a


president who has tried to withdraw his country from the Middle East,


over the eight years in power, is it conceivable he would want to get


dragged in in the final two months of his presidency? He has said many


times force is not an option and that has put secretary Kerry in a


bad position because he can only do so much finger wagging with the


Russians with nothing in his back pocket. I do not think Obama will do


anything. Potentially some sort of escalation after the results are in


from the election because it is possible that any negative happening


security wise would only benefit Donald Trump's candidacy. John


Woodcock, if there is no stomach in the White House for a no-fly zone,


or a no bombing zone, I'm not sure of the difference, but if there is


no stomach for that, it is not going to happen? It is very difficult if


the US does not want to be part of the coalition but there are options.


Let me quickly say what I think is the difference between a no-fly zone


and no bombing zone. I agreed with so much with what my colleague said


just then. The no bombing zone option would not entail shooting


down Russian planes. I understand why, for many, that would be an


aggravation. How would you enforce it? What the Syrians suggest and I


was in Istanbul last week, talking to the exiled opposition leadership,


they are saying there would be a response for every time there was a


strike by Russia or Syria deliberately on civilians. They


would be a response from the coalition to target Assad's military


infrastructure so we would not be shooting down planes in the air and


we would not target Russia, we would target the regime of Assad,


primarily using naval assets, missiles rather than the potential


for getting involved in any dogfight over Syrian airspace. And what if


the Russians decide to put Russian forces to protect this


infrastructure? I don't think Russia is wanting a conflict with the west.


It has nothing like the capacity to do that. Its economy is in very


severe recession. There is a place for Russia as a constructive


partner, but the need for us to step up the degree of firmness where we


are putting military options on the table is because Vladimir Putin has


sensed the weakness from the west from 2013, that vote, and before


that. He cares nothing for the humanitarian consequences of what he


is doing. He does not care about being a pariah state in the UN. He


will push and push as long as he feels there is a weakness in the


rest of the international community that will letting get away with it.


Let me pin you down. There is a lot of something must be done rhetoric,


but it is important to work out what it means. Supposing in the no


bombing zone, the Russians put anti-missile batteries around the


Syrian infrastructure that you might want to bomb and in the process of


bombing you take out Russian antimissile batteries? What will


happen? Russia will only end up being part


of this confrontation if it makes itself. If it wants actively to be


so. I do not think when push comes to shove, Russia wants to do that.


You don't know, do you? Undoubtedly there will be a ramping up of the


rhetoric from President Putin. The alternative has been to effectively


to protest, to say Russia don't do this. But to do nothing while it


does more and more, it has unilaterally invaded another


European country, in the Ukraine... We know all that. There seems to be


no public appetite. How many people would be outside the American


embassy if it was the Americans dropping barrel bombs on Aleppo? The


point that was made... Thousands, thousands. How many Labour


colleagues have been outside the Russian Embassy, given that Russia


has been complicit in barrel bombing? It was an important point


made about the strained double standards of the stop the War


coalition run by the Socialist workers party, in hock with Seumas


Milne the spokesman for Jeremy Corbyn, in relentlessly targeting


America and the West. Which undoubtedly have made severe


mistakes. Allowing Russia and President Putin to get away with


these horrific atrocities where civilians are being very


deliberately targeted, as every single hospital in Syria has been


bombed. People are being killed every day by the regime. We do not


have two months or three months to wait which is why I am pushing for


more action now. People see the atrocities on their screens, they


would like to do something but not what. But they must also think if


dropping bombs was a solution in Syria, Syria would have been


resolved a long while ago. Don't forget the US is already bombing in


Syria with the UK and others, targeting Isil. Is rushed -- is


Russia bombing Isil? No. The real challenge for the Russians if


nothing happens is they will need some sort of ground offensive. I


don't think it will go over very well having Christian troops inside


on the ground. Sometimes the horse has just bolted. And it's been a


consequence of American foreign policy, and to a lesser extent,


European foreign policy as well, that a vacuum was created in the


Syrian zone, Russia has filled it. In a way, despite the terrible


pictures, the reality may be was that we lost our opportunity. Russia


has filled that vacuum and there's not much we can do about it now.


Russia has filled the vacuum but if Aleppo is depopulated, the Syrian


regime doesn't have the strength to hold it so there will be another


vacuum filled by more terrorist groups. If Russia is worried about


Aleppo being a terrorist magnet now, guess what it'll be later. I'm happy


that Boris and the MPs are putting this on the table. The more


attention that is paid to Aleppo, the more policymakers are forced to


discuss this and come up with some option. Whether it's a no-fly or no


bomb, there's got to be something in between that can be done. We're


putting it on the table, Rosa, but there seems to me to be no stomach


in Downing Street or the White House to do more than look at options.


That's quite right. It was very interesting the speed with which


Downing Street pretty much slapped down Boris Johnson. His was perhaps


an admirable statement. It was an emotional response, he obviously


feels strongly about the refugee situation,


about eight months old and in charge of ways. She's Brexit, she's got to


live up to her rhetoric at the conference. She's got Heathrow


expansion coming around the corner next week. She's a Middle East


entanglements like a hole in the head. Not a shortage of sophistry.


She's practical and hothouses of outfit. It seems to me this is the


ultimate in point of Fifa mussels worldview. After Afghanistan and the


Rock you get a swing away from interventionism and America


withdraws. When America decides not to lead from the front or take a


serious interest in the Middle East, the Russians fill a vacuum. All that


Putin wants, dreadful though he John Woodcock, hadn't you and your


party being complicit in helping to create the vacuum. We had drawn a


red line under the Syrian chemical weapons and backed away several


years ago as did President Obama. You voted for air strikes against


so-called Islamic State in Syria last December but by then it was


probably too late, the Russians were on the ground and increasingly


ensconced in the region. I regretted deeply the decision not to take


action once we had drawn a red line against that. But we cannot do


foreign affairs and intervention on the basis of not wanting to have


started from here and wishing things had gone differently. It has been


made hugely more difficult by the intervention of Russia, but the


consequences of standing back over the last years have been civilians


dying in horrific numbers and a member of the permanent Security


Council not simply being too careless in the way it has been


bombing but deliberately targeting civilians in an open war crimes of


the whole of the rest of the international community to see, on a


daily basis, while we do nothing. Of course government is difficult and


the Prime Minister has a lot of things on her to-do list. But I


think the world cannot really afford to pay a heavy price if we don't act


now to put President Putin back into the sense of needing to act within


the international framework which the UN sets out rather than this


rogue state which is appearing to be now. At times heart-rending issues.


I am grateful to you for joining us today and going through them with


us. Now, Theresa May wants to lift


the ban on new grammar But the policy was not


in the Conservative manifesto They did say they were prepared to


expand existing grammar schools. So what peers think


matters and yesterday There is a diversity


of education in this country And no one's going to have a grammar


school forced upon them We all should believe in choice


and nor should any of us seek to deprive others of what we


ourselves have benefited from. It was a German Chancellor who once


said the problem with some on the political right


is that they promise to the many what they know they will only be


able to deliver to the few. If one is imposed into an area,


or a transfer takes place to make an existing school selective,


the parents, the children who would have expected


to go to that school, who would have had expectation


of high-quality education for themselves or their child,


will find themselves excluded It's morally wrong, it's


philosophically wrong, it's practically impossible to implement,


and I do pray that the government will think again and place emphasis


on raising standards for all, The very notion that


by reintroducing selection, the people that this policy


is intended to attract will suddenly find their children -


let's say the traditional white working-class - would find


their children surging into new and better grammar schools


is a fantasy. What will actually happen,


and I really admire and salute this, is that migrant and first-generation


kids from Asia - we know already the highest performing children


in Britain are Bangladeshi girls - from Asia and Eastern Europe,


will sweep into those But the small problem


that the disgruntled and now a disconnected white working class


who believed they were going to get I can think of no other tinderbox


that you could strike on the hard-pressed and already


divided communities. Now there is a body of evidence


which shows that teaching pupils in mixed ability settings does


indeed lift the attainment of those However, the corollary is that those


who would have achieved the very The most able are having


their wings clipped. The reasons for inequality


in selective settings are many - poorer teachers in charge


of less able classes, a lack of confidence,


sometimes, in less able children, and a lack of positive


peer group role models. But rather than throwing the baby


out with the bath water and saying that all selection by


ability is always bad, perhaps we should mitigate


the impact and to look as you said, so that


our most able can fly. We're joined now by the Labour


peer Michael Cashman, Welcome back to the programme. Are


you against any kind of selection by ability or aptitude? Not at all. My


biggest problem is that there is an age picked, at the moment it is


11-13, and I don't believe everyone develops at the same time and


therefore selection at an imposed age actually mitigates against a


majority of children and as I said in a debate I want to make sure the


educational service serves the needs of every child throughout their


learning years and more importantly, especially with my experience beyond


your schooling years, recognise that we have unique potentials that can


be developed at different times. The old Grammar school system had the 11


plus will stop it was a brutal watershed. I know I suffered because


of it. You have not suffered too badly, you are in the House of


Lords. I did, because it has an incredible impact. You have overcome


it. I overcame it because. You have a CBE. You are a famous actor! I was


lucky, a drama teacher saw in this rebel at the secondary modern where


I did not feel I fitted, or belonged, he spotted something and


because my parents got into debt and I hack to work as a child actor, I


went to a stage school that developed my talent and it was only


when I was 25 when I wanted to do O-levels and A-levels, I thought I


could actually do it. I don't want that to happen to another child. You


were selected on the basis of ability? On the basis of talent by a


talent scout. My point is, we develop at different ages. Which


brings me back to the question I was going to ask you. I began by saying


the old grammar school secondary modern system had a brutal watershed


at 11 and there were sometimes when you could get back in but by and


large that was it, it decided your future education. What if there was


a more flexible selective system, that there was not an 11 plus, it


was later, and there were multiple opportunities and a variety of


schools for aptitudes and abilities that took that into account? Of


course I would look at that and will commit but I rely on experts. So


Michael Walsh, the chief inspector of education, said increasing


academic selections would be a profoundly retrograde step. The


institute of education, the national association of school and College


leaders, when I read the library briefing from the House of Lords, it


is clear the consensus is this does not help social mobility and does


not improve school performance overall. Iain Martin, you take a big


interest in this. I think you are right about the sharp division at 11


and the government has got itself into a mess partly because of the


way the story leaked. It was supposed to be the big announcement


at conference but it leaked and it is presented that they want a return


to the 11 plus and the secondary modern system, which was unfair and


divisive, but working back, they are trying to get to somewhere


interesting which is if you look at university technical colleges that


Ken Baker and others have been behind, there are more than 50 now.


There are 39 working towards 50. They take kids at 13-14, so the


point is the division is not sharp at 11. Out of that it would be


interesting to see if the government as well as creating technical


schools, could you create liberal arts colleges? Schools in poor areas


for very bright kids. There is a performing... I was meaning


humanities. How can we ensure in a country in which we have a delete


that is so stratified? How can we ensure it? In the debate, who spoke


who did not go to a grammar school? Three. How can we ensure bright kids


from poor areas get an elite education of the kind many members


of the Cabinet had? For me it is simple. Choice. Patrick Cormack used


the word choice. Often we get into a stream and let's take me as an


example. A young actor I got into the arts and suddenly decided I


wanted to study medicine. There was no method by which at the age of


205I could get A-levels and A-levels to do that, therefore I want choice


either when someone goes to a specialist college. A lifetime


choice? They change their mind. One's talent and potential develops


according to our experience of the world. If you looked at our school


system and you would find many weaknesses, and a huge diversity of


performance between various types of school, but if you looked from the


outside, rather than saying more grammar schools would be a priority,


you may want to say they should be more, but would it be a priority


that the glaring thing we lack is a wide range of high-quality


technology schools? I think what most parents want is just a really


good school that is not worse than the school that someone else is


going to. I went to what Alastair Campbell called a bog-standard


comprehensive and I did OK. Now I am a parent and always believed in


comprehensive education. Now as a parent, you begin to think, I don't


know whether I want to send my little treasure to the comprehensive


when others are going to the grammar school. I think there needs to be,


for a one nation Conservative, Theresa May is introducing a system


which is about differences and degradation, and even having the


humanities College, technical College, that is fine if you live in


a concentrated urban area where you can go to different schools for


different aptitudes, but in a rural area, even a suburb, you want the


school up the road to be good and cater to all pupils. The logic of


the Tony Blair, Lord Adonis, Michael Gove reforms needs to be followed


through and unwonted selection although I think everyone involved


went to selective schools. The key is variety. The too long we have had


a top-down national model. Let 1000 flowers bloom, try different


schools, introduce some selection. There will be some new full-scale


grammar schools where people want it but we have to get away from the


idea of enforcing one rigid national model. Michael, the final word. This


is hopefully what the House of Lords will ask the government to do dash


to think again and think of any proposals. There isn't a manifesto


commitment. There is not even widespread support on the government


benches but hopefully the debate yesterday which Baroness Andrews


managed to get will say to the government, if you proceed down this


route, it will be very difficult. Think differently, think more


widely, think imaginatively. And then there might be a proposal that


would emerge that would have the support of the Lord's? I hope so


because the Lord's works on the basis of achieving compromise from


all parties. It is like my experience of the 15 years in the


European Parliament. You have to work with others to achieve the best


and that is what I hoped for. Michael Cashman, good to see you


again. Time now to see what else has been


happening in the world of politics Here's Ellie with the


week in 60 seconds. With early voting already underway


in the US, Donald Trump's presidential campaign faltered


after numerous allegations about his inappropriate


behaviour towards women. One suggesting he was


like "an octopus." Debating the war in Syria,


Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson made this rather


undiplomatic suggestion... I'd certainly like to see


demonstrations outside But not wanting to be outdone,


Jeremy Corbyn's top aide Seumas Milne later suggested that


people should protest outside the American Embassy


in London instead. Iain Duncan Smith apologised


to Labour's shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer,


a QC no less, after calling him It was clumsy, it was not meant


about him, it was And I don't doubt for one


moment his capabilities as a lawyer. Boris Johnson, yes him again,


told the Foreign Affairs Select You seem to think the single


market is sort of like To paraphrase, it was Groucho


himself who once said he'd never be a member of any club would have him


as a member, whatever that means. month to go until the US election,


November the 8th. Results will be live on BBC One. And BBC World and


BBC News. It looks like the past ten days have been a watershed in a


campaign. It was pretty nip and tuck but Mrs Clinton seems to be pulling


away but not dramatically. Many are surprised she has not pulled away by


morbid it is clearly hers to lose? I spend a lot of time in the States


and Hillary Clinton is surprisingly unpopular. I do not think people


here quite realise. Some try to make an equivalence between her and


Donald Trump and her challenge will be to get people to turn out.


Probably Donald Trump has been so unappealing people will do that, but


it is not a done deal. She needs young people to come out and a


massive mobilisation of the black and Hispanic vote. The Republican


leadership, which a lot of it has disowned Mr Trump. Their worry is


they have written off the White House in their minds, they are


trying to hold onto the Senate. This is such a crazy scramble. I spent a


lot of time in the US in the past year and the Republican


establishment, the part of the establishment that did not do enough


to stop him, is now pretty much getting what it deserves. You are


right, the polls might be wrong, but the Clinton campaign have played the


last few weeks absolutely brilliantly. He walked into it. They


suckered him in that first debate and he was ranting and being rude to


women, dropped the famous tape, force him to deny that he had ever


done this and them produce via the media... It had been a stuttering


campaign until then. We will see if you can get his campaign together


now. There is all to play for. Before we go, the answer to our


quiz. Who is going to be the new women's


champion for the UN? I do not know. I will guess wonder


woman. Wonder woman. You are both right. She does not even exist!


Really? Apparently it is a studio tie-up that makes it, anyway. There


you go. The one o'clock news is starting


over on BBC One now. I'll be back on Sunday


with the Sunday Politics, We will look at airport expansion


and inevitably the latest on Brexit. Join me at 11am, BBC One, Sunday


morning. ..and builds worlds,


not just characters.


Download Subtitles