17/10/2016 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 17/10/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


With the Calais Jungle camp due to be shut down within days,


more unaccompanied child migrants arrive in Britain,


but are we taking too long and taking in too few children?


They're said to be overwhelmingly in favour of Remain


but how far will the unelected Lords dare to go


in being seen to frustrate the progress of Brexit?


We'll ask the new man in charge of the Upper House.


Has the feminist movement empowered women


And can a good logo get you elected, or help you lose?


And with us for the whole of the programme today


is former Labour Leadership contender Angela Eagle


and the former Culture Secretary Maria Miller,


who now chairs the Commons' Women and Equalities Committee.


First this morning, the Independent Inquiry


into Child Sexual Abuse is now on its fourth inquiry chair,


as well as suffering several resignations from its legal team.


But it is the inquiry's third chair, Dame Lowell Goddard,


that's attracting most interest at the moment


with the Home Affairs Select Committee


about to hold a hearing on the circumstances


surrounding her appointment and dismissal.


But are they poised to call Theresa May,


who was Home Secretary at the time, to give evidence?


Let's talk to our assistant political editor, Norman Smith.


Can you just remind us about the circumstances of her departure? She


left early August, the Home Secretary Amber red saying she left


because of the distant she had to travel back to New Zealand. She was


feeling lonely. Suggesting a personal reasons that led to her


resignation. We now know very serious allegations have been made


about the way she managed the inquiry and whether she lost the


confidence of leading members of the inquiry team and also allegations


about her attitude, particularly claims she had made racist remarks.


What the MPs want to try to understand is, if those kind of


allegations were being made, where any of them relayed to ministers and


in particular to the Home Secretary at the time, Theresa May? Speaking


to MPs on the committee, they take a view it is inconceivable that the


Home Office at least was not aware of the deep concerns within the


inquiry because members of the Home Office had been succumbed to the


inquiry and they say it is not credible that sort of information


would not have been known about. When you talk to Downing Street this


morning, they said the first alarm bells were not sounded until 29th of


July. That was a week or so before Justice Gothard resigned. In other


words, Theresa May was not alerted. That is not the only aspect of this


which concerns MPs regarding the Prime Minister. There is also an


appetite to understand why the inquiry was set up as it was with


this huge remix to investigate pretty much the world and his wife,


allegations of abuse at Westminster, local government, the military, the


police, it you name it. A lot roads come back to Theresa May. Is there


now a suggestion that it will be scaled back, the scope of this


enquiry? That is highly likely. There is a view it is out of control


in terms of the extent of lines of enquiry it now has two pursue. There


are? About how you pull all of that together in a reasonable time frame.


I suspect you will hear from Alexis Jay later saying she is going to


pair the inquiry back. It does raise questions about why it was setup in


this way in the first place and in the hall management of this enquiry.


It was originally set up by Theresa May as a panel. It had its remit


extended to become a full-blown enquiry. There are fundamental


questions about the Prime Minister's handling this enquiry. She is likely


to be called, is she? Or will she accept? I would say it is doubtful


she will accept that Amber Rudd has responsibility for the department. I


am struggling but I cannot remember a Prime Minister coming before the


departmental select committee. They appear before the Liaison Committee


bike cannot remember one appearing before a departmental committee and


I imagine they would not want to go down that road. Presumably that


might be the time they can compose some of these questions.


Should she appeared before the committee bearing in mind she was


Home Secretary when these serious questions and allegations began to


surface? It is right that the select committee should do its job and


scrutinise civil servants and ministers. It is Amber Rudd who is


in position now and the Liaison Committee has ample opportunity to


press the Prime Minister on this if we choose to so do at a later date.


I think they should not let this overshadow the important work the


inquiry is doing for victims and my worry is this is somewhat


sidetracking people from that important work and the work of


Alexis Jay. I'm glad she will be talking later to get the focus of


people back on that. You say you are worried about it sidetracking what


has already been a difficult enquiry to get going due to resignations. We


have heard, or it has been reported, the permanent Secretary to the Home


Office implied they already knew about allegations about her conduct


went to reason may was Home Secretary. Surely the onus is on her


to respond. It was an Independent enquiry. There were civil servants


from the Home Office are conjured there and there was a close link. I


think I will be listening very closely to what the civil servants


have to say, when they knew it will stop it is important not to lose


sight of the inquiry. Should it be scaled back? It is clearly in


trouble, onto its fourth head. The trouble is about the judge from New


Zealand and I hope she agrees to give evidence about what actually


happened. I think we are in danger of losing the point of setting it up


in the first place, which was to try to deal with some of the cover-ups


that have been going on about child sexual abuse and many lives being


ruined. It has clearly got completely out of control. It is too


wide-ranging in its rebate for any person to be able to do it. It goes


back 40-50 years. It is a difficult ask for anyone. The Chan in the


inquiry of chairs has demonstrated that. You do think it should be more


targeted? They need to see how they can begin to attack the remade. They


are making no progress and time is going on. No one is satisfied. All


good reasons, Theresa May wanted to have something done about this. I


think it has spiralled out of all control and is not fit for purpose.


They need to take another look at it but they must also look at the


expenditure of public money. The judge had half ?1 million in


recompense. They will look at that in the select committee, when pay?


Do you think it has been well handled? It has not made the


progress we would have hoped. Whose fault is that? Whether it is to do


with the terms of the inquiry or the people, ultimately victims will be


saying it has not made the progress it should have had. I hope Alexis


Jay will say it has made a clear way forward. It is not right to say it


has made no progress. Darting to identify the sorts of inquiries and


13 inquiries that should be undertaken. The scale of what is


being done is very ambitious. I have been listening carefully to what


Alexis Jay has to say. If it will be restricted in some way, in what way


would you like to see it more limited? I would like to see victims


having clear answers about how these sorts of abuse allegations were


dealt with in the past. Whether the inquiry needs to have the breadth of


scope across the public and private sector. I will be listening


carefully to that later on today if Alexis Jay makes a statement. By


focusing the inquiry in a less ambitious way across all of those


sectors, we might be able to get results sooner. Are you confident


Alexis Jay can do the job any better than her predecessors? I hope so. We


can but hope. Otherwise we will get into a round of ongoing problems. A


lot of the victims would say that what they want is to create a


circumstance where people cannot be subjected to the kind of horrors


they were subjected to in the past again in the future. It is also


importantly tried to learn lessons about how child abuse is dealt with,


how the authorities deal with it, and how we can best protect victims.


That is the key point for everyone concerned. Do you think learning the


lessons, the historical lessons, because there is a history of being


examined about child abuse, the thing that can still help today?


Absolutely. We will be letting victims stand we did not make sure


recommendations coming out of the inquiry do absolutely get embedded


in all of that. Let's leave it there.


Now, the Calais Jungle, the make-shift migrant camp


is due to be cleared in the next week or so.


Amongst the estimated 10,000 people in the camps


are thought to be between 600 and 900 unaccompanied refugees.


The British Government has agreed to take some of those


but are they acting too slowly and taking too few children?


are due to arrive in the UK today from Calais.


They include Afghans, Syrians and stateless Bidun children


They are the first group of minors to be brought over


by the Home Office under a fast-track registration scheme.


The Dublin Regulation allows children to seek UK asylum


because they have close relatives living here.


The UK has also made a wider commitment to taking


in unaccompanied children caught up in the migrant crisis.


The Lord Dubs Amendment to the Immigration Act which passed


requires the Government to "arrange transport and support"


for unaccompanied refugee children - whether family in UK or not -


requires the Government to arrange transport and support


for unaccompanied refugee children from Europe,


regardless of whether they have family here.


And Home Secretary Amber Rudd said last week that it would be


"a good result" if the UK ended up taking 300 unaccompanied


But the Former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams has


warned of "foot dragging" over accepting children from the Calais


Mr Williams said "the clock is ticking" because the camp


is expected to be demolished next week and the UK had a "moral


Maria Miller, why is it taking so long to get unaccompanied child


refugees with relatives in this country to come to the UK? It has


been a bureaucratic system and been very problematic in getting speedy


resolutions. More than 5000 Syrian refugees have come to this country


since 2012. The systems are in place. Again I do not think we


should forget the Government policy of supporting refugees on the Syrian


border is on the campus is something which we have done and proudly done.


That is, as you say, a two pronged attack. Let's focus on the


unaccompanied children and the commitments that have been made.


Have there been tracking of feet? -- has there been? The numbers have


been so huge that invariably the bureaucratic system has got in the


way. More than 100 children have already come over. The Home


Secretary has said she wants to see many more come over. Local


authorities are there, willing and ready to help these children, many


of whom have significant needs. What numbers are you talking about? The


Home Secretary has talked about 300 children coming over. I think that


is Britain playing its part, which is what we want to do, without


acting as a magnet for people traffickers who have used and abused


young people, dragging them to Calais. We can see some of the


pictures of children. There have been reports suggesting that not all


of the people who say they are children actually are and they are


trying to get some sort of refuge here. The Government has said, and


Amber Rudd has said it will be a good result if the UK manages to


take 300. Local councils had to deal with child refugees when they come


over here and not all of them said they can afford it. By definition,


the Government has agreed the dubs amendment. You want to ensure that


children who have gone through a very traumatic time when they are


reunited with relatives are properly looked after. I think it is for the


Government to ensure there is adequate resources available for


local authorities, many of whom have had huge cuts in their budgets, to


be able to ensure those children are properly integrated. Of course, the


longer they have been in those terrible conditions, the more needy


they are likely to be when they come over here. If the Government


accepted the Dubs Amendment, I think it should have been faster and more


effective in taking those children. If the Calais camp closes within a


week, we have had months and months since this amendment has passed and


hundreds of children have come over. Even on the figure of 300, less than


a week to integrate and find the other 200. There have to be a lot


more work done and more quickly to get these children over safely. I


agree you voted against the original amendment stating the UK should take


in 3000 unaccompanied child refugees.


My position right from the start has been that we should be supporting


people in the camps nearer to Syria, any countries are not doing that.


Britain is, we have stepped up to our obligations. Individuals,


particularly young people in the camps near Syria are often the most


disabled, the most challenged, they cannot pay people traffickers to


take them on board. Britain has the right strategy in that respect. We


remember where the amendment came from, it was because it was on the


Kindertransport, during the period of the Nazis, when ordinary


community groups, not the government, brought Jordan over. And


we know from that period that many of the children who came over have


made an enormous contribution to British life afterwards, so I think


that we should get on and get this sorted and not leave those children


in the danger they are in now. Do you think there is a moral


obligation, as Ryan Williams has said, to take the children, I take


your point, it should be in the camps, the focus, but the Dubs


Amendment was eventually passed. -- Rowan Williams. Absolutely there is


a moral obligation, that is what Parliament has acted in this way,


with a very specific objective in our sights. You didn't want to take


all of them. It comes down to the fact that we need to be so careful


that the policies we took in place do not encourage people trafficking


in the ways... People trafficking is going on now, large numbers of


people are paying huge amounts of money to cross the Mediterranean in


boat, many people are being exploited, we need to use the forces


of law and order to help to deal with some of those trafficking


routes. It is not a reason not to help people who are in dire need.


You admit that there is a bureaucratic process to go through,


claims of having relatives in this country have got to be investigated


otherwise everyone would say, no matter their tragic circumstances.


Of course but it could have been done faster. Has Jeremy Corbyn


offered strong enough position on the refugees, should he have been


pushing harder? It has pushed pretty hard, he has made it clear that we


should be doing more, and the opposition have voted to support the


Dubs Amendment, I think it is clear that there is a humanist airing


crisis going on across Europe and we must play our part, as one of the


European nations and one of the leading nations in the United


Nations, to do the right thing. I have to say, I think Maria Miller is


right, about the fantastic support that this government has been giving


on the borders, of Syria, but that does not mean that we cannot do


something to help people in dire need in Europe now, and we should be


playing our part. We are playing our part. We make sure those children


come to the UK. As well as the bureaucracy, Winnie to make sure


those children, when they arrive, have this right support in place,


many have significant needs. -- we need to make sure. Dozens of


children have gone missing while waiting for their claims to be


processed, according to aid agencies, what do you say to that?


That is an appalling situation for us to be facing. Whether that is the


French government or the British government or indeed the whole of


the new, it needs to be looked into very carefully. Finally, Francois


Hollande has promised to set up reception and orientation centres,


the camps will be cleared, and that will deal with and process asylum


seekers, do you really think that is going to be the end of watching


hordes of migrants and refugees trying to get onto lorries to come


to Britain? The whole of Europe has to deal with the dispersal of those


refugees arriving in great numbers. How should it be done? It should be


done with co-operation with some of the international agreement that are


being made, and it should be done more effectively. But we know that


this is controversial within countries, as we see from the rise


of the populace. Are you optimistic that the plan of Francois Hollande


for the new reception centres is going to work? We have got to wish


it the best and we have got to hope it works because the alternative is


people really living in fields, like they are at the moment, in Calais,


risking their lives to get on lorries. That is not what we want to


see in the centre of Europe. Now, remember it wasn't


about his leadership and he wouldn't resign if he lost,


but in the end David Cameron resigned as Prime Minister and then


as an MP in the wake The by-election prompted


by his departure is on Thursday and our Ellie's been to his former


constituency of Witney to test The Oxfordshire


constituency of Witney. A place known for


blankets, airbases, and, until recently,


the Prime Minister. because he didn't want to be


a distraction to Theresa May. Some of his former constituents


are slightly annoyed by the distraction


of a by-election. What were your thoughts


on David Cameron standing down? I thought he had said several times


he wouldn't do that. I did understand the reason


he did stand down. I don't think he had


the choice, to be honest. It's a shame because he's


been doing a good job. What are your thoughts


on David Cameron standing down? Don't get me on that


subject, David Cameron. When David Cameron was re-elected


here in the general election last year,


he increased his majority There is no doubt it


will be an uphill struggle for the other parties


hoping to overcome that. There are 14 candidates


in total hoping to they're in a similar


position, or worse? Councillor Duncan Enright is the


Labour candidate. He stood against David Cameron


in the general election. With David Cameron's personal


vote out of the way, I think there's a real chance


for something to happen here. I'm the most famous candidate


on the ballot paper in Witney. I may not be famous


across the country How are the Liberal Democrats doing


at the moment? Liz Leffman, is standing


for the Lib Dems. Quite a number of people in this


constituency, 57%, particularly people who


voted Conservative in the past, are really upset that they've got


somebody, the Conservative candidate,


who voted to leave. Always nice to have a professional


wardrobe dresser. Dickie Bird, who served


in the British Army for 20 With possibly a cooling down


on Brexit from the Government, there's a possibility of 30,000


votes there that can reinforce and keep the Prime Minister's toes


to the fire to make sure that Brexit is Brexit


and we do actually leave the EU. You know my name?


Great. His name is Larry Sanders,


the Green candidate. If he seems a bit familiar,


it's because his brother was the US presidential


hopeful, Bernie Sanders. I'm part of a world movement


that we can get past the last 30 years of perhaps shifting


money from the rich from My brother Bernie started it


and I want to finish it. It's a real pleasure


to meet you both. Barrister Robert Courts is


hoping to follow in David Cameron's


Conservative footsteps. There's no such thing


as a safe seat. I'll be getting out and meeting


as many people as I possibly can in every town and listening


to their concerns, and explaining why I think I'd be the best


person to represent them. This will be Theresa May's first


electoral test as Prime Minister, which is why she's not


taking any chances and was out with one


of her old friends this weekend, By-elections in safe seats sometimes


have a knack of throwing Witney goes to the


polls on Thursday. Ellie Price there,


and a full list of candidates standing in Thursday's


by-election is on the website. Now, he's got the most


comfortable seat in parliament, he's a Lord but had to be elected


to his position. Former Conservative Cabinet


Minister Lord Fowler took up his position last week


after winning a vote amongst fellow peers,


and joins us in the studio. Congratulations again, although I


think we spoke at the time, what is the role of the Lord's post EU


referendum? The role of the Lord's post-referendum is exact to what it


has been before, what we are about is scrutinising every piece of


legislation that comes through, we do not have a guillotine process in


the Lords, which, in the Commons, I was in the Commons 31 years, often


means that really quite important issues are not given the attention


that they might be. And so we go through every piece of legislation,


and try to make constructive changes, if changes are needed to


it. How will that work when it comes to legislation regarding Brexit, the


laws, as you say, are not meant to frustrate the will of the Commons,


they will vote against manifesto commitments by the government. --


the Lords. The EU referendum result is different. We recognise, first


thing, we recognise the primacy of the House of Commons. We don't wish


to challenge that. But what it sometimes means is that there are


disagreements between the two houses, or fiercely. We have an


example of that last week, when, I think, the government lost about six


divisions. That does not mean to say that those losses were actually


going to legislation, because there will be compromises in between. You


previously said that the Prime Minister the Commons should not


leave the unchallenged so should they be able to block Brexit


negotiation? As a general principle, certainly, I think that the Lords,


at times, can vote down something that has come from the Commons, you


have just been spending a lot of time, quite rightly, on health Dubs


Amendment, well, if it had not been for the Lords, we would not have had


alt Dubs Amendment, it did not get through the Commons. -- on Alf Dubs


Amendment. Should the Lords be able to block through the terms of Brexit


negotiation. I am going to give you the same reply, I am the House of


Lords, I am neutral, I am not... I'm asking for your view, in terms of


advising peers what to do, how did you vote on the EU referendum?


McGrath I voted to remain. When it comes to decisions for example on


the approval of triggering Article 50, the great repeal Bill. The


Conservative peer, Baroness Patience Wheatcroft said that approval could


be withheld and the Lords might actually delay things, is she right?


I don't know, and I think that the position is at the moment with


Article 50 there is a legal case, as you well know, on that. On the great


repeal Bill, I'm not sure if that is going to be the title, but on the


great repeal Bill, it will be like any other piece of legislation, we


will go through it and there will be proposals and the government and the


Lords and the Commons can go through it and make amendments. If


amendments are necessary. I'm sure there going to be debates... Where


we end up is anyone's guess. It is about the role, the great repeal


Bill was not a manifesto commitment, it couldn't be, so in that case,


could, as Patience Wheatcroft said, could the Lords frustrate the


government on that issue? Frustrate is putting it in a rather emotive


way. De Laet yet? Stop it? I think that the Lords could make amendments


to the bill. -- delay it. They can make amendments to the bill in the


same way that they make amendments to any other Bill, whether that is


the end of the matter is quite another decision. The Commons can


look at it, they can say whether they degree all they want some


compromise or they reject. Let's say that one of the amendments of the


great repeal Bill, we have been told by government ministers that is a


chance for both elected members -- elected members and the house of


lords to discuss this, what if one of the amendments was to discuss


that there should not be a stance on the government of coming out of the


single market, would that be in your view within the role of the House of


Lords? I don't know, that would have to be something for the clerk of the


parliaments to decide. As I say, you are putting me into a position that


I don't actually occupy. I cannot be an advocate on this, I am meant to


hold the balance, hold the consensus. It is rather new for me!


Broadly speaking, would that be within the remit that you would find


expendable -- acceptable. If it is in order, any thing that comes in


order. Do you see a situation whereby the House of Lords could


change of frustrate the democratic will of the people? On the great


repeal Bill, that comes at the end of the process, what we are talking


about is whether Parliament should be allowed to scrutinise, both


houses, should be allowed to scrutinise the way that the


government intends to interpret the instruction from the British people


in the EU referendum to leave. What I said in the debate we had on this,


in the Commons last Wednesday, was that there has clearly been a vote


to leave the European Union expressed in a referendum but that


does not mean that we should leave it in the most damaging way. I think


that... You mean by leaving the single market? By having a very hard


Brexiteer with no access... Relying upon... -- very hard Brexit. There


has not been any vocation of not having access, a tariff... They are


not sharing with us any of their thoughts on how they are trying to


do it at the moment and I think that it is important for Parliament to


have a say and be able to scrutinise the government in how they are going


about the process. Do you believe there should be a vote ahead of


Article 50, for the Commons, ahead of next March, for the terms of the


negotiation? I think it is really important that the government sets


out in a White Paper what they are thinking about in terms of the


future. If there was a vote and they voted against the negotiating stance


or coming out of the single market, surely that would be frustrating


what people said in the EU referendum. This is done normally,


this used to be done any time any minister... And I have represented


the Council of ministers for the UK, whenever you would go to talk about


a directive, you would have scrutiny from Parliament saying that you


could operate within certain contexts. Nothing new about this.


Would you like to see a vote before Article 50 is triggered?


Should there be a vote? We should let the Government continue with the


negotiation and I do not think there should be a vote before the


triggering of article 16. Mike Watson has said grammar schools are


dead. -- Article 50. The house of Lords would be within their right to


oppose that policy. You say oppose it. Remember, we never defeat


anything on second reading. What one is looking at is the bill. It had


not come to us from the House of Commons. I don't know what happens


in the hands of Commons, let alone in the House of Lords. We will


obviously does that will be scrutinised. -- the House of


Commons. You have to sit in the chair for about five minutes only to


know there is a lot of feeling on grammar schools. We do take these


decisions. On tax credits, we took the decision. We were much


criticised, the House of Lords, for taking that. When it went actively


House of Commons, and we basically said, look at this, think again,


they thought again and nothing else was heard about the tax credits


proposal. It is a process in action. I do know if that will be what


happens with grammar schools. What I do know is with the educationalists


and the others, grammar school people like myself, there will be


quite a lot of feeling on this and quite a lot of experience. I hope


you are looking forward to it. I am, greatly.


Now, our guest of the day, Maria Miller, chairs the newly


formed Women and Equalities select committee.


But with a woman Prime Minister at the helm for a second time


and girls now outperforming boys at school, is the work


Well, Laura Perrins of the website, The Conservative Woman,


Here's her Soapbox on why she thinks feminism is making women


Modern feminism ignores what women actually want, which is a balance


Feminism has been hijacked by a narrow elite who dominate


Lots of women have far more traditional views


than they are permitted to admit, which is one of the reasons


we set up the website, the Conservative Woman.


We used to have a reader who left comments telling us that today's


generation of young women were kick ass and confident and going to take


over the world, so we had better get used to it.


What feminism has produced is a generation of whining,


moaning women, who, despite unparalleled


opportunity and wealth, view themselves as victims.


After at least a decade of feminists claiming victimhood and mounting


an extremely effective public campaign to serve their interests,


girls now outperform boys all the way through


Young women significantly outnumber young men at university and they out


earn young man after graduation until the age of about 30.


A recent report revealed that 38% of women were worried


22% felt depressed, and 55% were worried for their future.


The modern 20-something woman has inherited the fruits


of the poisonous, feminist ideology that seeks to divide the sexes


And Laura joins us now have already started the conversation. Listening


to you, the sisterhood will be crying out and saying, you are a


traitor to the cause and how on earth is the medicine to be blamed


for women being Moni and miserable today? First of all, the first


statistic is that only 7% of women identify as feminists. Medium


politics is dominated by the agenda when ordinary women do not identify


with it at all. Only 7%. The problem with modern feminism is that it is


elitist, it in fantasises women by often second-guessing motives and it


also, sadly in some cases, can make women genuinely unhappy. It is not


those women I feel sorry for those women, and they should be supported.


One reason I believe they are unhappy is because of an elitist


agenda, a 1% feminist agenda, pushed by people like Maria Miller. What do


you say to that, that it is an elitist issue? The menace is not


something that has anything to do with the lives of ordinary women.


The evidence we took in our select committee and our report to women at


work and the payback -- pay gap would suggest that Laura is entirely


wrong. The biggest problem hitting women are those on the lowest of


pains. When in sectors like caring and hospitality, they will continue


to have problems getting the sort of wages they can live on and the sort


of career progression that perhaps other women take for granted. Some


women in this country, very privileged women, have seen a great


deal of change and benefit art of the feminist agenda. We want to make


sure that it is everyone in who gets more access to equality in the


future. Isn't you'll is really to do with middle-class women? You cite


the fact that girls are doing better than boys at school and women are


outperforming men throughout education. That is the new


generation coming through and you have a problem with middle-class


women who use they may be miserable and moany as a result of feminism


but that is not entirely fair. Certainly not. The issue of the


gender pay gap has been misrepresented in the media can do


it ignores first low pay especially on how families work as a unit. The


Institute for Fiscal Studies says women and 18% less per hour than


men. There is nothing misrepresented about that. That does not take into


account part-time work. I have never heard such rubbish.


That is because you do not read about it. What is the rubbish?


Demolition of the creed of liberation and equality for women.


It has not caused women to become whining and unsatisfied. What we


need is to see that women ought to be in allowed to take their places


on equal terms with men in our society. We are a very long way from


that. The pay gap is 30%. Once you are past 30. Why does it go down?


Why does it widen when you are past 30, because most of the duties to


have and look after children and disproportionately on women. We have


not organised our society. They want to do that. I am not saying they do


not. We need to organise our society so we care for children and are more


child centres and when women do that they do not suffer a career


disadvantage. -- child centred. Men and women contribute more. That is a


change that feminism brings. When women want to come back into the


workplace, are you saying they are not unfairly paid compare it to male


counterparts and they are able to do the jobs they did before? --


compared to male counterparts. They are not discriminated against once


they come back. There is no evidence for that. Let Laura finished. It has


been looked into. The Institute of economic affairs has looked into


theirs. Women's hour, let's take women's hour. They had a survey out


last week. Just let me finish this point. Of the women who work


full-time, 56% said they would like to spend more time at home and 1.6%


said they wanted to work. That is not the point we were talking about.


Let's go back to being discriminated against in terms of pay. You have


found different evidence. Let's listen to the evidence from Maria


Miller on the Pagan. Our select MIDI took extensive evidence on this. --


our select committee. Women over 30 could not go back into the sort of


jobs they had before they had children and could not get flexible


working enabling them to do the sorts of things they needed to. What


we found very clearly was women did want to go back into work, did want


to balance children and family commitments and their work lives.


Too many employers are not making that available. Britain is suffering


as a result. That is why business needs to deal with it. This woman


has blamed the existence of Donald Trump on feminism. This is


ludicrous. There were male chauvinist pigs long before feminism


existed. We have got a liberation movement of women fighting for our


equality, not more, fighting for our equality, to deal with issues like


that. I won't sit here and be told by some of the better fight for


equality causes male chauvinism. It certainly does not. Are you saying


the absence of feminism means women would be happier today? I am saying


they should not pitting men against women. Just because you do not like


somebody's and to view does not mean you can ignore the evidence that is


out there. There is conflicting evidence, isn't there? Conflicting


because it has been picked out by the medium political elite. It is an


important issue. Flexible working and part-time working is what women


want. Top-down government initiatives will actually have a


chilling effect on employers offering that. I seriously ask you


to reconsider those kinds of proposals. It does not work. There


are women on the right, like this, who say that if you give women equal


pay it would stop women being allowed into the workplace. If you


give women maternity leave... This is nonsense. Isn't it the point that


the women who want to stay home and look after their children, they


don't want to enter the workplace necessarily. Feminism is about


choices and creating a society that enables women to stay at home and


look after their children if they want or to go out and have a career


and children if they want. Laura does not represent the views of the


Conservative Party and I think her website could be misinterpreted in


that way. The Conservative Party is absolutely focused on making sure


that women can do their best in terms of going into work by getting


jobs they want, and balancing that in the way they choose to balance


it. I think Laura needs to look at the facts. Interestingly, Labour


women MPs have always numbered more highly than other women MPs. In


terms of Prime Minister is, of course, they have had two female


Prime Minister. In a way, reaching the top has been easier or more


possible under the Tories and Labour. That is undeniably true. We


will carry on fighting. It is interesting to bearing in mind the


different approaches, it has not happened. I absolutely accept that


point. Will fight and carry on fighting the rest of my life to make


sure we do as well in terms of female Prime Minister 's than the


Conservative Party. Thank you. Now, looking ahead, let's see


what else is coming up this week. At some point this week


the government is expected, finally, to back a third


runway at Heathrow. That was the recommendation


of the Airport Commission last year, but with reports of up to 60


backbenchers being opposed to the move, the pressure


is on the government to come up Today Ukip's National


Executive Committee will meet to discuss the process


for electing a new leader. This follows a tumultous few weeks


for the party, which ended in a fracas at the European Parliament


that saw leadership hopeful On Tuesday the Home


Affairs Select Committee will hear from the new chair of


the inquiry into child sexual abuse. The inquiry has suffered a number


of setbacks, and Professor Alexis Jay is the fourth


person to have chaired it. On Thursday voters in Witney,


David Cameron's former constituency, There's also another


by-election in Batley and Spen, which was triggered after the death


of Labour MP Jo Cox, but the main parties


will not be contesting that. And Friday will mark Theresa May's


first 100 days in office. But while the new PM has emphasised


that "Brexit means Brexit", more and more questions are being asked


about her government's plan We're joined now in the studio


by Kevin Maguire, associate editor of the Daily Mirror,


and the Daily Mail's Andrew Pierce. I knew that he would gate-crash...!


Is that true? LAUGHTER I couldn't possibly comment. Talking


about Philip Hammond and reported splits and tensions in the cabinet,


is Philip Hammond the Chancellor a remoaner? He is, and it is visible


servants, lukewarm Brexit, soft Brexit, whatever you want to call


it, the Treasury is against it and it does not take long for


institution of the Treasury to get the chance link to its claws,


somebody in the Treasury is leaking stuff.


Leaking stuff from government, surely not, that never happens(!)


has this row been overblown, talk of Philip Hammond's role as a remoaner?


He is looking at the figures and can see the realities of what Brexit


might mean and he is concerned for the British economy, next year 's


growth figures have been downgraded because of it, we have seen the


powerful, hearing all the investors, not just banks but big manufacturers


as well warning that they may cut investment, waiting to see how


Brexit may work out, and it is not just the Treasury riffing, he has


not fallen into the clutches of the Treasury, everybody is briefing, and


labour, the governing party is what really counts, right across the


governing party, there is a huge differences on where we go. If


Philip Hammond is raising concerns, legitimately, in cabinet, Andrew


Pierce, and saying he wants to delay migration curbs because it would


harm business, isn't that his role? Is that really trying to subvert the


democratic will of the people? He is entitled to raise his objections,


and resignations, but the Prime Minister made it absolutely clear


that free movement of people is one of her red lines, she wants curbs on


immigration, he is trying to slow that down, it is fine to slow it


down, I think he is resisting the will of the government. Will he get


anywhere? Probably, the referendum was won by those who want to quit,


Brexiteers, and... Theresa May has said that she has got to deliver


Brexit, and to her, that does mean what she certainly implied, that


freedom of movement will have two and, and we will not be under the


jurisdiction of the European court of justice. She always says Brexit


means Brexit but she does not fill in the gap afterwards, she never


says what it means, that is where the battle is, ending free movement


does not mean ending migration, we will still have a relationship,


people will come in, people will go and work from Britain in the rest of


the European Union, these attitudes must be had, these arguments must be


aired, to pretend everyone is United is a myth. In the Downing Street


briefing there was a vote of confidence from the Prime Minister


in Philip Hammond, you would expect that, but also... Also LAUGHTER


Also number ten make clear that she, Theresa May, once all the ministers


working together. That is easier said than done. -- oncewants. You


work with Philip Hammond in cabinet, is the one to resist and slow down


the progress of Brexit if he believes it is in the best interest


of the economy? It is not in the best interest of anybody to slow


down Brexit, businesses want certainty and they want the business


to be as quick as possible. I don't think the Treasury, or Philip


Hammond, who has a good business background, would like to slow that


down unnecessarily. We have to come to the right conclusion here, make


sure we do not simply leave the YouTube accepts their roles as they


are currently. We need to see a change in terms of freedom of


movement, we need to... We need to see the laws that affect this


country made in this country, that is what people voted for. Do you


think Philip Hammond is signed up to delivering Grexit? Every member of


the cabinet must be signed up to delivering Brexit, because that is


what the British people have voted for. -- Brexit. When it comes to


migration, it will be difficult to hit the net migration target if it


is delayed. The two do not go together. Theresa May missed it


consistently throughout her entire time. We were in the EU, then. I bet


that she will continue in the Prime Minister not least because more


people come into Britain from outside the European Union than


within it, if immigration is your big thing, you should cut off the


world instead of Europe! It is about sovereignty and Britain's parliament


deciding which laws it has, on migration and labour, what is wrong


with the government saying, limiting the influx of cheap unskilled labour


from Eastern Europe, we don't need it. Sovereignty of Parliament and


yet Theresa May is frightened of giving Parliament votes Andre Gray


Article 50 and the terms. Moving on to something else that we have been


waiting for a decision on, the airport expansion, Heathrow, looks


as if there is another short pause on that announcement, why is that?


We have been waiting for 15 years, Frankie, what's another week! But,


we still think it will be Heathrow, they will be sorting out Boris


Johnson, he once said that he would sit in front of the bulldozer to


stop it, perhaps trying to prevent a by-election in Richmond with Zac


Goldsmith full. The Shadow Transport Secretary has written a piece saying


that a third runway is fine? Most Labour MPs I believe back Heathrow


expansion, Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell they do not, and so the


tried and trusted way of the new Labour Party, they will have a free


vote and they will go that way! LAUGHTER


Where are you on it? I think Heathrow is probably the best at the


moment, not least because it connects the Northern economy with


the new gateway that the extra runway will bring about. But I also


think that we have got to ensure that the air pollution that would


result is dealt with appropriately, and the environmental safeguards are


good enough. Jeremy Corbyn is reluctant to support the idea of a


third runway and John McDowell, Shadow Chancellor, is dead against


it, always has been. What happen to leadership? -- John McDonnell. It is


clear to me that we need to make a decision on airport expansion for


the good of the economy, the economy is being threatened by other things,


not least the shock of Brexit. Without a united front on the Labour


leadership? There is probably a majority in the Commons for Heathrow


but time will tell. It is hopeless that the opposition


cannot form... To be honest, when David Cameron was in opposition...


When David Cameron was in opposition he had free votes on all sorts of


things and he took the credit. On Heathrow, Labour was for it, the


Conservatives were against it, conservatives for it, Labour


against. Flip-flop. Maybe a free vote is the only way forward! To


people who never free flip-flop on issues and their principles, thank


you very much. We reported earlier on the by-election in Witney and we


have our very own list of candidates standing in the by-election, that is


on-screen now: you can find that list on the BBC website as well.


Now, how do you like your political logos?


Red flag? Red rose?


Maybe you're more of a bird or oak tree person?


But what makes a good political logo and what do they say


about the parties and politicians they represent?


One of our guests has firsthand experience of this


after Angela Eagle recently had to devise a logo for her Labour


We'll be asking her about that in a moment,


but first here's a look at some of the new political logos


And, here to cast his eye over all those logos


is Benedict Pringle, the founder of


Why do they matter? They matter because they differentiate you from


the other candidates standing, and they tell the people looking at your


campaign a little bit about you, a visual short cut to the candidates


values, to their personas, and so, look, a good logo is not going to


win you the election but it is not a bad place to spot -- start. Look at


this, what did you think of this? I thought the positioning was very


strong, boring real leadership is the point of divide between her and


Jeremy Corbyn, very sensible. I thought, however, the general look


and feel of it for me did not feel particularly authentic to Angela.


That is my signature, that is me! LAUGHTER


Is it a bit behind the signature? Well, I have played chess for my


country, and when I was sat there, with the little flag, doing my


chess, I was as proud as proud and they, as a lot of those Olympians


will be marching through what I hope is a wonderful procession. That is a


flag... It is the UK flag. How long did you think about this? I'm sure


you are proud of being a chess champion, but... It was a long time


ago! What was going through your mind when you devised this? Well, it


was done very quickly, because obviously, you have a load of other


things to do and you do not have a megabudget. It is a signature, and a


quick message, that is all you can hope to get. Why the colour pink?


Well, it is not really paint, it is pinkish. -- not really pink. Owen


Smith, stood the leadership, we don't have time to get into a debate


about colour, we had this in the past. What about this one? This


is... A bit boring... He just wanted to avoid slipping on a banana skin.


I don't think he gained or lost anything from it. Jeremy Corbyn's...


This was his second logo, of his first leadership campaign, a


commentator on my website commented that maybe there is a hidden meaning


in this logo, does it say up with the left and down with the right?


Well! You would have to have thought about that...! Is that what it said


to you? I had never thought of it in that way... Perfectly reasonable


design. Keeping very safe there are! Sadiq Khan, news logo for Mayor of


London, did you like this? This was a logo, contemporary, bright,


colourful. Nice graphic of the Thames, who doesn't like rivers(!)


it is politically neutral, as well. Willing to cross the divide, that is


always sensible. Do you think there was a lot of money spent on that? I


know that that was done in-house at the Labour Party, so not that much


money was spent on it. So not always about money, you don't have to spend


a fortune. Very often you have to have a clear idea about what you


want to say, and ideas are free. You have some ideas for Angela Eagle,


here you go. Here you go... A gift! Symbol of leadership and strength,


going back to Roman times, a gift of a name! Looks a bit liberal... And a


kind of Dove peace thing going on, so you represent leadership,


strength, unity... Maria Miller, we will not leave you out, we have one


for you. I thought, if the time comes... Influence of Hillary in


there! The only way is up, good strapline if your party is in times


of trouble. And you have your theme song there as well! Looks a bit


industrial, I would go for something softer, the Conservative Party route


that you can move from the torch to the tree and actually make the


change really smoothly. She has been thinking about it, standing for the


next leadership(!) and give very much for coming in, and for your


ideas. -- thank you very much for coming in.


I'll be here at noon tomorrow with all the big political stories


Download Subtitles